New Highway Code

[Milkfloat]

My immediate reaction is that the highway code should not even suggest that cyclists should be in the 'wrong' lane if they are not confident. Cyclists should be seen as normal traffic and if a slow or unconfident cyclist is going slowly and wobbling around a roundabout then the rest of the traffic should just make allowances for them. After all a slow tractor is not told that they can use the wrong lane to turn right.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

I think the 'outrage' from some car drivers towards what are largely just clarification of the existing rules, emphasises what a poor job driving instructors have been doing for years, and how ignorant many road users are.

 

[mjr]

I think the 'outrage' from some car drivers towards what are largely just clarification of the existing rules, emphasises what a poor job driving instructors have been doing for years, and how ignorant many road users are.

Indeed, and the 4% of drivers saying that they will not read the updated code highlights that we have no effective system for revoking the licences of the willfully incompetent (keeping up to date on the code is a requirement of the licensing standard).

I've tried to summarise what's really changing below. Notice that all the crap about roundabout lanes, road position and overtaking distances are only clarifications, not actually new rules. Over half the new rules only apply to cyclists!

What's Really Changing in the Highway Code?

· Three new rules at the start:
⋄ H1 - All road users have responsibility for safety and "those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility to take care and reduce the danger they pose to others". Not only large goods vehicles to everyone else, but cyclists have greater responsibility than walkers.
⋄ H2 - basically, everyone else should give way to walkers, walkers may use any bit of a road unless specifically banned and only walkers may use the pavement.
⋄ H3 - drivers should not cut across cyclists or horse riders, even if they are on a cycle track.

· 3 clarified rules on overtaking: give cyclists 1.5m+ at 30mph (and more when faster), horses 2m+ at max 10mph and walkers 2m+ at low speed.

· 10 updated and clarified rules on crossings to say:
⋄ give way to walkers, riders and cyclists continuing straight ahead when turning or changing lane (even if they are on a pavement or track);
⋄ don't overtake them immediately before a junction where you will turn;
⋄ don't enter a crossing unless you can completely clear it.

· One updated rule on getting out of cars (look behind you before/as you open a door) and not leaving charging cables to trip people up.

· 12 updated and 5 new rules on how to cycle, including riding centrally in narrow lanes, two-stage right turns and roundabouts. Plus lots of small corrections.

I'd love an infographic of that, if anyone has time and/or more skill than me.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

2 points
Firstly - the bit about giving way to cyclists on a cycle path when the car is turning left (or right) is welcome
However, in many cases around here the cycle path has give way lines (but no sign) on it - so should they be changing this I wonder?

and Secondly
coming back from the shops today we came across this roundabout

We were coming up from the bottom (stop sniggering at the back!!) on Lower House Lane
we were turning left - or kinda half left
Waiting on the pavement on our left (which is also a cycle path) was a walker waiting to cross over to the other part of Lower House lane
so the walker was pretty much going strait on
BUT the main road is basically going left

so - once this new HC becomes valid - would be be supposed to stop and let him cross - and if there was traffic coming from his left
would they have to stop as well??
and would this change of there was a refuge in the centre of the road or not??

what does the community think??

 

[Alex321]

My immediate reaction is that the highway code should not even suggest that cyclists should be in the 'wrong' lane if they are not confident. Cyclists should be seen as normal traffic and if a slow or unconfident cyclist is going slowly and wobbling around a roundabout then the rest of the traffic should just make allowances for them. After all a slow tractor is not told that they can use the wrong lane to turn right.

It always has said that - and it isn't about confidence.
The change to the wording here is:

Rule 77 You may feel safer walking your cycle round on the pavement or verge. If you decide to ride round keeping to the left-hand lane you should be aware that drivers may not easily see you take extra care when cycling across exits. You may need to signal right to show you are not leaving the roundabout watch out for vehicles crossing your path to leave or join the roundabout.

Becomes Rule 79 If you are turning right, you can ride in the left or right-hand lanes and move left when approaching your exit. Position yourself in the centre of your lane if it is safe to do so (see Rule 72) and signal right to indicate that you are not leaving the roundabout. Alternatively, you may feel safer walking your cycle round on the pavement or verge. If you decide to ride round keeping to the left-hand lane you should • be aware that drivers may not easily see you • take extra care when cycling across exits. You should signal right to show you are not leaving the roundabout • watch out for vehicles crossing your path to leave or join the roundabout. Where a roundabout has separate cycle facilities, you should use these facilities where they make your journey safer and easier although you are not obliged to use them. This will depend on your experience and skills and the situation at the time.

And then rule 186 has had the following text added:

You should give priority to cyclists on the roundabout. They will be travelling more slowly than motorised traffic. Give them plenty of room and do not attempt to overtake them within their lane. Allow them to move across your path as they travel around the roundabout. Cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles may stay in the left-hand lane when they intend to continue across or around the roundabout and should signal right to show you they are not leaving the roundabout. Drivers should take extra care when entering a roundabout to ensure that they do not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles in the left-hand lane, who are continuing around the roundabout.

 

[Alex321]

2 points
Firstly - the bit about giving way to cyclists on a cycle path when the car is turning left (or right) is welcome
However, in many cases around here the cycle path has give way lines (but no sign) on it - so should they be changing this I wonder?

Yes, they should. It may take quite a while before all such markings get changed though.

