Priorities of road users to be changed to place responsibility on those that pose the greatest danger to others.

[Kez]

I often on my drive to/from work encounter a specific and tricky roundabout at the bottom of a hill which I would estimate cyclists can reach 40 mph and have, on more than 1 occasion, very nearly had one crash into the back of my car because they have failed to stop for the roundabout. The priority of cyclists too often is to maintain their speed at all costs no matter what other road users may get in their way. In any case, the maxim that motorised vehicles should be driven with regard to how quickly they can safely stop is one that is too often not applied by cyclists.

Another gripe that I have is the extremely frequent riding of cyclists two abreast on busy roads with no thought to traffic flow.

I am a cyclist myself but often cringe at the sense of entitlement cyclists exhibit and their complete disregard for other road users. Respect goes both ways

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Cyclists, braver ones than I, often ride two abreast with good reason.

If the road is narrow, winding, unsuitable for overtaking, they thus prevent drivers trying to squeeze by leaving less clearance than the 2m minimum required by law, which they might try if the cyclists were in single file.
..
Sean Kelly once reached 77 mph on a bicycle, going downhill in France.

Even unfit cyclists could exceed many 20/30 mph limits downhill.

 

[Bikeman78]

I am a cyclist myself but often cringe at the sense of entitlement cyclists exhibit and their complete disregard for other road users. Respect goes both ways

The problem is that it doesn't go either way at the moment. Both sides resent the other. No idea how we solve that. It's not even just a driver/cyclist divide. I've seen plenty of drivers having a row with each other. You only need to watch what happens when two lanes merge into one. Most people are happy to take it in turns but there are a lot of people that will barge their way in. All that achieves is standing in a queue five metres further forward than if they had been polite and taken their turn.

 

[DB]

I am a cyclist myself but often cringe at the sense of entitlement cyclists exhibit and their complete disregard for other road users. Respect goes both ways

It's normally the ones with the full outfit, the wannabe Bradley Wiggins types. A while back when out walking I saw four of them deliberately riding four abreast along a lane to stop a car from overtaking. Absolutely pathetic behaviour.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Might have been a good reason for not letting the car by, if there was not enough width to get by in safety.

When driving I do not expect cyclists to stop and doff their caps to me, so that I can save a few seconds.

 

[DB]

Might have been a good reason for not letting the car by, if there was not enough width to get by in safety.

When driving I do not expect cyclists to stop and doff their caps to me, so that I can save a few seconds.

There wasn't - I was walking along the lane behind the car. If they'd gone in single file there was plenty of space for the car to get past.

 

[75A]

It's normally the ones with the full outfit, the wannabe Bradley Wiggins types. A while back when out walking I saw four of them deliberately riding four abreast along a lane to stop a car from overtaking. Absolutely pathetic behaviour.

Same happened to me around 8am on a country lane in Northamptonshire 3 weeks ago.

Same happened to me around 8am on a country lane in Northamptonshire 3 weeks ago.

Begining to think that maybe I ought to get a copy of the new tome, having passed my test in 1976, I think a few things might of changed............

 

[Peter Sarf]

As most cyclists are mostly riding well below the lowest one you get (20mph) this would be fairly pointless.

My main concern with cyclists riding fast is when they do so on the pavement !. Riding on the pavement is illegal iirc but I do not begrudge cyclists using the pavement for their own safety just as long as they remember there are others using the pavement who maybe more frail than them. The cyclist (or electric scooter etc) should drive a lot nearer to walking pace than many do.

Of course dealing with speeding motorists is much more important.

But there are many places where cyclists share with walkers (adults and children), cyclists and walkers have been pushed out of the way of motorists and made to share paths. Where there is little space, say the path is 2m wide total, cyclists often go too fast where they should slow down, wait, stop. Large groups of cyclists, racers, €bikes riding two or more abreast are troublesome too.

I agree. It is about thinking about others.

That, of course, would require all cycles to be fitted with a calibrated speedometer.

