Cycling laws that need clarifying

[stuu]

..I have done 45 on the same stretch, and left a skidmark…

on the road?

 

[Bald Rick]

on the road?

also on the road!

 

[Ediswan]

unlikely to have been doing 70. Most amateurs will rarely go above 50/55 simply because of the aero effect and technique, and that‘s assuming they dont run out of courage first. Even the best pros on the very best machines money can buy will struggle to get past 60 - Tom Pidcock just managed it on his hair raising descent off Galibier in Le Tour last year, and won the stage. I have done 45 on the same stretch, and left a skidmark…

The Galibier has far more and sharper bends than Llanberis. I once reached 56 on a touring bicycle, with all sorts of non-streamlined attachments. The only fettling was well adjusted wheel bearings. This was in Leicestershire.

 

[Bald Rick]

The Galibier has far more and sharper bends than Llanberis. I once reached 56 on a touring bicycle, with all sorts of non-streamlined attachments. The only fettling was well adjusted wheel bearings. This was in Leicestershire.

Only at the top. Once you are past Plan Lachat it is much straighter all the eay to Valloire.

 

[al78]

Why are helmets not applicable to pedestrians and motorists? Both suffer head injuries in accidents, especially the former,

Similar to condemning cyclists who wear dark clothing but not condemning cars that are painted black

Helmets for motorists would save many lives unlike with cyclists where the evidence for the effectiveness of helmets is minimal if it exists at all beyond anecdote (which isn't a logically valid method of analysis). You can look at statistics for countries that have adopted compulsory helmet laws which will show no significant difference in death rates pre and post law when using pedestrians as a control group. There is also no evidence bright clothing or hi-vis makes any difference to cycling safety. The primary cause of deaths and injuries to cyclists is careless driving, which contrary to what some might want to believe, can be deliberate e.g. using a mobile when driving or not looking properly at a junction. The problem is people want to believe cycle helmets make a difference to safety because it sounds reasonable without having to think and aligns with common sense, but common sense does not always align with reality. That is why we have the scientific method so that good decisions can be made with logic instead of belief.

I feel it is incorrect to class anyone who rides a bicycle to be called a cyclist, just like it’s wrong to class anyone who wires up a plug to be called an electrician.

I don't. A cyclist is someone who is riding a bicycle, end of, like a motorist is someone driving a motor vehicle, and yes that technically includes criminals fleeing from the police in a stolen car. Someone who wires a plug is an electrician if they are employed as an electrician. Trying to pretend a cyclist is strictly someone riding a bicycle but excluding anyone who might give them a bad name is just unnecessary tribalistic IMO and doesn't do anything to improve the image of cyclists in the public's eyes.

Teenagers are just as capable of cycling on the road as adults. If the road isn't safe then the road needs sorting out

The road is perfectly safe, it's the people using the road in big heavy machines that are unsafe.

Indeed. And the segregation needs properly designed junctions too.

How do you propose to engineer Dutch quality cycling facilities in the towns and cities of the UK?

Thing is with that, it’s probably fair to say that walking you are less likely to be involved in an incident that’s not your fault. By contrast on a cycle the chance of that is much higher.




Agreed. Certainly helps a lot.

If you have a flashing light have a steady one as well. It has been said that a flashing light in isolation makes it more difficult to judge the distance and speed of the cyclist ahead.

I once got my road bike up to 40.1mph coming down one of the North Downs hills (forget which one). Pretty sure the speed limit would have been 50mph though, so not breaking any rules. Was a bit hairy braking on the final bit before the bend at the end!

I have reached that speed cycling to Dorking coming down the A25 from Wotton to Westcott which is a long and moderately steep downhill section with good sightlines. I have also managed it cycling from Rusper to the north Horsham bypass, but there is a world of difference between cycling at 40 mph for a couple of minutes on a quiet country road with good sightlines and minimal hazards, compared to urban areas with pedestrians that could step out into the road in front of you because they are looking for big motor vehicles or gawping at their phone.

 

[Krokodil]

I don't. A cyclist is someone who is riding a bicycle, end of, like a motorist is someone driving a motor vehicle, and yes that technically includes criminals fleeing from the police in a stolen car. Someone who wires a plug is an electrician if they are employed as an electrician. Trying to pretend a cyclist is strictly someone riding a bicycle but excluding anyone who might give them a bad name is just unnecessary tribalistic IMO and doesn't do anything to improve the image of cyclists in the public's eyes.

Most Dutch people aren't cyclists. They ride bikes regularly but that doesn't make them "cyclists". They ride bicycles because it is the most convenient way to travel, in the same way that most car drivers aren't petrolheads. Labelling everyone as a "cyclist" dehumanises them and ends in ordinary people (who are just going to get safely to work) being attacked for the simple act of cycling somewhere. Tom Samson wasn't a cyclist, he was just a teacher trying to get to work when he was killed in a hit-and-run collision.

The road is perfectly safe, it's the people using the road in big heavy machines that are unsafe.

Read up on the hierarchy of hazard controls. Administrative controls (rules and signs) comes below engineering controls. The Dutch police spend little time enforcing speed limits. In the Netherlands if speeding becomes a problem on a particular road then it's the job of engineering to solve, not enforcement. If a road is unsafe then you redesign junctions, add calming measures etc.

How do you propose to engineer Dutch quality cycling facilities in the towns and cities of the UK?

The same way that the Dutch did. They didn't start yesterday, it has been an ongoing process over the last 50 years. Little by little the work is starting in the UK, though we do still have some traffic engineers who stick some blue signs on the pavement and claim the active travel grant anyway.

 

[Ediswan]

Most Dutch people aren't cyclists. They ride bikes regularly but that doesn't make them "cyclists". They ride bicycles because it is the most convenient way to travel, in the same way that most car drivers aren't petrolheads. Labelling everyone as a "cyclist" dehumanises them and ends in ordinary people (who are just going to get safely to work) being attacked for the simple act of cycling somewhere. Tom Samson wasn't a cyclist, he was just a teacher trying to get to work when he was killed in a hit-and-run collision.

The roadside traffic signs in Stevenage (probably other parts of Hertfordshire) have recently been seeking respect for 'people who cycle'. Would that phrasing keep everybody happy ?

 

[Krokodil]

The roadside traffic signs in Stevenage (probably other parts of Hertfordshire) have recently been seeking respect for 'people who cycle'. Would that phrasing keep everybody happy ?

While less applicable to signs, I'd prefer news reports to say "mother of two killed on her bike by speeding driver" rather than "cyclist killed by car". It reminds everyone that the victim was a person. Also reminds everyone that cars don't generally kill people of their own accord, there is usually a person reponsible for controlling them.

 

[Jimini]

While less applicable to signs, I'd prefer news reports to say "mother of two killed on her bike by speeding driver" rather than "cyclist killed by car". It reminds everyone that the victim was a person. Also reminds everyone that cars don't generally kill people of their own accord, there is usually a person reponsible for controlling them.

100% this.

 

[Bikeman78]

Thing is with that, it’s probably fair to say that walking you are less likely to be involved in an incident that’s not your fault. By contrast on a cycle the chance of that is much higher.

That may be true but my point is that fewer pedestrians would die if they all wore cycle helmets. But no one is seriously suggesting that they should. So, why do we get hung up on cyclists wearing helmets? Not wearing one doesn't pose any threat to anyone else. The Dutch don't really bother with helmets. Sure, they have better cycle infrastructure than us, but they still ride on roads and interact with vehicles a lot.

 

[paul1609]

The same way that the Dutch did. They didn't start yesterday, it has been an ongoing process over the last 50 years. Little by little the work is starting in the UK, though we do still have some traffic engineers who stick some blue signs on the pavement and claim the active travel grant anyway.

Interestingly yesterday I was sitting on a road side bench in Goldsmith Avenue Portsmouth waiting for my train home. This is a road which has recently been fitted with dedicated cycle lanes protected by bollards. There were several Ambulances with Blues and twos going just stuck in the traffic as the ex football traffic which was solid in both directions could no longer move out of their way by bumping on to the kerb. THere was one Ambulance that was next to me with its lights going for in excess of 5 mins. Whilst Im sure it must have improved safety for cyclists and e scooters it must have destroyed emergency vehicles respone times on a saturday afternoon at least. Goldsmith Ave is one of the major roads in to the city.

 

[Haywain]

Whilst Im sure it must have improved safety for cyclists and e scooters it must have destroyed emergency vehicles respone times on a saturday afternoon at least.

As ever, the problem is the motor traffic but the blame is on the cycling infrastructure.

 

[Krokodil]

Interestingly yesterday I was sitting on a road side bench in Goldsmith Avenue Portsmouth waiting for my train home. This is a road which has recently been fitted with dedicated cycle lanes protected by bollards. There were several Ambulances with Blues and twos going just stuck in the traffic as the ex football traffic which was solid in both directions could no longer move out of their way by bumping on to the kerb. THere was one Ambulance that was next to me with its lights going for in excess of 5 mins. Whilst Im sure it must have improved safety for cyclists and e scooters it must have destroyed emergency vehicles respone times on a saturday afternoon at least. Goldsmith Ave is one of the major roads in to the city.

Again, look at what the Dutch have done. Emergency vehicles are permitted to use cycle paths when they come up against traffic on a shout, and the paths are designed with this in mind. The users of the path can clear the way much easier than cars can.

 

[paul1609]

Again, look at what the Dutch have done. Emergency vehicles are permitted to use cycle paths when they come up against traffic on a shout, and the paths are designed with this in mind. The users of the path can clear the way much easier than cars can.

The problem with Goldsmith Ave A2030 is that the pavements are already of a sub standard width obstructed by bus shelters and other street furniture. The cycle paths are only 1 metre wide but were formed by narrowing the road to two lanes and then bollarding off the cycle route. The road is constrained by buildings either side and part by the railway depot perimeter fence. The problem is that the emergency vehicle centre Fire and Ambulance Stations for most of the east side of Portsea Island are situated about a mile further along the A2030 out of the city centre as is St Marys Hospital which although not an A & E hospital is the only Minor Injuries unit on the Island.
As well as the football ground, The adjacent Pompey Centre is the major retail park on the island, Tesco Extra, Aldi, B &Q, Screwfix etc, etc
It probably needs part of (all?) the railway depot being taken over, alot of demolition and a proper solution being put in place. What has happened is a cheap bodge

 

[Meerkat]

The ‘should wear helmets’ should be removed from the Highway Code. There should be a general policy of stopping the portrayal of cycling as a danger sport. The best way of improving cyclists safety is to get a lot more people cycling, not frightening people away from it.
The thing they really need to concentrate on is ensuring homes have cycle storage, and that bikes are protected in towns - a huge effort to clamp down on bike theft.

 

[E27007]

The ‘should wear helmets’ should be removed from the Highway Code. There should be a general policy of stopping the portrayal of cycling as a danger sport. The best way of improving cyclists safety is to get a lot more people cycling, not frightening people away from it.
The thing they really need to concentrate on is ensuring homes have cycle storage, and that bikes are protected in towns - a huge effort to clamp down on bike theft.

Regular cycling is a beneficial form of low-impact exercise, a work out of the cardiovascular system without the impact upon knees etc of running, the evidence of the benefit is the age when onset of cardiovascular diseases occurs in the elderly, for regular cyclists it tends to be later in life.
For myself the likely-benefit of an enhanced life-expectancy exceeds the risk of an early demise through a cycling accident

 

[lachlan]

The ‘should wear helmets’ should be removed from the Highway Code. There should be a general policy of stopping the portrayal of cycling as a danger sport. The best way of improving cyclists safety is to get a lot more people cycling, not frightening people away from it.
The thing they really need to concentrate on is ensuring homes have cycle storage, and that bikes are protected in towns - a huge effort to clamp down on bike theft.

