Cornering in town

[Astraist]

Another instructor, who is also a tutor for learner drivers, shared with me the wisdom that is now being applied in driving tests in my country which is to go around the corners in towns at a tight line to prevent any possibility of riders and cyclists getting on the inside.

Till now I sided with "late apexing" a corner. Even in towns, I find that cornering like this allows, for one, to merge into traffic in the other street at an angle which is less steep, which causes less conflict with it and less need for a head movement in checking traffic. Also, the wider radius taken allows to prevent the inside-rear wheel from meeting the curb, which happens ever more often in longer and wider vehicles like goods vehicles and vans.

Which of the two approaches sounds logical to you? which of them do you take?

[ROG]

Depends on the situation at the time

slow moving with loads of bicycles around I would keep tight to prevent conflict

[Gareth]

I'm having trouble picturing the two approaches and relating them to what I do.

to go around the corners in towns at a tight line to prevent any possibility of riders and cyclists getting on the inside.

I suppose this is close to the normal UK approach in towns, in that the initial position before the nearside corner is to the nearside of the lane on the main road, but this isn't with the aim of preventing other road users slipping up between the car and the kerb, and the driver is expected to check the nearside mirror before starting to turn into the minor road.

To imagine that there is likely to be a problem from riders and cyclists positioning between the car and the kerb suggests the car driver is not being considerate to other road users - they shouldn't be trying to make a turn that chops up another road user, so if a cyclist is riding a little before a minor road on the nearside, the driver should be waiting for them to clear the junction before making the turn, rather than overtaking then turning in from of them.

The main time where there might be a rider or cyclist between the vehicle and the kerb is either at traffic lights, where traffic has necessarily stopped allowing slower road users to catch up, and/or where the driver's vehicle is large such as a van or lorry. In the case of a van it might be possible to position extra close to the kerb, although not for a lorry if it is to be able to make the turn, and anyway in both cases the driver should be checking in the nearside mirrors.

Till now I sided with "late apexing" a corner. Even in towns, I find that cornering like this allows, for one, to merge into traffic in the other street at an angle which is less steep

This is the part I find hard to imagine, mainly because I'm thinking that if the problem being addressed is avoiding encroaching on potential on-coming vehicles in the minor road then the driver is probably trying to go too quickly. Once urgency is removed driving mostly becomes a lot safer!

[brianhaddon]

I agree with Gaereth's points. We try to avoid conflict by either being a long way ahead or waiting behind the cyclist. But that is possible because there are not that many cyclists (well in places where I drive these days including large cities and towns) and the conflict is generally with one cyclist at a time. The only time I can think of adopting a similar tactic is if I am at the head of the traffic coming to red lights and I am wishing to turn left. If there are no particular markings for cyclists I will take a position closer to the kerb to stop a cyclist riding between me and the kerb and ensure my signal is on. I also make sure the cyclist stays behind as I move off. If the town was full of cyclists then perhaps a different tack would have to be be taken. Do you have many cyclists to deal with in? Either way pace and good all round observation would be very important. The problems for larger vehicles are different and I do believe that many cyclists are not accepting their responsibility in the quest to avoid conflict.
Regards
Brian Haddon

[Astraist]

I suppose this is close to the normal UK approach in towns, in that the initial position before the nearside corner is to the nearside of the lane on the main road, but this isn't with the aim of preventing other road users slipping up between the car and the kerb, and the driver is expected to check the nearside mirror before starting to turn into the minor road.

Of course any driver should be observing and in particular checking the nearside mirror to ensure no one is getting in the way. Nobody, myself the least, would suggest road positioning as a replacement for observation.

This is the part I find hard to imagine, mainly because I'm thinking that if the problem being addressed is avoiding encroaching on potential on-coming vehicles in the minor road then the driver is probably trying to go too quickly. Once urgency is removed driving mostly becomes a lot safer!

It's not a matter of urgency, surely not in town. The concept is that changes in road positioning should be made in the most shallow angle possible. By coming wide and that encroaching the bend near the point where it opens, you can merge at a much less steep angle. Very often I see drivers that merge at angles of nearly 45 degrees, diagonal to the direction of traffic; whereas proper planning of road positioning allows to merge at much more "flat" angles into traffic.

do you have many cyclists to deal with in?

No, by gratitude of the hot sun and the obvious lack of cyclist lanes.

[7db]

I prefer moderating positioning when the speed is low, so unless there is an identified threat to be managed keeping an unextreme expected position.

[TripleS]

.

[fungus]

Many people seem to swing wide before starting a left turn, though I doubt if it is in the interests of taking a late apex; I suspect it is so there is less need to slow down, and they don't need to turn the steering wheel quite as much as if they were to do it tidily.

