This morning's commute and other commuting stories

It is noticeable when cycling (I guess as you're paying much more attention to traffic) how much effort drivers will go to put themselves a car-length ahead. Cutting in and out of lanes, screeching off from the lights only to merge 50 yards later, getting het up at a cyclist in primary position or someone crossing the road.

Cyclists are the same, squeezing along the gutter or between a couple of trucks, hopping on and off the pavements, jumping lights (often only to sit in advance of the stop line where they can't see the lights change).

Yes, it's essentially the same thing except that cyclists can squeeze through gaps or go onto the footway and so the futility of their actions is less noticeable. Generally, if you travel at the same speed as an RLJ-ing rider, you will most likely encounter them again at the next major junction, i.e. one where it's more difficult to jump lights than at the minor junctions or the signalised pedestrian crossings, unless they manage to jump the lights there, too, of course. If not, they tend to lose the time there that they 'gained' by RLJing the little junctions earlier. (And no, I don't have evidence other than having tested this lots and lots of times.)

It all just seems so much hassle for such a small gain. I wouldn't say it's a London-centric, city-centric thing though. Driver behaviour appears to be like that everywhere.

Oh, it's certainly not just a London thing. Elsewhere in the country, the relatively sustainable network of small market towns has long been dismantled (it happened first because of the coming of the railways and got considerably worse with mass motorisation), so that people have had to drive ridiculous distances all over the place for decades. Economic opportunities have been becoming more and more centred in more major centres for the last thirty years or so, a process much more marked in other countries than the UK. The UK's saving grace for the last twenty years has been the absence of any concerted road-building programme, which would have continued to accelerate the process, but other recent technological developments have certainly picked up some of the slack there. Road-building is a terrible way of borrowing from the prosperity of future generations, as the design life of roads and especially bridges is quite short, as they're currently finding out in Germany, where they're saddled with ridiculous maintenance needs. Generally, if you want to make your economy sustainable, reduce the need to travel and enable people to make a decent living where or near where they live. Try to avoid over-concentrating power.

I think the insecurity of people's jobs and (un)affordability of rent in London exacerbate levels of stress related to whether you're going to get to your job on time.

Most definitely. It's all cut from the same cloth, and people feel it collectively, as you say. If you have a commute so long that you can barely help put your kids to bed on a weekday, that will prey on your mind all day long. Obviously, if you cycle, your journey time is fairly predictable, but not with any other mode, certainly not in London.

I don't know if this is the result of 20 years of commuting or what?

Well, do you think it works for you at some level or not? Does it reduce your anxiety, or does it actually make you more anxious, or neither? If you find it really hard to get out of the mindset, do you actually want to get out of it?

You shouldn't jump red lights because you give people another excuse to perpetuate all the things you mention. Who knows what of it is caused (directly or indirectly) by RLJing? Who could possibly tell, and by what method? What is clear is that cycling needs to have a good reputation and should not be seen as the demi-monde of traffic. It's also clear that people who think they don't want to cycle will try to use any excuse they can to get out of it or to justify their behaviour towards people cycling. Don't give them more excuses.

Be the change you want to be.

Don't go over to the Dark Side of the Force.

Don't change horses in mid-stream.

Peace.

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Etc.

Before we ask the question again, is there any data to back up that the question is there to be asked?
Are there casualty figures by gender published anywhere?

Women are generally under-represented in crash stats, partly as they cycle less than men, but it is also thought that they take fewer risks than men. There is one glaring exception to these general trends, and that's in the aforementioned deaths from left-turning lorries, where they are over-represented.

I've looked at this question for years and have found (where such information was available, which of course it wasn't in quite a few cases) that most victims, not all but a very significant majority, of this type of crash were quite short (men and women). As women tend to be shorter than men, this may explain why they seem more affected, but whether this is true or not, it highlights the need for direct-vision lorries.

http://lcc.org.uk/pages/direct-vision-lorries

Thanks back.

... people who think they don't want to cycle will try to use any excuse they can to get out of it or to justify their behaviour towards people cycling. Don't give them more excuses.

Be the change you want to be.

Don't go over to the Dark Side of the Force.

You're on fire today.

It's what being off the shoulder of Orion does to you.

Addison Lee giving The White Van a real run for it's proverbial money for the worst and most abusive drivers in London. I will walk to Heathrow with 50kg of luggage before I use them, Add Lee can fuck off forever.

