Journalism and cycling

CramCycle · 02-10-2018 02:09PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

I was aware of the no right of way until you step on the crossing. Unfortunately my experience is that many motorists aren't aware that once you step on, they have to stop.

Me too but I know you would fail your test if you went through as a pedestrian was approaching or about to step onto it as you would not be able to stop in time anyway. Imagine you are doing 50kmph, and there is a zebra crossing ahead and you see a pedestrian approaching it and they will reach it either just before you, at the same time or while you are crossing. The implication here is that they will take the right of way, away from you, so you must drive to the conditions.

It is a similar to the speed limit being a limit not a target, you can legally drive at 80kmph on some country roads but several, where there are blind bends, tight turns etc. you would be breaking the law dud to not driving for the conditions.

Macy0161 · 02-10-2018 02:15PM

CramCycle wrote: »

you can legally drive at 80kmph on some country roads but several, where there are blind bends, tight turns etc. you would be breaking the law dud to not driving for the conditions.

Which is where the RSA should be focusing, but really won't grasp the nettle. I've said before, anything that focuses on, never mind enforces, motorists behaviour is politically toxic in this state. It says much about the lack of independence of the RSA that they won't tackle this, call for more camera enforcement, ANPR etc.. Half arsed calls for more in the traffic corp is as far as they'll go.

CramCycle · 02-10-2018 02:21PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

It's only 2% though, so even if all were assigned to one category or the other, it wouldn't make a massive difference to the overall breakdown.

Hard to tell from their wording, a hit and run should still be able to assign blame in many cases (eg witnesses, forensics etc.). They exclude 15% of fatalities off the bat. There is also the issue that they give the impression that a large amount of accidents are solely attributable to one factor, trying to simplify a huge task. They also give no indication of what they consider culpability. If a pedestrian has no hi vis, does that make them culpable automatically?

It is pretty lazy and you would get far better reports from the Young Scientist competition, than these professional stats. I don't know Dr. Aoife Kervick or her background, but it does seem that there is a heavy bias in the way the PR reports are put together.

what_traffic · 02-10-2018 02:25PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

Which is where the RSA should be focusing, but really won't grasp the nettle. I've said before, anything that focuses on, never mind enforces, motorists behaviour is politically toxic in this state. It says much about the lack of independence of the RSA that they won't tackle this, call for more camera enforcement, ANPR etc.. Half arsed calls for more in the traffic corp is as far as they'll go.

True - but who is paying them? They are "looking after" there clients. The group who pays for the salary's.
Follow the money, they get all money now independent of central Government.

The remit of the RSA needs to be split in two.Road Licensing and Safe Transport/Road Safety should be brought back under Dept of Transport

Seth Brundle · 02-10-2018 02:43PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

I was aware of the no right of way until you step on the crossing. Unfortunately my experience is that many motorists aren't aware that once you step on, they have to stop.

Oh I think they're aware. There is just nobody to enforce the rule and it's therefore easier to ignore it.
I say this as someone who consistently exceeds the posted speed that I (and I believe all the others who do so) break the law because the law is so poorly enforced.

CramCycle · 02-10-2018 03:13PM

Undoubtedly, its the reason why we (as a generalisation of the nation) look like we don't speed much. It is because we know where speed vans are, therefore people tend to drive under the limit in those areas, nothing to do with being safe, 100% to do with being caught.

Macy0161 · 02-10-2018 03:21PM

I'm not claiming to be the perfect driver, but I really don't have a problem with more enforcement. I'm in the village facebook group, the same ones posting about "flash for cash" on the main road, are the same ones giving out about people speeding in the estate. A bit like "someone else" should be paying taxes, "someone else" should modify their behaviour/ feel the force of the law.

magicbastarder · 02-10-2018 03:26PM

In spain, the speed limit system is very bloody annoying. On roads which usually have a limit of 80, the limit drops to 60 at every junction. And I mean every junction, so the speed limit yoyos like you wouldn't believe. Up to five times a kilometre.

Doc07 · 02-10-2018 07:15PM

Bit late here but just to add my 2cents that the pedestrian road deaths item that on the RTÉ news at 9 last night has to be one of the most piss poor efforts I’ve ever seen. Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t recall any mention of the cars (and drivers) that hit the pedestrians. Even fthe drivers involved were driving legally and sensibly it should have been in the intro.
You could have watched that piece and thought they all fell over and banged their heads.

Corca Baiscinn · 02-10-2018 08:52PM

Rechuchote wrote: »

The RSA think inside the car, rather than thinking outside the box. Every statement they make is from the point of view of a driver.

They recently had a scold about how old people are slow on the road and should take extra care crossing. Now, the reason that old people get hit by cars is that as you age, your ability to judge distances declines, so it's harder to see how far a car is from you. Same applies to children

The obvious advertising campaign would be "Drivers: be careful when old people are crossing: slow right down." But no, they went for "Old people, be careful crossing."

