Transport for London (TfL) has told a London cyclist who complained about the danger posed by motorists jumping red lights at Bow Roundabout that its strategy and planning team is considering suggestions he made about how to improve safety there.

Last month, we reported how Luke Redpath, who has to negotiate the roundabout by bike when travelling to and from his home in Romford to visit clients in the City, had been told by TfL that they were unable to take measures he suggested such as fitting cameras to catch motorists ignoring red lights.

The reason they gave was that there was no history within the last three years of drivers going through red lights being a factor in collisions.

But as we pointed out in our article, that was found to have been a potential factor in the death in October 2011 of Brian Dorling, one of three cyclists killed at Bow in the last three years.

TfL has now told Mr Redpath, who had supplied it with links to videos shot by cyclists that showed drivers at Bow ignoring traffic signals, sometimes putting bike riders at risk, that his suggestions were now being looked at by its strategy and planning team.

It said they would “investigate deterrent options for drivers going through red traffic light at this junction.”

In his original email to TfL, sent on 10 September, Mr Redpath said: “I seriously urge you to take measures to reduce red light jumping at all the lights at the roundabout but particularly those on the roundabout itself.”

His suggestions included installing red light cameras, changing the phasing of the lights, and putting up signs warning both motorists and cyclists of the potential danger.

He added: “In an ideal world none of these things should be necessary but there are a lot of bad, dangerous drivers out there.”

TfL has also told him that Metropolitan Police officers will now be monitoring Bow Roundabout as part of Operation Safety, which aims to crack down on anti-social or illegal road users, whether motorists or cyclists, and including those who jump red lights.

Mr Redpath told road.cc: “I am pleased that TFL are taking steps to improve the situation although I remain sceptical that Operation Safeway is a good deterrent to his kind of problem, as it seems more focussed on handing out often patronising advice to cyclists (wear high-vis! etc) than actually engaging with or educating drivers. But it's a start.

“Maybe instead of handing out safety leaflets to cyclists, they could start giving them out to drivers instead,” he added.

https://road.cc/content/news/134598-tfl-address-safety-concerns-over-drivers-ignoring-red-lights-bow-roundabout

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> Transport for London (TfL) has told a London cyclist who complained about
> the danger posed by motorists jumping red lights at Bow Roundabout that
> its strategy and planning team is considering suggestions he made about
> how to improve safety there.

Oh…the irony…you couldn’t make it up.

--
Spike

QUOTE: TfL has now told Mr Redpath, who had supplied it with links to videos shot by cyclists that showed drivers at Bow ignoring traffic signals, sometimes putting bike riders at risk, that his suggestions were now being looked at by its strategy and planning team.

It said they would “investigate deterrent options for drivers going through red traffic light at this junction.” ENDS

Far more broken laws to go at.

Speeding, parking the wrong way at night, on yellow lines, on zig zags, outside schools, pavement parking, obstructing traffic by inconsiderate parking, driving while drunk, on mobile phones, with no car tax, no licence, no insurance, no MOT, illegal plates, overtaking on double lines, due care, bald tyres, faulty brakes, one eyed monsters, no rear lights, no brake lights, no indicators, fog light abuse, faulty steering, windscreen obscuration, darkly tinted windows, child seat abuse, no seatbelts, insecure load, one way street abuse, amber/red light jumping, cycle box abuse, bus lane abuse, box junction abuse, death by dangerous driving, excess smoke and noise from exhaust, duff suspension, leaking oil, cash for crash fiddles, underage child in front, lights causing glare, over weight limit, ignoring no entry signs, parking without permit, not having control of your vehicle, improper use of horn, using horn at night, no in date photo licence, no licence application after long ban, without prescribed eyewear, failing to stop for police/lollipop/zebra etc - ran out of space.

Mason seems to be saying that cyclists should be brought in to the full
reach of motor-vehicle law.