That point about relative heights is very interesting, hadn't considered the effect on visibility before, thanks!

"In 2007, an internal report for Transport for London concluded women cyclists are far more likely to be killed by lorries because, unlike men, they tend to obey red lights and wait at junctions in the driver's blind spot." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8296971.stm

very interesting about the height

Yes, I think that report sheds no light. There has always been the problem of victim-blaming in reports on crashes involving cyclists, i.e. 'what has the cyclist done wrong this time?' Backhanded victim-praising isn't any better. Likewise, with very few exceptions, drivers don't want anyone to get injured, so discounting bad or good intentions for the moment, which factor could be significant here when looking at the issue dispassionately? Mine is an unproven hypothesis, of course. Anyway, direct-vision lorries are on their way, so I hope we'll see a positive effect from their introduction.

they tend to obey red lights and wait at junctions in the driver's blind spot."

I'd want to see the evidence gathering for this conclusion. Also seems to suggest most guys are just RLJing to safety. Perhaps @Skülly is right after all.

Here come the PC scolds.

I made my comment in good faith, we all notice outlier behaviour e.g. "all them cyclists jump red lights" etc, thought you might want to consider why you drew that conclusion.

If you are going to dismiss that as 'PC' then I'm not sure you're worth the good faith.

It concluded nothing of the kind, and since it was never published it's not possible to say why the beeb said that. The TFL report said:

“Women may be over-represented in (collisions with goods vehicles) because they are less likely than men to disobey red lights.”

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/why-women-seem-to-be-more-vulnerable-around-traffic-blackspots-in-london-10341420.html

From such a small data set it is not possible, or helpful, to claim that firm conclusions can be made.

I don’t think it necessarily has anything to do with gender, but maybe as the article goes on to say, confidence. I just read your previous post and thought “where have I read that?”
Will companies be that fussed about investing in direct-vision lorries or is it something that will come in and make others obsolete?

I am never right. Semi-serious trolling as usual.

agreed, im not sure how they have managed to collect statistics for such a statement. Also is it really neccessary to RLJ to safety? surely just to be at the front of traffic, clearly visible is enough?

edit:
@spindrift thanks, hadn't seen that! as above, i was curious as to how they'd quantified that statement.

Well, do you think it works for you at some level or not? Does it reduce your anxiety, or does it actually make you more anxious, or neither? If you find it really hard to get out of the mindset, do you actually want to get out of it?

I think it does work for me, generally.

Particularly when cycling, I do have to control my natural inclination to push on which could lead to poor risk judgement.

I decided to default to not rlj as otherwise I was making a decision on risk at each red light and that was too much.

I do get it wrong sometimes, though. Often when attempting to filter past stationary traffic. I've warned myself about that.

So, I guess i don't want to get out of the mindset, just moderate it a tad.

There has always been the problem of victim-blaming in reports on
crashes involving cyclists, i.e. 'what has the cyclist done wrong this
time?'

The study states:

Cyclists may wait at the lights just in front of a lorry, not
realising that they are difficult to see.

Yeah, sorry about that.

I, a general, on the other hand, tried a left turn on Oxford Street today and bounced off the bus onto a taxi driver's window. Much red face.

A little late but, I bounced off the front of a Mercedes on Friday.

Red hand, sore foot, much swear.

2 Attachments

I also left earlier than usual and it was so much worse, spring is definitely on the horizon, lots of hybrid riding fair weather commuters.

I think the road from Ham is closed for re-surfacing, the cull is normally 8pm-7.30am but it's always open earlier.

Interesting that you bring height/visibility/gender into this discussion .
You have probably observed that many victims of this type of crash were non natives* of this country ( clumsy phrase I know - sorry ) so could this be a factor ?

• as in possibly more familiar with more benign road cycling environments ?
  
  

I don't know.

Got a bit of a surprise yesterday, right at the start of my commute. I was going pretty slowly downhill on a narrow path when a guy + dog came round a corner towards me. I braked a little in anticipation and just kind of did a massive flip forwards over the bars.
Really weird as I didn't brake hard - guess the slope was steeper than I thought.
Big rear in tights and knee but otherwise just glad to give the guy some lols at me doing spontaneous low speed acrobatics.