Also there is no speed limit for runners


Pelican crossings in areas with lots of pedestrian traffic should default to red to road traffic, green to pedestrians. When a car is detected the lights could change with the appropriate interval for pedestrians to get clear.

But pelican crossings do not detect pedestrians. The pedestrian pushes a button. One gripe I have with that is that I often see pedestrians push the button, look, see there are no cars coming and walk across on their red. That then means that if I am walking far enough behind I get to the crossing just as the cars get their green light. The cars have stopped for no pedestrians this using fuel and creating pollution unnecessarily. But also inconveniences other pedestrians (including me) following who have to wait for the next green pedestrian light !. To be honest I usually look first and walk across if there is no traffic. I reckon on always looking even if I have priority as it will hurt me if the car driver has made a mistake !.

I often on my drive to/from work encounter a specific and tricky roundabout at the bottom of a hill which I would estimate cyclists can reach 40 mph and have, on more than 1 occasion, very nearly had one crash into the back of my car because they have failed to stop for the roundabout. The priority of cyclists too often is to maintain their speed at all costs no matter what other road users may get in their way. In any case, the maxim that motorised vehicles should be driven with regard to how quickly they can safely stop is one that is too often not applied by cyclists.

Another gripe that I have is the extremely frequent riding of cyclists two abreast on busy roads with no thought to traffic flow.

I am a cyclist myself but often cringe at the sense of entitlement cyclists exhibit and their complete disregard for other road users. Respect goes both ways

The priority to maintain speed is indeed a cause of risk. As a motorcyclist I see lower powered motorbikes/scooters whizzing past me as I slow down for a danger that they cannot easily accelerate from after passing.

Cyclists, braver ones than I, often ride two abreast with good reason.

If the road is narrow, winding, unsuitable for overtaking, they thus prevent drivers trying to squeeze by leaving less clearance than the 2m minimum required by law, which they might try if the cyclists were in single file.
..
Sean Kelly once reached 77 mph on a bicycle, going downhill in France.

Even unfit cyclists could exceed many 20/30 mph limits downhill.

Interesting - I thought it was illegal (or perhaps just not allowed !) to ride two abreast. Riding two abreast is not necessary to avoid cars squeezing past. All the cyclist has to do is ride a good distance from the curb. The cyclist can then move over towards the curb if they feel the car/lorry is too close.

Same happened to me around 8am on a country lane in Northamptonshire 3 weeks ago.


Begining to think that maybe I ought to get a copy of the new tome, having passed my test in 1976, I think a few things might of changed............

Thing is how many cyclists read the highway code ?. My parents made myself and my sister do a cycling proficiency course back in about 1970. That actually prepared me to learn to drive a car about ten years later and also was valuable for riding a motorcycling.

I really do think cyclists should have to take some sort of course and pass a test. That is even more of an imperative for these electric bicycles and scooters that are appearing. Many cyclists do have a car driving licence but there are still unique risks for smaller vehicles. A motorcycle appears as a car a long way away at first glance - so a cyclist is going to have cars pull out of side roads in front of them. Also a motorcycle or cycle hides in a blind spot a lot easier than a car. I always try to predict what a car I am overtaking is doing. That would be easier if tinted windows were banned as the car drivers body language often gives clues. But there will be little/no legislation to prevent something unnecessary until the fashion for tinted windows has really caught on.

As for the classic case of a car turning left across the path of a cyclist going straight on. I have seen it happen. If the car has just overtaken the cyclist then the car driver is in the wrong. But I have seen cases of a cyclist overtaking on the left of a car that is turning left. What is wrong ? - well the car should be indicating. But overtaking on the left is not allowed according to the highway code as i remember it. So the cyclist should not be creeping up on the left side. I see this very often in queuing traffic. Irony is that the cyclist is often squeezing through on the left where there is almost no room. But if the car overtook the cyclist leaving such a small amount of room then the car driver is seen to be in the wrong !.