Bring it on…

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: TfL has now told Mr Redpath, who had supplied it with links to
> videos shot by cyclists that showed drivers at Bow ignoring traffic
> signals, sometimes putting bike riders at risk, that his suggestions were
> now being looked at by its strategy and planning team.
>
> It said they would “investigate deterrent options for drivers going
> through red traffic light at this junction.” ENDS
>
> Far more broken laws to go at.
>
> Speeding, parking the wrong way at night, on yellow lines, on zig zags,
> outside schools, pavement parking, obstructing traffic by inconsiderate
> parking, driving while drunk, on mobile phones, with no car tax, no
> licence, no insurance, no MOT, illegal plates, overtaking on double
> lines, due care, bald tyres, faulty brakes, one eyed monsters, no rear
> lights, no brake lights, no indicators, fog light abuse, faulty steering,
> windscreen obscuration, darkly tinted windows, child seat abuse, no
> seatbelts, insecure load, one way street abuse, amber/red light jumping,
> cycle box abuse, bus lane abuse, box junction abuse, death by dangerous
> driving, excess smoke and noise from exhaust, duff suspension, leaking
> oil, cash for crash fiddles, underage child in front, lights causing
> glare, over weight limit, ignoring no entry signs, parking without
> permit, not having control of your vehicle, improper use of horn, using
> horn at night, no in date photo licence, no licence application after
> long ban, without prescribed eyewear, failing to stop for
> police/lollipop/zebra etc - ran out of space.
>
>

--
Spike

QUOTE
London’s Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) has footage that it
claims shows a majority of cyclists ignoring the red light at a junction in
Hackney. But our analysis of the complete video footage from one location
shows that most cyclists obey the law.
ENDQUOTE

SO, why doesn’t road.cc analyse that footage with the same enthusiasm that
they brought to the video taken by taxi drivers showing cyclists ignoring
red lights at a junction in Hackney?

[Rhetorical question]

QUOTE
London’s Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) has footage that it
claims shows a majority of cyclists ignoring the red light at a junction in
Hackney. But our analysis of the complete video footage from one location
shows that most cyclists obey the law.

The LTDA claims that of 170 cyclists who passed through the junction of
Hackney Road and Queensbridge Road in the morning rush hour on one day in
September, 108 failed to stop at the red light, a staggering 64 percent. At
another junction in Camden, 86 out of 194 failed to stop.

But we counted a total of 750 cyclists riding through the junction along
Hackney Road toward the city centre. Of 243 who arrived when the light was
red, 131 stopped.
ENDQUOTE

So 243 cyclists arrived at the red light, but only 131 stopped.

102 cyclists ride through the red light, and road.cc appears to be saying
this is OK.

So why the fuss about Bow?

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: TfL has now told Mr Redpath, who had supplied it with links to
> videos shot by cyclists that showed drivers at Bow ignoring traffic
> signals, sometimes putting bike riders at risk, that his suggestions were
> now being looked at by its strategy and planning team.
>
> It said they would “investigate deterrent options for drivers going
> through red traffic light at this junction.” ENDS
>
> Far more broken laws to go at.
>
> Speeding, parking the wrong way at night, on yellow lines, on zig zags,
> outside schools, pavement parking, obstructing traffic by inconsiderate
> parking, driving while drunk, on mobile phones, with no car tax, no
> licence, no insurance, no MOT, illegal plates, overtaking on double
> lines, due care, bald tyres, faulty brakes, one eyed monsters, no rear
> lights, no brake lights, no indicators, fog light abuse, faulty steering,
> windscreen obscuration, darkly tinted windows, child seat abuse, no
> seatbelts, insecure load, one way street abuse, amber/red light jumping,
> cycle box abuse, bus lane abuse, box junction abuse, death by dangerous
> driving, excess smoke and noise from exhaust, duff suspension, leaking
> oil, cash for crash fiddles, underage child in front, lights causing
> glare, over weight limit, ignoring no entry signs, parking without
> permit, not having control of your vehicle, improper use of horn, using
> horn at night, no in date photo licence, no licence application after
> long ban, without prescribed eyewear, failing to stop for
> police/lollipop/zebra etc - ran out of space.
>
>

--
Spike

On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 5:38:24 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> QUOTE: TfL has now told Mr Redpath, who had supplied it with links to videos shot by cyclists that showed drivers at Bow ignoring traffic signals, sometimes putting bike riders at risk, that his suggestions were now being looked at by its strategy and planning team.
>
> It said they would “investigate deterrent options for drivers going through red traffic light at this junction.” ENDS

Here is the problem writ large.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwzSA0KXsAATHr7?format=jpg&name=medium

Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> Mason seems to be saying that cyclists should be brought in to the full
> reach of motor-vehicle law.
>
> Bring it on…
>

Indeed.

