Was this all my fault?

There's a new mini roundabout replacing a T junction, on a cycle journey
that I do. One of those where the 'round' is not raised at all.

As I approached it yesterday along the 'side' road, there was nothing coming
on the left, and to the right, not yet reached the roundabout was an Iceman
lorry. Doing the sort of instant, non-conscious calculation that you do, I
figured that I would have plenty of time to get across the roundabout safely
as the lorry would need to slow from (I guess) around 30mph to negotiate the
roundabout.

As it was, I was very nearly hit because

a) the lorry didn't slow down at all and simply drove across the roundabout
as if it wasn't there.
b) since it went dead straight, it actually occupyed a piece of road that I
didn't expect it to occupy, and hence put us in contention.

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no raised
bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at full speed and
on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force them to actually
treat it as a roundabout?

Colin McAdams wrote:
There's a new mini roundabout replacing a T junction, on a cycle journey
that I do. One of those where the 'round' is not raised at all.

As I approached it yesterday along the 'side' road, there was nothing coming
on the left, and to the right, not yet reached the roundabout was an Iceman
lorry. Doing the sort of instant, non-conscious calculation that you do, I
figured that I would have plenty of time to get across the roundabout safely
as the lorry would need to slow from (I guess) around 30mph to negotiate the
roundabout.

As the prophet says, "assumption is the mother of all screw-ups".

As it was, I was very nearly hit because

a) the lorry didn't slow down at all and simply drove across the roundabout
as if it wasn't there.
b) since it went dead straight, it actually occupyed a piece of road that I
didn't expect it to occupy, and hence put us in contention.

You live and learn. Now you know for next time.

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no raised
bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at full speed and
on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force them to actually
treat it as a roundabout?

Yes. Always be prepared to yield. Always expect drivers to do the
expedient and easy rather than the correct.

...d

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 10:30:01 +0100, "Colin McAdams"
wrote:

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no raised
bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at full speed and
on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force them to actually
treat it as a roundabout?

Yes.

In article , Colin McAdams says...
There's a new mini roundabout replacing a T junction, on a cycle journey
that I do. One of those where the 'round' is not raised at all.

As I approached it yesterday along the 'side' road, there was nothing coming
on the left, and to the right, not yet reached the roundabout was an Iceman
lorry. Doing the sort of instant, non-conscious calculation that you do, I
figured that I would have plenty of time to get across the roundabout safely
as the lorry would need to slow from (I guess) around 30mph to negotiate the
roundabout.

As it was, I was very nearly hit because

a) the lorry didn't slow down at all and simply drove across the roundabout
as if it wasn't there.
b) since it went dead straight, it actually occupyed a piece of road that I
didn't expect it to occupy, and hence put us in contention.

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no raised
bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at full speed and
on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force them to actually
treat it as a roundabout?

Try INDICATING. Yopu know what that is? Its called "Letting others know
your intention".

And why did the lorry occupy a piece of road you didn't expect it to?
ITS A ****ING 53 ft long vehicle.


--
Conor

If Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened
rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic
music.

Conor ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no
raised bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at
full speed and on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force
them to actually treat it as a roundabout?

Personally, I'd be more surprised at people using a "paint-about" as a
"traditional" roundabout.

Besides, whatever the rights and wrongs, he did have priority over you.
Simple prudence would have dictated a pause until you could be certain of
his intentions.

Try INDICATING. Yopu know what that is? Its called "Letting others
know your intention".

Conor, dearie... I don't think bicycles usually have indicators.

Besides, even if the OP had been in a car - if the wagon was about to t-
bone him, would the indicator have helped? Does it proffer some kind of
mystery forcefield?

And why did the lorry occupy a piece of road you didn't expect it to?
ITS A ****ING 53 ft long vehicle.

Mmmm. I read it as more of a large van, mebbe 7.5tonner.

Would undiminished speed straight over a mini r'a'b with other traffic
present be wise in an artic, anyway?

Conor wrote:

And why did the lorry occupy a piece of road you didn't expect it to?
ITS A ****ING 53 ft long vehicle.

Indeed. There is no obligation on drivers to go round the painted 'round'
(especially LGVs) -- just to follow normal roundabout conventions. IIUIC,
the OP was turning right (2nd exit), so he should have indicated. Even
better, he shouldn't have joined the rbt at all if another vehicle was
entering to the right.

"Colin McAdams" wrote in message
...

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no raised
bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at full speed
and on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force them to
actually treat it as a roundabout?

Yes, you entered the roundabout fully expecting to cause a driver entering
from the right to change speed. If you were a car driver who had caused a
crash doing this you may well have ended up losing your licence.

Don't be so stupid in future.

Colin McAdams wrote:
There's a new mini roundabout replacing a T junction, on a cycle journey

Should one, when deciding on whether to enter a roundabout with no raised
bump, now assume that drivers may actually drive across it at full speed and
on an unexpected path because there's nothing to force them to actually
treat it as a roundabout?

An old-fashioned roundabout is something you physically travel round
according to well-known rules. A mini-roundabout isn't: it's merely
a device for giving priority to vehicles from the right. Going straight
across the middle is perfectly OK if it doesn't bring you into conflict
with other traffic.

So from your description, yes, it was your fault. The lorry had right
of way and a right to expect you to give way. Of course he also has
a responsibility for driving safely (which implies more than merely
obeying the rules) when in charge of a deadly weapon, but since it
was a near miss rather than a hit, he fulfilled it.

--
Nick Kew

Nick Kew wrote:

An old-fashioned roundabout is something you physically travel round
according to well-known rules. A mini-roundabout isn't: it's merely
a device for giving priority to vehicles from the right. Going straight
across the middle is perfectly OK if it doesn't bring you into conflict
with other traffic.

....is the wrong answer.

From the highway code:

"164: Mini-roundabouts Approach these in the same way as normal
roundabouts. All vehicles MUST pass round the central markings except
large vehicles which are physically incapable of doing so. Remember,
there is less space to manoeuvre and less time to signal. Beware of
vehicles making U-turns.

Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD reg 10(1), 16(1) "

R.

Simon Bennett wrote:

Indeed. There is no obligation on drivers to go round the painted 'round'
(especially LGVs) -- just to follow normal roundabout conventions.

....is the wrong answer.

Highway Code:

"164: Mini-roundabouts Approach these in the same way as normal
roundabouts. All vehicles MUST pass round the central markings except
large vehicles which are physically incapable of doing so. Remember,
there is less space to manoeuvre and less time to signal. Beware of
vehicles making U-turns.

Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD reg 10(1), 16(1) "

R.