Cyclist killed on the Port River Expressway

[Nathan]

Rev, if you really think 99% of cyclists are lycra roadies and flout road rules, then yes, you are blind.

The purpose for a road is for a variety of traffic to move along, whether they be motor vehicles, bikes, or horse drawn carriage. They are not just for cars. Do you yell at mounted police to get off your road when you drive past them?
Also, you moan about cyclist not obeying road rules, but then advocate them riding on the footpath instead of the road - which is illegal unless you're under 12, or riding with someone under 12.

My arguments are not mixed. Cyclist prefer to ride in the bike lane, but in the many instances where that's not best (be it obstacles, or lack of bike lane), then it's perfectly fine to ride in the car lane closest to the curb. It's also ok to ride in bus lanes (except where they're physically separated).

It's very annoying that every time a cyclist is killed, it becomes an invitation for ignorant car drivers to bitch about cyclists. It really should be a chance to remind motorists to share the road, but it always causes the opposite effect.

[peas_and_corn]

The purpose for a road is for a variety of traffic to move along, whether they be motor vehicles, bikes, or horse drawn carriage. They are not just for cars. Do you yell at mounted police to get off your road when you drive past them?
Also, you moan about cyclist not obeying road rules, but then advocate them riding on the footpath instead of the road - which is illegal unless you're under 12, or riding with someone under 12.

As someone who has recently hired a motorbike and is spending time riding around the treets of Hanoi, I now really understand exactly what this means, and the sort of respect everyone gives each other on the road- be it a pushbike, a motorbike with a 2m wide load or a bus- is just fantastic. The chaos of Hanoi's streets ironically feels much safer than Adelaide because I know my fellow road users are always conscious of what everyone else is doing on the road and their requirements as a road user. This happens too rarely in Adelaide for my liking.

[drwaddles]

How did this idiot get himself hit by a truck? I can't see anything in the story that would suggest the cyclist had right of way.

Ignoring the stupid bickering in this thread, I will say one thing - cyclists tend to want to take advantage of the road rules when it suits them and then flaunt them when it suits them. This includes riding through red lights, going up on on the footpath to bypass traffic queues, lane splitting etc. etc.

From a moral perspective it is a bit rich for cyclists to expect car drivers to always obey the road rules when they themselves only do it when it suits them.

[Nathan]

How did this idiot get himself hit by a truck? I can't see anything in the story that would suggest the cyclist had right of way.

Ignoring the stupid bickering in this thread, I will say one thing - cyclists tend to want to take advantage of the road rules when it suits them and then flaunt them when it suits them. This includes riding through red lights, going up on on the footpath to bypass traffic queues, lane splitting etc. etc.

From a moral perspective it is a bit rich for cyclists to expect car drivers to always obey the road rules when they themselves only do it when it suits them.

There's nothing in the story to suggest the truck had right of way either - but go ahead, blame the guy who lost his life.

You're generalising cyclists, just like Rev.

[Nathan]

And for the record, the real blame is the extremely badly designed bike lane and on ramp at the location of the incident (yes, there is a bike lane - despite what the police said).

http://www.nearmap.com/?q=Almost%20a%20 ... d=20100830

As you can see, the bike lane follow from the expressway to part way along the off ramp, where you have to cross over - then cross over the on ramp (where the accident occurred). The on ramp has a blind bend just before where it joins on to the expressway, so it's completely possible to not see oncoming traffic until it's too late.

If you doubt that it's a bike lane, you can see a (blurry) bike symbol just before the right turn symbol in the lane, at the start of the off ramp.

[drwaddles]

There's nothing in the story to suggest the truck had right of way either - but go ahead, blame the guy who lost his life.

The man, 24, of New Port, died at the roadside after being hit by a truck. He was attempting to cross lanes to get to the left side of the highway while riding east towards Salisbury about 7.15am.

Crossing lanes = does not have right of way.

Your aerial photograph again proves me correct - the cyclist was crossing traffic lanes where the truck had right of way. That design is stock standard for grade-separated interchanges across the country, the only difference being the curve radius of the on-ramp which is significantly tighter than you normally see in this situation. I don't know about the sight distance as I'm not in Adelaide.

So my point still stands - the cyclist got himself killed. Thanks for explaining how he did it.

[Nathan]

There's nothing in the story to suggest the truck had right of way either - but go ahead, blame the guy who lost his life.

The man, 24, of New Port, died at the roadside after being hit by a truck. He was attempting to cross lanes to get to the left side of the highway while riding east towards Salisbury about 7.15am.

Crossing lanes = does not have right of way.

Your aerial photograph again proves me correct - the cyclist was crossing traffic lanes where the truck had right of way. That design is stock standard for grade-separated interchanges across the country, the only difference being the curve radius of the on-ramp which is significantly tighter than you normally see in this situation. I don't know about the sight distance as I'm not in Adelaide.

So my point still stands - the cyclist got himself killed. Thanks for explaining how he did it.

You say yourself, the curve of the on ramp is significantly tighter than normal. It's completely possible (and the likely scenario) that he did stop, give way until it's clear, and before he's even made it across both lanes, a truck has come around the bend and hit him. In that case, it was not the fault of the cyclist, but poor design of the on ramp and bike lane. The design of the bike lane, with crossings across off and on ramps, is ridiculously dangerous.

[AtD]

Anyone familiar with that offramp will know traffic is moving quite fast and it's often quite congested. You get a lot of people zipping across lanes in an attempt to get into the far right lane of Salisbury Hwy before everyone else. I always find that ramp unnerving because of the bad behaviour of people - tailgating, cutting each other off, speeding and all sorts. I think because people are finally 'free' of the stop-start of South Road they want to floor it as quickly as they can along Salisbury Highway. The last thing people are expecting is a cyclist.

Expecting anyone to cross there is dangerous. Perhaps a bikeway should be constructed that goes above South Road to the north to avoid the crossing completely?

[drsmith]

Expecting anyone to cross there is dangerous. Perhaps a bikeway should be constructed that goes above South Road to the north to avoid the crossing completely?

I'll suggest that the cycleway markings in their present form are a token gesture with the expectation that very few would be foolish enough to actually use it.

[drwaddles]

You say yourself, the curve of the on ramp is significantly tighter than normal.

Tighter than normal, yes. I can't comment on the sight distance as I haven't driven or ridden through there since the PRE was opened.

The design of the bike lane, with crossings across off and on ramps, is ridiculously dangerous.

As I said, this is stock standard practice across the country. It is not ridiculously dangerous provided the sight distance is adequate.

It is also NOT a bike lane, it is a road shoulder which cyclists are permitted to ride on. It's up to the individual rider to make their own risk assessment. It's no different to a 10 year old deciding he doesn't feel comfortable riding on the road.

[drsmith]

As I said, this is stock standard practice across the country. It is not ridiculously dangerous provided the sight distance is adequate.

Taking a quick look, the closest I can find in Perth is this,

http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-32.091166,1 ... d=20100919

It though is a much lower traffic volume and while uncontrolled itself, it is in close proximity to a signalised intersection.

[drwaddles]

Cyclists aren't allowed on the freeways or most parts of Tonkin, Roe etc in Perth so of course there's no provision for them crossing off-ramps.

Look at Sydney's M4, M5, F3, F6 etc and every single off/on ramp where cyclists are allowed on the freeway has this treatment.

[Nathan]

It is also NOT a bike lane, it is a road shoulder which cyclists are permitted to ride on. It's up to the individual rider to make their own risk assessment. It's no different to a 10 year old deciding he doesn't feel comfortable riding on the road.

If it's "not a bike lane", why is there a bike painted in the lane, with turn markings and crossings? A "road shoulder which cyclists are permitted to ride on" wouldn't have any markings at all.

[drwaddles]

If it's "not a bike lane", why is there a bike painted in the lane, with turn markings and crossings? A "road shoulder which cyclists are permitted to ride on" wouldn't have any markings at all.

Because that is the Australian Standard design. The markings show the cyclist where they should cross the off/on ramp to continue along the road shoulder. The single marking at a ramp crossing does not make the whole shoulder a bike lane, in fact the only thing that makes a lane a bike lane is the black-on-white regulatory signage.

[drsmith]

Cyclists aren't allowed on the freeways or most parts of Tonkin, Roe etc in Perth so of course there's no provision for them crossing off-ramps. .

Roe Highway in the vicinity of Tonkin Highway is one example where the are.

http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-31.987413,1 ... d=20100919

Look at Sydney's M4, M5, F3, F6 etc and every single off/on ramp where cyclists are allowed on the freeway has this treatment.

Are these freeway to freeway interchanges (South road/PR Expressway is effectively a trumpet interchange), or do they include some form of access control for any movements (either in the form of give way/roundabout/traffic signal) like the above ?