Insurance, licensing, paying an annual ‘road tax’ ( note the quotes), a
requirement to leave a distance when passing vehicles and pedestrians, DUI
laws, …..

Aside from the most important cost – the safety of you and other road users – if caught, you'll be required to pay a fine. The current penalty for failing to stop for a red light is usually an £100 fine and 3 points on your licence. The points will stay on record for four years.

On 23/05/2023 12:05 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Aside from the most important cost – the safety of you and other road users – if caught, you'll be required to pay a fine. The current penalty for failing to stop for a red light is usually an £100 fine and 3 points on your licence. The points will stay on record for four years.

What happens to chavs on bikes like you when they - as usual - disobey
traffic signals and signage?

Red light cameras detect vehicles which pass through lights after they’ve turned red by using sensors or ground loops in the road.

When traffic lights are on red, the system becomes active and the camera is ready to photograph any car that passes over the trigger.

It’s an offence for any part of your vehicle to pass the white stop line if a traffic light has turned red.

The vast majority of red light cameras in the UK are made by Gatsometer.

These Gatso RLC 36 units also have built-in radar technology, with dual speed and red light functions, so for the sake of safety and the law, avoid the temptation to put your foot down when they start to change.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here is the problem writ large.
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwzSA0KXsAATHr7?format=jpg&name=medium

Red lights aren’t the problem…

QUOTE The parents of a Buckingham girl who was killed by a cyclist will be
in the House of Commons later as their fight to change the law continues.

Rhiannon Bennett, 17, was walking with friends when she was hit by cyclist
Jason Howard on 2 April 2007.

Howard was convicted of "dangerous cycling" and fined. Under the charge
there was no penalty of imprisonment. ENDQUOTE

QUOTE Over the past seven years [up to 2017] there have been 25 pedestrians
killed in accidents with bikes and another 700 seriously injured – meaning
roughly two people every week are being killed or badly hurt in crashes
with bikes.

The Department of Transport data shows three pedestrians were killed in
crashes with bikes last year and another 112 were seriously injured.
ENDQUOTE

--
Spike

As far as I am concerned stick cameras on every set of traffic lights, but also have a copper on duty to catch those who do not have registration numbers.

Exactly. Driving standards are so abysmal that TfL should just automatically build in a camera at every traffic light they install - and then retrofit all the old ones.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I am concerned stick cameras on every set of traffic lights,
> but also have a copper on duty to catch those who do not have registration numbers.
>
> Exactly. Driving standards are so abysmal that TfL should just
> automatically build in a camera at every traffic light they install - and
> then retrofit all the old ones.

Where would they send all the videos of cyclists jumping red lights?

Suitable AI could be used the identify riders.

--
Spike

I am very clear that the Inquest for Venera M wrongly blamed her for running the red light and being rear-ended (NOT SIDE SWIPED) by a truck which had just about reached 13mph and then after hitting Venera took 49 metres to come to a stop.

A lot does not add up about the Police's responses to the Coroner's questions and the claim that she shot through on the inside to end up in front of the truck - well as a fit cyclist, she would be making a move like that at a speed of 15-20mph, hardly likely then to be rammed in the back by a truck doing 13mph. To make the suggested move, she would have had to pass within the range of the side detection system - tested, and working properly but not for the purposes of this inquest verdict (apparently) triggered by a cyclist passing on the nearside.

The Police were adamant that there was no STATIONARY traffic which could have blocked Venera setting off with the green advance (2 seconds) on the motor traffic - but from a massive library of video evidence we know that circulating and MOVING traffic is blocking cyclists for up to 4 seconds of the 2 second head-start (see the blindingly obvious issue here?). Several videos confirm this issue, cyclists cannot get away when the advance signals go green and faster motor vehicles barge through and cut them off with a left turn.

The inquest heard that the truck that killed Venera was not the front vehicle at the stop line. A light vehicle for which no details were offered by the Police or others set off ahead of the truck, and with the usual blocking of the advance start Venera would I suspect have been moving off as this untraced vehicle came upon her - perhaps forcing her to swerve or stop. If that vehicle had been a small van Venera would not have been visible to the truck driver - masked on the left side of the van, to the driver on the right side of the truck cab, and this detail exacerbated by the sweeping left bend.

The untraced, mystery driver has I suspect forced Venera to swerve and slow to get back on course to head for the City, leaving her exposed and directly in front of the accelerating truck, and having been masked by the preceding vehicle she would then be well down below the screen line for the truck driver to see her as the masking effect of that vehicle cleared.

The issue was clouded by the fact that when describing the traffic signal sequence, there was as far as I noted no mention of the fact that the circulating traffic phase preceded the cyclists early start, and what the overlap times were between the circulating traffic red signal appearing, and the cyclist getting their green - all 2 seconds of advance start!

Many still use the far safer option of going over the flyover - on the roundabout 100% of the motor traffic WILL drive through the path of any cyclist on CS2 at least once, and the only way this is prevented is by all parties complying with the traffic signals. On the flyover the risk of any motor vehcle driving through the path of a cyclist is practically nil.

The CS2 works on Stratford High Street have actually made things more dangerous for both drivers AND cyclists, with a major motor vehicle crash Eastbound where the flyover and slip road merge about 2 months ago, and a huge morning risk of left hooks or rear ending where a lot of traffic turns down Sugar Mill Lane and either charges through the CS2 lane or stops sharply with a less alert driver behind, plus cyclists heading over the flyover aslo move out to the outside lane (where previously they used the middle one.

When supposition is piled upon supposition, one can get any answer one
wants.

The second paragraph contains no less than three:

…she would be…
…hardly likely…
…she would have had to…

The rubbish posted below is not worth reading.

Really, who wrote this expecting it to be authoritative?

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am very clear that the Inquest for Venera M wrongly blamed her for
> running the red light and being rear-ended (NOT SIDE SWIPED) by a truck
> which had just about reached 13mph and then after hitting Venera took 49
> metres to come to a stop.
>
> A lot does not add up about the Police's responses to the Coroner's
> questions and the claim that she shot through on the inside to end up in
> front of the truck - well as a fit cyclist, she would be making a move
> like that at a speed of 15-20mph, hardly likely then to be rammed in the
> back by a truck doing 13mph. To make the suggested move, she would have
> had to pass within the range of the side detection system - tested, and
> working properly but not for the purposes of this inquest verdict
> (apparently) triggered by a cyclist passing on the nearside.
>
> The Police were adamant that there was no STATIONARY traffic which could
> have blocked Venera setting off with the green advance (2 seconds) on the
> motor traffic - but from a massive library of video evidence we know that
> circulating and MOVING traffic is blocking cyclists for up to 4 seconds
> of the 2 second head-start (see the blindingly obvious issue here?).
> Several videos confirm this issue, cyclists cannot get away when the
> advance signals go green and faster motor vehicles barge through and cut
> them off with a left turn.
>
> The inquest heard that the truck that killed Venera was not the front
> vehicle at the stop line. A light vehicle for which no details were
> offered by the Police or others set off ahead of the truck, and with the
> usual blocking of the advance start Venera would I suspect have been
> moving off as this untraced vehicle came upon her - perhaps forcing her
> to swerve or stop. If that vehicle had been a small van Venera would not
> have been visible to the truck driver - masked on the left side of the
> van, to the driver on the right side of the truck cab, and this detail
> exacerbated by the sweeping left bend.
>
> The untraced, mystery driver has I suspect forced Venera to swerve and
> slow to get back on course to head for the City, leaving her exposed and
> directly in front of the accelerating truck, and having been masked by
> the preceding vehicle she would then be well down below the screen line
> for the truck driver to see her as the masking effect of that vehicle cleared.
>
> The issue was clouded by the fact that when describing the traffic signal
> sequence, there was as far as I noted no mention of the fact that the
> circulating traffic phase preceded the cyclists early start, and what the
> overlap times were between the circulating traffic red signal appearing,
> and the cyclist getting their green - all 2 seconds of advance start!
>
> Many still use the far safer option of going over the flyover - on the
> roundabout 100% of the motor traffic WILL drive through the path of any
> cyclist on CS2 at least once, and the only way this is prevented is by
> all parties complying with the traffic signals. On the flyover the risk
> of any motor vehcle driving through the path of a cyclist is practically nil.
>
> The CS2 works on Stratford High Street have actually made things more
> dangerous for both drivers AND cyclists, with a major motor vehicle crash
> Eastbound where the flyover and slip road merge about 2 months ago, and a
> huge morning risk of left hooks or rear ending where a lot of traffic
> turns down Sugar Mill Lane and either charges through the CS2 lane or
> stops sharply with a less alert driver behind, plus cyclists heading over
> the flyover aslo move out to the outside lane (where previously they used the middle one.
>

