9hrs is all it took!

[Finallylostit]

The new highway code to cause anger!

I went for my morning cycle - no issues did nothing different than I normally do.

Home, shower, jump in car to get food shopping. I live down a country road - wide enough for 2 cars to pass with care, wide enough for a car to over take a cyclist sticking to the left of the lane, with the required space at certain points. Locals all know the places to do it safely.

Today 1 cyclist riding down the middle of the lane - now unsafe for car to pull over to other lane and pass - brilliant

Was he considerate of other road users and pulled over- no.

As on the other side were 8 riders riding two abreast high fiving each other and doing the finger to the motorists. Shouting its the law twats!
Were they considerate of other road users no.

Some of the new laws i think are sensible -
but the ride in the middle of the road, even if there is a cycle lane because you don't feel like it - is asinine

2 abreast packs of mamils hunting on weekends as they venture out of London - when they are generally rude enough as it is - gives those cyclists who are arseholes a legal right to now be an arsehole.

Be considerate and pull over to let cars and vans pass -
that is as likely as Downing Street not having another party in a lockdown!

@AuntyBumBum

Hi *@Fudgein*

I've just come to accept that we are all going to be driving more slowly everywhere .... It's so dangerous

I don't quite see how these two things relate to each other! Isn't the point to make drivers go slowly and cautiously so that the roads are less dangerous?

But the pollution levels will rise which makes it more dangerous and emergency service vehicles will have difficulty getting through.

It will also mean that the cost of things will go up as the drivers will need more money because journey times will be longer and the fuel used will go up. Dawdling at 5mph per hour isn’t really possible in some vans. Instead you would have more braking, idling and starting up to go a few yards.

OFFS A Cyclist next to the centre line - as in the one in the middle of the road - cyclist is indicating by their road position they intend to turn right. DO NOT OVERTAKE. You wouldn’t overtake a car turning right would you?

Some idiot last week tried to overtake me as I indicated and moved to turn right. I thought they were an absolute moron and that they must be the only idiot in the world who didn’t realise this but now I realise they are not alone!

Bikes don’t have indicators. If I am planning on making a right turn on a road with two lanes well before the junction I:

1. Check my mirror (yes I have one) and over my shoulder
2. Stick my right arm out
3. Put my arm down and Move to the centre of the road (need the arm to turn)
4. Turn if it opposing carriageway is clear
5. If not clear stop and wait in the centre of the road with arm out.
6. When clear out arm down and turn

If it’s a road with more than one lane per side I do the above but at some point earlier I move to the right hand lane.

Just like a car I use the correct lane for my direction of travel. So if I’m coming up to a junction and it had left hand and straight on lanes with arrows then I will be in the straight on lane if I’m going straight ahead not in the left hand one - going straight on in the left hand lane is asking to be killed by a left turning lorry. Good bike riders follow the rules of the road and will be in the correct lane which sometimes means they are not at the far left

If the cyclist is on the centre line and not turning either they are going to turn very soon and have made the appropriate manoeuvre early, there is an obstruction in the left of the lane, or they are an idiot who doesn’t know what they are doing - all very good reasons not to overtake!

In summary cyclist road positions
Left side - overtake when safe to do so by going into the opposing side of the road
Middle of lane - it’s not safe to overtake me now
Right side of lane- I’m turning right

@Cbtb

OFFS A Cyclist next to the centre line - as in the one in the middle of the road - cyclist is indicating by their road position they intend to turn right. DO NOT OVERTAKE. You wouldn’t overtake a car turning right would you?

Some idiot last week tried to overtake me as I indicated and moved to turn right. I thought they were an absolute moron and that they must be the only idiot in the world who didn’t realise this but now I realise they are not alone!

Bikes don’t have indicators. If I am planning on making a right turn on a road with two lanes well before the junction I:

1. Check my mirror (yes I have one) and over my shoulder
2. Stick my right arm out
3. Put my arm down and Move to the centre of the road (need the arm to turn)
4. Turn if it opposing carriageway is clear
5. If not clear stop and wait in the centre of the road with arm out.
6. When clear out arm down and turn

If it’s a road with more than one lane per side I do the above but at some point earlier I move to the right hand lane.