Indeed - I live in a new build which doesn't have a garage and every house has two spaces for cars but no cycle storage. At least they gave us a garden shed...

Links in with the houses being built with gas boilers and no provision for swapping to a heat pump, and while there is some provision made for walking/cycling into the estate, it's incomplete

 

[E27007]

Indeed - I live in a new build which doesn't have a garage and every house has two spaces for cars but no cycle storage. At least they gave us a garden shed...

Links in with the houses being built with gas boilers and no provision for swapping to a heat pump, and while there is some provision made for walking/cycling into the estate, it's incomplete

The opposite in areas such as Southwark in London , new-builds for social and low-cost housing schemes have not only no provision for car ownership, planning permission approved specifically deprives residents of vehicle ownership, if your address is such a new-build in a CPZ ( controlled parking zone) a parking permit is required for the vehicle to be parked in on a public road within the CPZ, parking permits will not be granted on the basis of the planning permission approval.

 

[Haywain]

I really don't see why a 40+ tonne HGV should be allowed to do 30mph but I'm restricted to 15.

The 15mph restriction is not a maximum speed but the maximum at which it should be electrically assisted. You can go faster but you have to put in the effort yourself.

 

[Meerkat]

For myself the likely-benefit of an enhanced life-expectancy exceeds the risk of an early demise through a cycling accident

I believe someone did the numbers to prove that overall cycling’s benefit to one’s health is greater than the risk via accidents.
Of course that is average.

 

[Bikeman78]

And which should be applied to reckless cyclists too. And if someone on a escooter is riding sensibly at 15 mph they should be left alone, common sense really. Nothing actually inherent makes them much different from a legal ebike other than law hasn't caught up yet

I have pootled along Queen Street, which is pedestrianised, many times, usually at 0600 or 2200. Given that there are HGVs driving along there to make deliveries, I don't feel guilty.

Helmets for motorists would save many lives unlike with cyclists where the evidence for the effectiveness of helmets is minimal if it exists at all beyond anecdote (which isn't a logically valid method of analysis).

There must be a limit as to what impact the human skull and brain can take in an impact. I expect that will vary slightly from person to person. Clearly the polystyrene helmet will compact and reduce the force slightly. For any collision where the force is way above or below that critical point, the helmet will make no difference. I recall that when my granny got flattened by a mini, most of her extensive injuries were not to her head. On the rare occasion that I have come off my bike, I have never hit my head.

 

[JGurney]

new-builds .... specifically deprives residents of vehicle ownership,

Only in the same sense that you could claim that a house being located miles from any bus route or railway station 'deprives residents of public transport access'.

If it is a new-build there are no existing residents to be deprived of anything they previously enjoyed. Presumably it is made clear to potential new residents that these properties are not suitable for those who plan to own cars, just as those considering a remote rural home would be aware of the lack of public transport. In both cases, sensible people will not choose dwellings which will not suit their intended lifestyles.

 

[Meerkat]

I have pootled along Queen Street, which is pedestrianised, many times, usually at 0600 or 2200. Given that there are HGVs driving along there to make deliveries, I don't feel guilty.


There must be a limit as to what impact the human skull and brain can take in an impact. I expect that will vary slightly from person to person. Clearly the polystyrene helmet will compact and reduce the force slightly. For any collision where the force is way above or below that critical point, the helmet will make no difference. I recall that when my granny got flattened by a mini, most of her extensive injuries were not to her head. On the rare occasion that I have come off my bike, I have never hit my head.

From my unscientific visual survey a significant number of helmets are worn so badly they would offer little protection and are possibly dangerous! Wrong size, loose fitting, too far back, perched over a thick hat etc etc
don’t want to tempt fate but I don’t remember ever hitting my head when I fell off my bike as a kid, not even when I went over a bonnet and slid ten yards down a side road! The evidence will be skewed because a helmet is bigger so will show damage in instances when an unhelmeted tucked in head wouldn’t have hit anything.
There was somewhere in Australia that mandated helmet wearing and cycle use dropped dramatically. I believe there is concern about risk compensation too - taking more risks because of the perception of being safer under a helmet.

 

[Krokodil]

For myself the likely-benefit of an enhanced life-expectancy exceeds the risk of an early demise through a cycling accident

Importantly the more bicycles there are on the road, the safer the roads become - each bicycle on the road is a two-tonne car off of the road.

 

[Taunton]

More regularly, they pick up unlit cyclists, usually setting up in the evening the week the clocks go back.

This was done long ago at my school, which had quite a contingent of cyclists, on the first Monday afternoon after the clocks went back, by one of the schoolmasters who inspected every bicycle leaving, and any without lights were impounded there and then and the rider told to go home on the bus, it being released when they brought the lights in. It was warned in advance the previous week.

 

[BingMan]

Helmets for motorists would save many lives unlike with cyclists where the evidence for the effectiveness of helmets is minimal if it exists at all beyond anecdote (which isn't a logically valid method of analysis). You can look at statistics for countries that have adopted compulsory helmet laws which will show no significant difference in death rates pre and post law when using pedestrians as a control group. There is also no evidence bright clothing or hi-vis makes any difference to cycling safety. The primary cause of deaths and injuries to cyclists is careless driving, which contrary to what some might want to believe, can be deliberate e.g. using a mobile when driving or not looking properly at a junction. The problem is people want to believe cycle helmets make a difference to safety because it sounds reasonable without having to think and aligns with common sense, but common sense does not always align with reality. That is why we have the scientific method so that good decisions can be made with logic instead of belief.

Calling them helmets is misleading. It gives the impression that they offer the same protection as a motorcycle helmet or an industrial safety helmet or a rock climber's helmet.
Properly speaking they should be called bump-caps, the sort of thing that in an industrial setting ,merely protects you from bangin your head on a low ceiling but doesn't protect from a hammer dropped from a second story scaffold.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Calling them helmets is misleading. It gives the impression that they offer the same protection as a motorcycle helmet or an industrial safety helmet or a rock climber's helmet.
Properly speaking they should be called bump-caps, the sort of thing that in an industrial setting ,merely protects you from bangin your head on a low ceiling but doesn't protect from a hammer dropped from a second story scaffold.

They are very similar to climbing helmets, indeed there are quite a few dual purpose ones that cover both.

Climbing helmets primarily protect against falling rocks and do very little
for you if you fall several metres onto
your head (which is why they mostly aren't worn for indoor climbing).

 

[takno]

Properly speaking they should be called bump-caps, the sort of thing that in an industrial setting ,merely protects you from bangin your head on a low ceiling but doesn't protect from a hammer dropped from a second story scaffold.

Described like that I really should get one for when I'm at my parents house. So many unexpected low ceilings

 

[renegademaster]

Interestingly yesterday I was sitting on a road side bench in Goldsmith Avenue Portsmouth waiting for my train home. This is a road which has recently been fitted with dedicated cycle lanes protected by bollards. There were several Ambulances with Blues and twos going just stuck in the traffic as the ex football traffic which was solid in both directions could no longer move out of their way by bumping on to the kerb. THere was one Ambulance that was next to me with its lights going for in excess of 5 mins. Whilst Im sure it must have improved safety for cyclists and e scooters it must have destroyed emergency vehicles respone times on a saturday afternoon at least. Goldsmith Ave is one of the major roads in to the city.

Part of the justification croydon Council used for getting rid of their cycle bollards along Brighton Road was that it stopped ambulances unloading stretchers along the roadside

 

[takno]

Part of the justification croydon Council used for getting rid of their cycle bollards along Brighton Road was that it stopped ambulances unloading stretchers along the roadside

Literally any excuse would have done there of course.