--
Spike

QUOTE: “Maybe instead of handing out safety leaflets to cyclists, they could start giving them out to drivers instead,” he added. ENDS

Waste of time - they don't even read the HC.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: “Maybe instead of handing out safety leaflets to cyclists, they
> could start giving them out to drivers instead,” he added. ENDS
>
> Waste of time - they don't even read the HC.

Push off to your beloved Europe and give the group a break.

--
Spike

QUOTE: Last month, we reported how Luke Redpath, who has to negotiate the roundabout by bike when travelling to and from his home in Romford to visit clients in the City, had been told by TfL that they were unable to take measures he suggested such as fitting cameras to catch motorists ignoring red lights. ENDS

RLJ cameras are all over the place now.
Ask Cycling Mikey.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: Last month, we reported how Luke Redpath, who has to negotiate the
> roundabout by bike when travelling to and from his home in Romford to
> visit clients in the City, had been told by TfL that they were unable to
> take measures he suggested such as fitting cameras to catch motorists
> ignoring red lights. ENDS
>
> RLJ cameras are all over the place now.
> Ask Cycling Mikey.

What do they do with the videos of cyclist RLJ, then?

--
Spike

On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 17:33:12 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> QUOTE: Last month, we reported how Luke Redpath, who has to negotiate the roundabout by bike when travelling to and from his home in Romford to visit clients in the City, had been told by TfL that they were unable to take measures he suggested such as fitting cameras to catch motorists ignoring red lights. ENDS
>
> RLJ cameras are all over the place now.
> Ask Cycling Mikey.

Red light cameras detect vehicles which pass through lights after they’ve turned red by using sensors or ground loops in the road.

When traffic lights are on red, the system becomes active and the camera is ready to photograph any car that passes over the trigger.

It’s an offence for any part of your vehicle to pass the white stop line if a traffic light has turned red.

The vast majority of red light cameras in the UK are made by Gatsometer.

These Gatso RLC 36 units also have built-in radar technology, with dual speed and red light functions, so for the sake of safety and the law, avoid the temptation to put your foot down when they start to change.

On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 17:33:12 UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> QUOTE: Last month, we reported how Luke Redpath, who has to negotiate the roundabout by bike when travelling to and from his home in Romford to visit clients in the City, had been told by TfL that they were unable to take measures he suggested such as fitting cameras to catch motorists ignoring red lights. ENDS
>
> RLJ cameras are all over the place now.
> Ask Cycling Mikey.

Does every traffic light have a camera?

No, but they are quite common. Usually bigger and busier junctions have red light cameras; if a junction is a bit of an accident-prone area, then they're more likely to be installed as well.

The best advice is just to treat every junction as if there are cameras, and be careful not to disobey the lights or drive over the white lines.
Why do we need red light cameras?

All traffic cameras are there for our safety. They’re typically installed in high-risk areas, perhaps where someone has previously been injured or an accident has occurred after a red light was run.

At busy junctions and crossings you’ll often also see smaller cameras on top of the lights themselves. These are there to help monitor traffic and congestion on roads, but do not flash for driving offences.