-
I am a bit confused by the stickers. Is there a measured danger in drafting such vehicles, as they imply? I suppose an emergency stop could lead to a nasty bump but it doesn't seem like a lethal risk.
It's more about cyclists undertaking(more so at junctions). When all the traffic is stopped some will scoot up the side of a HGV and then the lights change and the HGV makes turn left with a chance they haven't seen the cyclist it can all get messy.
Like a more cycle specific one of these.
Problems I can think of are when they just get plastered on any/all on the road it doesn't signify a difference(so if all cars had long signs on it would make the sign irrelevant).
Your post does nicely sum up how unclear/badly worded the sign is, I'm sure many share in that not knowing.
-
I am a bit confused by the stickers. Is there a measured danger in drafting such vehicles, as they imply? I suppose an emergency stop could lead to a nasty bump but it doesn't seem like a lethal risk.
Yeah, there are a risks;
The driver can't see you as you're in a blindspot
You hit holes or stuff in the road which the vehicle passes overPlease tell me this isn't news...
-
It's good you're having a conversation about this poster, but it's literally just an argument about semantics.
I don't mind being told to stay back if I'm honest. You're telling me people don't rush around London, making all kinds of careless choices and a bit of attention grabbing (good) advice isn't needed? A bit of shouty Stay Back in a Lorry-at-a-Junction-Situation isn't necessarily a bad thing for me when it can be (unfortunately at the moment) a life or death decision.
I'm happy for your insight and I agree with you, but that's the level at which I think the argument should be pitched at. My 2 p.
-
just read this.
/language is important.
-
'cyclists stay...' stickers could easily be jammed;
awesome,
thin,
sexy,
up all night...
-
^ lol
just read this.
/language is important.
That's such a weak article. These stickers are not some kind of road-apartheid, it's a warning sticker – each of us ignore hundreds each day. Peter Walker should HTFU.
Worded as they are is less ideal than the 'inside' sticker in the opening post, however they might still prevent someone thoughtlessly, dangerous filtering on the left. Entering into design-by-comittee on this is a waste of people's time and energy in my opinion.
-
^^^Of course language is important (I'm not going to try and undo the years of hard work by Derrida and Foucoult), but they question is worth asking: are we accused of being second-class by stickers on a lorry, or by streets that are unfit, laws that don't protect, politicians that don't respond to cycle deaths, and cars that crowd our space? The reality is that we are second class road users and stickers don't make that any more or less real. The stickers could be bright and yellow and say FREE HANDJOBS FOR CYCLISTS but that won't change our rights on the road if say for example the Bricklayers Arms roundabout never gets redesigned.
-
^^^Of course language is important (I'm not going to try and undo the years of hard work by Derrida and Foucoult), but they question is worth asking: are we accused of being second-class by stickers on a lorry, or by streets that are unfit, laws that don't protect, politicians that don't respond to cycle deaths, and cars that crowd our space? The reality is that we are second class road users and stickers don't make that any more or less real. The stickers could be bright and yellow and say FREE HANDJOBS FOR CYCLISTS but that won't change our rights on the road if say for example the Bricklayers Arms roundabout never gets redesigned.
Small steps, bricklayers arms wasn't built/rebuilt in a day.
-
I'm not sure it's a step though, more like shouting at the flag instead of the person holding it.
-
I've been watching a lot of game of thrones recently, sorry.
-
My problem with these is not so much the obnoxious tone, but the blanket nature of the instruction.
Clearly it's not always necessary to stay back. I probably pass at least a dozen of these stickers each day. Most of them are on small-to-medium vans sat stationary in gridlock on straight sections of road. I breeze past up the inside because I'm in a nice wide cycle lane with good sight lines and the danger is minimal.
In my opinion, this sort of "crying wolf" only serves to desensitise cyclists to dangers that are very real in certain circumstances. The same sticker on a tipper truck at a junction might therefore be ignored.
It feels like a "there, we did something" political approach to me and I don't like it.
-
^^^Of course language is important (I'm not going to try and undo the years of hard work by Derrida and Foucoult)
'Foucault'. :)
-
There's nothing wrong with the message (as such) for riders not to go down the side of high-sided vehicles. This is not only owing to left-turn danger, but also because there's a danger of riders getting crushed against guard rail by such vehicles, even if they're not turning, but merely adjusting their position in the lane. We have had a programme of guard rail removal in London, which has reduced the latter danger, but riders can still get injured in such collisions even without guard rail. Conveying the message is simple prevention of potentially fatal crashes, which is a Good Thing.
The question is about the way in which this message is conveyed. Much has been said about that, so no need to add much more, but suffice to say that commands don't work, explaining the issue to as many people as possible is helpful, riders shouldn't be the only party suspected of being to blame in this, and the stickers shouldn't appear on vehicles where they have no business being.
Charlie will be able to say more about the 'blind spot' myth, but basically there are no real 'blind spots', only 'hard to see' spots. This is something which needs to be partly addressed through vehicle design, see the LCC's Lorry for London:
-
'Foucault'. :)
No, you Foucault. -
Surely something as simple as:
CYCLIST: DO NOT PASS THIS VEHICLE ON THE LEFT AT JUNCTIONS.
I don't think everyone would clearly understand what passing on the inside meant tbh.
-
it's just a matter of time until one of these stickers is used by a driver to wriggle out of a prosecution. 'he didn't pay attention to the sticker yer worshipfullness, that's why i hit him while i was turning left - can't be expected to look ahead AND use my mirrors now can i? it's not like he wasn't warned'.
-
just read this.
/language is important.
"If I'm near a lorry in traffic I'll always do my best to get in front of it as soon as possible for my own safety..."
Does not compute. Isn't this is the attitude that leads to untold people rushing around, not giving way way (even in the face if the most basic of common sense) and always having to get to the front first? Unless I've missed something this is what causes problems.
-
'cyclists stay...' stickers could easily be jammed;
awesome,
thin,
sexy,
up all night...The more I think about this, the more I want a "cyclists stay sexy" jersey.
JAH_tim
Aroogah
Clockwise
miro_o
youramericanlover
deleted
Drakien
sorethroat
jimmy_james
Oliver Schick
NotThamesWater
Multi_Grooves
wqvm-
Post a reply
About
Cyclists stay back! stickers
Posted by
@skydancer
I think the implication, given their position on buses, lorries etc is: Cyclists stay back [, instead of overtaking on the inside.]
Bit daft to draft so close that you can't emergency stop in time.