To worry about seeing little cyclists on busy roads

[heartstornastray]

It's nice that family's all get to go out cycling and learn how to be responsible on roads but there's no way i'd have a small child cycling behind me on a busy road like i often see. You really can't depend on car drivers seeing the child. Also if something's overtaking on the other side and a car has to pull in the child would be killed. Surely if they must cyvle on busy roads the child would be safer in front.

The other day we passed a man with two children, both cycling behind him and the smallest one (about 6) was wobbling precariously trying to keep up with dad, he could so easily have fallen into the path of a car, and the father wouldn't have even been aware, why put your children at risk.

I'm 31 weeks pregnant and still cycling over here (Netherlands).

Not on your friggin life would I be doing that in the U.K. (esp London and the SE where there are actually pretty good provisions for cyclists considering) make me feel like I've got a big target on my back that says "try and ram me, go on".

That's why I wont be cycling with my toddler on a seat at the back when we return.

The OP has a point BUT having been on both sides, basically it's drivers in the U.K. that seem to see cyclists as an annoyance to be swatted out the way.

*where I
(Not "make me")

The road i was talking about with the father and little boy, the car drivers were all driving responsibly, they couldn't have drove any further out from the side. If the little boy had stumbled and fell outwards he wouldn't have stood a chance., the father couldn't even see what he was doing. The same if it had been an adult, the difference is, the little boy depends on an adult to keep him safe from danger, an adult is aware of the dangers and is better equipped to cope with it.

Just out of interest hearts were they all wearing helmets?

Another rule of thumb...
If there isn't enough room to safely overtake a car then there probably isn't enough room to overtake a bike.
I'm fecking sick of cars 'squeezing past' me when there simply isn't enough room to do this safely.

My tongue in cheek suggestion is a compulsory cycling element to driving tests. Feel the fear of a vehicle passing too close, cutting up when a vehicle passes too closely.

How would you propose making this accessible for people with disabilities who cannot ride a standard bike?

Oh God!!!! Here we go again. This is so typically British. A family are riding on the road as they are perfectly, legally entitled to do but some folk think they shouldn't because it makes them feel scared. They do not seem to have this problem on the continent where everyone can share the road, highways and bi-ways without getting their knickers in a twist. A friend of mine had words with me because I wasn't wearing a helmet as I cycled into town. Remaining perfectly calm, I pointed out that I wasn't breaking any law by not wearing a helmet however she was breaking the law as she was riding on the pavement.

Another covert cyclist-bashing thread. Simple fact is: pedestrians, riders and cyclists have a right to use the highway, drivers don't , they need to seek permission and are licensed to do so if they behave.
Everyone pays for roads via their taxes, regardless of whether they are a driver or not, they are owned and maintained by us all. If drivers want to set up their own private roads solely for their use, go ahead and pay for them, otherwise obey the rules and quit whinging.

Totally agree OP. I hate to see it as it scares the life out of me. We live near an off road nature area with lovely cycle paths. But of course people cycle on fast country lanes to get there and I just hold my breath when I come round a corner and there's little children on bikes.

I drive below the 60mph speed limit as I know that horse riders and cyclists regularly use the road but I often see people thrashing their cars along that road and I shudder at the dreadful possibilities.

@Andro How would you propose making this accessible for people with disabilities who cannot ride a standard bike?

You sit them on a stationary equivalent and have vehicles whoosh past them at road speeds. You'll still feel the judder and the wind rush and the fear of having several ton of metal close enough to touch. A bus firm did exactly that with its drivers, training them about close passes by buses. Had an incredible effect that all the written guidelines in the world would not have.

@TheLegendOfBeans Just out of interest hearts were they all wearing helmets?
I don't get the relevance of this question, but interestingly, studies show that vehicle drivers give significantly more room and drive less riskily around unhelmeted cyclists.

So should cyclists go bareheaded and have motorised traffic behave more safely (but risk a slip); or put a lid on and risk the close passes and dangerous overtakes (and hence injuries which could be 'caused' by the helmet)?

I don't think it's necessarily cyclist bashing. I'm a cyclist and I won't ride on the road as I'd be vulnerable. I take a longer route through parks, quiet footpaths (as do our local police) or our cycle paths instead of touching the road. The laws of the road were probably made when the roads were safer for cyclists.

@SleepFreeZone
Totally agree OP. I hate to see it as it scares the life out of me. We live near an off road nature area with lovely cycle paths. But of course people cycle on fast country lanes to get there and I just hold my breath when I come round a corner and there's little children on bikes.