I have seen a cyclist pull out around a parked car on a road with two lanes in the direction of travel. But doing it without looking behind them or indicating. I regularly see cyclists run red lights. The law needs to apply equally.

Anyone using the roads should learn how to use them.

Fortunately most cyclists and pedestrians do know how to use the roads.

I always think that although the car driver can be in the wrong it is a very big risk to the well being of the pedestrian, motorcyclist or cyclist. Another risk is that it always rains when I am not in my car !.

 

[Meerkat]

But pelican crossings do not detect pedestrians.

But puffin crossings do and cancel the lights change if you walk off

 

[Peter Sarf]

But puffin crossings do and cancel the lights change if you walk off

Ah, thanks. I have heard of Puffin Crossings vaguely. So that is what they are.

 

[AM9]

Ah, thanks. I have heard of Puffin Crossings vaguely. So that is what they are.

There is a self-cancelling crossing near where I live that I would cross without if there was a gap in the flow. A couple of times when I did this, a car decided that it wasn't my turn to cross, and floored his throttle so that he could give me a blast. It didn't frighten me as he probably wished but since then I resolved to request a traffic stop every time I crossed there. So that imbecile has had the exact opposite result to what he probably wanted.
As a pedestrian, I don't take many risks, - there's too many selfish idiots on the roads, but I will not be intimidated. As an occasional cyclist, other than the elevated risk of riding amongst moving traffic, I am quite willing to take the prime position in the road to prevent inconsiderate overtaking and move back when it's safe. As a motorist, I give way to both cycles and pedestrians where it is in the interests of their safety. None of this is difficult and the HC has many rules of the road that apply unequally to different groups of road users. It's not about equality of rules, just a means of minimising the risk to the most vulnerable groups. It's a shame that many motorists don't understand that simple concept.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

The rules about, and the different types of crossings, (P-words), are really far too complicated for most people to understand. Besides the rules and types of crossings keep changing.
Unrealistic to expect adults to understand all the rules let alone children.

Generally the crossing times are too short, for people who walk at less than 5 kmh. If I have green to walk across but a moving vehicle is approaching I do not trust it to stop. By the time it has stopped the lights may have changed again and I may have to wait for the next phase.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The rules about, and the different types of crossings, (P-words), are really far too complicated for most people to understand. Besides the rules and types of crossings keep changing.
Unrealistic to expect adults to understand all the rules let alone children.

Generally the crossing times are too short, for people who walk at less than 5 kmh. If I have green to walk across but a moving vehicle is approaching I do not trust it to stop. By the time it has stopped the lights may have changed again and I may have to wait for the next phase.

There is a crossing near me on a 40mph dual carriage way that really ought to be 30mph. That is where I see most of the bad use by pedestrians pushing the request button and then not waiting. Thing is the gaps in traffic are frequent enough and long enough to easily get across !. One side however I am very wary of as it is followed by lights controlling a junction and I have heard it has killed people. Car drivers see the junction change to green and forget the red for the crossing just below (above) their nose. I recall driving along there a long way behind two cars that were alongside each other. I saw the junction change to green and feared one of the car drivers would be fooled into going through the pelican red - but they both did !. I bet that is how people get run over there. The big irony is that there is a pedestrian underpass there that no one uses. Apart from it involving a struggle against gravity on steps it is smelly and floods every time it rains. I never use it.

There are mistakes that are easily made by car/lorry drivers. So pedestrians and cyclists etc need to be wary. Well as do other car/lorry drivers of course. But then there are also totally careless drivers out there. - like that lorry driver who was persistently texting and ended up going up the back of a prison transport recently. When I worked in insurance young male drivers were renowned for serious accidents because of driving assuming everyone else had really good reaction times and believing they themselves were indestructible. Apparently young women have become like that as well.

 

[bramling]

I absolutely agree, the Alban Way in Hertfordshire (Hatfield - St Albans) is such a route, which I avoid myself for that very reason - it isn't fair on the walkers. It is hard to enforce a speed limit as let say it was 10mph, most cyclists are going on gut feeling, so it is just consideration.

