Feedback : 2 year old law junctions

[WEBH]

I would be interested in people's thoughts on the revised road position for cyclists. I still ride where I was originally taught, and much closer to the nearside than current guidance. I find it perfectly ok, both for my convenience as well as for giving vehicles more chance to give me a wider berth. However whilst on an A road a couple of days ago, I had my arm brushed by a Skoda passing at 50-60mph. I was terrified, as was the following white van man, who set off hooting at the Skoda.
Unlike others experience, I'm fairly sure the driver was a) elderly and b)never saw me at all. If I had been in a wider position I would have been just another statistic rather than writing this. I appreciate that not every driver is a Magoo type character, but there's a fair few out there. I honestly feel that my safety is my responsibility as much as possible, and trusting to the driving skills/general awareness of others is a broken reed. I wonder if riding wider is simply putting oneself on offer?

[drossall]

It's not as black and white as that. I think the key points to make are that:

• Riding in primary position (further out) is not remotely new, nor a revised road position; it's been taught for years, especially under the government-backed Bikeability scheme, which you might like to try - all that's happened this year is to have it mentioned explicitly in the Code
• However, it's not necessarily recommended on 50/60mph roads; the idea is choose your road position according to the conditions
• That said, the point is that riding where drivers are looking makes you more likely to be seen, and therefore riding at the side can be more dangerous (as you discovered); this is also an issue at junctions, where drivers waiting to pull out look in the line that cars take, not at the side of the road where less-confident cyclists ride

Without seeing/experiencing the road in question, I'm not going to comment on how I would balance those things in the specific circumstances that you encountered.

[WEBH]

Yes that's a fair point, I guess my takeaway on the new guidelines was a bit simplistic. I try and go for visibility, lights always on and so forth, and as an experienced driver put myself into the potential mindset of those behind the wheel - with an emphasis on 'worst case scenario '.
My particular instance was on a wide flattish stretch of the A49, and really reflected I suppose on the difficulty of planning for those drivers for whom cyclists are simply 'not there's, whether from lack of ability or lack of interest. Short of being on the grass, with this sort of driver it'll always be something of a lottery.

[cycle tramp]

I still ride where I was originally taught, and much closer to the nearside than current guidance. I find it perfectly ok, both for my convenience as well as for giving vehicles more chance to give me a wider berth. However whilst on an A road a couple of days ago, I had my arm brushed by a Skoda passing at 50-60mph. I was terrified, as was the following white van man, who set off hooting at the Skoda.
Unlike others experience, I'm fairly sure the driver was a) elderly and b)never saw me at all. If I had been in a wider position I would have been just another statistic rather than writing this. I appreciate that not every driver is a Magoo type character, but there's a fair few out there..... I wonder if riding wider is simply putting oneself on offer?

Or the flip side was that he did see you, but because you were riding so far to the left the driver thought that there was no reason to change his road position when he overtook you. Without speaking to the driver, we're entering a whole world of assumptions. And I hate that place....

..I've been cycling since the mid nineties and I have always positioned myself, on the road, where one would expect to see a moped or light motorcycle... this means that drivers actually have to make a conscious decision and effort to overtake me by moving into the other lane.. now this behaviour comes with a whole host of caveats including;

-my riding position is upright (probably no more than a 30 degree bend at my most sporting) and everyone can see that I'm a person and I can be seen from several cars behind the one that's following me.

- out of preference I will cycle on c and b class roads, where I come from these roads are lighter in traffic and demand more attention from drivers of motor vehicles (otherwise they will be crashing into that tree, ditch, telegraph pole, sheep, dog walker, cat, chickens, big pile of manure which has fallen from the back of an open trailer).. out of preference I prefere to cycle on tracks and heavily rutted roads, were oil sumps are torn from any car attempting to travel at more than 10 miles per hour....

- I ride in a hi-vis waist coat

- I don't ride into low sun and i'm cautious about riding when the sun is low

- if the motor vehicle behind can't overtake me safety but wants to overtake, then I'll pull in

..personally it works for me, and drivers seem to give me more room when overtaking me. Admittedly I might be facing more danger from a powerful rear-ram (no sniggering at the back there!) from someone who is texting, drunk, or has just simply sneezed or has been blinded by the sun..
but what's the alternative.....that I wrap myself in cotton wool and sit quietly in a box until I died of boredom?

[Steady rider]

https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/manualcountpoints/36537
traffic count seems quite high and at night may be high risk
It looks like off the highway cycle tracks are needed, A64 between Tadcaster and York provides an example.

[cycle tramp]

The other reason good reason to avoid the far left of the road is that's because that's where most of the pot holes and most of the nails, thorns, old screws and glass live...