Yes and delayed reaction times of children and the elderly also an argument for lower speed limits in urban areas in the first place. Helps vulnerable pedestrians/cyclists but leads to quieter, more liveable communities for all

Pinch Flat · 02-10-2018 09:11PM

We and the uk must surely be the only European countries with the hi vis obsession, especially when it comes to road safety. Although from memory when driving in France a hi vis was needed in case of breakdown. But I’ve driven the length and breath of France and rarely seen hi vis either on cyclists or pedestrians

RacoonQueen · 02-10-2018 09:35PM

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Although from memory when driving in France a hi vis was needed in case of breakdown

Also required here for PSV drivers
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/taxi-and-bus-licensing/taxi/spsv-vehicle-licensing/safety-equipment/

P_1 · 02-10-2018 09:40PM

CramCycle wrote: »

Me too but I know you would fail your test if you went through as a pedestrian was approaching or about to step onto it as you would not be able to stop in time anyway. Imagine you are doing 50kmph, and there is a zebra crossing ahead and you see a pedestrian approaching it and they will reach it either just before you, at the same time or while you are crossing. The implication here is that they will take the right of way, away from you, so you must drive to the conditions.

It is a similar to the speed limit being a limit not a target, you can legally drive at 80kmph on some country roads but several, where there are blind bends, tight turns etc. you would be breaking the law dud to not driving for the conditions.

Slight tangent but I got failed on a driving test once for driving too far to the left of the lane. The delightful tester would not hear a word of my explanation that I was leaving space for any cyclists I would encounter

Seth Brundle · 02-10-2018 09:49PM

P_1 wrote: »

Slight tangent but I got failed on a driving test once for driving too far to the left of the lane. The delightful tester would not hear a word of my explanation that I was leaving space for any cyclists I would encounter

Driving too far to the left helps cyclists?
Do you drive a taxi perhaps?

Rechuchote · 02-10-2018 10:36PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Driving too far to the left helps cyclists?
Do you drive a taxi perhaps?

Or perhaps did the test in a country where people drive on the right?

P_1 · 02-10-2018 10:40PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Driving too far to the left helps cyclists?
Do you drive a taxi perhaps?

Derp, this is what happens when you post when tired. Too far to the right, not to the left!

Arcade_Tryer · 02-10-2018 11:59PM

P_1 wrote: »

Slight tangent but I got failed on a driving test once for driving too far to the left of the lane. The delightful tester would not hear a word of my explanation that I was leaving space for any cyclists I would encounter

Tester was probably right to be fair. It's not your place to correct poor or inadequate infrastructure with your road positioning, even if your intentions are good. If there had been cyclists on your left, then you might have had a case for staying more to the right, or you could have just remained behind them and overtaken when safe to do so. Sorry for being a killjoy.

CramCycle · 03-10-2018 01:16AM

P_1 wrote: »

Derp, this is what happens when you post when tired. Too far to the right, not to the left!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIMg2Xw4_8s

what_traffic · 03-10-2018 10:32AM

Pinch Flat wrote: »

We and the uk must surely be the only European countries with the hi vis obsession, especially when it comes to road safety.

Agree.
Who is supplying all the HI-Viz VESTS to the RSA (in Ballina, Mayo)?
What Company?
What Country and County have they there Worldwide Headquarters based in?

meeeeh · 03-10-2018 11:28AM

Pinch Flat wrote: »

We and the uk must surely be the only European countries with the hi vis obsession, especially when it comes to road safety. Although from memory when driving in France a hi vis was needed in case of breakdown. But I’ve driven the length and breath of France and rarely seen hi vis either on cyclists or pedestrians

How many villages with no street lighting, no sidewalk or space at the side of the road did you come across? Where I come from, kids are encouraged to have reflective objects or high viz accessories. Main difference is though is the sidewalk or at least path besides the road. There is none in Ireland. I used to live in a village, I never wore high viz or torch light before I moved to Ireland. It would be suicide not to at least bring torch light when walking where I live now. You adapt to local circumstances.

what_traffic · 03-10-2018 11:35AM

meeeeh wrote: »

How many villages with no street lighting, no sidewalk or space at the side of the road did you come across?
.
..
... You adapt to local circumstances.

Why do the RSA not advocate that those local circumstances be changed.
Not saying that it would work for every area, but you never hear them say this.

meeeeh · 03-10-2018 11:47AM

what_traffic wrote: »

Why do the RSA not advocate that those local circumstances be changed.
Not saying that it would work for every area, but you never hear them say this.