The current "key design principles" suggest that such markings (and also "cyclists dismount" signs) should be avoided. But those are recent, and how long it will take to update al existing ones, who knows?

and Secondly
coming back from the shops today we came across this roundabout

View attachment 628025
We were coming up from the bottom (stop sniggering at the back!!) on Lower House Lane
we were turning left - or kinda half left
Waiting on the pavement on our left (which is also a cycle path) was a walker waiting to cross over to the other part of Lower House lane
so the walker was pretty much going strait on
BUT the main road is basically going left

so - once this new HC becomes valid - would be be supposed to stop and let him cross - and if there was traffic coming from his left
would they have to stop as well??
and would this change of there was a refuge in the centre of the road or not??

what does the community think??

With the roundabout there, leaving it classes as a junction, so yes, you should let them cross.

 

[mjr]

However, in many cases around here the cycle path has give way lines (but no sign) on it - so should they be changing this I wonder?

They should. Anti-cycling Norfolk is instead taking the opportunity to refresh or add give-way lines to some cycleways. They're not doing all of them and I'm not inclined to tell them which ones they've missed!

so - once this new HC becomes valid - would be be supposed to stop and let him cross - and if there was traffic coming from his left
would they have to stop as well??
and would this change of there was a refuge in the centre of the road or not??

You should, in line with several rules including H2 ("At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning"), possibly 151 if traffic is slow-moving ("allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross in front of you") and 170 ("give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning"), as should the other traffic (the rules say "into which or from which"), but none of these are MUSTs so I think it's necessarily not an immediately-punishable offence not to stop. You're just more likely to be viewed as a careless or dangerous driver if you don't. I'd suggest deliberately revving, honking or flashing to discourage the walker from crossing would add to that likelihood.

A central refuge might mean that only one direction should stop at a time, but I think it's only stated as a definite difference for marked crossings.

 

[Milkfloat]

Yes, they should. It may take quite a while before all such markings get changed though.

It is a bit of a mess to say the least - when I looked at this the wording said that road marking or signs take precedence, therefore the cyclist still has to cede priority if they have give way markings which the majority of junctions I have seen do. However, how a driver is supposed to know if the markings exist or not I have no idea. Hopefully all drivers will just give way in all cases, but let's be honest there is not a chance of that at all.

 

[mjr]

Hopefully all drivers will just give way in all cases, but let's be honest there is not a chance of that at all.

Wouldn't be a chance of that, no matter what. We still have to wait for the feckers to stop (or nearly) and it to be physically near-impossible for them to run us over before we finish crossing, else we're chancing our arms (or legs, or possibly neck).

The AA instructor shown on BBC Breakfast about 07:15 this morning is teaching his pupils to stop well before the junction, before they even start to turn in: hopefully, all instructors are doing that and so will the THINK adverts when they start next month.

 

[sheddy]

Does anyone know Jason ?
Ranty radio phone in - short clip
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0bjyzq5

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Sounds to me that this has not been well thought out
It seems clear if a pedestrian is approaching a junction off the road they are walking along

but what if the junction is a major junction - maybe a motorway junction or similar

As said above - how does a driver know whether or not there are give way lines on a cycle path - and are these legally enforceable if there is no roadside signpost - as far as I am aware it needs both on a full road but what about a cycle path???

One of my rides goes along a path that crosses a major expressway - should traffic stop for me if I am waiting for a gap? This would clearly be dangerous but does the new guidance imply they should?

I may be taking rubbish - but I thought I would ask.

 

[mjr]

Sounds to me that this has not been well thought out
It seems clear if a pedestrian is approaching a junction off the road they are walking along

but what if the junction is a major junction - maybe a motorway junction or similar

What about it? It's clear: drivers give way. The number of pedestrians willingly traversing a major motorway junction will be tiny. I've done it on M5 and M42 from memory, and it's something you only do if there's no reasonable alternative. They're having a shoot walk, so why make it any worse for them?

As said above - how does a driver know whether or not there are give way lines on a cycle path - and are these legally enforceable if there is no roadside signpost - as far as I am aware it needs both on a full road but what about a cycle path???

I'm 95% confident that they're only legally enforceable in so far as failing to give way may contribute to a charge of carelessness or reduce the liability of the person who hit you, same as it ever was. I doubt the presence of a sign makes any difference unless the markings have worn out.

One of my rides goes along a path that crosses a major expressway - should traffic stop for me if I am waiting for a gap? This would clearly be dangerous but does the new guidance imply they should?

I may be taking rubbish - but I thought I would ask.

Yes, it should stop, but I bet it will take some prosecutions before it's commonplace. How would it "clearly be dangerous", if all are using the road in line with the law and with due regard to the Highway Code?

 

[lazybloke]

Does anyone know Jason ?
Ranty radio phone in - short clip
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0bjyzq5

What kind of person presents themself on the radio like that.

 

[mjr]

I'd love an infographic of that, if anyone has time and/or more skill than me.

First decent infographic I've seen of some of the cycling-related changes, but I wish it had other pics instead of the ones used for 4 and 5:

View: https://twitter.com/tomstaniford/status/1485550742173847556

 

[Accy cyclist]

Have these changes come into effect yet? I ask because while out walking this aft' I stopped at the kerb to wait for a fire engine to turn right into the fire station. I raised my walking stick as if to say "I've seen you, so I'm not going to do something daft" as in step out in front of a fire engine. The driver of the vehicle gave me the thumbs as he turned right in front of me. After I thought about it and thought maybe he was thanking me for letting him go, when as a pedestrian I now have the right of way over vehicles.🤔