It does make us feel like us cyclists are not welcome anyway. Go on the road the motorist think you should be on the cycle path, go on the cycle path the walkers don't like it (A problem with the shared use in the UK)

But these shared use paths seem to cause the cyclist and walkers to always be in conflict. Ring the bell and some jump out the way, in front of you. Hard problem to solve, it is really down to curtsey

Shared paths simply do not work well unless either (1) usage is extremely light, or (2) they are very wide.

To be honest, doing quite a bit of walking on disused railway alignments I get utterly sick of cyclists, especially the "cycle hire" types who really seem to think that they have divine right to have the way cleared for them. It really isn't a pleasant experience to hear ding every 10 seconds, which is the case on some routes, and woe betide if you don't move out the way in the blink of an eye. Indeed, I have found some cyclists to be *extremely* abusive should one dare to do the terrible act of standing on a path for a few seconds to take a photo of something. Rather unfortunately, despite being a cyclist myself I can see why they get such a bad press.

Utility cycling on the roads doesn't seem to cause as many issues, though of course one will encounter the occasional bad apple motorist from time to time. I get the impression it's stuff like group leisure cycling which causes a lot of the angst from motorists.

 

[Re 4/4]

A proper transport strategy, in my opinion, would treat pedestrian, cyclist (perhaps including e-scooter), and motor vehicles as three separate categories with segregated paths/roads.

I realise the land cost of that in the UK would be prohibitive.

 

[DB]

Shared paths simply do not work well unless either (1) usage is extremely light, or (2) they are very wide.

To be honest, doing quite a bit of walking on disused railway alignments I get utterly sick of cyclists, especially the "cycle hire" types who really seem to think that they have divine right to have the way cleared for them. It really isn't a pleasant experience to hear ding every 10 seconds, which is the case on some routes, and woe betide if you don't move out the way in the blink of an eye.

Utility cycling on the roads doesn't seem to cause as many issues, though of course one will encounter the occasional bad apple motorist from time to time. I get the impression it's stuff like group leisure cycling which causes a lot of the angst from motorists.

Indeed. Same issue on some sections of canal towpath too.

 

[Meerkat]

. I get the impression it's stuff like group leisure cycling which causes a lot of the angst from motorists.

It does grate a bit that groups of MAMILs pretending they are a peloton act arrogantly toward drivers whilst doing something that would get drivers points on their licences. If the first one hits a pothole and goes down they’re all going down!

 

[AM9]

There is a crossing near me on a 40mph dual carriage way that really ought to be 30mph. That is where I see most of the bad use by pedestrians pushing the request button and then not waiting.

If the lights at a pelican/puffin/toucan crossing cause the traffic to wait even when pedestrian(s) have already crossed in a safe gap in the traffic, the road traffic is not held for any longer than if the pedestrian(s) had to wait for their green light. In prectice, the wait at an empty crossing will be the minimum that the pedestrian phase allows. The traffic may have to wait to the end of the flashing yellow phase before it can proceed if any pedestrians cannot complete their move within the allowed green period. So in fact, pedestrians that can cross in gape between the traffic are doing the motorists a favour.

It does grate a bit that groups of MAMILs pretending they are a peloton act arrogantly toward drivers whilst doing something that would get drivers points on their licences. If the first one hits a pothole and goes down they’re all going down!

Be careful what you wish for. If every cyclist was to keep a gap between themselves and the cyclist in front that was their safe braking distance, and the cyclists took the prime position where necessary, you would have very long queues of motor vehicles behind the cyclists, (recognising that cycles at (say) 20mph have much longer safe braking distances than motor vehicles - especially in wet conditions).

 

[Meerkat]

So in fact, pedestrians that can cross in gape between the traffic are doing the motorists a favour.

No they aren’t. I do the motorists a favour by checking, before I push the button, whether there is a gap I can safely cross in without the lights.

