BBC helmet cam film to explore cyclist-motorist conflict

[Bassjunkieuk]

I actually had a chance to explain to a driver about the primary position today :-)
It was during a driver training CBT I was completing at work and one of the practice questions was asking you to place in the missing road sign on a given piece of road.
Now to help visualize this I can only really describe it as a "Darwins Corner" (tm BentMikey IIRC) - It was a sharp right hand turn, single chevron marking on outer edge, with the "Keep in lane/left" arrow followed by a solid white line/dashed line down the centre of the road. There is a barn style building on the turn and you can't see out the other side.

After first trying the "concealed entrance/sharp turn" sign I found I'd be a little over cautious and it was just the "sharp turn" sign however when I mentioned about this being a great example of where some idiots do overtake cyclists he asked "So what are cyclists meant to do?" which I thought was a really good question. It gave me a chance to explain that the best course of action would be to take the primary position, explaining what that entails and why cyclists use it. In this case it was to discourage or block an unsafe overtake. I pointed out that any driver who attempts to overtake here can't reasonably ensure the second lane is clear enough (hence the solid white line, not that it stops the determined idiot....) to complete the pass. He seemed happy with my explanation and carried on working, I can only hope that next time he is behind a cyclists who takes primary he might be a little more aware of just why the rider feels the need to ride there and it most likely isn't to impede his progress or slow him down but rather for their own safety and possibly even for the drivers safety :-)

 

[cd365]

Unwillingness to learn and improve is not something to be proud of, IMO. Having not read cyclecraft, and making such unwarranted conclusions about its contents leaves you on very shaky grounds when it comes to debating. Your credibility here is not strong, IMO.

You talk about credibility yet all you do is try to twist what I say to suit you and then you try to criticise my cycling/driving skills without even knowing me. What do you think that makes you look like?
Which part of my statement "I am not making any conclusions about Cyclecraft" have you not understood?

 

[campbellab]

I agree with a lot that cd365 says with some caveats:

My point is that Cyclecraft is often mentioned on here in relation to primary/secondary etc.and at the end of the day it is just a book with no legal significance.

I thought that often literature on best practice could be used as a legal defence even if not enshrined in law?

It's great if someone reads it and believes it makes them a better cyclist but it also seems to make them more militant in that if it is in Cyclecraft then it has to be right and seems to change their attitude to other road users. We all have to share the same road space and I believe that means we should all be thoughtful and considerate to other road users.

Yes it might change some attitudes towards other traffic, but generally for the better. When I cycled as a kid I saw myself as subservient to motor traffic - thats not a safe way to navigate the roads. Some people might become too militant, but generally they are safer (which is the main point) even if they peeve people off. At the end of the day if someone is being a numpty its going to cost me at most 60s (and that long happens rarely) no matter what vehicle I am in or on, unless they act dangerously and cause an accident...

Motorists are not aware of the primary/secondary terminology, all they know from the highway code is that cyclists should keep to the left, there should be pressure on the government to get the Highway Code and the Theory test changed so that it reflects why a cyclist will take a certain road position.

A lot more needs to be done on driver education, the highway code still mentions about cyclists navigating roundabouts in the left hand lane for example. Its not an excuse for a driver not to follow the highway code and pass safely, but it is very understandable why motorists are confused about cyclist positioning. This leads to frustration, agression and lack of sympathy when the issue is raised to the general populace.

 

[Matthew_T]

A lot more needs to be done on driver education, the highway code still mentions about cyclists navigating roundabouts in the left hand lane for example. Its not an excuse for a driver not to follow the highway code and pass safely, but it is very understandable why motorists are confused about cyclist positioning. This leads to frustration, agression and lack of sympathy when the issue is raised to the general populace.

How can we chance the Highway Code then? Who governs it? And would it ever be changed?

 

[campbellab]

How can we chance the Highway Code then? Who governs it? And would it ever be changed?

I think it falls under the Department for Transport.

http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=147862169

Best bet for getting changes to the highway code would be to support a cycling group who lobby the govnmnt - by signing up a subscription. Unless you want to start your own campaign. Oh and vote for pro cycling parties during the elections.

 

[summerdays]

Militant isn't the word I like use with regard to my cycling and Cyclecraft, instead I aim for assertive (rather than aggressive).

 

[Bassjunkieuk]

Militant isn't the word I like use with regard to my cycling and Cyclecraft, instead I aim for assertive (rather than aggressive).

I think that's an excellent way of putting it however I think how it's perceived by drivers (or even other riders) can be misunderstood as they see they see assertive actions as a type of aggression.

Over the past few weeks I've had a few instances where I've been approaching traffic islands or keeping pace with traffic ahead with someone up my chuff trying to get passed. In these cases my position has helped to some degree but I have also found a shoulder check, possibly with a bit of a stern look, has had them remain behind me.

As others have said Cyclecraft is a set of guidelines and advice on riding techniques for coping in a motor-dominated road environment. At the end of the day we are all road users, regardless of our chosen mode of transport, and I believe we all have the same reasonable expectations of safety whilst travelling. As cyclists however we don't have the luxury of an extra pair of wheels to help with stability and nor to we always carry around a metal box containing 4 (often empty) seats that can shield us from relatively minor knocks. As such at certain times when our safety is potentially going to be compromised we have to alter our position and if that holds up a driver for a few seconds then frankly I don't care. I have 6 kids and a wonderful wife at home and I'd quite like to get home in one piece and not via A&E.

 

[cd365]

So the statement " it also seems to make them more militant in that if it is in Cyclecraft then it has to be right and seems to change their attitude to other road users." in this post



Is not a conclusion?

No, it is my opinion about some cyclists views after they have read cyclecraft not about cyclecraft itself.

 

[subaqua]

No, it is my opinion about some cyclists views after they have read cyclecraft not about cyclecraft itself.

i was miulitrant looooong before i read cyclecraft and loooong before i had even heard of it

 

[subaqua]

i was miulitrant looooong before i read cyclecraft and loooong before i had even heard of it

thats a combination of mutant and militant BTW .

 

[BSRU]

Nowhere does the Highway Code recommend to cyclists that they use the left hand land when turning right at a roundabout - in fact, in Rule 76 it makes it clear the should follow the same procedures as other road users (see Rules 184-190) and in Rule 77 it points out that hazards of staying in the left hand land and not following the correct procedure.

I am sure it does somewhere but I could be wrong.

 

[campbellab]

Nowhere does the Highway Code recommend to cyclists that they use the left hand land when turning right at a roundabout - in fact, in Rule 76 it makes it clear the should follow the same procedures as other road users (see Rules 184-190) and in Rule 77 it points out that hazards of staying in the left hand land and not following the correct procedure.

Sorry my wording is poor its not specifically advising cyclists but definitely gives the wrong impression to drivers (and maybe give some cyclists the wrong idea):

'187 In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to

• pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads
• traffic crossing in front of you on the roundabout, especially vehicles intending to leave by the next exit
• traffic which may be straddling lanes or positioned incorrectly
• motorcyclists
• cyclists and horse riders who may stay in the left-hand lane and signal right if they intend to continue round the roundabout. Allow them to do so'

 

[BentMikey]

Nowhere does the Highway Code recommend to cyclists that they use the left hand land when turning right at a roundabout - in fact, in Rule 76 it makes it clear the should follow the same procedures as other road users (see Rules 184-190) and in Rule 77 it points out that hazards of staying in the left hand land and not following the correct procedure.

You're right, but as you well know, the previous version used to suggest keeping left, and the quote from 77 is a nod to that.

 

[campbellab]

Not if you read the other parts of the Highway Code and don't just cherry-pick bits...

I didn't cherry pick anything in my original post:

'A lot more needs to be done on driver education, the highway code still mentions about cyclists navigating roundabouts in the left hand lane for example.'

The highway code does mention cycling in the left hand lane. Whats the argument?

 

[BSRU]

You're wrong...

Rule 76 is very clear:



Rule 77 is clear:


The recommendation is to get off and walk. It then says if you do decide to ride round keeping to the left hand lane, these are the issues to consider. That's not a recommendation.

Nothing in Rules 184-190 is a recommendation or direction to cyclists to use the left hand lane at all times.

Yes you are correct, but how many people reading rule 77 would know it is not recommended.