That's correct Dave. It's not unusual when taking on a new associate to spend some time on the first run getting the speed down for left turns. If you watch many drivers when turning left, they swing out to the centre of the road then turn in. This is due to their speed being too high. If they maintained a line more to the left they would be wide in the road that they are entering.

[gannet]

I also make sure the cyclist stays behind as I move off.

as a cyclist may I ask how you achieve this?

In the situation you describe I have actually come down your outside and be sitting in front of you if there was space, or alongside you if no space. Given the green light I would then be away rather smartly, and no cars can out accelerate a cyclist from a standstill...

[TripleS]

.

[gannet]

I also make sure the cyclist stays behind as I move off.

as a cyclist may I ask how you achieve this?

In the situation you describe I have actually come down your outside and be sitting in front of you if there was space, or alongside you if no space. Given the green light I would then be away rather smartly, and no cars can out accelerate a cyclist from a standstill...

I have heard that claim made previously, and I don't know whether it's true or not. It might be possible for an energetic cyclist intent on making a quickest start he can, but I doubt if it is true for the average cyclist: but there again not many car drivers seek to make the quickest possible start either. In any case I doubt if the average cyclist would normally remain ahead for very long.

While we're about it, what is the general feeling here about the advanced stop line business at traffic lights, and the box reserved for cyclists at the head of the traffic queue? Why was it introduced, and does it really serve any useful purpose?

In my more sceptical (not to say paranoid) moments I have this suspicion that it was introduced on the pretext of helping cyclists, but in truth it was another anti-car measure; maybe a bit like bus lanes. I've sometimes had this mental picture of two or three cyclists sitting in their box at the front of the queue, and then slowly wobbling away when the lights change, with a few frustrated drivers held up behind them. To be honest I've never seen that happen, but you know how my (tiny) mind works; always attributing the worst motives to officialdom.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

maybe I should quantify my statement somewhat? From a standstill in city traffic most cyclists can out accelerate a car to about 10-15 mph - by which time we are safely through the junction. I do admit that some cyclists aren't quite as briskly away and er wobble a bit...

ASLs, make little or no difference to my commute. Sometimes they allow more room in front of a line of traffic - but only sometimes as most drivers (including bus drivers) don't seem to know what they are for and stop as if they are not there...

[brianhaddon]

I also make sure the cyclist stays behind as I move off.

as a cyclist may I ask how you achieve this?

In the situation you describe I have actually come down your outside and be sitting in front of you if there was space, or alongside you if no space. Given the green light I would then be away rather smartly, and no cars can out accelerate a cyclist from a standstill...

Sorry perhaps I didn't make myself clear. Quite often in town I come to traffic lights where I wish to turn left. I may have on approach overtaken a cyclist who duly arrives behind me and most times stays against the kerb behind me. When I write 'I make sure' I keep an eye on them whilst they stay behind - if they attempt to go past (and it hasn't happened yet) then I am ready for them. With regard to those who perform your tactic - provided they exit the junction without holding me up then no problem. I have had cyclists, however, try to do as you do when I am wanting to go straight ahead and they don't stay ahead of me for long.
Regards
Brian Haddon

[gannet]

I also make sure the cyclist stays behind as I move off.

as a cyclist may I ask how you achieve this?

In the situation you describe I have actually come down your outside and be sitting in front of you if there was space, or alongside you if no space. Given the green light I would then be away rather smartly, and no cars can out accelerate a cyclist from a standstill...

Sorry perhaps I didn't make myself clear. Quite often in town I come to traffic lights where I wish to turn left. I may have on approach overtaken a cyclist who duly arrives behind me and most times stays against the kerb behind me. When I write 'I make sure' I keep an eye on them whilst they stay behind - if they attempt to go past (and it hasn't happened yet) then I am ready for them. With regard to those who perform your tactic - provided they exit the junction without holding me up then no problem. I have had cyclists, however, try to do as you do when I am wanting to go straight ahead and they don't stay ahead of me for long.
Regards
Brian Haddon

Fair enough, I don't hold anyone up

[f3racer]

Once urgency is removed driving mostly becomes a lot safer!

I go along with that. Now that my tearaway days are mostly behind me, I'm sure I'm even less of a menace to one and all. No doubt f3racer will be much relieved.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Sorry?? I don't remember commenting on this topic!

[jcochrane]

Having been what would be called a serious cyclist I would agree with Gannet that generally speaking a cyclist can initially get away quicker in the first few yards from traffic lights.

The concept of ASL I believe to be good from a cyclists stand point. Sadly too many motorised road users miss use them and have no idea what they are all about. On a London commute I had one bus driver who told me it was OK for him to ignore the first stop line if no cyclist occupied the space between the stop lines on his arrival.