Review of Highway Code to improve road safety for cyclists
Discussion
pedestrians and horse riders
Consultation seeking views on proposed changes to The Highway Code to improve safety for vulnerable road users, particularly the groups of:
- cyclists
- pedestrians
- horse riders
The main alterations to the code being proposed are:
- introducing a hierarchy of road users which ensures that those road users who can do the greatest harm have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others
- clarifying existing rules on pedestrian priority on pavements, to advise that drivers and riders should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross the road,
- providing guidance on cyclist priority at junctions to advise drivers to give priority to cyclists at junctions when travelling straight ahead
- establishing guidance on safe passing distances and speeds when overtaking cyclists and horse riders
You can have your say
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review...
Consultation seeking views on proposed changes to The Highway Code to improve safety for vulnerable road users, particularly the groups of:
- cyclists
- pedestrians
- horse riders
The main alterations to the code being proposed are:
- introducing a hierarchy of road users which ensures that those road users who can do the greatest harm have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others
- clarifying existing rules on pedestrian priority on pavements, to advise that drivers and riders should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross the road,
- providing guidance on cyclist priority at junctions to advise drivers to give priority to cyclists at junctions when travelling straight ahead
- establishing guidance on safe passing distances and speeds when overtaking cyclists and horse riders
You can have your say
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review...
JPJPJP said:
- clarifying existing rules on pedestrian priority on pavements, to advise that drivers and riders should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross the road,
This part is madness. It basically gives pedestrians the right to just step into the road, without taking any care or responsibility 
JPJPJP said:
pedestrians and horse riders
- introducing a hierarchy of road users which ensures that those road users who can do the greatest harm have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others
Thanks I'll take a look at the link.- introducing a hierarchy of road users which ensures that those road users who can do the greatest harm have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others
That will put the horse riders near the top then?
What about a ranking of those that pose a threat to themselves?
SlimJim16v said:
JPJPJP said:
- clarifying existing rules on pedestrian priority on pavements, to advise that drivers and riders should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross the road,
This part is madness. It basically gives pedestrians the right to just step into the road, without taking any care or responsibility SlimJim16v said:
This part is madness. It basically gives pedestrians the right to just step into the road, without taking any care or responsibility
It applies to side roads, where pedestrians who are already crossing have priority. They're effectively implicit zebra crossings.Motorists should be prepared to give way to crossing pedestrians already, but knowledge of rule 170 is... lacking.
Close to the curb has been out-of-date for decades! If you've read Roadcraft, haven't you read Cyclecraft?
Gweeds said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Of course. Because it's *definitely* not other cars causing hold-ups is it, it's those pesky cyclists.
That's not the case anymore. B
y motorway lanes aren't wide enough for it.With the new rules – which I reckon are inevitable – many drivers are going to be surprised (unless the Government advertises the changes widely).
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?
littlebasher said:
That would explain the cyclist riding to the right of the lane on the A3 last week, which came as a surprise.
Not sure those proposed rules take into account a road with a 70mph limit and an unsighted uphill bend
Not sure those proposed rules take into account a road with a 70mph limit and an unsighted uphill bend
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?
Salted_Peanut said:
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?
There's no such thing as an unsighted bend, there's speed inappropriate for the conditions. Which is a problem on both types of road.
DCs generally have better sight lines, and they have a dedicated overtaking lane. Problems arise when you have someone trying to overtake you while they themselves are being overtaken.
From my ride yesterday:
Preparing to turn right off the A420. The prior single carriageway section of that road was far worse
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?
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?
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?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?
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!
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!
Salted_Peanut said:
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?
“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).“
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff