We've all done it - dashing across the road when we shouldn't - but isn't it a basic principle that you make sure you've got eye contact with the driver before you run in front of their car? Or at the very, very least, watch the driver so you can see and immediately tell if they're about to hit the gas before they actually touch the peddle.

What really gets me these days is the number of people who come running through slow (never mind stationary) traffic coming down from Davids Road or Devonshire road, cutting diagonally to get to the station. In effect, sneaking up behind drivers then cutting across them just as they're about to drive on. Sheer utter madness.

A summary of some research done on pedestrian safety and waiting times:

Regarding waiting times at signalised crossings - studies done by the UK Road Transport Laboratory show 30 seconds was the longest pedestrians would wait at signalised crossings before attempting to cross against the red man. Focus group studies with adults & children report that 30 seconds is the maximum amount of time they are willing to wait at a signalised crossing before they become impatient. Impatience peaks at 40 to 45 seconds. The recommendation from the Road Transport Laboratory is that traffic collisions can be reduced by developing a control system that does not cause pedestrians to wait an unduly long time.

We are dealing with human behaviour - very complex !

One of the interesting things about the facts in this thread is the behaviours of humans. The same behaviour I have referred to numerous times now with regards to a crossing at the rear of the station.

Those who cross roads properly make a habit of it, and will use a crossing if available. Those who are too important or impatient will simply take any risk necessary to get across the road as quickly as possible.

Waiting 60 seconds for a crossing to make it safer to do so clearly doesn't compute for some.

There is always room for improvement in road safety, from every angle. The question is, does the purse allow for it? And at what point do you throw every penny you have at something, in order to eliminate the humans responsibility in the matter?

Snazzy, the problem will be solved when people take back their own responsibility for their actions and not hive them off to someone else.

I don't think it's Lewishams or the government's fault for this collision (and its not an accident), it's the fault of the person who decided to move across the road when not safe to do so and against everything put in place to help them make the right decision.

Darwin is always looking to hand out more rewards.

Londondrz, I have to agree. The whole blame culture has a lot to answer for.

Slip, trip or fall at home or work...

Before calling, were you drunk, playing the fool, or not paying attention?
If you answer NO to all the above, please let us see if someone is actually to blame. Otherwise, grow up!

Common sense and a little patience goes a long way when crossing roads, and making other such decisions. While crossings play a part in our day to day lives, they are tools for our use. Like any tool, don't use it properly and you will get hurt.

That's not to say I don't think all crossings and road layouts need reconsidering at times. The one further up by Honor Oak Road is very much one of those badly thought out crossings.

That said, I do sometimes wonder if some crossings are rushed and put in stupid places due to good old human behaviour. If people keep crossing in dangerous places, and keep getting hit by cars, surely they will just fit a crossing. So there is hope for a crossing at the back of the station after all.

There are some surprisingly sensible posts on this thread which is greatly encouraging. Thanks. (And some predictable trolling ones...)

I will query this though: the idea of a pedestrian first catching the driver's eye.
When crossing Perry Vale for example (which uses this crossing-free wild-west model), I cannot usually see car drivers' faces at all. All a pedestrian can see is glare from the laminated screen. It's the way they are angled.
(Drivers of Buses, vans and un-aerodynamic British cars from the '60s can be seen fine.)

So if a driver thinks he is meaningfully visually negotiating with a pedestrian through the windscreen, they are probably mistaken. We simply cannot see their cheery waves and smiling face...

Regarding the timing on crossings, the main reason for the 'waiting time' is that they are programmed not to operate within a certain time of the previous cycle. The reason for this is obvious as if they responded immediately to the press of the button every time you could have a situation where the traffic could be stopped for excessive periods as successive pedestrians kept pressing the button, hence the delay so that the traffic can be kept moving.

Perryman, the "looking at the driver" to see if he/she is looking at you is not foolproof. Drivers get what is called "target fixation" so you may think they are looking at you but they are not, they are fixated on something else. The other side of the coin is they become fixated on you and drive into you. Happens to motorcyclists quite a lot.

A sensible rule of thumb is to treat everyone else as idiots how set off with the sole purpose of causing you harm. Be aware of your surroundings and don't try to predict what people are going to do.

I give this advice as an ex motorcyclist who started to take my years of experience for granted and came up against a drunk driver who decided to turn in front of me and put me out of action for a very long time.

