Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 43 total)
  • Updated: Ipley Cross | Why This Type Of Road Junction Will Keep Killing Cyclists
  • pyranha
    Full Member

    The pictures show a Stop line at that junction, rather than a Give Way. Firstly, this suggests that the Highways Agency (or Local Authority, depending on who is responsible) already recognise it as problematic, but it, surely, also implies that not stopping is, of itself, failing to obey road signs?

    Sandwich
    Full Member

    IF you go to Bez’ first link to Google Street View, both marked lines and signage are for Give Way. The implied Stop is supplied by a Google overlay to show which road has priority.
    Stop lines would be a cheap, first improvement by local highways. The responsible highways engineer that didn’t take the suggested improvement scheme further should be subject to some sanction for failing to mitigate risk to the best of his/her ability

    Bez
    Full Member

    Stop lines are cheap but naive. It’s far too easy for people not to stop, especially those who have used the junction for years without ever being unlucky enough to have had a collision.

    Bez
    Full Member

    In other words, the presence of stop signs might—*might*—qualify a collision of this type as “dangerous”. But they’re a weak tool for preventing the collision in the first place.

    robertajobb
    Full Member

    I’d certainly agree that driver training and licencing is poor. Would you allow people to drive trains or fly aeroplanes with such a low level of skill to get a licence and then zero supervision and zero re-assessment afterwards ? Bearing in mind a mondern chelsea tractor isnt much different in weight to a light aircraft and can go 50% faster ?

    epicyclo
    Full Member

    The large A pillar is for the safety of the occupants of the car, namely the driver, and as we see it is at the expense of any vulnerable human coming from the drivers side.
    Perhaps we can start by eliminating that.
    The wrap around windscreens that were popular in the late 1950s to 60s gave much better side vision.
    I’ve often thought that a car licence should be preceded by 2-3 years on a motorbike. You quickly learn on a motorbike never to rely on the predictability of car drivers – at least those that survive the motorbike do. You also learn to scan the peripheries continuously.

    Bez
    Full Member

    Indeed. Just another of many car features which protect car occupants at the expense of anyone outside. It’s NRA logic, the arms race of the roads.

    Seat belts: another look at the data

    maxtorque
    Full Member

    sorry, but it’s got f-all to do with “sight lines” or “blind spots” or similar. The driver simply wasn’t paying (enough) attention. You could arrive at that junction at 150mph and still stop for it if you were paying attention. For years we have had “speed kills” rammed down our necks, and now we are seeing the results. (people who drive along, not exceeding the speed limit, but not paying any attention to their surroundings)

    Two things would change that (ime):

    1) Proper driver training and licencing (get people who can’t drive very well off our roads) and for people who can, get them checked every so often (say every 10 years)
    2) Massively ramp up the penalties for dangerous or in-appropriate driving, or perhaps, even having an accident where someone is injured?

    big_n_daft
    Free Member

    not just cyclists worried about them.

    http://www.safespeed.org.uk/bike005.pdf

    funkrodent
    Full Member

    Good article and pretty much agree with all the points raised. Seems odd to not mention Saccadic masking however, as I suspect this is common to most, if not all, smidsys and to me should be a compulsory part of any driving test

    dr2chase
    Free Member

    CBDR is something I use all the time biking around pedestrians. But I spent a fair amount of time as a kid messing around in boats.

    Thank you, I have leant something from this. My driving and riding will be a litle bit safer.

    MrOvershoot
    Full Member

    Just realised my mum lived about a mile from that junction till 1998 probably rode across that junction about 50 times, though I was mostly on a mountain bike in very vivid Lycra that gave most car drivers a headache 😮

    shaneforan
    Free Member

    Ok one issue here would appear to be excessive visibility at the junction. This might be counter intuitive but it is known to be contributory factor in crashes at priority junctions. My observations are based on the following sources. (It’s also a cut and paste so the same phrasing will show up in other locations)

    1. Layout and Design Factors Affecting Cycle Safety at T-Junctions, R. Henson and N. Whelan, Traffic Engineering and Control, pp. 548-551, October 1992.
    2. TD 42/95, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Part 6, Geometric Design of Major Minor Priority Junctions
    3. Accidents at Three Arm Priority Junctions on Urban Single Carriageway Roads, I. Summersgill, J.V. Kennedy and D. Baynes TRL Report 184, Transport Research Laboratory, Crowethorne, 1996.

    While visibility should be enough for entering drivers to assess the immediate junction conditions it is long known that excessive visibility can encourage excessive entry speeds and discourage entering motorists from yielding to main road traffic including cyclists. In 1992 Henson and Whelan reported sightlines along the major road of greater than 25m as being associated with increased risk of car/bicycle collision (distance was measured from 9m back on minor road).

