Turning right is dangerous

[Hot_Air]

Turning right is blooming dangerous — at least if you’re a cyclist:

https://road.cc/content/news/turning-ri ... sts-303693

Evidently, it’s time to give up cycling (too bloody dangerous) and instead stick to motorcycling.

[Felix]

Evidently, it’s time to give up cycling

Gets my vote

[roadster]

For a long time this is what I have believed. On major roads I don't use the official method if I am cycling. Instead I pull in to the nearside kerb and wait until the road is clear in both directions.

[iansoady]

I must say even on the (motor)cycle, I try to avoid turning right off relatively fast single carriageways. It only takes someone following to be fiddling with their mobile phone to end in disaster. There's usually an alternative that doesn't carry the same risk.

[Count Steer]

I must say even on the (motor)cycle, I try to avoid turning right off relatively fast single carriageways. It only takes someone following to be fiddling with their mobile phone to end in disaster. There's usually an alternative that doesn't carry the same risk.

Didn't learn this on a bike but it may apply. When waiting to turn right, don't turn the wheel ready for the turn because when aforesaid numpty fiddling with phone rear ends you, you get shoved into the oncoming traffic.

[Rockburner]

I must say even on the (motor)cycle, I try to avoid turning right off relatively fast single carriageways. It only takes someone following to be fiddling with their mobile phone to end in disaster. There's usually an alternative that doesn't carry the same risk.

I've been hit from behind while waiting to turn right on a fast-ish A-road. The bike, a K1200R was hit so hard the swingarm bent, trapping the drive-shaft so tight the bike couldn't be pushed. They had to lift the rear wheel off the deck to get it into the recovery van.

For some reason I am still completely befuddled by, the cuddly-wuddly-beary-boo wasn't even prosecuted by the police for anything at all. Made the insurance claim harder.

I received concussion and lost about 20 minutes - one moment I was on the bike watching for a gap in the oncoming, the next I'm starting to sit up with the ambulance crew in attendance and a copper asking me damn-fool questions about why the hazard lights on the bike were on. (I think I'd flicked them on because I saw a car behind me approaching, about 100 yrds back and realised I was under a tree shadow).

[The Spin Doctor]

I must say even on the (motor)cycle, I try to avoid turning right off relatively fast single carriageways. It only takes someone following to be fiddling with their mobile phone to end in disaster. There's usually an alternative that doesn't carry the same risk.

Didn't learn this on a bike but it may apply. When waiting to turn right, don't turn the wheel ready for the turn because when aforesaid numpty fiddling with phone rear ends you, you get shoved into the oncoming traffic.

I might have mentioned it

It was a Jackie Stewart driving tip years ago. That's where I heard it.

PS... how did these collisions happen BEFORE mobile phones?? Just asking

[iansoady]

PS... how did these collisions happen BEFORE mobile phones?? Just asking

It was just an example...... I'm sure we can all think of lots of other attention-diverting situations.

[Horse]

PS... how did these collisions happen BEFORE mobile phones?? Just asking

It was just an example...... I'm sure we can all think of lots of other attention-diverting situations.

Are triple-edged swords available? Double doesn't seem sufficient.

Modern cars are much easier to drive. EFI, power steering, etc. So potentially allowing more concentration outside of the vehicle. So we invent new distractions (which actually means an additional choice for concentration). And, of course, roads are typically busier too.

[The Spin Doctor]

It was just an example...... I'm sure we can all think of lots of other attention-diverting situations.

But it's also the go-to knee-jerk conclusion to explain collisions and near misses.

In a study of motorcycle fatals in London a couple of years ago, out of 50 deaths, just ONE had mobile phone use as a contributing factor... that was the same number of biker deaths caused by 'medical emergency at the wheel'.

[Rockburner]

Turning right is blooming dangerous — at least if you’re a cyclist:

https://road.cc/content/news/turning-ri ... sts-303693

Evidently, it’s time to give up cycling (too bloody dangerous) and instead stick to motorcycling.

What's the next bit of research from the "school of the bloody obvious"?


The issue really being that for many, many, probably lovely people... the bloody obvious... isn't.

[Wossname]

I must say even on the (motor)cycle, I try to avoid turning right off relatively fast single carriageways. It only takes someone following to be fiddling with their mobile phone to end in disaster. There's usually an alternative that doesn't carry the same risk.

Didn't learn this on a bike but it may apply. When waiting to turn right, don't turn the wheel ready for the turn because when aforesaid numpty fiddling with phone rear ends you, you get shoved into the oncoming traffic.

That applies in the car too. Keep pointing straight till you move off.

[Wossname]

PS... how did these collisions happen BEFORE mobile phones?? Just asking

It was just an example...... I'm sure we can all think of lots of other attention-diverting situations.

Are triple-edged swords available? Double doesn't seem sufficient.

Modern cars are much easier to drive. EFI, power steering, etc. So potentially allowing more concentration outside of the vehicle. So we invent new distractions (which actually means an additional choice for concentration). And, of course, roads are typically busier too.

I’ve had a hire car for the last 2 days - an MG HS SUV thingy. Driving along, too hot, want to “make it less hot”. Large central screen, small icon on the far side, aim for it, miss and get something else, stab again to get back to “home”, eventually get to the heating / vent bit, repeat etc etc. All trying to keep focus on the road. We have an Up GTI at home. Big knobs, findable if I was blind, seats ditto, fan yep.

Most modern cars seem to be variations of that- we can do it on a screen, so we will. Forget mobile phones, it’s the car, not even the driver, that’s the problem.

And another thing…MG HS- rear view is appalling. I can see headrests and the lower edge of the screen. Can’t see the car behind even at night even with its lights on. Terrible design. Bah.

[Horse]

Some manufacturers have stated that they will move back to 'hard' controls.

[Horse]

Turning right is blooming dangerous — at least if you’re a cyclist:

https://road.cc/content/news/turning-ri ... sts-303693

Evidently, it’s time to give up cycling (too bloody dangerous) and instead stick to motorcycling.

What's the next bit of research from the "school of the bloody obvious"?

I mentioned that to a mate who was doing a PhD.

He replied that until someone did the research, it could only fall into the 'bleedin obvious' category and that might be wrong.

Like, for example, hi-vis and headlamps to stop SMIDSYs. Obvious, innit?

[The Spin Doctor]

I mentioned that to a mate who was doing a PhD.

He replied that until someone did the research, it could only fall into the 'bleedin obvious' category and that might be wrong.

Like, for example, hi-vis and headlamps to stop SMIDSYs. Obvious, innit?

Until someone did the research etc...

www.scienceofbeingseen.org

[Horse]

Yup, plenty of research through the years.

Perhaps the most valuable one being an old TRRL project that did a 'before and after' study, the 'after' being bikes with conspicuity aids.

Unfortunately, trials participants saw all of the control 'inconspicuous' bikes

[The Spin Doctor]

The most valuable new idea comes from the UK and suggests drivers 'look, see, but forget again' due to limited visual memory - we can only remember about 5-6 objects at the same time. And it's last in, first out... so if the cycle or motorcycle is actually the FIRST thing the driver spotted, and if there's a lot of 'stuff' going on, then there's a good chance the fact that the driver saw it will go out of working memory...

...as far as the driver is concerned "it appeared from nowhere".

[Horse]

The most valuable new idea comes from the UK and suggests drivers 'look, see, but forget again' due to limited visual memory - we can only remember about 5-6 objects at the same time.

I've had riders say "but look at that headlamp - he's 1/4 mile away and you can see him!"

There's also the 'where do drivers look?' work (Labbatt? Langham?) which suggested experienced drivers look only where they think approaching vehicles will be (and only look for 0.4s).

Add to that other work which found that riders are often going faster than other traffic (so may be outside of that 'where' zone). And the 'time to arrival illusion'.

[The Spin Doctor]

I've had riders say "but look at that headlamp - he's 1/4 mile away and you can see him!"

There's also the 'where do drivers look?' work (Labbatt? Langham?) which suggested experienced drivers look only where they think approaching vehicles will be (and only look for 0.4s).

Add to that other work which found that riders are often going faster than other traffic (so may be outside of that 'where' zone). And the 'time to arrival illusion'.

There's research which also tries to discover what conspicuity aids work at long distance... headlight modulators work at 1000 ft plus according to one US study... as I commented at the time - "we don't collide with cars over 1000 feet away". It's the last 75 or so that matters.