Xerces Fobe2 Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 IMO This sytem will be expensive maintain and once in daily use, damage will occur to both the buses and and the "track", this will be its downfall. Xerces Fobe 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Welly Posted October 9, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 9, 2011 (edited) Last weekend a collision between a bicycle on the busway and a guided bus occured. Luckily no-one was hurt but I do wonder why the bus driver didn't stop in time? http://www.cambridge...ck-05102011.htm Edited October 9, 2011 by Welly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Richard E Posted October 10, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 10, 2011 There's nowt so queer as folk as they say. People will do daft things. How long before there is a fatality I wonder as a result of this sort of activity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted October 10, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 10, 2011 So other than the cyclist problems how successful has this been so far? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Cyclists are well known to be a law unto themselves - the best you can do when designing road junctions etc is to provide them with a safe route then they are less likely to be successful if they sue after having an accident when they didn't use it. I have some sympathy with their attitude to motorised vehicles given the threatening way some drivers behave towards them. I suspect this number of cyclist incidents would be to be expected with the same bus mileage on normal roads in the Cambridge area. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Last weekend a collision between a bicycle on the busway and a guided bus occured. Luckily no-one was hurt but I do wonder why the bus driver didn't stop in time? Given that buses don't have seatbelts and potentially have passengers standing, I'd have thought doing a full emergency stop at 56mph is likely to send people flying and cause them injuries.A normal brake application, sounding your horn and then hitting the cyclist a more pragmatic option - for starters you only have one inured person sueing you....... Edited October 10, 2011 by pete_mcfarlane Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Unless the cyclist suddenly and unexpectedly went onto the guideway in front of a bus then an emergency stop shouldn't be necessary. The driver should be controlling the speed of the bus so as to stop short of any actual or likely obstruction without using emergency braking. So if the cyclist was just riding along the guideway when hit, then questions need to be asked. Edited October 10, 2011 by Edwin_m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Welly Posted October 10, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 10, 2011 Good point about the bus coming to a sudden stop with standing passengers on board, Pete! I just recalled that a lady died from a serious neck injury sustained when she was standing on a bus that had to make an emergency stop to avoid hitting a car. How sucessful has it been? The answer will require a few FOI Act questions to the council and the bus companies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 So what advise does the Highway Code give for cyclists who come across this thing? None that I can see. As cyclists normally, legally, use bus lanes I think a re education programme is required. Certainly some thing needs to be done in the local area where they are being introduced. What type of signs are there at road junctions prohibiting cycling and pointing out that use of the bridleway is compulsory? In this case it seems as though the bridleway alongside the bus way was closed for re surfacing. What was the cyclist supposed to do. Ride on the A14? Was the bridleway 'closed' or 'legally closed'. Can of worms. The only good thing to come out of it is that nobody was injured. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) So if the cyclist was just riding along the guideway when hit, then questions need to be asked. Why not questions about why he was riding in the bus lane with headphones on? An ounce of common sense, please.... By the way, there are signs all along it saying no entry except for Guided Buses but OK spend a few million on a "Re education program" - and people ask me why I moved out of the UK........... Best, Pete. Edited October 10, 2011 by trisonic 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Unless the cyclist suddenly and unexpectedly went onto the guideway in front of a bus then an emergency stop shouldn't be necessary. The driver should be controlling the speed of the bus so as to stop short of any actual or likely obstruction without using emergency braking. So if the cyclist was just riding along the guideway when hit, then questions need to be asked. The bus was where it should be, the cyclist was where he SHOULDNT have been, why would the bus have to be driven in such a manner? This is a dedicated road specifically for (mis)guided buses. General comments not replying to Edwin_m rant mode on- Just because there isnt a sign saying you cant do something (there are signs along this route) doesnt automatically mean you can, is there a sign saying I cannot belt you round the head with a cricket bat, no, so that would be okay then would it? You are saying that all the traffic on motorways would be able to avoid/ stop short of some berk on a bike? Are you suggesting that I drive my train at 20mph everywhere just in case I come across some thicky that has gone for a walk on the tracks? What ever happened to personal responsibility in this country, oh thats right these no win no fee solicitors did for that! Maybe the bus driver should sue the cyclist for all the stress he has had to suffer because of this? rant mode off! Edited October 10, 2011 by royaloak Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Not wishing to speculate about a specific case, but a bus driver seeing a cyclist riding in the normal direction along the guideway must assume that they will continue to do this. The bus driver can sound the horn by all means but must also brake so as to avoid hitting the cyclist, including if the cyclist panics and slams on their own brakes, and without endangering passengers by a sudden stop. Headphones make no difference in this case - would you have had more sympathy if the cyclist had been deaf? Would you expect the bus driver not to slow down for someone driving a car or walking a dog on or across the guideway? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) So you are saying its the bus drivers fault, yes or no! As for riding a bike with earphones in, that is just plain stupid, IF the bus driver sounded the horn how would the cyclist expect to hear it? Edited October 10, 2011 by royaloak Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 The bus was where it should be, the cyclist was where he SHOULDNT have been, why would the bus have to be driven in such a manner? This is a dedicated road specifically for (mis)guided buses. General comments not replying to Edwin_m rant mode on- Just because there isnt a sign saying you cant do something (there are signs along this route) doesnt automatically mean you can, is there a sign saying I cannot belt you round the head with a cricket bat, no, so that would be okay then would it? You are saying that all the traffic on motorways would be able to avoid/ stop short of some berk on a bike? Are you suggesting that I drive my train at 20mph everywhere just in case I come across some thicky that has gone for a walk on the tracks? What ever happened to personal responsibility in this country, oh thats right these no win no fee solicitors did for that! Maybe the bus driver should sue the cyclist for all the stress he has had to suffer because of this? rant mode off! While I note this is not aimed at me, I spend a lot of time working on safety issues for on-street tramways in particular, so I need to set the record straight here on behalf of all the anonymous targets of this rant. This is a road, not a railway. All road users (including tram drivers) have a duty to drive at a speed where they can stop safely short of an obstruction and to anticipate obstructions (see highway code paragraph 146). Railways are different, here the onus is on the person using an unprotected crossing to ensure no trains are approaching, or for the railway to provide this reassurance at other crossing types. Thus, if the cyclist didn't unexpectededly swerve in front of the bus (we don't know this of course), then the bus driver should have reduced his speed to avoid hitting the cyclist and without endangering the bus passengers by a sudden stop. Sound the horn by all means but what if the cyclist is deaf? Would the bus driver carry on regardless on seeing a person on the guideway walking a dog, or driving a car, or another bus? There is some suggestion that the parallel cycleway was out of use, in which case what else was the cyclist to do? In this situation I think most of us would judge cycling on the guideway to be a safer option than diverting onto the A14, signs or no signs. You wouldn't expect to see a cyclist on a motorway, as they are forbidden. However if you do see one you have a duty to do whatever necessary to avoid hitting them, as long as this doesn't cause a worse accident. If you just drove straight into them you'd be both morally and legally guilty. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 So you are saying its the bus drivers fault, yes or no! I am not saying anything about this specific accident, as we do not know the facts. However, if the cyclist was cycling normally along the guideway not veering in front of the bus then the bus driver would deserve a significant part of the blame. It's illegal for you to drive your car in a bus lane but if you chose to do so, I assume you'd be completely happy to be deliberately rear-ended by a double-decker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Actually it is clear from the signs on this that it is only for "Guided Buses Only" - look at the photo on page one. These signs are all over the place along it, that I could see. Effectively the cyclist was trespassing. He should not have been there in the first place. You can't legislate for idiots, I understand that. Best, Pete. Edited October 10, 2011 by trisonic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) I agree the cyclist should not have been there but that is not the point. If somebody is trespassing they are still owed a duty of care, see my example of driving in a bus lane above. Edited October 10, 2011 by Edwin_m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 I agree the cyclist should not have been there but that is not the point. If somebody is trespassing they are still owed a duty of care, see my example of driving in a bus lane above. Your point is that the cyclist is more important than the passenger's safety on the bus? That is why other modes of transport are banned from the busway. I can't believe that I'm standing up for this stupid piece of transportation............. Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 No. Please read my previous posts. If the cyclist did no more than ride along the busway, and had the proper lights lit if it was dark, then the bus driver should have been able to slow down without endangering passengers. If this was not so then the bus was going too fast. What concerns me here is the underlying attitude that the busway is like a railway and the buses therefore have absolute priority. This is not so - there are no signals and it is still a drive-on-sight system like any other road. I sincerely hope everyone connected with the system understands this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERGE Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 What concerns me here is the underlying attitude that the busway is like a railway and the buses therefore have absolute priority. This is not so - there are no signals and it is still a drive-on-sight system like any other road. I sincerely hope everyone connected with the system understands this. As i've already said...What happens when they can't see like during fog or falling snow? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Why should the driver EXPECT to see cyclists (or anything else that isnt a bus) on this section of road? While I agree that this is a road and not a railway the problem is that ALL OTHER forms of transport are barred from it because the drivers do not have the option to swerve. As for the cyclist deciding that it is safer to break the law (and use the busway) rather than use the (apparently dangerous) A14 then that was his decision which he should be held accountable for! You have explained why you feel the bus driver ultimately has to bear (some of) the blame for this so can you also explain how somebody who places themselves willingly in a dangerous position (when an alternative exists) breaking the law in doing so and blocks out the 1 sense that could help them (their hearing) isnt to blame? On the rest of it we will have to agree to disagree because I feel that ultimately I am responsible for my own safety (and actions) rather than somebody that was lawfully going about their duties. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 It's illegal for you to drive your car in a bus lane but if you chose to do so, I assume you'd be completely happy to be deliberately rear-ended by a double-decker. I dont drive in bus lanes any more* but yes I would be! If somebody is trespassing they are still owed a duty of care, see my example of driving in a bus lane above. So I break into your shed and slice my arm open on a spade and you would be happy for me to sue you! * ex bus driver! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 As i've already said...What happens when they can't see like during fog or falling snow? Errr, you drive SLOWER. Simples. Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 As i've already said...What happens when they can't see like during fog or falling snow? Errr, you drive SLOWER. Simples. Ed I dont when at work! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Why should the driver EXPECT to see cyclists (or anything else that isnt a bus) on this section of road? In the same way as he should EXPECT to see children, animals, bits fallen off other buses, damage to the road/guideway etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now