Just like a car I use the correct lane for my direction of travel. So if I’m coming up to a junction and it had left hand and straight on lanes with arrows then I will be in the straight on lane if I’m going straight ahead not in the left hand one - going straight on in the left hand lane is asking to be killed by a left turning lorry. Good bike riders follow the rules of the road and will be in the correct lane which sometimes means they are not at the far left

If the cyclist is on the centre line and not turning either they are going to turn very soon and have made the appropriate manoeuvre early, there is an obstruction in the left of the lane, or they are an idiot who doesn’t know what they are doing - all very good reasons not to overtake!

In summary cyclist road positions
Left side - overtake when safe to do so by going into the opposing side of the road
Middle of lane - it’s not safe to overtake me now
Right side of lane- I’m turning right

Well said.

[quote heartonthetyne](@Kennykenkencat if a cyclist has positioned themselves in the centre in front of you, it is their signal not to try and overtake) [/quote]
I am talking about the middle of the whole road.

I.e the cyclists I have seen (2 way traffic) are to the right of me not in the middle of the lane.
It would be safer for all concerned for me to undertake them than go into the opposite lane and try and over take them.

A lot of roads barely fit 2 cars going in opposite directions let alone being able to leave gaps to over take.

Add in 4.25 metre wide bus lanes on either side of the street and you really can’t do over take.

I was surprised to see on one road I travel along that they had actually got rid of the bus lane and now wonder if it is because there was only enough room for a car let alone leaving 1.5m gap to pass a cyclist.

Usually if I saw a cyclist coming towards me in a narrow street I would find a gap between parked cars so they can get through or if they were in front wait till they have cleared the cars and got to a point where I could overtake them but now if they are in the middle of the road it means no one can get passed and I see a lot of clogged streets.

Usually if I saw a cyclist coming towards me in a narrow street I would find a gap between parked cars so they can get through or if they were in front wait till they have cleared the cars and got to a point where I could overtake them but now if they are in the middle of the road it means no one can get passed and I see a lot of clogged streets.

Isn't it the parked cars that are the problem, and if more people cycled and there were fewer cars this problem would reduce?

@Cbtb

OFFS A Cyclist next to the centre line - as in the one in the middle of the road - cyclist is indicating by their road position they intend to turn right. DO NOT OVERTAKE. You wouldn’t overtake a car turning right would you?

Some idiot last week tried to overtake me as I indicated and moved to turn right. I thought they were an absolute moron and that they must be the only idiot in the world who didn’t realise this but now I realise they are not alone!

Bikes don’t have indicators. If I am planning on making a right turn on a road with two lanes well before the junction I:

1. Check my mirror (yes I have one) and over my shoulder
2. Stick my right arm out
3. Put my arm down and Move to the centre of the road (need the arm to turn)
4. Turn if it opposing carriageway is clear
5. If not clear stop and wait in the centre of the road with arm out.
6. When clear out arm down and turn

If it’s a road with more than one lane per side I do the above but at some point earlier I move to the right hand lane.

Just like a car I use the correct lane for my direction of travel. So if I’m coming up to a junction and it had left hand and straight on lanes with arrows then I will be in the straight on lane if I’m going straight ahead not in the left hand one - going straight on in the left hand lane is asking to be killed by a left turning lorry. Good bike riders follow the rules of the road and will be in the correct lane which sometimes means they are not at the far left

If the cyclist is on the centre line and not turning either they are going to turn very soon and have made the appropriate manoeuvre early, there is an obstruction in the left of the lane, or they are an idiot who doesn’t know what they are doing - all very good reasons not to overtake!

In summary cyclist road positions
Left side - overtake when safe to do so by going into the opposing side of the road
Middle of lane - it’s not safe to overtake me now
Right side of lane- I’m turning right

Unless they were going to turn into the oncoming traffic then I don’t see their intention was about turning right. They were in both instances cycling along with queues of cars following at a snails pace with drivers unable to put their car into the lane of on coming traffic and leave a 1.5 metre gap to pass the cyclists without ending up with a fine for driving in a bus lane and then get back into the left hand lane before having a head on collision with an oncoming car or truck

I think either some are doing it because they are trying to be smug and think they have been given all the rights over drivers and I actually think for some they have misread the Highway Code and thought middle of the road meant plum middle of both ways of traffic.

Interested to see what happens when they meet another cyclist coming from the opposite direction

jgw1

Usually if I saw a cyclist coming towards me in a narrow street I would find a gap between parked cars so they can get through or if they were in front wait till they have cleared the cars and got to a point where I could overtake them but now if they are in the middle of the road it means no one can get passed and I see a lot of clogged streets

Isn't it the parked cars that are the problem, and if more people cycled and there were fewer cars this problem would reduce

Maybe they belong to the cyclists who are out on their bikes.

Or cars that don't indicate. Or cars that don't stop at red lights. Or cars that cut you up. Or cars that swerve in front of you etc

I'm impressed that anyone can cycle at a snail's pace. That would take some amazing balance far beyond what I am capable of.

Parked cars are a pain in the arse, it's seen as the norm for everyone to own a great hunk of metal that sits outside their house, mostly not being used, taking up road space. More shared car schemes would definitely help

And the argument that traffic jams cause more pollution. Drivers cause traffic jams.

@Kennykenkencat

jgw1

Usually if I saw a cyclist coming towards me in a narrow street I would find a gap between parked cars so they can get through or if they were in front wait till they have cleared the cars and got to a point where I could overtake them but now if they are in the middle of the road it means no one can get passed and I see a lot of clogged streets

Isn't it the parked cars that are the problem, and if more people cycled and there were fewer cars this problem would reduce

Maybe they belong to the cyclists who are out on their bikes.

You are really not understanding this, are you? If the cyclist is in the middle of the lane it's because it wouldn't be safe for you to overtake even if they'd stayed to the left! So the cyclist will be in that position to avoid cars close passing. The rules of overtaking cyclists hasn't changed at all. What has changed is the cyclist riding defensively and so stopping the car being able to do a dangerous overtake.

Change123, makes a change from roads being dominated by cars 7 days a week, which is what it's like in most of the country. Do bikes stop you going out for walks too?

@Cbtb

Maybe these will help for those that don’t seem to get that as long as you always go over the central line when overtaking it shouldn’t matter where the cyclist is in the lane and why it’s easier to overtake cyclists side by side

This makes so much sense to me but I can see most people just want to swear at cyclists not use logic.

It's a stupid change made by stupid people. This applies to the change that cars also have to give way to pedestrians waiting-not actually crossing-the road as they make a turn.

I'm a pedestrian too and I won't be stepping out in front of traffic but there will be dickheads who will do it to make a point-just like the cyclists.

The head of the AA has said all this is going to cause accidents and it will.

Hopefully, it will all go the same way as Smart Motorways-probably thought up by the same gobshit.

@thereisonlyoneofme

Would be of more use if cyclists were told not to cycle down unlit roads with no lights on and to wear hi viz at all times

Absolutely right.

I'd add that they should also use the cycle lanes made available for them and have their bikes taxed.

They're no paying consumers on the road and therefore their rights come second-froth and pick the bones out of that.

@TameDucksAtChatsworth we all pay for roads out of general taxation. Car owners don't pay more.
The changes are just clarifying what cyclists and cars should be doing already.
I could be cycling around wearing fluorescent green covered in flashing lights and cars would still overtake me dangerously. So these new rules are to try and stop "dickhead" (as you so nicely put it) motorists doing that.

Roads are not just for cars. Clearly you hate that fact but it is a fact.

@SockFluffInTheBath

Thanks *@Lockheart* that makes perfect sense and I agree with most of what you’ve written. However I still think there are potential issues on a practical level especially if numbers of cyclists increase- given cyclists could feasibly cause harm to each other, pedestrians, horses I think there should be some traceability and accountability.

I agree. If the hierarchy of vulnerability is really what the government is basing policy on, then they've only done half the job. Each layer of the hierarchy must be held accountable for the damage they do to other levels of the hierarchy, & for that to happen cyclists & horse riders need to be identifiable.

@TameDucksAtChatsworth who's the most dangerous. Perhaps the 4% of drivers who have "no intention" of reading the new rules

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/highway-code-new-changes-driver-cyclist-b2003379.html

@Momicrone - the cyclist pack are on the road in their individual CARS all meeting up in a car park before then going off to cycle so there is no reduction in the car road usage in our area just lots of cars with bikes on their roofs as well! - so it doesn’t quite balance up in this instance.

