Newcastle motorcyclists claim 'Orca' cycle lane separators could prove lethal

Plus it's nonsense and very bad journalism to say that Newcastle Council "admitted" that they don't have DfT approval. Read the quote!: "these orcas do not require DfT approval" - there's no admitting anything there! There is no need for orcas to have DfT approval as they are classified as street furniture, the same way that litter bins and bus shelters are.

My big concern is that when leaving the bike lane (e.g. to get around the inevitable parked car, or take a safe line through a junction) you need to look over your shoulder while hoping you don't hit an orca.

I don't understand how motorcyclists are coming into contact with these? Are the motorbikes trying to use the cycle lane or is just when they are attempting to undertake stationary traffic?

I thought that motorbikes should generally be ridden in the middle of a traffic lane or in the case of stationary/slow traffic they'd be splitting lanes to go between lines of cars (or on the outside).

Apart from the fragility of these armadillos, I don't have a big problem with them as it looks easy enough to avoid hitting them on your bike.

Personally I think that all cycle lanes should be abolished. On my commute around the north side of Bristol I always feel less safe on the road where there are cycle lane markings as other road users seem to assume that they can pass as close as they like up to and including the white line regardless of where in the cycle lane I'm riding. Where there is no cycle lane most road users seem to give me a much wider berth. Even pulling completely onto the opposite carriage way to pass. And often waiting to pass rather than squeezing through as they would have if I were in a designated cycle lane!
Anyone else with similar experience?

Armadillos recently installed on my commute just to the North of the Velodrome as I enter the Olympic Park.
Sort of see the thinking as there is a bus depot there, although generally it's a really quiet road. Suspect there was some money left over from the bigger cycle lane scheme on the main road which these lead off from.
But, the things are installed much closer together than in the picture above so weaving in and out not such a good idea, which I wanted to do because they are interrupted by a bus stop - I wanted to get out to the road to go past a bus, and clipped one with my rear. And now I just stay in the road!
Guess there are no standards for how they should be paced.
As someone else has mentioned, wouldn't want to meet them in the dark if I didn't know they were there.

BTW, here's how it's done in San Francisco:

The white things are made of light plastic and fold easily. Probably still dangerous when ran over on two wheels, but at least they're clearly visible.

If they are being trialled, shouldn't they be called guinea pigs as opposed to armadillos?

Anyway as soon as some one is seriously injured or killed because of one of these lumps in the road and that local authority is sued by the injured/dead party then they will all hastily be removed.

Sorry, my post of 19:04 was a reply to Al_S

I'd rather see wands than armadillos but some people think they're ugly. I think they make all the difference.

I'd like to see proper physical segregation, but understand its 10 times more expensive than using armadillos, paint and planters

unfortunately the armadillos and planters in Royal College Street London NW1 were repeatedly trashed by motor vehicles, especially HGV around the Parcelforce depot. These items then became a hazard to cyclists using the cycle lane.

It became expensive for these to be constantly replaced so there were long periods with the cycle lane having no markings or "protection", hence the brilliant idea (!) to paint a thick white line along the edge.

Driving (or riding a motor cycle) in a mandatory cycle lane is a moving traffic offense under the 2006 Road Traffic Act. motorcyclists should never be in a mandatory lane, and these armadillo things just physically enforce that which is why MAG hate them. Cycle lanes cannot be enforced by cameras under current UK law, and it is the responsibility of police to enforce them (but they flatly refuse to).

Therefore an affordable measure is needed to protect cycle lanes from general traffic. Armadillos, or orcas, are cheap to install because the drainage on the carriageway does not need to be altered which is very expensive and which you would have to with other types of physical segregation.

I don't buy the argument that they are hazardous: splitter islands with bollards are installed at the beginning and end of the runs, and the armadillo are retro-reflective and only used under streetlighting. Kerbs don't have retro-reflective glass beads stuck all over them, and I don't hear motorcyclists, pedestrians etc saying that they are dangerous. You have to drive according to the conditions presented too you.

I think Stato made the obvious point - you are nto supposed to be anywhere near these as a motor user. Just like any other kerb. Possibly they should be a lot more visible.

I'd rather see them have the tyre shredding capability added to them as you see in some car parks (hire car places mostly) to encourage drivers to not cross into areas they are not allowed into.

Looks like it needs developing - rather like the flower tubs as a solution as long as the outside edge really will damage any motor vehicle to discourage the pesky lorry drivers who love to hit street furniture - self policing solutions do seem to work best

Haven't we seen those armadillos held up as great cycle lane planning and protection on some bike paths abroad just recently ?

No experience myself - but I'd ask the cities concerned who already have them if they've had any problems ?

Oh no STATO, you've just spoilt their fun

Seriously, thanks for some factual info. Not enough of it around these days.

I was going to write a nice detailed response as i ride the road in question daily, but reading many of the responses so far its the usual ill-informed bigoted posters. So instead ill say this...

'Speeding motorcyclists' if this was your comment f-off back to the Sun or Daily-mail website you came from. Idiots.

Armadillos provide separation while allowing cyclists to manoeuvre in or out of the lane as they wish, say to overtake or move into right lane at the next junction (as i do daily). This is better for more users than a lane completely separated, that does not allow flexibility of use.

They pose a risk to motorcyclists where a law abiding rider may be forced to swerve by a poorly executed overtake or other incident, hitting one may launch them into the air.

Visibility? See the big white line in the opening picture, well the armadillos (also in picture) are on that. The white line is preceded by tall orange bollards, the white line is straight.

Personally the armadillos are a good part of the facilitates installed in this location, the bus stop chicanes and quality or roundabout crossings are more debatable.

Ive not seen one car hit or cross into the cycle lane, or park over it where these armadillos are installed. They are square edged to traffic like a curb would be.

The fact that these can be driven over renders them useless. Wherever they are trialled they quicker get destroyed by the first lorry or bus drives over them.

Segregated cycle lanes need to physically separated (by a proper kerb or grass verge) so that cars and lorries can’t drive into them!

Why not just used the old tried and tested method of camera-enforcement?

Put cameras above the cycles lanes, if motorised vehicles encroach- fine them £60 per offence.

It would stop it happening and make a few quid for the councils.

Or am I missing something?

These products seem to have been designed and implemented by car drivers who do not understand the safety needs of cyclists or motorcyclists. I agree that they are potentially lethal to both cyclists and motorcyclists and should be removed.

I can understand the "useless halfway house" comments but I can see the appeal of armadillos - in theory they really should keep cars out the cycle lane whilst allowing permeability for cyclists and preventing a drainage problem.

I think the problem comes from visibility and forgivingness. They are forgiving to cars because they have to be as a result of their poor visibility. Bolt-down kerbs with those yellow signs with a blue circle and arrow down and right like they use for any other potentially damaging obstruction would be much better and would avoid the drainage problem. As would a nicely aggressive rumble strip continuous white line. The edge of the motorised road really has to look like the edge of the motorised road or the cars will end up in with the bikes. Clearly the roads design isn't well refined

As much as I can see the problems with these half-arsed attempts to segregate cyclists from motorised traffic, I struggle to sympathise with the cycle-lane-riding motorcyclists, who, round where I live, treat the A-roads more like a race track than a public highway with 50mph limits.

We wouldn't put up with it from boy racers, so why should be put up with it from bikers?

Motorcycles should stay in the centre of the lane, and not be in the cycle lane like they have been taught during their training.

I think curb would be better - it gives better protection and it's very visible due to its continuity.