I though that having a headlight on, wearing reflective clothing and doing everything in my power to be seen would help me. It didn't.

The issue is not that there is a wait at all, but the length of the wait.

While 60-80 secs is not a long time, human behaviour is conditioned by expectation. Most pedestrian controlled crossings have a shorter minimum wait. One you've waited longer than you are used to, the subconscious starts kicking in, questioning if the lights are working properly, making you impatient. It's not a conscious thing, it's conditioning.

I was in Spain recently and saw pedestrian crossings that gave you the countdown until you'd get a crossing light, rather than what we commonly have here, which is a countdown for how long you have to cross. The former might be helpful. Or it might make people think: 60 seconds? I'm not waiting that long.

Separate entirely from this is the foolishness of trying to cross through standing traffic towards a lane where traffic is moving freely and can't see you, when there is a safe crossing provided. That's a bad decision, pure and simple. I don't suppose any of us are innocent of making bad decisions, so let's not judge.

I very much like the countdown idea - a pedestrian would at least know the lights are working. And it would encourage tfl to set sensible waiting times.

In the trade-off between pedestrian and driver inconvenience, my rough rule would be that if 4 cars are going to be held up for 10s, then 1 person crossing should be prepared to wait 40s.
If 8 cars are being held up, then 80s is not an unreasonable wait.
But of course 2 people crossing should then halve the time, and so on.

Lots of good points here and I do agree that Forest Hill is not pedestrian friendly. There are surely enough reasons to promote non-car transport in London so am puzzled by the oft heard bias towards the car. If 4 cars have to wait 10 secs at the lights then each car has been delayed by only 10 secs. This is not a big deal yet many motorists seem frustrated by it even though they will probably get to their destinations faster than those on foot anyway. Hardly surprising that a minute wait or more causes those on shanks' pony to find their own way across the road, even if it is not safe to do so.

Roads are there for all users and that includes pedestrians. I know of a local crossing where the lights turn immediately on request and only give a c. 20 sec wait if the cycle has just completed. Perfect bias and the busy traffic still flows fine. People make a point of using it and there is very little jaywalking as a result. Am not naming the spot in case this happy compromise was unintentional.

Since traffic is at saturation point, waiting at a set of lights does not delay the journey. It just means the motorist does not wait so long at the next set of lights.

I completely agree about the countdown. I first saw such pedestrian countdowns in the US. The helpful thing is the double countdown - countdown on the green man and countdown on the red man. The current generation of countdowns that can be seen springing up across London are not good enough as they don't give waiting times, only crossing times.

I believe double countdowns would encourage safer behaviour by pedestrians and reduce unnecessary injuries. As others have said, there is something psychologically helpful about seeing your goal getting closer rather than automatically thinking after 45 secs "Will these lights ever change, perhaps they aren't working, what if they never change...". We are now so used to downloads progressing with a visible indication. We need to learn from User Interaction from software and websites, and provide a visual cue for people waiting more than 20 seconds.

I did a little research and found this:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...ssing_wait

Does anybody have time to time this crossing? From start of the red man to start of the green man. Are we being made to wait excessive times on this crossing?

I timed it about a year ago, just the once and it was bang on two minutes back then.

I would like to see a smart crossing installed where it allows pedestrian crossing very quickly when the lights sense low traffic. This sort of technology is used on non pedestrian traffic lights (one example being between dulwich village and North dulwich station)

I timed it yesterday and it was exactly 90 seconds between traffic lights switching from red to returning to red. That was during the evening , it is possibly longer at other times. However that is in line with the timings at Honor Oak Road with which these lights appear be be aligned.

I don't have a car. But I doubt the lights can be changed. We live on the SOUTH CIRCULAR. Keeping traffic flowing is the priority. Especially at the corner where the station is.


It's like people running across the lights at the station instead of waiting 30 seconds. Even if you make the sequence shorter.....idiots will still run across with prams/children/alone. You can't stop them.

Having a count down is probably the only good idea here.

I like the idea of a countdown.

Too true Nick, too true, the childs welfare should always take preference

Not sure what happened here as I replied to Nicks post

Speaking as a qualified driver - where was the emergency stop? no need to hit anybody.

Bus drivers are the same most of them haven't heard of - looking ahead and anticipating having to stop- to avoid excessive and potentially dangerous use of the breaks - this problem is constant.
+ cars moving in a car park or anywhere there are pedestrians - should stop when one is walking near their car.