Clubjazz - Honda Jazz & HR-V Forums
Other Hondas & General Topics => Off Topic (Non-Honda) => Topic started by: Kremmen on December 02, 2021, 04:04:52 PM
-
This should cause some shunts
Legislation has been passed from January that will force vehicle drivers to give way to pedestrians crossing at junctions.
This means that if you are turning left into a blind junction and suddenly see someone waiting to cross the road you will have to stop and let them cross even if you are creating a hazard on the main road.
There will of course be all sorts of issues with people assuming they can walk out into the road and vehicles not stopping. Also if it's dark the driver may not see that someone will be waiting. Drivers will suddenly stop when the vehicle behind will think its carrying on and run into the back of them.
The far simpler solution would have been to ban pedestrians from crossing at dangerous road junctions and making them walk up the road where they can see clearly both ways.
Instead a dangerous precedent has been set that will cause more problems than it solves.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/355693/cars-give-way-cyclists-when-turning-left-or-right
-
This should cause some shunts
Legislation has been passed from January that will force vehicle drivers to give way to pedestrians crossing at junctions.
This means that if you are turning left into a blind junction and suddenly see someone waiting to cross the road you will have to stop and let them cross even if you are creating a hazard on the main road.
There will of course be all sorts of issues with people assuming they can walk out into the road and vehicles not stopping. Also if it's dark the driver may not see that someone will be waiting. Drivers will suddenly stop when the vehicle behind will think its carrying on and run into the back of them.
The far simpler solution would have been to ban pedestrians from crossing at dangerous road junctions and making them walk up the road where they can see clearly both ways.
Instead a dangerous precedent has been set that will cause more problems than it solves.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/355693/cars-give-way-cyclists-when-turning-left-or-right
Who did they survey to get that amount of agreement, the national cyclist organisation. Cyclists are not good at obeying the laws of the road at best of times, and to give them more 'power' is a big mistake. Many pedestrians just stand on the pavement with no intention of crossing so that will be a big problem. Who gets the blame if you stop in good faith for a pedestrian who does not want to cross and you get shunted by another vehicle. Us motorists have t get used to be the underdogs ( while our fuel duty pays for many things but not better roads ).
-
The sentiment is fine but the likelihood of rear end shunts as a turning car suddenly stops is very high. Roundabouts are bad enough, as soon as a car starts to move the following car tends to react as though they are going to continue. If a car turning from a junction suddenly stops for something which the following vehicle possibly cannot see it could end up badly.
I'll have to remember to be extra vigilant come January 29th.
I have to say I feel slightly uncomfortable about this change. I'm all for peds and cyclists being safer on the roads, but that's very often down to their decision making. I can see some possible entrapment going on too, could be an easy way for plod to meet some booking targets (of course they don't exist, we keep being told they don't, must be true.....).
Potentially a free-for-all for the cash for crash brigade too, all they need is a stooge pedestrian standing at a suitable junction and bingo.
-
Many motorists don't even give way to pedestrians at pedestrian crossings. Probably only enforcement will be after someone gets knocked down. The second part regarding cutting off cyclists when turning left is just something good drivers have always done. It is only common courtesy when coming up behind a cyclist when you are about to turn to sit behind then make your turn behind them.
All in all, it seems like an extra good reason to fit a front and rear dashcam to protect yourself and your pocket.
-
Crash for cash will now involve a car and pedestrian
-
I'm puzzled where the quote comes from, because when I followed your link that text wasn't in the article.
-
The quote wasn't from the link.
It seems that if you are on a main road, turning right into a side street and a pedestrian is about to cross the minor road just as you turn, you are now blocking oncoming traffic.
I just don't get how this was approved.
-
I assume these significant changes will be widely advertised and explained to the nation before implementation and will hold my breath until that happens... :-X
-
I assume these significant changes will be widely advertised and explained to the nation before implementation and will hold my breath until that happens... :-X
That's not a trivial problem. Most drivers haven't touched the Highway Code since their test, and a huge proportion of the population no longer look at traditional media so don't see or believe any public information messages. How do you get this kind of thing through to people who get their news from Facebook, their entertainment from YouTube, and their music from Spotify (other platforms are available!)?
-
The quote wasn't from the link.
It seems that if you are on a main road, turning right into a side street and a pedestrian is about to cross the minor road just as you turn, you are now blocking oncoming traffic.
I just don't get how this was approved.
Haven't you noticed, the objective of traffic planning these days is NOT to speed the passage of traffic, but to actively slow it down!
In the situation you describe, surely you wouldn't start the turn if you see a pedestrian approaching the junction. So you'll be holding up traffic behind you (assuming there's no room to position yourself to allow them through on your nearside, as I was taught but many other people don't bother), not blocking the oncoming traffic.
-
Crash for cash will now involve a car and pedestrian
A decent dashcam is now a 'must have' accessory for any vehicle, and also a rear camera.... it is just a matter of protecting yourself from events that are out of your control. The stupid things I have seen cyclists do like cutting inside turning HGV's and buses, riding without lights etc. is unbelievable. With 'rights' come 'responsibilities' - maybe a complusory test for cyclists and a number plate so that they can be traced when they do stupid things that cause accidents.
-
I assume these significant changes will be widely advertised and explained to the nation before implementation and will hold my breath until that happens... :-X
That's not a trivial problem. Most drivers haven't touched the Highway Code since their test, and a huge proportion of the population no longer look at traditional media so don't see or believe any public information messages. How do you get this kind of thing through to people who get their news from Facebook, their entertainment from YouTube, and their music from Spotify (other platforms are available!)?
I was about to post much the same.
I think the idea is good in principle but not everybody will know about the new rules and pedestrians will not know if the approaching motorist knows and vice versa.
Confusion all round.
-
It's already the case that those on wheels should give way to those on foot who are already crossing. Many don't seem to be aware of this.
-
Trouble is when it's dark ,poor street lighting, pedestrian in dark clothes in central island decides to run across the road in front of you to take advantage of a gap.
And it's raining as well.
And said pedestrian trips and falls in the middle of the road.
I missed him on Thursday night at 9pm.
-
Trouble is when it's dark ,poor street lighting, pedestrian in dark clothes in central island decides to run across the road in front of you to take advantage of a gap.
And it's raining as well.
And said pedestrian trips and falls in the middle of the road.
I missed him on Thursday night at 9pm.
I’m not entirely clear that that scenario is any different with the new rules than at present. If the incident was far enough ahead to be able to brake or avoid then that’s what you do ... no change there. If the pedestrian leaps out in front of you at the very last second such that you can’t avoid, then you have an interesting discussion with plod and/or a magistrate ... again, no change there. Surely the new rules can’t make a driver responsible for irresponsible action by another road user? I suppose the untested point is the extent to which the pedestrian’s behaviour (last minute action, dark clothes) can relieve the driver of some responsibility; that’s well established at present, but how will it change with the new rules?
(BTW, I don’t think poor street lighting and rain are relevant because a driver should be driving according to the prevailing conditions anyway.)
-
The difference between now and the new ruling is at present the pedestrian stands on the kerb waiting for a gap to cross. With the new ruling, if he is standing at the kerb, watching the oncoming traffic you will be duty-bound to stop and let him cross as if it was a zebra crossing.
-
Reading H2 it sounds like the requirement to stop for a pedestrain waiting to cross is only encumbant on someone turning. If you're going straight ahead them presumably you do not need to stop for a pedestrian waiting at the kerb to cross.
If this is the case, consider this.
A pedestrian is standing at the kerb of a main road next to a side road, waiting to cross the main road. Someone turning out of the side road onto the main road is required to stop for the pedestrian to cross the main road.
Someone already travelling on the main road (and not turning) is NOT required to stop for the pedestrian to cross the main road.
Yes, no?
One car turning out stops, one car coming along the main road doesn't. The pedestrian does what?
Am I not understanding it? Does it only work when turning from a main road into a side road or does it also work the other way round?
-
Am I not understanding it? Does it only work when turning from a main road into a side road or does it also work the other way round?
I think it only refers to a pedestrian crossing the side road and the driver turning into or leaving the side road but it is not very clear even in the picture.(but see the give way road markings)
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/356781/2022-highway-code-changes-cars-must-give-way-cyclists-when-turning-pictures
-
Right, hadn't seen the pictures. Hopefully the exact circumstances will be spelled out, but it would appear to apply to a pedestrian on a minor road only, not on a major road, and the vehicle must give way whether turning into or out of that minor road. As long as pedestrians understand this also.
-
Poor street lighting means a pedestrian in the centre of the road ,dressed in dark clothes, is only visible under your headlights. So if you are going round a slight right hand corner, he /she will be virtually invisible until the bend straightens...
Or in the case above, when he runs into the road...
-
There is even less likelihood of pedestrians and cyclists reading the Highway Code so basically, we can forget all about it!
-
Not if a zealous plod spots a pedestrian waiting and you turn and don't stop to let them cross. Whether they were about to go will be irrelevant, you as the car driver will be the one transgressing the law.
I don't know if the distance for the pedestrian from the junction is specified anywhere, how near to the junction do they need to be for this rule to apply, 10m, 50m, 200m?
-
Pedestrians have had right of way when crossing a side road for a long time. Rules 170 to 183 - 'if they have already started to cross', does that mean they have half their foot over the kerb or that they are approaching the kerb on the footpath and look as though they intend to cross ? I have had pedestrians walking along a pavement swerve at right angles onto a zebra crossing - hardly looking at the traffic - if you catch them on dashcam do they fined - I doubt it, so just a case of more rights but no more responsibilities.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
-
I think I am going to burn more fossil fuels as a solution. If I see a pedestrian on the corner of a road I am turning into in my neighbourhood, I am going to go to the next turning. Where I live, getting rear ended in this scenario is a near certainty.