..here's the thing, right... imagine you're driving a car and ahead of you is a cyclist and there keeping well to the left, but riding very predictability...
There's a car behind you and it's quiet close its been following you for the last four miles. You're keen to get on with your journey and you've got a couple of miles before you get home and leave the idiot who has been following you behind..... get home have a nice cup of tea, see what's on the telly, perhaps have that chicken pie for tea tonight.....
So you're keen to get past this cyclist as soon as possible, he's riding predictability and so you overtake, but perhaps not leaving enough of the gap that you should do. But that was okay because you've been watching him and he's not even twitched the last quarter of a mile.. straight all the way, the guy knows how to cycle.....

........BANG!.....

Suddenly just as you over take the cyclist veers right to avoid a long strip of twisted metal... he catches your wing mirror... and then the car behind hits him and he's gone over the bonnet.

Personally it's down to playing the odds, look at the situation, ask yourself how likely something adverse could happen, plan and act accordingly.

[Pete Owens]

Yes that's a fair point, I guess my takeaway on the new guidelines was a bit simplistic. I try and go for visibility, lights always on and so forth, and as an experienced driver put myself into the potential mindset of those behind the wheel

Indeed, that is always a good point to start.

Imagine that you (and I mean YOU as opposed to some fictional blind driver who cannot see the road ahead of them) are driving along a road with lanes almost, but not quite, wide enough to safely overtake a cyclist leaving a 1.5m gap. This means that to overtake a cyclist (whatever position they are riding in) you need to wait for a gap in oncoming traffic. It is a busy road so you might have to wait a while for a gap to materialise.

Imagine you see a cyclist riding in the middle of the lane. It is obvious that sharing the lane is physically impossible so the cyclist is in control of the situation and has made the decision for you - you don't have the possibility of attempting to squeeze past you have to follow until it is safe.

Now imagine the cyclist moves left to ride at the edge of the road - leaving a car sized gap to their right. They are effectively inviting you to share the lane and overtake. Although, in an ideal world, you know that you really need to wait for a safe gap, you are running late for an appointment and another car is tailgating you. You feel the pressure to not delay the driver behind and that car sized gap looks very inviting.

[Steady rider]

I would suggest riding about 800mm from the kerb or a distance that may tend to reduce the speed of a vehicle from behind and allow you to move towards the kerb if needed. Bends may need extra attention depending on your speed and the driving speed of approaching vehicles.
the link offers some advice
https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community ... ositioning

[Pete Owens]

I would suggest riding about 800mm from the kerb

That is secondary position - appropriate in situations where you are happy to share the lane, but in many situations leaves a gap to your right just wide enough to facilitate a close pass.

https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community ... ositioning

It starts well by explaining how riding in primary is safer and the sort of situations where it is most important.

But it is very poor when advising when not to ride in primary (basically any situation where someone might want to overtake). Since the main point of riding in primary position is to prevent unsafe overtaking this defeats the entire object. It also references the old version of the highway code with its emphasis on not delaying motor traffic at any cost.

[Steady rider]

It is not easy to recommend a precise figure but A roads are a high risk and using you own judgement may be your best option.

[mjr]

It is not easy to recommend a precise figure but A roads are a high risk and using you own judgement may be your best option.

Ah, but as we've often seen, some judgment is a bit flawed and people would put themselves at greater risk crawling along the gutter instead of controlling primary position when appropriate.

[briansnail]

quote]A third (31%) of drivers think pedestrians face even greater danger at junctions after changes to the Highway Code made two years ago were meant to improve safety, according to the RAC.

One of the most notable changes that was introduced advises drivers turning into or out of a junction to give way to pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders who are either crossing or are waiting to cross the road.Source article G Roberts 29 Jan 2024[/quote]

Now I know why cars were stopping for me.I thought it was old age.Time to invest in that walking stick.The advent of autonomous vehicles is a problem. They may drive blind in heavy snow and heavy rain.Especially if you have a budget car with modest sensors.Is it better to revert to the old system? .Courtesy v Safety .You often cannot see the car driver late at night.He thinks you know he is waving us on "shanks mare" hoofers and pedal cyclists alike .We don't.
How is the "new law" going for walkers and cyclists? Would you feel safer if we reverted? I would.I am also a dedicated democrat and might be a lone objector.
ps I tried a search on this topic but nothing came up on the CTC search engine forum
********************************
I ride Brompton,Hetchins 531

[Jdsk]

"Two years on, half of drivers still unsure if Highway Code changes have made roads any safer for pedestrians":
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/drivin ... any-safer/

"Highway Code revisions: Now implemented 29 January 2022":
viewtopic.php?t=139662

Jonathan

[Bmblbzzz]

Just this afternoon, a driver was coming down a side road towards a give way line at I would estimate close to 40mph, saw me about one foot off the kerb and slammed to a stop, waving me on. Yes, the law is working.

Communication with car occupants can be tricky and it would be very foolish to rely on drivers obeying this law before they start slowing, etc, but having it in place does make some beneficial difference. There will of course be criticism because not everyone follows or understands it, but that goes for virtually all laws.

[mjr]

The Royal Automobile Club is not completely supportive of guidance that benefits people not using automobiles? I'm shocked!