Safe Speed Forums

It's pretty simple really. The bus should just do what everyone else does - wait for a gap in the traffic, signal and pull out. If someone lets it out, fine. Normal behaviour; no special privilege; no animosity.

Bus timetables should be set to reflect the prevailing average traffic conditions.

The main reason for not "letting the bus go first" is the foul black fumes emitted by most of them.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Hmmm, I agree with you (Paul) on 99% of stuff, but here I must suggest that the Dutch system is better, and state my belief that, if handled correctly, it would be as succesful in the UK as it is in the Netherlands.

As I said, bus drivers do not suddenly indicate and pull out. If they can't just filter in as a regular parked vehicle would, they indicate for a few seconds before slowly edging out. Vehicles approaching from behind know the drill (and respect it), and will slow down appropriately to let the bus in. It's really as simple as that, and it really works, believe me, I see this every day. Anything "big-bus" like seems to get the same treatment. Minibuses tend to fall in the category of "general traffic". However, courtesy on all roads in all countries does happen, so if it's busy I suppose they'll be let out sooner or later, just like a normal car. Again, not rocket science.
As far as "uncertainty" is concerned, isn't this the theme running through the whole SafeSpeed philosophy - managing risk, and reacting to the circumstances? If I see a child walking towards the road engrossed in an ice-cream, a good driver will prepare appropriately, which may involve being ready to stop. Beyond a certain point, road positioning etc. will mitigate any risk until the child is passed. Similarly, if you can see the bus at the bus stop, you will be aware that it may want to pull out. If the indicator does not show at a certain point, you just drive past. Easy peasy. Again, it works.


This is no problem once everyone accepts that the rule gives buses pulling out right of way.
Drivers in the UK do this already (prioritise traffic types). e.g. emergency vehicles, extra wide loads, horses etc.

So, there is really no reason why this should not work in the UK now is there?

_________________
p.s. I am still absolutely floored by Paul's death. May 2008 be the greatest ever for SafeSpeed. His spirit lives on.

How often is the average private motorist forced to relinquish their position in the mainline traffic and pull into a layby/side road? Leaving the main carriageway is an operational necessity for buses, so should we not perhaps at least try to make allowances for this when it's time for them to rejoin the main carriageway?




We already seem to manage to cope with differing levels of priority at other times - traffic lights, give way lines, emergency services vehicles etc.

Is the bus intending to pull out? Yes, if it's indicating its desire to do so. Should indicating be sufficient to force priority over everyone else? No. It should still be the responsibility of the bus driver not to pull out if it's not clear (though see my earlier comments regarding crap rearward visibility on some buses - sometimes the driver is doing all they can to check for a clear gap, but might still miss something because they genuinely can't see it), but once the indicators go on any vehicle approaching from behind really ought to be preparing to open up a gap rather than the typical response of flooring it to nip past the bus before it has a chance to start pulling out.

Giving way to coaches, mini-buses etc... Yes. Some of them will be entitled to use the stop, and you don't know which ones are and which ones aren't. If use of bus stops by non-entitled vehicles is a genuine problem in a certain area then deal with it at that local level.

Empty buses... Yes, because penalties for early/late running don't differentiate between a bus that's fully loaded and one that's empty.



I'm not saying buses have a divine right to priority over everyone else, but I think we do need to take into consideration the fact that a bus simply can't join the main carriageway as easily as a car or small van - they need a gap that isn't just large enough for the physical bulk of the bus itself, but which is also large enough to give them time to accelerate up from a standing start. So saying that they should just have to wait the same as everyone else seems to be ignoring the point that they're not having to wait like everyone else, because most other road users won't need to wait as long for a suitable gap to come along.

And we also need to consider that buses are on that specific road at that specific time only because that's what they're there to do. If the road is busy, most drivers have the option of trying a different route. Bus drivers go off-route only if absolutely necessary, and even then the size of the vehicle restricts them to certain diversionary routes.

So I'm with Rigpig here. If other road users are going to continue to show a lack of common sense and courtesy towards groups of vehicles that are working at a disadvantage, then it's pretty much inevitable that sooner or later there'll be a piece of legislation passed that coerces everyone into modifying their behaviour.

_________________
Chris

Ideally yes. In reality no!

To echo Johnnytheboy’s observation: I have found an increasing number of bus stops placed in the road instead of in a layby - where they block traffic. I’ve even seen cunningly positions traffic islands, or should that be ‘pedestrian refuges’, very close to the bus stop so traffic cannot even pass the bus even when on a wide road – a la the A3 northbound approaching the Hindhead junction

Our transport policy have put us all in positions of conflict – divide and rule!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Fine, if that segment of the route (it's not just the two endpoints of the route where timings need to be maintained, there are usually several points along the route where the timings are similarly monitored) has at least one lay-by stop where the bus can wait without holding anyone up, but often this isn't the case. Is it then worse to drive slowly and at least keep everyone moving, or to park up at the side of the road and potentially force everyone behind to stop for a minute or two because there's no gaps in the oncoming traffic to allow overtaking?

