New Highway Code
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450
Now push bikers have a rule book !!!
Read it.
Now push bikers have a rule book !!!
Read it.
Edited by LargeRed on Friday 30th July 08:04
LargeRed said:
What does it say? BBC article says that cyclists will have priority when travelling straight ahead at junctions. If I understand that correctly, I can cycle past a give way line into traffic, and be given priority?
I presume if a cyclist is also on the main road in the above situation, neither would have priority, thus making it like a junction with no markings.
I presume if a cyclist is also on the main road in the above situation, neither would have priority, thus making it like a junction with no markings.
Cyclists emerging from a side road aren't in conflict with vehicles turning left from the main road into the side road anyway.
Having said that many people seem unable to turn left into a side road without either drifting to the middle of the main road or cutting across the centre line of the side road. Turn the wheel a few more degrees!
Having said that many people seem unable to turn left into a side road without either drifting to the middle of the main road or cutting across the centre line of the side road. Turn the wheel a few more degrees!
Ah that makes more sense. Whilst I wouldn't attempt to undertake a left turning vehicle on my bike, neither would I turn left across a bike coming up my inside if I thought he would reach me before I completed the turn.
I'm surprised that really needs clarification as turning left across a cyclist's path is effectively crossing a lane of traffic.
I'm surprised that really needs clarification as turning left across a cyclist's path is effectively crossing a lane of traffic.
LargeRed said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450
Now push bikers have a rule book !!!
Read it.
Cycling has always been in the Highway Code.Now push bikers have a rule book !!!
Read it.
Edited by LargeRed on Friday 30th July 08:04
Most road users of all types seem to have zero Highway Code knowledge.
RECr said:
Ah that makes more sense. Whilst I wouldn't attempt to undertake a left turning vehicle on my bike, neither would I turn left across a bike coming up my inside if I thought he would reach me before I completed the turn.
I'm surprised that really needs clarification as turning left across a cyclist's path is effectively crossing a lane of traffic.
Unfortunately it does. Mostly because of the poor state of our road infrastructure that seems to encourage, rather than minimise, conflict, especially cycling infrastructure. Cycle lanes putting cyclists inside turning traffic, dump cyclists in stupid places where they seem to stop because the workers ran out of paint and went home (I can think of no other reasonable expectation for cycle lanes that just end on the pavement)I'm surprised that really needs clarification as turning left across a cyclist's path is effectively crossing a lane of traffic.
See also busy roundabout lanes that are marked only after you enter the roundabout, lane markings giving left/right only directions too late and so on.
Schmed said:
More utter madness written by idiots.
As clearly seen from the comments above nobody has a f
king clue what these retards are on about anyway but no surprise there. Maybe when the cycling fatalities go up again they can remove these idiot rules.
Utter fktards.
Given that it has not been published yet it’s impossible to say. The BBC article, based on a DFT press release, is not the best way to judge.As clearly seen from the comments above nobody has a f
king clue what these retards are on about anyway but no surprise there. Maybe when the cycling fatalities go up again they can remove these idiot rules.Utter f
ktards.All this will do is result in more injuries and richer lawyers. Its my right of way so they must stop, oh they did not and I am in a wheel chair. Total fkwits in the civil service who dream up this utopian world.
Rule one if they are bigger than you smile and give way, if they are smaller than you steam on and test their skill. Not fair but has fewer collisions.
kwits in the civil service who dream up this utopian world.Rule one if they are bigger than you smile and give way, if they are smaller than you steam on and test their skill. Not fair but has fewer collisions.
Electro1980 said:
Cycle lanes putting cyclists inside turning traffic,
That's the key bit I think. I've often seen cyclists heading down the inside of traffic in a cycle lane, only to have a car turn left across them from the left "car lane" on the same road, nearly taking them out. It should be pretty bloody obvious that the driver has to give way in this situation, but sadly it's clearly not to some drivers. 
RECr said:
Wishful thinking from the Guardian? From what I have seen the priorities are not radically altered.
Indeed, sounds like more of a clarification of the existing rules than a change. There may be a slight change in that cyclists now explicitly have priority when filtering down the left of traffic?The alterations seem minor or are only reinforcing what happens anyway.
If you wait for a pedestrian to step onto a crossing before stopping then you're probably a tt.
Likewise a cyclist going straight ahead obviously has priority over a car turning left. What are you going to do just turn into the cyclist and say "sorry mate it wasn't explicit you had right of way"
If you wait for a pedestrian to step onto a crossing before stopping then you're probably a t
t. Likewise a cyclist going straight ahead obviously has priority over a car turning left. What are you going to do just turn into the cyclist and say "sorry mate it wasn't explicit you had right of way"
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff