Review of Highway Code to improve road safety for cyclists

Review of Highway Code to improve road safety for cyclists

Author
Discussion

budgie smuggler

4,202 posts

119 months

Monday 14th September
quotequote all
Salted_Peanut said:
I agree about unsighted (Limit Point Analysis). But many people neither use nor know about the Limit Point, plus they don't expect to come across a cyclist on a 70 mph stretch of road.

The same holds for some 60 mph roads: many drivers will (wrongly but often) be taken by surprise to come across a cyclist. And it's worse uphill, where you can't cycle quickly, with cars will be doing 60+ mph.

Legally, I might be able to cycle on these roads. And many other cyclists do. But I think it's leaving my safety to chance (hoping that every driver behind me is going to be 100% on the ball, not chatting on the phone). And isn't it how Matthew Pinsent, while cycling, got his life-changing brain injury when a truck whacked him?
Wasn't that James Cracknell?

littlebasher

2,939 posts

131 months

Monday 14th September
quotequote all
In my example, this is the location

https://goo.gl/maps/atT2Ha3GFUZUKnm78

He was just around that corner. Sunny day just like that image, with him slowing wobbling up the hill almost on the center white line

Came up on him really fast at 75mph. Maybe naive of me, but it really wasn't what i was expecting to come across!

Pica-Pica

7,658 posts

44 months

Monday 14th September
quotequote all
Salted_Peanut said:
yikes Recently, I saw the same thing: someone cycling on a dual carriageway with a 70mph limit and an unsighted bend. As a cyclist, I think it's madness. I wouldn't cycle on a 70 mph dual carriageway (surely a Darwin Award?), but I'm amazed how many people do.

And the law says we can cycle on 70 mph dual carriageways unless the authorities take out a specific traffic regulation order banning bicycles from a particular section of road. I've not yet seen a No Cyclists sign on a dual carriageway, have you?
Yes. A stretch of the A55. It is a special road.

“Two sections between (Junction 23) Llanddulas to (Junction 17) Conwy are signed as a 70 mph (110 km/h) speed limit because they are actually special roads. This is because these sections were built under legislation for building motorways but they were never declared as motorways.[3][4] Legally it means these two stretches of the A55 are neither part of the national UK motorway network nor trunk roads. As such, the national speed limit does not apply so 70 mph (110 km/h) signs (the maximum speed permitted on UK roads) are used instead. Unlike other sections of the A55 that have National Speed Limit (NSL) signage and are accessible to all motor vehicles, motorway restrictions are enforced on these two stretches of road (therefore no pedestrians, learner drivers, farm vehicles etc).“

waremark

2,710 posts

173 months

Tuesday 15th September
quotequote all
littlebasher said:
In my example, this is the location

https://goo.gl/maps/atT2Ha3GFUZUKnm78

He was just around that corner. Sunny day just like that image, with him slowing wobbling up the hill almost on the center white line

Came up on him really fast at 75mph. Maybe naive of me, but it really wasn't what i was expecting to come across!
Not sure why this was a problem. Surely you needed to be able to stop for any obstruction in the road, whether debris, broken down vehicle or cyclist? Surely you would not have expected to overtake a cyclist without moving to Lane 2 whatever his position within lane 1? Therefore his assertive position in the lane is safer than a nearside position. Or have I misunderstood?

yellowjack

13,711 posts

126 months

Tuesday 15th September
quotequote all
Pica-Pica said:
Salted_Peanut said:
yikes Recently, I saw the same thing: someone cycling on a dual carriageway with a 70mph limit and an unsighted bend. As a cyclist, I think it's madness. I wouldn't cycle on a 70 mph dual carriageway (surely a Darwin Award?), but I'm amazed how many people do.

And the law says we can cycle on 70 mph dual carriageways unless the authorities take out a specific traffic regulation order banning bicycles from a particular section of road. I've not yet seen a No Cyclists sign on a dual carriageway, have you?
Yes. A stretch of the A55. It is a special road.

“Two sections between (Junction 23) Llanddulas to (Junction 17) Conwy are signed as a 70 mph (110 km/h) speed limit because they are actually special roads. This is because these sections were built under legislation for building motorways but they were never declared as motorways.[3][4] Legally it means these two stretches of the A55 are neither part of the national UK motorway network nor trunk roads. As such, the national speed limit does not apply so 70 mph (110 km/h) signs (the maximum speed permitted on UK roads) are used instead. Unlike other sections of the A55 that have National Speed Limit (NSL) signage and are accessible to all motor vehicles, motorway restrictions are enforced on these two stretches of road (therefore no pedestrians, learner drivers, farm vehicles etc).“
A120 in Essex comes to mind. No cycling, no peds, no mopeds, no horse-drawn traffic, etc. But it's a new road carved out of "virgin" countryside, so there's no historic right of way to lose by declaring it motor vehicles only. The 'old A120' is still there, reclassified as the B1256 now, so traffic prohibited from the new A120 can just use that (more safely) as it always has done.The A3 also prohibits slow/vulnerable users at the Hindhead tunnel, with a cycleway going up and around the Devil's Punchbowl where the Devil's Pinchpoint used to be.

Salted_Peanut

421 posts

14 months

Tuesday 15th September
quotequote all
waremark said:
Surely you needed to be able to stop for any obstruction in the road, whether debris, broken down vehicle or cyclist? Surely you would not have expected to overtake a cyclist without moving to Lane 2 whatever his position within lane 1? Therefore his assertive position in the lane is safer than a nearside position.
You are, of course, correct. But (irrespective of positioning) I still think it's madness to cycle on a 70 mph dual carriageway yikes

I might be allowed to cycle there, but it's leaving my safety to chance (hoping that every driver behind me is going to be 100% on the ball, not chatting on the phone). Even with a strobing rear light, it's reasonable to expect that cycling on a 70 mph road will take many drivers by surprise.

Gweeds

644 posts

12 months

Tuesday 15th September
quotequote all
True, but 70mph isn't a target either.

Salted_Peanut

421 posts

14 months

Wednesday 16th September
quotequote all
I'm afraid that 70 mph is a target when I'm cycling biggrin



JPJPJP

Original Poster:

9,574 posts

128 months

Thursday 17th September
quotequote all
Anyone so inclined can join a webinar organised by the all party parliamentary group on cycling & walking to discuss this Highway Code review

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/97539806...

WJNB

2,637 posts

121 months

Tuesday 22nd September
quotequote all
Salted_Peanut said:
The new (proposed) rules appear to make Primary the default position for cycling, i.e. the centre of the road. While I know – because I cycle – about the Primary and Secondary positions, this change is going to be a Big Deal for many drivers.

A lot of cyclists are going to get killed or maimed if they do that.

giantdefy

511 posts

73 months

Tuesday 22nd September
quotequote all
WJNB said:
Salted_Peanut said:
The new (proposed) rules appear to make Primary the default position for cycling, i.e. the centre of the road. While I know – because I cycle – about the Primary and Secondary positions, this change is going to be a Big Deal for many drivers.

A lot of cyclists are going to get killed or maimed if they do that.
Why?

Haltamer

1,523 posts

40 months

Tuesday 22nd September
quotequote all
I'd much rather use the primary position as the default.

It's the epitome of vehicular cycling; Less "I'll squeeze by between them and oncoming traffic", No need to cross the stream of traffic for right turns or to select lanes at junctions - Safer overall.

It's not "Holding people up", They're free to overtake when it's safe to do so. All it requires is a press of the foot on the gogo pedal and a twirl of the wheel; It's hardly an imposition for motor traffic to overtake safely.

Solocle

1,612 posts

44 months

Wednesday 23rd September
quotequote all
Haltamer said:
I'd much rather use the primary position as the default.

It's the epitome of vehicular cycling; Less "I'll squeeze by between them and oncoming traffic", No need to cross the stream of traffic for right turns or to select lanes at junctions - Safer overall.

It's not "Holding people up", They're free to overtake when it's safe to do so. All it requires is a press of the foot on the gogo pedal and a twirl of the wheel; It's hardly an imposition for motor traffic to overtake safely.
There are times that I feel like primary position would get me squished. [Some] Dual Carriageways come to mind, e.g the A34...

That's not that primary position is wrong, it's that the A34 is treated [incorrectly] as a de-facto motorway, rather than the all purpose trunk road that it is. Frankly, my judgement of the situation is that a proper hard shoulder on a motorway would be a safer place to be! But hey, it was an irresistible, legal, shortcut. Not a particularly busy time, and only 3.6 miles.