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly. Outside of the towns it would be incredibly expensive in Ireland. We actually live in village but there are parts of the road when you walk the dog that are designed completely unsuitably for pedestrians. Yes ideal it would be to redevelop the roads but I can understand why high viz is encouraged where we live. You also need a torch, that is non negotiable.

cdaly_ · 03-10-2018 12:18PM

meeeeh wrote: »

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly.

Alternatively, you could install traffic calming hardware on the roads.

I was on holiday in France this summer, there was a country road that was a nice little rat run to the local hypermarche. But it was modified with chicanes, proper speed ramps and the like so you couldn't drive fast and so it wasn't getting used as a rat run and was nice to be on and safe to walk...

Chips Lovell · 03-10-2018 12:20PM

This "unsuitable for pedestrians" kind of thing drives me around the twist.

The road is a shared space. If there's no footpath, as a driver you need to anticipate that pedestrians may also be using it, maintain observation, and drive at an appropriate speed.

meeeeh · 03-10-2018 12:28PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

This "unsuitable for pedestrians" kind of thing drives me around the twist.

If you don't mind I will take care to be visible and my kids to be visible on the part of the road I deem dangerous. I prefer not to be statistic someone like you will be able to use to bang on about how drivers don't know how to drive. But if you want to volunteer yourself and walk down the road where we live dressed in black waiting to be moved down be my guest. Maybe something good will come out of your sacrifice but I would rather not do it myself, thank you very much.

Edit: and just to add, I explained why I consider Irish country roads much more dangerous. it's fine if you don't believe me but I can only compare my experiences. I'm not a hi wiz enthusiast but I feel it is necessary where I live now, I didn't feel that where I used to live despite much worse driver behaviour.

Chips Lovell · 03-10-2018 12:29PM

I think you kinda missed my point there.

Duckjob · 03-10-2018 12:40PM

cdaly_ wrote: »

Alternatively, you could install traffic calming hardware on the roads.

I was on holiday in France this summer, there was a country road that was a nice little rat run to the local hypermarche. But it was modified with chicanes, proper speed ramps and the like so you couldn't drive fast and so it wasn't getting used as a rat run and was nice to be on and safe to walk...

Agree. Carve out some protected walking / cycle space on the existing roads and slow them down. If necessary, cut the car space down to 1 way at a time with specific passing points. Speed ramps, Chicanes, raised kerbs for cylists and pedestrians. These measures are normal in advanced places like the Netherlands, but unthinkable here because of the "what about the motorists ?" mentality.

CramCycle · 03-10-2018 12:43PM

meeeeh wrote: »

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly. Outside of the towns it would be incredibly expensive in Ireland. We actually live in village but there are parts of the road when you walk the dog that are designed completely unsuitably for pedestrians. Yes ideal it would be to redevelop the roads but I can understand why high viz is encouraged where we live. You also need a torch, that is non negotiable.

meeeeh wrote: »

If you don't mind I will take care to be visible and my kids to be visible on the part of the road I deem dangerous. I prefer not to be statistic someone like you will be able to use to bang on about how drivers don't know how to drive. But if you want to volunteer yourself and walk down the road where we live dressed in black waiting to be moved down be my guest. Maybe something good will come out of your sacrifice but I would rather not do it myself, thank you very much.

Edit: and just to add, I explained why I consider Irish country roads much more dangerous. it's fine if you don't believe me but I can only compare my experiences. I'm not a hi wiz enthusiast but I feel it is necessary where I live now, I didn't feel that where I used to live despite much worse driver behaviour.

I don't get you here at all, it is for the most part driver behaviour that drives the need for Hi Vis (pointless in lit up areas at night BTW) and torches. If a car has both lights working and driving at a speed for which they can react to the unexpected, then even if you forgot your Hi Vis or Torch you would be fine. I use a torch when walking, but not because the roads are unsuitable for pedestrians, but because the drivers of many vehicles are unsuitable for the roads.

I constantly have people driving up my ass when driving on country roads as I slow coming into bends. Simple reason being if there is a person or animal, and I have to react, going at a faster speed means I will either hit the aforementioned or I will lose the road if I twitch or hit an oncoming vehicle.

The only good thing about Ireland is that the RSA have put the fear of god into most people so they don't walk, which is why when people tell you if my point was true we would have more deaths, when you look at the bigger picture, we have more deaths they are just not caused in the fashion that the RSA stats like to present.

meeeeh · 03-10-2018 12:44PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think you kinda missed my point there.

No I didn't. I just have experience of dark roads, overgrown hedges that can't be cut half of the year and blind corners. I use that road as cyclist, driver, pedestrian, runner and adapt to situation but that doesn't mean I consider it safe.

magicbastarder · 03-10-2018 12:45PM

hi-vis probably neatly fits into the X, in the common 'if X is the answer, you're asking the wrong question' construct.

Journalism and cycling

Comments