-
Not until the end of January, IIRC.
Keep an eye on: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/updates
Cyclists taking up secondary position (passenger side wheel rut) and not being expected to cling to the gutter, is a good move.
Cyclists having priority in a situation where a car is turning left and the cyclist filters up from behind into the car driver's blind spot, is not.
-
Very similar to what applies in many countries anyway. And paves the way for better cycle lanes.
I'd be much happier if cyclists behaved more responsibly . Or is it just me who thinks many of the worst offenders amongst reckless cylists actually hold driving licences and should know better.
If you are indicating and positioning for an obvious turn a motorcylist who undertook you at 30 mph would (IMO) be driving dangerously . Yet a pedal cyclist can do the same at 30 mph and its all your fault?
A rear dash cam may be a good idea. It may prove that you should have seen them, but occasionally a cyclist (or electric scooter if they are eventually included) who 'came out of nowhere ' might indeed have been travelling at high speed along the footpath immediately prior to the incident .
I accept as a driver of a motor vehicle you have the ultimate responsibility to anticipate and avoid such incidents. As with pedestrians some cyclists will be young or have no road sense.
-
I'd be much happier if cyclists behaved more responsibly . Or is it just me who thinks many of the worst offenders amongst reckless cylists actually hold driving licences and should know better.
You are right that many cyclists should behave more responsibly in traffic.
But this is a two-sided story. I am someone who has traversed half of Europe on a bicycle. See my avatar and this link: https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=14100.msg114318#msg114318.
Unfortunately I have to say that (some) drivers also behave very irresponsibly towards cyclists. When the law of the strongest is applied, the cyclist always loses...
I better not say how many times I have stood trembling and swearing next to my bicycle on the verge because I was almost killed by that stronger (fellow?) road user...
-
I can see some rear end shunts as vehicles have to brake sharply when a pedestrian or cyclist decides to use their new power.
-
Luckily the Highway code is not the law.... 8)
-
I can see some rear end shunts as vehicles have to brake sharply when a pedestrian or cyclist decides to use their new power.
I think this is being over-thought. If I’m turning into a junction then I’m looking for hazards at the turn, and I’m indicating and braking anyway so anyone behind has ample warning. Nothing new there. And if I’m the following vehicle, then I try to drive as if I’m expecting the vehicle ahead to stop suddenly anyway. So nothing new there either. If others don’t drive like that, well, that’s their problem.
[Quote from deleted post removed by Admin]
-
Luckily the Highway code is not the law.... 8)
If any Highway code rule says 'must not' it is defacto the law, and any highway code rule broken will go against you if it comers to court.
-
There must be dozens of Highway code rules broken every day by millions of drivers, they are too numerous to list.
-
There must be dozens of Highway code rules broken every day by millions of drivers, they are too numerous to list.
Many laws are broken in UK every day, but it only becomes a problem for you if you get caught ! The thing is that if you have broken a 'must not' highway code rule and caused an accident or just been unlucky enough to have been spotted by the police it will not go well. Many cyclists especially the cycling mafia in coloured lycra have headcams now, and have taken it upon themselves to be cycling vigilanties, going out of their way to film and report wayward motorists to the police for the slighted transgression. The problem I have is that cyclists carry no sign of identity that can be traced ( like the large numberplate on a vehicle ) so are very hard to report with any success even if they are caught on dashcam doing illegal and stupid things, a cycle is also capable of traveling at a fair old speed and the way cyclists weave among pedestrians, with no warning of their approach is stupidity, I have not seen a horn or bell on a bicycle for may years now, nor rear-view mirrors.
-
I have used dashcams in my vehicles for a few years now, just in case anyone tries to take the mick.....
-
I have used dashcams in my vehicles for a few years now, just in case anyone tries to take the mick.....
So have I - but how do you trace a cyclist that does something wrong, they have no means of ID ? There seems to be no middle way with cvclists where lights are concerned - either none at all or high powered strobes that can blind you at 50 paces. Cyclists really do seem to consider Highway code is irrelevant to them, and to 'empower them' against motorists by use of the highway code is proper ironic.
-
Since cyclists seem to think they own the road they should be taxed like most other road users
-
The idea behind the changes is simple: protect vulnerable road users. These rules already apply in most European countries.
An "encounter" of a car/van/truck with a pedestrian or cyclist ends in some scratches or a dent for the motorized road user. The pedestrian or cyclist often gets off less well: for them it can just end up in a hospital (or a coffin)...
But now the real problem: every game has its rules. That also applies to the "game" in this topic: traffic. If everyone adheres to the rules of the game, it will be fine. There will be no "encounters".
If some of the participants of the game (consciously or unconsciously) break the rules, things go wrong and there is a risk of "encounters".
When I look around me from behind the wheel of our car, sitting on my bicycle saddle or walking in our beautiful city, I unfortunately see that many road users either do not know the rules of the game or violate them consciously or unconsciously.
And let's be honest: it's not just cyclists and pedestrians who are the offenders...
-
I have not seen a horn or bell on a bicycle for may years now, nor rear-view mirrors.
The requirements were removed several years ago. No idea why.
-
I have not seen a horn or bell on a bicycle for may years now, nor rear-view mirrors.
The requirements were removed several years ago. No idea why.
So, the answer to the knock-knock, 'Isabel neccessary on a bicycle?' is no.
-
Let’s just be careful guys. I am a car driver and a cyclist who has lights, camera, mirrors and a bell on their bikes.
Why do I do this, to be honest I have been forced to as my wife and I have been subject to many close passes and in case of my wife road rage when on her bike and trying to turn right across a very busy road.
When I do get to chat with the driver I try to remind them that the worst I can do to him in an accident is I might scratch their paintwork, whilst they could kill me in a one ton machine.
Let us all get on together on the road, yes there are some idiot cyclists, just as there are some idiot drivers.
Just a reminder should you drive in most European countries, and we have cycled in many off them, automatically the onus is on the car driver to prove they had not caused the accident with a pedestrian or cyclist. This creates a general safer environment on the road. Just don’t cycle in France after lunch!
-
I have not seen a horn or bell on a bicycle for may years now, nor rear-view mirrors.
The requirements were removed several years ago. No idea why.
So, the answer to the knock-knock, 'Isabel neccessary on a bicycle?' is no.
Necessary? In my view yes!
Take a look at my bike in the picture in my post https://clubjazz.org/forum/index.php?topic=14216.msg114324#msg114324 .
The rear-view mirror is clearly visible, to see the bell one needs hawk eyes, but is visible, the small (but LOUD) black roundish thing above the brake lever, just to the right of the handlebar bag.The lighting is a strong battery LED lamp, positioned just below the handlebar bag, so that the bag shields light that shines upwards and could dazzle.
So it means that (that few...) responsible cyclists (like me... :P) really have (and use) a bell, rear-view mirror and decent bike lighting. Of course also a red rear light and reflective strips on the tires, so that I am clearly visible from aside.
-
Some of the bike bells out there are a bit weedy. I have heard some (when out running) that sound like a notification ting sound on a phone.
-
I had a Soonhua extra loud bicycle horn/siren on my bike. As loud as a car horn but still not loud enough for joggers with their buds in their ears.
-
I can see some rear end shunts as vehicles have to brake sharply when a pedestrian or cyclist decides to use their new power.
I think this is being over-thought. If I’m turning into a junction then I’m looking for hazards at the turn, and I’m indicating and braking anyway so anyone behind has ample warning. Nothing new there. And if I’m the following vehicle, then I try to drive as if I’m expecting the vehicle ahead to stop suddenly anyway. So nothing new there either. If others don’t drive like that, well, that’s their problem.
[Quote from deleted post removed by Admin]
Better to avoid creating a situation in the first place then be deemed in the right in the collision.
I've seen two collisions and been involved in one myself where the chain of events was kicked-off by someone up front choosing to stop to let someone out (not the same as reacting to someone pulling out - that's different). In one instance I was one of the stationary cars that got hit from behind. In one of the collisions I witnessed, an overtaking biker - hidden from view by the car that had stopped - was struck by the emerging vehicle and knocked off his motorbike and tossed up in the air and along the road.
-
I had a Soonhua extra loud bicycle horn/siren on my bike. As loud as a car horn but still not loud enough for joggers with their buds in their ears.
I use bone conduction headphones which don't block my ears.
-
I can see some rear end shunts as vehicles have to brake sharply when a pedestrian or cyclist decides to use their new power.
I think this is being over-thought. If I’m turning into a junction then I’m looking for hazards at the turn, and I’m indicating and braking anyway so anyone behind has ample warning. Nothing new there. And if I’m the following vehicle, then I try to drive as if I’m expecting the vehicle ahead to stop suddenly anyway. So nothing new there either. If others don’t drive like that, well, that’s their problem.
[Quote from deleted post removed by Admin]
Better to avoid creating a situation in the first place then be deemed in the right in the collision.
I've seen two collisions and been involved in one myself where the chain of events was kicked-off by someone up front choosing to stop to let someone out (not the same as reacting to someone pulling out - that's different). In one instance I was one of the stationary cars that got hit from behind. In one of the collisions I witnessed, an overtaking biker - hidden from view by the car that had stopped - was struck by the emerging vehicle and knocked off his motorbike and tossed up in the air and along the road.
I pretty much stay in lane on my motorbike in traffic because many bikers are killed or injured doing insane speeds between other moving vehicles ( called lane-splitting in some countries and illegal ). If the traffic is stopped I will cautiously filter at no more than 10mph, it ain't worth ending up in A&E to saver a couple of minutes. Better to be a bit late in this life than early into the next......
Overtaking on the inside in Aussie, if not entirely legal was tolerated and we had a grandstand view ( much too close ) of a pretty bad smash, at front of queue at traffic lights on two lane road with turning lane for traffic turning right - stationary traffic, lights on green for our direction, but the traffic stopped across lights with a gap to let cars across, and a RH turning car from other direction came across in front of us, car going straight ahead to our LH side traveling past inside us at about 30mph, big crunch just in front of our nearside wing, coolant and steam everywhere and airbags popping - luckily it was right outside a fire station and I ran across to wake them up....
-
Guardian's take on the Mail's take on new rules on priorities.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/24/common-myths-about-what-uk-highway-code-changes-will-mean
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/30/two-in-three-uk-drivers-unaware-of-planned-highway-code-changes
Edit Added second link
-
Just been watching a news item regarding the changes and the item showed images suggesting that the highway code encourages cyclists to cycle in the centre of the carriageway they are in.
We will now get the obnoxious ones who will reduce traffic to about 10mph, with often no chance to overtake, because they can.
-
There’s been lots of mis-reporting and wild (ie wrong) speculation about these changes and what they mean. It’s worth going back to the source and reading the official line:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-changes-you-need-to-know-from-29-january-2022
-
(https://i.imgur.com/sp0QNxZ.jpg)
will = (when nearer to the kerb is more courteous IMO, not as below)
(https://i.imgur.com/ka88sYu.jpg)
It's early days so let's see how this pans out, dashcam at the ready :)
-
Are you implying that the cyclist in your picture is being discourteous? To me, it looks like he's being sensible. He seems to be doing what the new HC suggests: "riding in the centre of their lane on quiet roads, in slower-moving traffic and at the approach to junctions or road narrowings" (noting that the diversion sign ahead of him constitutes a "road narrowing", he doesn't want to get trapped against it by an overtaking vehicle). No problem there, just hang back and pass when it's safe.
-
I just think with maybe an engine sound behind he should move closer to the kerb.
-
I just think with maybe an engine sound behind he should move closer to the kerb.
And get trapped in front of the diversion sign? He's doing what any road user should do, ie looking ahead for hazards and planning to mitigate them.
-
I just think with maybe an engine sound behind he should move closer to the kerb.
...Nah he'll have some 'buds in listening to his choonz, won't even know you're there ;) :D
-
I just think with maybe an engine sound behind he should move closer to the kerb.
The cyclist is approaching an obstruction (the diversion sign) Perfectly reasonable to position for it in good time. He shouldnt have to scuttle along in the gutter until the last moment,and possibly have to come to a stop, for the convenience of overtakers. Reality may have been different but from this photo I wouldnt overtake here anyway , even if it appeared the cyclist was going to remain in the gutter. Too many potential hazards.
-
I just think with maybe an engine sound behind he should move closer to the kerb.
That could be considered harassment by some. The cyclist in your photo is in exactly the right position given the road ahead, and it would be most unwise to pass them given the hazards ahead: oncoming car passing parked cars, diversion sign causing an obstruction in the road, multiple side roads.
You should in any case allow enough space for the bike to fall over sideways when passing them. That's about the width of a car.
This is all without any changes to the Highway Code.
-
In my defence m'lud, after a previous post I tried to find an image of the new code showing a cyclist centre carriageway as in my top image.
To help show the potential problem as I saw it I searched for a dashcam image showing a cyclist mid carriageway. What I failed to notice during posting was the roadworks ahead.
What I was trying to convey was a situation I can see happening a lot from now on with cyclists occupying centre carriageway regardless.
Bad example, my fault.
-
What I was trying to convey was a situation I can see happening a lot from now on with cyclists occupying centre carriageway regardless.
I personally have no problems with a cyclist taking a more prominent positioning, like a motorcyclist, in situations where they would otherwise be vulnerable by hugging the gutter. On a flat road a fit cyclist can often keep up with other traffic.
The new rules also make explicit that cyclists should never undertake horses being ridden.
And I'm in favour of making it explicit that pedestrians already crossing a side road junction have right of way (in addition to the new H2 requirements). If I hadn't been closely watching a minivan driver yesterday, I would have been run over. He hadn't looked once into the side road I was crossing before turning into it with me already halfway across the junction (running) at that point. I stopped, stared and waved. (No rude gestures.) 2000kg of metal beats 70kg of flesh and bone for kinetic energy. The laws of physics trump the laws of the land.