    (The last time I checked it) UK guidance (DMRB TD 42/95) has been to specify minimum and maximum visibility parameters for priority junctions. In addition, a separate visibility envelope is specified for the immediate area of the junction. Maximum (not to be exceeded) visibility parameters are set out because long sight distances are associated with excessive entry speeds and consequently with increased risk of collisions. In the UK, a “Desirable Minimum Stopping Sight Distance” to the junction is provided to allow “drivers time to slow down safely at the junction, or stop, if this is necessary”. However, UK guidance expressly cautions that “increased visibility shall not be provided to increase the capacities of various turning movements”.

    TRL Report 184, “Accidents at Three Arm Priority Junctions”, identified length of stopping sight distance on all arms as a multiplying factor for several types of accidentsi:
    1) On major left arm, increased accident risk for right turn from the major with major left to right accidents;
    2) On major right arm, increased risk for right turn from the minor with major right to left accidents;
    3) On the minor arm, increased risk for two types of accidents: right turn from the minor with major left to right accidents and for left turn from the minor with major right to left accidents.

    So yes realigning the junction is a good suggestion for improving safety. However a quick fix might be to put up something (plant hedging etc) so that entering motorists can’t see what’s coming and need to slow down and look before moving off. I should point out that the same issue arises at roundabouts – “good” visibility can be bad for safety. Regards Shane Foran -Galway Cycling Campaign

    shaneforan
    Free Member

    PS I accept that this is not a 3-arm junction but the same principle likely applies.

    robertajobb
    Full Member

    Shaneforan’s comment explains why a bimber of roundabouts near to me have exactly these ‘sight limiting’ (added in the past few years) to force cats etc to slow down arriving at a junction, and have to near-stop before being able to see what is already on tje roundabout.

    Cougar
    Full Member

    If you blast through any Give Way at 37mph then you need your licence taking away from you even if it ‘looks’ clear, no?

    The problem with that road is clearly obvious and it’s bog all to do with A pillars and relative speeds of crossing traffic. It’s a nice big straight road with a Give Way in the middle of it, and it needs breaking up. Speed bumps, traffic lights, a roundabout, anything that says “hey, wait!”

    prettygreenparrot
    Full Member

    Why not make these junctions ‘stop’ junctions? With forced stop and wait procedures rather than give way/yield markings. While they’re weird to encounter, I’ve found these work well when I’ve come across them in the USA. You see the stop sign. You slow down. You stop. You look. And you proceed if clear.

    prettygreenparrot
    Full Member

    @dannyh. Excellent observation of the ‘slow speeders’. I find it perplexing when these folks zoom through villages and danger zones with 30mph and sometimes 20mph limits only to stay at ~40mph in the adjacent 50mph and national speed limit areas.

    billyboy
    Free Member

    Good article.

    Apart from the drivers having a disconnect from the reality of the danger they pose to other people every second they are out there driving which has already been covered, there is another disconnect involved here. And that is a jury’s inability to see through the guff they are fed by some silken-tongued QC.

    Bez
    Full Member

    I can’t add to the article above but I’ve added an addendum to the version on my site which discusses the alternative interventions that people have mentioned here and on Twitter.

    Collision Course

    DezB
    Free Member

    Fascinating stuff. What baffles me though, is, yes, there’s a well researched and written article on a mountain bike site, there was a suggestion sent to the council, now someone else has died. So why aren’t the council taking immediate action to prevent another death? Are they doing their own investigations, as, or more, in depth that Bez’s? Is the DoT investigating these cases? Or is it “oh well, another cyclist, less of them on the road the better”..?

    DezB
    Free Member

    Christ, just seen the amendment. A Stop sign. Brilliant.
    Why don’t they just put a “cyclist dismount” sign up? That’s what we have round here to stop us killing people..

    tandemonium
    Free Member

    There is something else that could be done to counter act the CBDR on this junction without changing the road layout…… plant some trees to the NE & SW of the junction to obscure the view as you approach the junction, this would cause the driver approaching to slow. This is exactly what is being done on the approach to a lot of motorway /large roundabouts where screens are being installed to block your view approaching the roundabout & thus stopping people approaching * joining them at speed when there is another car coming around with very similar approach angles to the junction above. Plant trees – good for reducing CO2 too 🙂

    tandemonium
    Free Member

    Ah, just read shaneforan’s last paragraph… as he says 🙂

    seadog101
    Full Member

    I agree that blind spots, CBDR, stop signs, give way signs, junction designs are part of the problem, here and at similar junctions. The real problem though is the way people who drive a vehicle and kill someone else are allowed to simply hang their head and say sorry, opps, slap my wrist, give me a fine, possibly even stop me driving for a wee while, maybe lock me up if I’ve very very naughty.
    Maybe some properly scary punishments, like lifetime driving bans, jail terms similar to manslaughter?

    mikeyp
    Full Member

    great thoughtful piece as ever bez.

