Motorcycles in your bus lane

I don't see the problem with it, surely there's enough room in a lane built to cater for busses, for a bicycle and motorbike/scooter to ride side by side no?

So why not, cyclists don't need to take up an entire lane to themselves, as this picture shows.

Only if the surface is well maintained. I have seen huge craters in most of them.

and don't forget the black cabs who try to squeeze past too.

This is all assuming that the cyclist and motorbike rider are riding level with each other, which rarely happens in my experience, the only time they are really level with each other is when they are overtaking, or both sitting in traffic together.

Risking a flaming perhaps, but save for the occasional twit on a scooter, this appears to have been a success.

Define your criteria for 'success', please?

I'm partially biased as I have a motorbike too, but I can honestly say that I've not been bothered by motorbikes riding in the the buslanes.

I'm sure motorbikers are happy to be allowed to use them, and the vast majority seem to respect the priviledge.

Those aren't criteria by which the scheme could be assessed. The problem is that it's very difficult to monitor something like this and establish baselines. What we don't know, and what is hardest to determine, is whether novice riders or other timid riders are put off by it, and whether avoidance increases. Another issue that is difficult to monitor is the effect on pedestrians. We suspect that most of this wouldn't result in such a dramatic increase in collisions, but make crossing the street more difficult, etc.

And of course you haven't had many problems--you're a good rider. So am I, but even I have definitely noticed being buzzed more closely in bus lanes (then again, my perception of this is heightened).

Hopefully, some decent figures will be published--TfL have been making strong claims about the quality of their monitoring, so let's see if it comes through. But you can't judge such a complex scheme anecdotally. The whole policy was set up on an evidence-free basis after the failure of the London trials, and that's not a good way of making policy.

I've experienced few problems with having the motorbikes in the bus lane per se. Most times they give plenty of space, and they are considerate when we ride two-abreast (which we do every morning).

Problem is its they now think they've got a God-given right to charge up to the front of the queue and straight into the ASL. On my route to work this all too often leaves no room for any bugger else.

edit: I know this has been said a squillion times before but its friday and distractions are good

What we don't know, and what is hardest to determine, is whether novice riders or other timid riders are put off by it, and whether avoidance increases. Another issue that is difficult to monitor is the effect on pedestrians. We suspect that most of this wouldn't result in such a dramatic increase in collisions, but make crossing the street more difficult, etc.

I might be missing the point Oliver, but surely these factors can only be assessed anecdotally? I agree that changes that might be imperceptible to me, may be of greater consequence to other road users. However, I also have my doubts that the interpretation of statistics used to measure policy implementation and success, is always impartial.

Fundamentally, I dislike the reporting and lobbying that seeks to position different groups of road users at loggerheads. I think that rather than being productive, constant battles for different road user rights have precipated higher levels of agressiveness and intolerance. (Although, there I go again with the anecdotal....)

I think we should dedicate a little more energy to live and let live.

+1 Olly398

Thats the problem with the ASL - As a motorbiker i can tell you that i use the ASL, because its the safest place for me to put myself. Sure i know its not what its designed for, but the ASL were a stupid idea in the first place, and they take up the space that motorbikers used to occupy before they came along.

However i never go in the middle of the ASL, always to the ouside side of the box, as it fucks me off when on my bike if someone on a motorbike sits in the middle of the ASL

I might be missing the point Oliver, but surely these factors can only be assessed anecdotally?

They will need to be assessed by traffic counts, surveys, and traffic observation. All produce numbers--not perfect, but from a certain sample size upwards they give you good grounds for judgement. TfL are doing some of these things, so let's see.

I agree that changes that might be imperceptible to me, may be of greater consequence to other road users. However, I also have my doubts that the interpretation of statistics used to measure policy implementation and success, is always impartial.

It certainly isn't always impartial, but there is no reason to assume that it won't be here. It will be heavily scrutinised by transport experts in any case and has to stand up.