-
The actual wording of the new rule for cyclists is more sensible than most reports have made it out to be:
Rule 72
Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.
1) Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations
- - on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely
- - in slower-moving traffic - when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake
- - at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you
2) When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads.
-
That'a good mention re busy roads.
There are a few weekends in the summer where there is some sort of a cycle rally along the A22 somewhere south of the East Grinstead area. I forget the exact stretch but it has a lot of single carriageway.
Every year there was a significant tailback of traffic as heavy goods and coaches got stuck behind cyclists 3 abreast with no regard for what was behind.
I seemed to always drive down to Eastbourne on one of the rally days.
-
Just wonder what your opinion would be on a situation that occurred this afternoon.
I was on a single track winding country road (40mph limit, single carriageway) when I came across several cars in front travelling at about 10-12mph.
This was because they were held up a convoy of cyclists, maybe 15-20 of them, riding mostly 2 abreast, forming a continuous line, maybe 40mtrs long.
Obviously there was no opportunity to pass without going onto the wrong side of the road, which was not safe given the winding nature of the road.
This situation continued for around 1.6km before I turned left off the road, by which time there several additional cars behind me. God knows when the traffic eventually got past
I believe they were fully aware of the traffic build up behind them, but could not have cared less
What chance has the motorist got with attitudes like that?
-
...
And I'm in favour of making it explicit that pedestrians already crossing a side road junction have right of way (in addition to the new H2 requirements). ....
That was the case but now it says that a pedestrian WAITING to cross a side road has priority and a vehicle turning in must stop to allow the pedestrian to cross. This in essence means that a pedestrian does not actually need to wait, they can just walk across. They have priority if either waiting or crossing, so just crack on.
I think that's a potential recipe for disaster, either people turning in will not be aware of the rule and will not stop and potentially get done for it (assuming it has law status) or the vehicle will suddenly stop part way into the turn and a following vehicle might collide with them, or you get a stand-off where the pedestrian not understanding the rule just stands there looking blank at the stationary vehicle part way into the turn.
.... and the business of giving 1.0m or 1.5m or 2.0m clearance to cyclists is way too complex for real world use. Give decent clearance, yes, but trying to decide whether it needs to be 1.5m or 2.0m depending on whether the cyclist is on a slow of faster road and is moving between the centre of the lane and 0.5m from the verge etc , all way too complex .......
I suspect for a large goods vehicle on a narrow road it wouldn't actually be possible to achieve some of these figures at all.
I bet there are a lot of people who couldn't accurately judge 1.5m anyway, even if they knew what it was.
Time will tell.
-
I think 'time will tell' is the key here.
It's far too early to see any reports of incidents.
Edit:
Seems not, this lot refused to let cars past for 8 miles whilst looking back and laughing :
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10454809/Cyclists-middle-road-drivers-POWERLESS-stop-new-Highway-Code.html
-
I think that's a potential recipe for disaster, either people turning in will not be aware of the rule and will not stop and potentially get done for it (assuming it has law status) or the vehicle will suddenly stop part way into the turn and a following vehicle might collide with them, or you get a stand-off where the pedestrian not understanding the rule just stands there looking blank at the stationary vehicle part way into the turn.
One thing that people have failed to pick up on is, that due to the new hierarchy, cyclists must also give way to pedestrians waiting to cross the road. In my opinion, a cyclist is more likely to get back ended by a car than another car is, with much worse consequences. Although I do think that all road users will 'cherry pick' the rules that apply to them and I can't see cyclists taking any notice of this particular one.
-
I think 'time will tell' is the key here.
It's far too early to see any reports of incidents.
Edit:
Seems not, this lot refused to let cars past for 8 miles whilst looking back and laughing :
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10454809/Cyclists-middle-road-drivers-POWERLESS-stop-new-Highway-Code.html
Oh, The Daily Mail eh? Must be true then. 8)
-
That'a good mention re busy roads.
There are a few weekends in the summer where there is some sort of a cycle rally along the A22 somewhere south of the East Grinstead area. I forget the exact stretch but it has a lot of single carriageway.
Every year there was a significant tailback of traffic as heavy goods and coaches got stuck behind cyclists 3 abreast with no regard for what was behind.
I seemed to always drive down to Eastbourne on one of the rally days.
Sounds like Forest Row to Wych Cross. An alternative route to is to leave the M25 at the M23 junction. leave the the M23 at Crawley and go via Turners Hill and Sharpthorne and join the A22 at Wych Cross. Wych Cross to Nutley has some overtaking spots and there are some wide single carriageways sections near Uckfield, but otherwise there is no dual carriageway until Hailsham.
For overtaking spots the A21 is worse - there is nothing south of the dual carriageway ending at Kipping's Cross, other than the short dual carriagway at Lamberhurst. There used to be a two lane dual carriageway at Flimwell but that was made single lane dual carriageway after some bad accidents.