    40mpg
    Full Member

    That’s interesting and frankly terrifying reading. I live a couple of miles from Ipley and go through there pretty much every time I get on my road bike. I know the history, and am very cautious of cars approaching. Note- the council have recently installed improvements – some yellow bump strips approaching the junction which are enough to make a tumble in your car or nearly have you off your bike. Thanks Hampsire Highways.

    40mpg
    Full Member

    *tumble = rumble

    portsmouthrider
    Free Member

    A “STOP” sign, as opposed to the current “Give Way” signs, would actually be against the Highway Engineering rules ….. see page 11 of https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223943/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf …… because visibility is TOO GOOD!!!!!!!!!

    HoratioHufnagel
    Free Member

    FWIW, I work in the automotive industry and they are working to address the issues with A-pillar blind spots. I work with cameras and algorithms, so only know about that stuff, but I think companies are also trying to reduce the width of the A-pillar.

    As for the Algo stuff, there’s lots of stuff in the pipeline, but the most likely solution is cameras looking out for this and putting the brakes on automatically. Called “crossing traffic alert” here. Also works when people (especially children) walk behind cars as they reverse out of car park spaces in supermarkets etc, which is especially problematic for SUVs.

    Better training for drivers would also help, but I’ve yet to see a government who will force 30 million drivers to go and take a re-test.

    markgraylish
    Free Member

    Many, many years ago I nearly took a cyclist out when I was driving. It was a classic case of SMIDSY as he was obscured by the A pillar of my car as I approached a large, open roundabout.
    Luckily for both he and I, my passenger spotted him and called out and I jumped on the brakes and we didn’t collide.
    Since then, as a cyclist, Ive always been aware of how vulnerable I would be in those situations and I must subconsciously do the “closing distance” calculations as im covering the brakes and looking for a safe swerve spot when I see vehicles closing in on junctions even if I have right-of-way…

    Bez
    Full Member

    Bez suggests that sometimes a steady driver can be the most dangerous driver – now with added content responding to comments and questions you raised

    By bez

    Get the full story on our front page at:

    Updated: Ipley Cross | Why This Type Of Road Junction Will Keep Killing Cyclists

    Support us from less than £0.06/day and help us keep the content flowing by becoming a full member.

    crazyjenkins01
    Full Member

    A perfect example of why driving behaviours need to change and mandatory re-tests are required.i have to ‘retake’ my IPAF licence every 5 years to update on operation and safety issues. Why not for driving?
    This added to the, quite frankly, stupid idea of having a ‘jury of peers’ (who would most likely do exactly what the defendant in most cases is charged with, would do) for motoring offences, is the reason this will NEVER stop happening.

    keithb
    Full Member

    Sadly this is indicative of the standard of highways departments across the country when it comes to understanding and assessing risks to cyclists. Derbyshire have a similar inability to realise that white paint incorrectly applied is worse than doing nothing. I pushed my case all the way to the local government ombudsman who,despite derbyshire acknowledging that they had no assessment or justification for sub standard cycle lane, still refused to find against the council!

    So not only are the highway authorities incompetent, but the appeals process is rigged against the complainant!

    Which reminds me,I’ve another complaint to make to them! Once I’ve cost them enough money, they may actually fix the problems rather than seeing the user’s as the problem!

    fanatik
    Free Member

    Bez,

    Thanks for this article. Kieran was my cycling buddy and long time friend, it was a sad loss.