Be careful what you wish for. If every cyclist was to keep a gap between themselves and the cyclist in front that was their safe braking distance, and the cyclists took the prime position where necessary, you would have very long queues of motor vehicles behind the cyclists, (recognising that cycles at (say) 20mph have much longer safe braking distances than motor vehicles - especially in wet conditions).

True, but the real MAMILS probably wouldnt bother with the group ride.
They wouldn’t actually need to be braking distance apart, just reaction distance so they could avoid the hazard (it’s unlikely the entire safe part of the road will be blocked suddenly).
But you are right about worst case - bunches are a long car, you can leap frog them when they are spread out, but even four bikes can be a couple Of lorry lengths if they are spread out just too close to leapfrog.

 

[bramling]

Be careful what you wish for. If every cyclist was to keep a gap between themselves and the cyclist in front that was their safe braking distance, and the cyclists took the prime position where necessary, you would have very long queues of motor vehicles behind the cyclists, (recognising that cycles at (say) 20mph have much longer safe braking distances than motor vehicles - especially in wet conditions).

I'm not sure leisure convoying should be happening at all. The road is, after all, a transport facility, not some kind of leisure track.

As has been suggested, cycling too close together is extremely dangerous if something goes wrong - one hits a pothole, a misunderstanding on routes, or whatever. (I once had rather hairy experience right in the middle of the Bank Of England road junction when riding with someone - we weren't purposely riding close together but had just happened to drift that way, one thought the road went round to the left, the other round to the right, and we very nearly went sideways into each other).

 

[Peter Sarf]

If the lights at a pelican/puffin/toucan crossing cause the traffic to wait even when pedestrian(s) have already crossed in a safe gap in the traffic, the road traffic is not held for any longer than if the pedestrian(s) had to wait for their green light. In prectice, the wait at an empty crossing will be the minimum that the pedestrian phase allows. The traffic may have to wait to the end of the flashing yellow phase before it can proceed if any pedestrians cannot complete their move within the allowed green period. So in fact, pedestrians that can cross in gape between the traffic are doing the motorists a favour.

My point is that it is unnecessary for pedestrians to hinder the flow of the traffic if they intend to spot a gap in the traffic and choose to use it. It shows a certain level of selfishness pressing the button then looking for and using a gap. Furthermore if I am walking behind then what would have been a gap for me is cluttered with the cars accelerating away from their unnecessary red. I get to breath in the fumes while waiting.

I'm not sure leisure convoying should be happening at all. The road is, after all, a transport facility, not some kind of leisure track.

As has been suggested, cycling too close together is extremely dangerous if something goes wrong - one hits a pothole, a misunderstanding on routes, or whatever. (I once had rather hairy experience right in the middle of the Bank Of England road junction when riding with someone - we weren't purposely riding close together but had just happened to drift that way, one thought the road went round to the left, the other round to the right, and we very nearly went sideways into each other).

Your mention of leisure track reminds me that cars must not race each other on the public highway. I wonder how many cyclists breach that ?.

Of course if either or both cyclist was indicating then there would be a reduced risk. Mind you many cars seem to have no indicators it seems to me !. I prefer to indicate even if I think no one is there to need to know my intentions. I am not afraid of wearing out my indicators but more afraid of damaging my car for want of telling someone, I did not see, of my intentions to change direction.

 

[Sprinter107]

I've noticed in recent times, more and more pedestrians just stepping off the curb without even looking, being more interested in what their mobile device is doing.
There are some youths that seem to like cycling at night dressed in black with no lights on their bikes. But it would be the motorist that would be in trouble if these people got hit. One such lad cycled straight in front of me a few weeks ago, as he crossed a road juction on red. Dressed head to tie in black, early hours of the morning, no light on his bike. Missed him by inches. He came from nowhere.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I've noticed in recent times, more and more pedestrians just stepping off the curb without even looking, being more interested in what their mobile device is doing.
There are some youths that seem to like cycling at night dressed in black with no lights on their bikes. But it would be the motorist that would be in trouble if these people got hit. One such lad cycled straight in front of me a few weeks ago, as he crossed a road juction on red. Dressed head to tie in black, early hours of the morning, no light on his bike. Missed him by inches. He came from nowhere.