I have no issue with bikes being on the road (husband is a cyclist himself) or the rule changes to be honest! What my issue is the roads being made dangerous with the large groups of cyclist and cars on the road. How dangerous the cyclist ride down the hill - I’ve seen an awful accident when two cycles collided and to many near misses with pedestrians - the hill has no path so you have walkers, cyclists, farm machinery and cars all trying to use a shared space - & only one group are being dangerous. So yes it does stop me going for a walk!

I think getting people back on their bikes is a good idea and to make the roads safer - but as in all walks of life there are selfish people who won’t give and take :(

I have a questions about drivers (D) turning into a road having to stop if a pedestrian (P) is on the pavement.

1. How does the D identify a P who intends to cross the side road, as opposed to a P who is standing there waiting for someone, say, or looking at a bird in a bush or a plant in a garden, or is just gazing into space?

1. How long is a D supposed to wait for a P to get their act together & cross the road? To put that another way, how long does a D have to wait before assuming that the P has no intention of crossing the side-street & so is legally allowed to turn their car into the road even though the P is still on the pavement?

1. What's to stop obstreporous kids standing on street corners to hold up traffic & never crossing the road? Before anyone tells me this is far-fetched, kids do (did in my day) press the buttons at crossings to make the lights change & then run off laughing, leaving Ds fuming as they're stuck at a red light with no-one crossing.

1. Isn't this training children to think that the safest place to cross the road is at a junction, when we were taught the opposite?

I cycle 7 miles each way to work (London) and welcome the new guidelines. Cycling in the gutter or too close to the left is really dangerous, mostly from people opening car doors without looking. And so many cars come too close to your back wheel and try to 'nudge' you to get right against the kerb so they can get past when it's clearly unsafe ... invariably I will find myself in close proximity to that same car for long sections of the journey so they've made no progress anyway! All they did was endanger my safety.

The speed thing isn't really an issue. The vast majority of roads are 20mph limit around here so cars and cyclists average out at the same speed.

I'm not going to start to undertake as it's just dangerous, especially vans and lorries.

I don't know why cyclists wouldn't use a cycle lane unless it was so poorly maintained as to be dangerous. That's just weird.

There will always be idiot cyclists as much as there are idiot drivers. The latter are more dangerous. These guidelines won't change that.

“ Unless they were going to turn into the oncoming traffic then I don’t see their intention was about turning right. They were in both instances cycling along with queues of cars following at a snails pace with drivers unable to put their car into the lane of on coming traffic and leave a 1.5 metre gap to pass the cyclists without ending up with a fine for driving in a bus lane and then get back into the left hand lane before having a head on collision with an oncoming car or truck”

If there are oncoming cars so that you can’t pull into the oncoming lane to overtake then you can’t overtake. That’s the whole point. If you cannot pull into the oncoming lane you cannot overtake unless the road is very very wide.

Maybe the cyclists didn’t know what they were doing or since you seen unable to understand that you can’t overtake anything unless the opposing lane is clear of traffic they were trying to save your life by stopping you having a head on smash?

Also if the road has parked cars then the cyclist is supposed to be out in the middle so they don’t get a door opened on them! See the below pic nicked from British cycling which shows a cyclist ending up in the middle of the road due to needing to give a parked car the appropriate distance.

When I was less confident I would pull back to the left between parked cars but that’s more dangerous as most drivers don’t realise that you will then need to come back out again when you reach the next parked car and seem to forget that as the bike is in front of them they will need to give the bike room to pull out. They seem to think that the bike should stop and give way to them which is odd because you don’t see them randomly trying to overtake the car in front of them when it’s weaving through parked cars in traffic. So now I don’t pull in to the left but stay in the middle past all the parked cars.

Imagine in your head the bike is as wide as a car and it all much easier. And yes I do drive a car both in a city and rurally- and I still manage to get places on time as do most other people who drive without trying to cut up bicycles all the time.

The new rules are ludicrous and will cause so many car accidents

@TameDucksAtChatsworth

It's a stupid change made by stupid people. This applies to the change that cars also have to give way to pedestrians waiting-not actually crossing-the road as they make a turn.

I'm a pedestrian too and I won't be stepping out in front of traffic but there will be dickheads who will do it to make a point-just like the cyclists.

The head of the AA has said all this is going to cause accidents and it will.

Hopefully, it will all go the same way as Smart Motorways-probably thought up by the same gobshit.

THis 100%