I drive below the 60mph speed limit as I know that horse riders and cyclists regularly use the road but I often see people thrashing their cars along that road and I shudder at the dreadful possibilities.

Not picking on you personally SleepFree, but why can't we then say that country roads like this give full legal priority to pedestrians, bikes, horses and other non-motorised traffic, like what they were built for (Tractors and other essential vehicles etc excluded etc)

Or say on weekends, cars are banned entirely? Or any other combination that doesn't permanently put cars at the heart of everything and gives other road users higher priority for once?

It shouldn't just be that motorised transport gets top billing on every single road, lane and country track, as well as the motorways, A roads and dual carriageways also available for them.

Haven't rtft but I don't think kids should cycle on busy roads until they have done their cycling proficiency. My dd certainly isn't safe on the road despite being able to ride a bike.

@DrDreReturns Haven't rtft but I don't think kids should cycle on busy roads until they have done their cycling proficiency. My dd certainly isn't safe on the road despite being able to ride a bike.

Agree with the desire for active cycle training. And wouldn't it be ace if we grew a generation of children who felt all modes of transport were safe and accessible and viable to them, and who would as likely jump on a bike or run, skate or scoot somewhere than drive - and not just short distances either.

Yes legend they were all wearing helmets. Tbh i think the father must have been seriously lacking in common sense, some people are just stupid.

I often see people thrashing their cars along the road and shudder at the dreadful possibilities

So cars are being driven irresponsibly but it's the cyclists, horse riders, pedestrians who shouldn't be allowed there, just in case????
In my Utopian world, driving tests would have to be sat every 5 years. Part of the test would be to cycle a bike so they know what it's like. All cyclists would sit a cycling proficiency test (or Bikeability as it is now known, in Scotland anyway). The roads belong to everyone and everyone should use them safely and responsibly and not blame others or twist the story e.g. a media report that will say "the cyclist, who was not wearing a helmet, was seriously injured when a car came round a corner at speed on the wrong side of the road and ploughed into said cyclist ....ergo cyclist at fault. It boils my piss. Let's all love one another and realise that it's not the fault of the cyclist, pedestrian, driver, horse rider etc. it's the fault of someone being a fuckwit!

I spend a lot of time in Belgium where cycling is totally normal and there are Children cycling everywhere from very young ages - and Belgium is a tiny tiny country so you can't blame our small and busy roads. It can be done! If people in their big cars (of which I have one) are prepared to accommodate! Also I should add.....very little obeisity in Belgium and I'm yet to see any overweight children. I think so much of this is to do with how much they cycle and how that breeds a culture of activity from a young age.

I really think that some parents imagine that helmets give some kind of magic immunity for their children and that it fulfills all the safety aspects of riding on roads. Like i've said, apart from children easily unbalancing off a bike you simply cannot account for the actions of some bad drivers. Why put your kids in danger and take a chance.

Pagan if a small child tumbles off their bike into the path off a car on a busy road, the only fuckwit would be the parent who allowed them on that busy road.

I see this quite often where I live. A lot of parents are idiots. Can't really intervene, the first directive you know.

So car drivers should have part of their test which educates them about cyclists. Will cyclists have something about cars in their test.....oh, wait. They don't even have to sit one. They can learn to ride a bike and wobble straight onto the road but it is the responsibility of the car drivers who have had a series of expensive lessons and pased a strict test to watch out for them???? Why???

Not if the driver is giving the correct amount of Overtaking space. It's all about risk assessment. Accidents happen yes but the mass wailing and gnashing of teeth where folk say young kids shouldn't be on the road is wrong. It's addressing a problem the wrong way. And as said if it can be done elsewhere it's attitudes that are the problem. It's all about risk assessment but how many folk never let kids cycle on roads but happily let them pile en mass on a trampoline which is against all advice. How many of the accidents dealt with in A&E are bike related compared to trampoline related?

Demented I did say Utopian world and I did say all cyclists should sit a test too. And you'll probably find that most cyclists have driving licenses but most drivers probably never ride a bike in traffic. Cycling proficiency isn't funded like it used to be and, in Scotland now relies on volunteers whereas before it was conducted by the police. And it's hard getting the volunteers

And during driving lessons and subsequent test, they may not always have encountered a cyclist, or a horse, or a tractor but they can still pass the test!!! IMO that is wrong and the lessons/test should include all this. I see that learner drivers will now be allowed on motorway with a qualified instructor presumably because it was perceived that it was safer to learn properly rather than pass the test and be chucked in at the deep end.

According to the Highway Code you are supposed to leave as much space as if you were overtaking a car.

If everyone did this cyclists would be a lot safer.