-
The SatNav always reckoned M25 > M23 > then along the coast but I just preferred the more scenic and relaxing A22.
I need to find some way of knowing these events before I go although this year it'll maybe be Sep.
-
Whenever I drive a motor vehicle I consider if I am holding up traffic behind me and will do all I can to let them overtake as soon as reasonably possible. It has never occurred to me to be any less considerate to others when I'm riding a bicycle. Is there some sort of righteous entitlement hysteria involved, especially when riding in a group , or is it simply the UK has a lot of innately selfish pigs?
-
... or is it simply the UK has a lot of innately selfish pigs?
Probably not a majority but enough to make other road users curse. >:(
-
I believe they were fully aware of the traffic build up behind them, but could not have cared less
What chance has the motorist got with attitudes like that?
Just like a tractor driver (or someone doing 40mph on a narrow NSL road), they should pull in from time to time to let waiting traffic past.
-
cyclists more likely do
I believe they were fully aware of the traffic build up behind them, but could not have cared less
What chance has the motorist got with attitudes like that?
Just like a tractor driver (or someone doing 40mph on a narrow NSL road), they should pull in from time to time to let waiting traffic past.
Most cyclists probably doing <20mph, but up a hill, a fair bit less. The lycra clad ones are the entitled ones, I used to work with a couple of blokes who had all the garish lycra and mega expensive carbon bikes, the only way I can describe them is 'militant'..
-
I agree that the majority of cyclists will continue to realise their vulnerability and will continue as normal.
I used to cycle 5 miles to work in the 80's and some car drivers were silly. As I cycled up the inside at a traffic light queue some would deliberately pull as close to the kerb to block you. Didn't work because that left a bigger gap on their drivers side. They were clearly peeved when a smile at them when passing this new big gap was realised.
-
I used to cycle 5 miles to work in the 80's and some car drivers were silly. As I cycled up the inside at a traffic light queue some would deliberately pull as close to the kerb to block you. Didn't work because that left a bigger gap on their drivers side. They were clearly peeved when a smile at them when passing this new big gap was realised.
I had exactly the same experience many times.
One day, while cycling to work, in a queue of traffic a lorry almost squeezed me to death. A bit further on he was stopped and there was room for me to come up the inside of him. I reached up and banged my fist on his passenger door as hard as I could. I then rapidly cycled off. He was hanging out of his window swearing and shaking his fist at me! I then regretted doing it because every morning I was worried that he might be on the road at the same time and do me in! After that I made sure I was wearing different clothes.
-
I had similar but in west London, Uxbridge Road, their were plenty of bus lanes to escape :)
-
If anyone wants a reasonable explanation of the changes Hubnut on Youtube gives an unbiased view.
-
If anyone wants a reasonable explanation of the changes Hubnut on Youtube gives an unbiased view.
Good video.
All it needs is for everybody to be a bit more tolerant and considerate of others.
-
I had an interesting issue today regarding pedestrian priorities. While driving in a strange town I was turning left into a street where pedestrians were waiting to cross. I was about to stop to give them priority when, at the last second, I noticed they were waiting at a light-controlled crossing.
Could have been embarrassing.
-
Whenever I drive a motor vehicle I consider if I am holding up traffic behind me and will do all I can to let them overtake as soon as reasonably possible. It has never occurred to me to be any less considerate to others when I'm riding a bicycle. Is there some sort of righteous entitlement hysteria involved, especially when riding in a group , or is it simply the UK has a lot of innately selfish pigs?
They say that drivers make good cyclists (and visa versa) as they are more conscious of their surroundings. I done my cycling proficiency when I was 10, but once I got behind the wheel I so much more aware of my actions towards car drivers.
The SatNav always reckoned M25 > M23 > then along the coast but I just preferred the more scenic and relaxing A22.
I need to find some way of knowing these events before I go although this year it'll maybe be Sep.
Along the A27 is the route used by locals even though signposts direct along the A22. Personally I always prefered the A22, especially through Ashdown Forest - very scenic and much lighter of traffic. Though for the last four years I've been living just outside Hastings so the A21 works best for me for the M25.
-
I only use the A21 when I go to Rye but I find it a pain as it seems to have more stretches of single carriageway. The only times I used the A27/M23 route was when I knew there was a steam fair on, again I forget exactly where along the A22 but a traffic jam generator.
Of late though, pre pandemic, my route to Rye was the HS1 from St Pancras. Far more relaxing and at 135mph fairly quick to Ashford, then just a few stops to Rye.
-
I found car drivers (warm and dry) were often intolerant of even a motorcyclists ability to utilise narrow gaps. (And I didnt take liberties -well not too often :-[)
The new Hierarchy of road user regulations puts emphasis that ALL road users ,including cyclists , should be considerate to others . But I suspect, as in the past, a minority of cyclists will continue to cherry pick their rights and ignore their obligations.
Up till now the highway code has been divided into things you SHOULD do (ie its not the law but could count against you in court if you didnt follow the code ) and things you MUST do by law .
The Hierarchy seems to introduce a new one . 'cyclists are asked to .....'. Not exactly emphatic is it ? :P
-
The new Hierarchy of road user regulations puts emphasis that ALL road users ,including cyclists , should be considerate to others . But I suspect, as in the past, a minority of cyclists will continue to cherry pick their rights and ignore their obligations.
Uh, I think I said that:
One thing that people have failed to pick up on is, that due to the new hierarchy, cyclists must also give way to pedestrians waiting to cross the road. In my opinion, a cyclist is more likely to get back ended by a car than another car is, with much worse consequences. Although I do think that all road users will 'cherry pick' the rules that apply to them and I can't see cyclists taking any notice of this particular one.
-
Sorry. I didnt read back through the full thread. Great minds think alike ;)
-
Sustrans Article.
https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/news/2022/january/new-changes-to-the-highway-code/?utm_source=Sustrans&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=12963357_2022%20February%20Enews&utm_content=highway_title&dm_i=6EB,7PUL9,6GTW3E,VGJF8,1
-
Anyone noticed much difference yet?
As a pedestrian crossing side streets I would have been run over more than once by now if I hadnt checked for traffic myself, as I've always done.
And whilst I fully agree with being considerate to cyclists it does cut both ways. I overtook a cyclist in good time. A few hundred metres later I had to pull over and come to a stop because of an oncoming truck. When the cyclist caught up he was annoyed because my presence meant he also had to stop and wait about 10 seconds for the truck to come through rather than continue riding through a dangerously narrow gap. . There wasnt a confrontation but I heard him grumbling. (nice quiet Jazz) . Sorry mate, courtesy is one thing, but you cant expect other classes of traffic to simply disappear for your convenience.
Then a cyclist travelling at 28 mph in front of me decided that the inconvenience of having to stop for a red traffic light did not apply to her.
I have nothing against cyclists, I am one myself sometimes.
-
Anyone noticed much difference yet?
As a pedestrian crossing side streets I would have been run over more than once by now if I hadnt checked for traffic myself, as I've always done.
I was just thinking the same thing this morning.
There's a side road I have to walk across almost every day - actually the exit from a mini roundabout - and even when I'm standing on the island half way across the road I have only had one vehicle stop for me.
-
I am aware that under the new Highway Code on turning into a side road you should give way to pedestrians crossing the road. But what about pedestrians waiting to cross the road? This morning I turned into a side road and there was a person standing on the edge of the pavement obviously wanting to cross the side road. They saw me, I saw them, I could easily have stopped but I didn't because if I had the back of my car would have been would have been sticking out into the main road which would be a potentially dangerous situation. Was I right or wrong not to stop?
-
I believe that according to the highway code, you should have stopped:
"when people are crossing or waiting to cross at a junction, other traffic should give way"
-
It's rather mad. Obviously, if someone is already in the road you have to give way to them but the risk of getting shunted by a following vehicle which in turn might push you into the pedestrian is too high for me. I turn slowly and try to make eye contact with the pedestrian. It would be stupid if pedestrians started to force the issue by stepping out in front of a close vehicle.
-
I do a lot of urban walking and I always let cars turn off a main road. I'm happy to wait a few seconds. Common sense.
However, once I'm half way across a junction and a car is approaching the junction from my left, minor to main road, they rarely stop. Me being me, I keep walking, carefully, and force them to keep further to the left than they would like.
I always stop for pedestrians who are already crossing a junction.
-
It would be stupid if pedestrians started to force the issue by stepping out in front of a close vehicle.
I think there is confusion about the concepts of "priority" and "right of way". The HC makes very clear who has priority, but it specifically says there's no such thing as right of way*. So if, whilst driving, you see a pedestrian waiting to cross at a junction you should allow them their priority, but they do not have any right to enforce that by stepping out in front of you (which is no different to previous rules). If you consider it would be hazardous for you to give way, then maybe you didn't actually see them so couldn't give way...
* https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158
"The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others."
-
As I was told by a driving instructor, back in the days of starting handles, if a pedestrian walks out in front of you and you don't try to avoid them by braking or swerving, then you are away the craw road.
-
you are away the craw road.
Translation required please ;D I presume the mention of starting handle is significant
-
"Away the Craw Road" originally meant dead but also equates to "up sh*t creek without a paddle."
-
"Away the Craw Road" originally meant dead but also equates to "up sh*t creek without a paddle."
Ah, I see.
I've read the book Crow Road by Ian Banks but didn't realise that the name had a special meaning.
-
The name of the book is taken from the auld Scots expression.