I feel the same. Its almost turning into a game of chicken. I can tell some are looking out of the corner of their eye at me to see if I brake.

As for mobiles etc. My GF witnessed an accident where a bus hit a young lady - head smack on the windscreen. The young lady did not see what was coming so did not even brace for impact. She was in a large group starting to cross the road, the bus driver blew the horn which stopped all of them except the young lady who did not notice everyone else stop !. I can imagine that, at that junction, it is easy to overlook one pedestrian in amongst all the other hazards.

At the same junction I saw someone walk in front of a tram that achieved an emergency stop. The pedestrian was totally unaware of the commotion as they were engrossed on their mobile !. Many passengers had fallen over in the tram. I nearly walked over to her to explain that she had nearly got killed but thought better of it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Your mention of leisure track reminds me that cars must not race each other on the public highway. I wonder how many cyclists breach that ?.

It isn't illegal to race bicycles on the public highway (but it probably should be to be honest).

 

[AM9]

My point is that it is unnecessary for pedestrians to hinder the flow of the traffic if they intend to spot a gap in the traffic and choose to use it. It shows a certain level of selfishness pressing the button then looking for and using a gap.

I presume that you are at least an occasional pedestrian so would not really believe that a normal pedestrian would be determined to hang around a roadside waiting for lights to change even if gaps large enough to safely cross the road without even remotely inconveniencing any vehicles. If the road has
been fitted with a pedestrian controlled crossing at great expense, that's because it was deemed that pedestrians needed such assistance to avoid them having to make a dash for it with all the risks that entails. It's naïve to think that a road busy enough to have such a crossing would have a permanent stream of vehicles 24/7.

 

[Falcon1200]

The problem with the pedestrian phase is is the time taken for it to activate; If a person waiting thus sees a gap in the traffic it is human nature to cross ! And in Glasgow, and no doubt elsewhere, there are junctions where the lights go through the road traffic phase twice before activating for pedestrians, regular users soon learn this and are therefore effectively 'encouraged' to take advantage of any perceived gap in the traffic flow. Not to mention the roads divided by a central island with separate lights, requiring pedestrians to wait for their phase of the lights twice.

 

[Meerkat]

There are some youths that seem to like cycling at night dressed in black with no lights on their bikes.

No lights is inexcusable now lights are so small and cheap and the batteries last for ages.
Utility cyclists wearing black don’t bother me - utility cycling should be ’come as you are’, no helmets or special clothing.
What does annoy me is the MAMILs who have spent a load of money on clothing specifically for cycling and then choose black - that is contributory negligence in my book.

 

[Failed Unit]

No lights is inexcusable now lights are so small and cheap and the batteries last for ages.
Utility cyclists wearing black don’t bother me - utility cycling should be ’come as you are’, no helmets or special clothing.
What does annoy me is the MAMILs who have spent a load of money on clothing specifically for cycling and then choose black - that is contributory negligence in my book.

As such a creature myself. I don’t get this either. I want the motorist to have no excuse not to see me. I once did a charity ride and the selected black. I wasn’t happy….

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

The problem of grouping could be reduced by promoting the traditional British sport of individual time-trialling.
..
The HC advises cyclists to ride in single file on busy narrow roads, but not on roads that are either narrow or busy.

 

[Meerkat]

As such a creature myself. I don’t get this either. I want the motorist to have no excuse not to see me. I once did a charity ride and the selected black. I wasn’t happy….

The wise ones have a flashing rear light on all the time. A skinny bloke on a skinny bike on a wooded lane going in and out of the dark shadows of dappled sunlight is incredibly difficult to spot even when you know they are likely to be there.

The problem of grouping could be reduced by promoting the traditional British sport of individual time-trialling.

That’s still racing - people going for fast times aren’t prioritising safety.