Cycling UK Forum

I've argued this point on Twitter countless times, including a few minutes ago.

If he's been following this subject on Twitter he'll have seen that motorists carry on arguing long after they've been made aware what the Highway Code says, so it's patently about arrogance, not ignorance. Their attitude is that "You're the vulnerable road user, so I can do as I please and rely on you to give way, confident that I won't be the one who gets hurt if you don't". This attitude doesn't just apply to turning left, either.

So yes, cyclists can keep backing down all the time, but if they do that nothing will ever change.

On the other hand, I have also said a lot about the wisdom of traffic management that deliberately puts left-turning vehicles on the right of those going straight ahead.

axel_knutt wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:33pm
So yes, cyclists can keep backing down all the time, but if they do that nothing will ever change.

If by backing down you mean not undertaking a vehicle that is signalling left I'll carry on avoiding it thanks. I'd rather be in one piece than part of a campaign to educate drivers of the contents of the Highway Code.

My approach is simple, whether I'm on foot, on a bike, or driving a car.

First priority is to stay safe.
Everything else is considered after that priority is satisfied.

I think of it as a generalisation of the 'defensive driving' approach.

I will only undertake when I can get ahead of the vehicle before it can turn. At traffic lights I get well ahead of the stop line to make sure I have been seen. It is then unlikely that there will be a problem. You may think that motorists are out to get you, but if they run you over it can be something of an inconvenience to them which they will avoid. I use much the same approach on foot (left turning vehicle should give way to pedestrians who are crossing) fortunately I am still fast should the driver have not read the highway code.

Apologies to the thread I made a pig's ear out of the title
Now rectified thanks

irc wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:44pm

axel_knutt wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:33pm
So yes, cyclists can keep backing down all the time, but if they do that nothing will ever change.

If by backing down you mean not undertaking a vehicle that is signalling left I'll carry on avoiding it thanks. I'd rather be in one piece than part of a campaign to educate drivers of the contents of the Highway Code.

Indeed. I'd prefer not to "educate drivers" with my corpse, widowed wife and fatherless children.

I'm willing to bet very good money that there is an equal proportion of cyclists who don't know this "rule" in the HC. Including me.

Even if it is a rule I'm certainly not going to attempt to "enforce" it by deliberately riding straight ahead, on the inside of a motorised vehicle that is already indicating to turn left, and that I am behind, therefore in a position to see more than the driver is.

What is the "rule"? I'd be genuinely interested to hear the explanation for it.

axel_knutt wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:33pm I've argued this point on Twitter countless times, including a few minutes ago.

If he's been following this subject on Twitter he'll have seen that motorists carry on arguing long after they've been made aware what the Highway Code says, so it's patently about arrogance, not ignorance. Their attitude is that "You're the vulnerable road user, so I can do as I please and rely on you to give way, confident that I won't be the one who gets hurt if you don't". This attitude doesn't just apply to turning left, either.

So yes, cyclists can keep backing down all the time, but if they do that nothing will ever change.

On the other hand, I have also said a lot about the wisdom of traffic management that deliberately puts left-turning vehicles on the right of those going straight ahead.

Absurd Lanes.jpg
Cycle path diagram #5.JPG
So which is it.png

Is that a picture of a current junction in York? Does the A3 even go anywhere near York? The picture on the left looks bonkers, are there any real junctions like that?

maximus meridius wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 4:43pm

irc wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:44pm

axel_knutt wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:33pm
So yes, cyclists can keep backing down all the time, but if they do that nothing will ever change.

If by backing down you mean not undertaking a vehicle that is signalling left I'll carry on avoiding it thanks. I'd rather be in one piece than part of a campaign to educate drivers of the contents of the Highway Code.

Indeed. I'd prefer not to "educate drivers" with my corpse, widowed wife and fatherless children.

Totally agree. There was one occasion were a young woman had just overtaken me and suddenly turned left in front of me with no indicator heading into lidl off a straight road -- no cycle lane but that didn't matter. She should have stayed behind me or overtaken me completely before putting on the indicator to at least give me a chance to slow or stop. As it was I managed to stop with her back bumper glancing off my front tyre.

Forget cycling for a minute, and think of driving.

You are on the inside lane on a motorway, there is a long gap between you and the next vehicle ahead in the same lane, and a vehicle slightly ahead of you in the next lane to the right starts indicating to move left. Do you;

a) attempt to undertake it before it moves into the space ahead of you; or,

b) maintain speed, possibly even hang back a little, so as to allow it to move across into the space ahead of you?

My instinct is that under most conditions, most people will follow (b), and that that line of thinking conditions expectations when a driver intending to cross a cycle lane spots that there is a cyclist in that lane, but behind them: at an instinctive level they expect the cyclist to hang back.

TBH, my personal opinion of these sorts of lanes is that they are almost worse than no lane at all in many circumstances, because of the sort of conflicts that they create at turnings.

All the largely unread words in the HC aren’t armour enough: cyclists and motor vehicles don’t mix safely unless the infrastructure is very carefully designed to manage the interactions and/or traffic speeds are controlled very low indeed.

Nearholmer wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 5:28pm Forget cycling for a minute, and think of driving.

You are on the inside lane on a motorway, there is a long gap between you and the next vehicle ahead in the same lane, and a vehicle slightly ahead of you in the next lane to the right starts indicating to move left. Do you;

a) attempt to undertake it before it moves into the space ahead of you; or,

b) maintain speed, possibly even hang back a little, so as to allow it to move across into the space ahead of you?

My instinct is that under most conditions, most people will follow (b), and that that line of thinking conditions expectations when a driver intending to cross a cycle lane spots that there is a cyclist in that lane, but behind them: at an instinctive level they expect the cyclist to hang back.

Exactly. And that's if the driver even sees the cyclist. A road user looking straight ahead, in the direction they are travelling (the cyclist), has far better vision than somebody glancing in a mirror about to make a turn, who will also be looking in the direction in which they are travelling. The cyclist only has to look one way, straight ahead. The driver has to look two ways, the direction they are travelling, and also behind and to the side, via the medium of a wing mirror.

I don't intend this to be on my gravestone:

"He was in the right. But he did his bit for cyclists." As Basil says - "yes, it's so final, isn't it".

Could this be for the first time ever that this forum is of one mind? Oh, the horror of it! Quick someone type something derogatory about carbon fibre or disc brakes or something.
It feels unnatural.

cycle tramp wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 6:10pm Could this be for the first time ever that this forum is of one mind? Oh, the horror of it!

The thread is but a young 'un....

Quick someone type something derogatory about carbon fibre or disc brakes or something.
It feels unnatural.

It is!

maximus meridius wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 4:43pm

irc wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:44pm

axel_knutt wrote: ↑8 Sep 2023, 1:33pm
So yes, cyclists can keep backing down all the time, but if they do that nothing will ever change.

If by backing down you mean not undertaking a vehicle that is signalling left I'll carry on avoiding it thanks. I'd rather be in one piece than part of a campaign to educate drivers of the contents of the Highway Code.

Indeed. I'd prefer not to "educate drivers" with my corpse, widowed wife and fatherless children.

Spot on both of you,I would NEVER ride up the inside of traffic,it's suicidal.