    In December A few other friends and I did a ride that way to finish off the ride he had set out to do, but not completed. I now ride with a Fly6 light/camera on my bike, and in the few seconds it took to ride past that junction, my camera captured this, which I uploaded to youtube:

    It simply shows 5 cars just driving across it without a care in the world.

    willpen
    Free Member

    I was knocked off at this junction Feb 2014.
    Saw this article as it had been re-posted on Core 77 a design forum website.
    Accident happened exactly as described, both Police and Ambulance attended the scene but I guess it was not added to official records as I did not press charges on driver.
    I was approaching junction as described 8:15am commuting to work in Beaulieu. Junction is at the top of a slight incline and into the prevailing SW winds so was not going very fast and had my head down a bit. This junction has always worried me as cars cross without stopping (it was Give Way junction), so as I always did I was keeping track of what was approaching the junction, at what speed, from peripheral vision.
    It had seemed like the car (approaching from direction shown on map) had seen me and was moderating speed to let me go through first. With maybe 2 seconds (???) to go I realised car was not stopping, or slowing sufficiently to go behind me. Only option I had was to brace and put everything I had through pedals to try to get through junction before car (no time even to stand on pedals).
    Car hit my back wheel at somewhere between 20 and 30mph, i did a somersault and landed 5m down the road on the wrong side, my bike did “endo’s” down the road for what felt like forever.
    Driver claimed she just did not see me ( I was wearing yellow hi-vis jacket), she was distraught and phoned me every day for the next week to check I was OK.
    I believed she did not see me hence not pressing charges. I have always wondered/worried whether this was right decision or not in terms of initiating changes to junction. As described brilliantly in article it is a design fault in road, although one thing to point out most junctions in UK have more evolved over the centuries rather than being designed. But still when there is a obvious problem something should be done about it.
    I was definitely lucky! I have replayed it in my mind many times and I must have been 0.2 secs away from some pretty serious injuries minimum. As it was I got away with cuts and bruises, a bad back for a while and a month or so after a spate of labyrinthitus which apparently can be caused by heavy impacts (who knew).
    I still cycle to work when I can, but I am definitely more nervous of traffic joining from the side!

    willpen
    Free Member

    I was knocked off at this junction Feb 2014.
    Saw this article as it had been re-posted on Core 77 a design forum website.
    Accident happened exactly as described, both Police and Ambulance attended the scene but I guess it was not added to official records as I did not press charges on driver.
    I was approaching junction as described 8:15am commuting to work in Beaulieu. Junction is at the top of a slight incline and into the prevailing SW winds so was not going very fast and had my head down a bit. This junction has always worried me as cars cross without stopping (it was Give Way junction), so as I always did I was keeping track of what was approaching the junction, at what speed, from peripheral vision.
    It had seemed like the car (approaching from direction shown on map) had seen me and was moderating speed to let me go through first. With maybe 2 seconds (???) to go I realised car was not stopping, or slowing sufficiently to go behind me. Only option I had was to brace and put everything I had through pedals to try to get through junction before car (no time even to stand on pedals).
    Car hit my back wheel at somewhere between 20 and 30mph, i did a somersault and landed 5m down the road on the wrong side, my bike did “endo’s” down the road for what felt like forever.
    Driver claimed she just did not see me ( I was wearing yellow hi-vis jacket), she was distraught and phoned me every day for the next week to check I was OK.
    I believed she did not see me hence not pressing charges. I have always wondered/worried whether this was right decision or not in terms of initiating changes to junction. As described brilliantly in article it is a design fault in road, although one thing to point out most junctions in UK have more evolved over the centuries rather than being designed. But still when there is a obvious problem something should be done about it.
    I was definitely lucky! I have replayed it in my mind many times and I must have been 0.2 secs away from some pretty serious injuries minimum. As it was I got away with cuts and bruises, a bad back for a while and a month or so after a spate of labyrinthitus which apparently can be caused by heavy impacts (who knew).
    I still cycle to work when I can, but I am definitely more nervous of traffic joining from the side!

    mudfish
    Full Member

    Bez,
    would you be able to put his excellent & clear explanation into succinct enough terms to succeed as a petition to “persuade” Hampshire CC to make a staggered junction.
    Your obvious expertise here and grasp of plain English explanation has a great value in this. Those door pillars have always concerned me but I’d never realised its quite this serious..
    £100K is a small cost to save lives and I believe only 10K signatures are needed to prompt a Parliamentary discussion.
    Can “we” realistically achieve that?
    38 degrees seems to work for many as a petition vehicle.

    Apparently 38 Degrees takes its name from “the angle at which snowflakes come together to form an avalanche”, nice.

    frogstomp
    Full Member

    Some interesting follow-up discussion from Wired (referencing this article): https://www.wired.com/story/the-physics-of-the-69-degree-intersection-that-kills-cyclists/

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 43 total)

The topic ‘Updated: Ipley Cross | Why This Type Of Road Junction Will Keep Killing Cyclists’ is closed to new replies.

Thanks for popping by - why not stay a while?IT'S FREE

Sign up as a Singletrack Member and you can leave comments on stories, use the classified ads, and post in our forums, do quizzes and more.

Join us, join in, it’s free, and fun.