_________________
Chris

Indeed - when did you stop beating your pedestrian?

Yeah. It violates two important road safety principles:

1) Everyone is equal
2) Priority is defined only by location.

I don't think it's possible to violate such basic principles without consequences. And even if you could, once one violation of a principle has been accepted, where do you stop?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I wonder if, for certain vehicles - and whether busses should be among this list is debateable - there could/should be a heirarchy that overarches road position? Certainly emergency vehicles on blues and twos are the ace of trumps. With the exception of a vociferous few who will not risk a photograph at a red light, nearly everyone else, irrespective of prior position, will, rightly IMHO, make way for such a vehicle if it is possible to do so safely.

Is there another class of vehicle - which may include busses - which, where feasible, one should defer to, irrespective of road position if one can do so safely, but in this second class (below blues and twos), unlike the emergency services, moving traffic violations are not permitted? Eg, if I'm travelling downhill and a lorry with any sort of momentum is coming toward me, if at all possible I wil defer to him irrespective of which side of the road the obstacle sits - me braking and then gathering speed compared to him (if loaded) doing so is such an overall conservation of sweat and fuel, to me is a no-brainer. Similarly, if a bus - or any wide vehicle for that matter - is waiting behind an obstruction that a queue of narrower traffic behind him could easily clear, letting that vehicle go is for the common good even if, by position, it is "wrong".

edited to correct typos and add a second example

Actually I'd just say that the timetable needed fixing. If they need pauses to reset to schedule, then they need to plan for the possibility out of the traffic flow.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Emergency services vehicles do not have priority. They progress by courtesy and assistance. A marvellous system, which ensures that (e.g.) Police drivers are always responsible for their mistakes. If we forced the public to give way, then some Police drivers might become super-arrogant.



I think that used to be a Highway Code rule - but was it quietly dropped at some point? I haven't seen it for a very long time.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

If I couldn't beat the pedestrian I wouldn't have a car...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Good point. I don't mind it being set as courtesy - this and my examples - rather than as a law. I just wish more would adopt such courtesey more readily!

In an ideal world, yes, and if you visited a bus depot canteen you'd end up with suggestions from every driver about how timetables could be improved to better cater for real-world traffic flows and passenger levels.

But... drivers have no say in how the timetables are organised, they just have to stick to them as best they can. Furthermore, whilst it is possible to fairly accurately predict the regular passenger pick-up/drop-off stops, you can't account for the randomness in stopping patterns due to the occasional passengers - I spent a year taking the same bus at the same time every day to work, and my journey times could vary from 10 minutes to half an hour...

So yes, whilst you'd have to work hard to find a driver who'd disagree with the need to fine-tune the timings, the question still stands - in the real world where drivers are faced with having to kill time somewhere along the route where none of the stops are in laybys, which of driving slowly or stopping completely in the carriageway is then the least worst option?

_________________
Chris

Neither. Traffic flow takes priority over the bus timetable.

Are you seriously suggesting that everyone should be delayed because a bus is ahead of schedule? I simply do not find that idea reasonable or acceptable.

If bus companies attach a high priority to their timetables - and I'm happy that they should - then they must build in flexibility which does not require every other road user in the area to contribute to the solution to their poor planning.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Exactly. It's called a lay-by. They used to double as a bus stop, but some other dork earning brownie points had them filled in.

Neither do I, but then neither do I find it acceptable that the driver of that bus could potentially end up losing their job simply because they tried to aid the flow of traffic rather than sticking to the schedule.



The bus operators are only acting under the threat of being penalised by the Traffic Commissioners - if you've got time, have a quick read through this VOSA document which explains it all better than I can from memory.

_________________
Chris

There's a very good reason why they often have pedestrian refuges quite close to bus stops. Those pesky pedestrians often need to cross the road to get to the bus stop. Pedestrian refuges (or anti-splat devices) are, in this context, quite useful.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

I haven't examined the VOSA document, but I wasn't intending to point the finger at any organisation or individual. I was intending to highlight the utter absurdity of slowing traffic because a bus was ahead of schedule.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

A35 approaching Lyndhurst is a good example, too. Narrowed the layby and built an island next to it, so traffic actually drives into what's left of the layby.

A permanently active feature, so close to the bus, in such a busy road?
It could have been placed 10 metres further down and have been a zebra crossing instead, let alone parking the bus in a lay-by.

Why are our only options a rock and a hard place?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign