Does anyone else find that the large chevron-marked boards on many large roundabouts hamper the view of approaching traffic from the right, when joining?
I find that they often obscure the view just long enough to prevent joining 'at speed', forcing an unnecessary stop!
Maybe I just need a longer neck, (or a 4x4, or an artic, etc.).......
|
|
Round here, it's not the signs that obstruct your view. It's the whacking great bushes and plants that the powers that be plant in the middle. There's a roundabout in Southport (at the end of Town Lane at the Birkdale end of the hospital) that is so bad you cannot see if anything is coming around the roundabout until it is about ten feet from you. I have lost count of the near misses and actual crashes I have seen here because of this.
|
|
|
>obscure the view just long enough to prevent joining 'at speed', forcing an unnecessary stop
Funny you should say that, that is EXACTLY what they are there for, to force a stop. Road planners use a technique whereby they make motorists unsure or feel unsafe. Deliberately obscuring a view onto a slow speed hazzard is one such way..
Most of the time - it works.
|
>Deliberately obscuring a view onto a slow speed hazzard is one such way....
Surely it would make more sense to optimise the view of a hazard rather than to obscure it deliberately???
|
|
The aim is to make motorists unsure. You will find that most motorists slow down or stop if they cant see where they are going. Try it yourself, on vision impaired junctions etc, what do you do? speed up or slow down and make sure?
|
|
I suspect the real trouble-makers on the roads are the drivers that don't feel unsure. So bushes in the roundabout don't have a great effect on their decisions.
|
|
|
|
>Deliberately obscuring a view onto a slow speed hazzard is one such way.... Surely it would make more sense to optimise the view of a hazard rather than to obscure it deliberately???
You know that, I know that, in fact ALL drivers know that but the tw*ts that call themselves 'traffic engineers' are, almost to a man, cyclists.
Their sole aim in life is to stop motorists at all costs. If they can't stop them then they'll do the next best thing in their eyes, which is slow them to walking pace.
Have you ever stopped to wonder why, these days, cyclists are given preference at traffic lights and allowed to form up in front of the cars? The slowest users at the front where they can hold everyone up when the lights change. That makes sense. Not!
|
When I used to cycle regularly to work one thing I noticed was that over a short distance from a standing start (such as across a junction controlled by traffic lights) the bicycle was nearly always quicker. So in your situation the cyclists have got time to get over the junction and reform in the usual single file well before the cars could catch them anyway, unless they're all pensioners on foldup bikes.
Matthew Kelly
No, not that one.
|
Some are. Most aren't.
There are exceptions to every rule.
|
|
|
When I used to cycle regularly to work one thing I noticed was that over a short distance from a standing start (such as across a junction controlled by traffic lights) the bicycle was nearly always quicker.
That depends if the cyclist is actually thinking about what they are doing, or is some overweight and unstable chap waddling along at 5 mph yet who seems to think they can wander around the road as much as they like with impunity. Cyclists in Stockport seem to be roughly half these, a quarter nippy idiots who use whatever is clear (cycle on the pavement, jump lights etc), and a quarter people who actually get a move on, think about what they are doing and are safe and predictable.
|
So they roughly mirror the same divisions in car drivers, all road users and indeed the general populace.
That, I'm afraid is just the way it is.
Matthew Kelly
No, not that one.
|
|
|
|
|
H vB wrote
"Have you ever stopped to wonder why, these days, cyclists are given preference at traffic lights and allowed to form up in front of the cars? The slowest users at the front where they can hold everyone up when the lights change. That makes sense. Not!"
Makes perfect sense. When the cyclist is in front there is a good chance of his being seen. Alongside he is out of sight, out of mind and a sitting duck to be squeezed against the kerb or "hooked" by an unsignalled left turn. And as Matt says initial acceleration on a bike is pretty good, even if the car gets off first the bike will catch up at the next jam.
Note for Matt: Folders are pretty nippy these days, try a Brompton!!!
|
|
|
Homme van Blanc wrote:
>Have you ever stopped to wonder why, these days, cyclists are >given preference at traffic lights and allowed to form up in >front of the cars? The slowest users at the front where they >can hold everyone up when the lights change. That makes >sense. Not!
Errrm...
I worry about the phrase 'hold everyone up'. Indicative of the general rush about, my time is more valuable than your mentality? Leads to aggressive driving?
Don't get me wrong, I have been guilty of this on occasion. Doesn't make it right, though. While I don't believe traffic planners always make the right decisions, I am always concerned by those who rail against them slowing people down, making people stop, etc. like it is a given right to hare about at top speed.
Please don't take offense, HvB, if that is not your style. But I do remember once participating in a thread on Fidonet a long time ago where a guy was convinced that his 'superior reaction and driving skills' coupled with an ABS-equipped car meant that he was perfectly safe at 120mph on a British motorway. He also commented on people doing 70mph in the outside lane holding him up...
|
|
|
|
|
The approach roads to the roundabouts at Junction 9 M25 have been doctored with high solid fences in the central reservations.
I am not convinced it improves the situation
|
|
|
|