Fundamentally, I dislike the reporting and lobbying that seeks to position different groups of road users at loggerheads.

Of course. This isn't about presenting different groups at loggerheads but about strategic direction of transport policy. It is a little impersonal at that high level, and it is key to consider people not as users of a sole mode, but as users of many, with different modes suitable for different trips. People shouldn't define themselves by their mode, e.g. I would never say 'I am a cyclist'.

I think that rather than being productive, constant battles for different road user rights have precipated higher levels of agressiveness and intolerance. (Although, there I go again with the anecdotal....)

What you see is more a consequence of years of less than strategic transport policy as started with the Mayor's Transport Strategy of 2001, than the effect of a single policy. This was an improvement on previous policies, e.g. by the Traffic Director for London, or local authorities, but still aimed to at least maintain motor traffic capacity, and in some cases increased it. More motor traffic capacity means more conflict--it almost invariably increases motor traffic volumes and speeds.

I think we should dedicate a little more energy to live and let live.

I agree. We should promote cycling as the default non-walking mode of transport in order to best achieve this aim.

Thats the problem with the ASL - As a motorbiker i can tell you that i use the ASL, because its the safest place for me to put myself. Sure i know its not what its designed for, but the ASL were a stupid idea in the first place, and they take up the space that motorbikers used to occupy before they came along.

1+, very poorly design that encourage all the cyclists in the United Kingdom to huddle together in the front box and wobble ahead toward oblivion once the light change.

Nothing wrong with waiting in line with the other vehicle, in fact I notice it's calmer that way since the motorists in the front tend to be a little more aggressive trying to accelerate as fast as possible.

ASLs were partly invented to deal with poor stop-line discipline by pedal cyclists. Unfortunately, this has now caused very poor stop-line discipline by motorists (two- or four-wheeled). As I've said before, I don't think they're a great invention, for this and other reasons.

particularly when they encourage even more poor stop-line by waiting between the car and the kerbs, which is significally more dangerous due to left-turning vehicles, and most notably, HGV.

ASLs are bollocks. If they were enforced they might 'work', but they're not.

The whole policy was set up despite an attempt to throw out the evidence after the failure of the London trials to deliver the result the LCC wanted.

fixed :-)

My serious responses are almost exhausted for the year....

Motorcyclists should recognise that cyclists have an inalienable right to jump red lights, dominate the lane and hold NJS bike love ins / rum drinking contests in the ASLs.

Cyclists should recognise that motorcyclists can and should exceed the speed limit by substantial multiples and pull wheelies / stoppies / burnouts at any and every intersection.

Fuck all the rest save 6.....

Motorbikes in the bus lane are fine by me.

Lcc's monthly storiesabout the dangers of it are pissing me off... And have been for some time.

The asl thing does annoy me and I've been wondering what would happen if I threw my self at the next asl full of bikers would I be able to get them all down like a bunch of dominos?

The asl thing does annoy me and I've been wondering what would happen if I threw my self at the next asl full of bikers would I be able to get them all down like a bunch of dominos?

If you put on a bit of weight.

maybe if these bad boys popped up on the vehicle stop line when lights went traffic lights turn red... hmmmmm

If you put on a bit of weight.
What about Hippy?

What about Hippy?

I'm about six inches taller than hippy, and pretty heavy, so I must be at least half his weight. 16.5 stone...

I would also say that the scheme has had little impact on my daily riding. I certainly remember motorbikes buzzing me in bus lanes before they were allowed in and I suspect it'll be the same cunts buzzing me now. I don't think a rider who is contravening the road traffic act by making dangerous overtaking manoeuvres cares whether they are there allowed in bus lane while doing so.

As VeeVee touched on, I have more of a problem with black cabs in bus lanes, mainly from a safety point of view, but also from am environmental/congestion angle too. To call the public transport is laughable.

isn't black cab allowed on the bus lanes in the first place? I don't see them to be a problem, the only problem I have is simply with idiot, regardless of what vehicle they're riding on.