Is it safe to cycle on UK roads? - interested in people's opinions

MalMonroe

baser999 said:

It was an interesting watch as it also featured ‘idiot cyclists’ jumping red lights, going straight across junctions etc - these are the ones that irritate the motorist and give all cyclists a bad name. I was amused in particular to watch the reporter claiming that quite legally he was allowed to cycle down the centre of his lane and that motorists are required to allow 5ft when overtaking. He then promptly pointed the driver who crossed double white lines to pass him; how was he supposed to get past otherwise, or was he expected to wait until the double white lines had ended? Had he not been in the centre of the lane, there’d have been no problem. 

I have no issue with cyclists being on the road, but they need to be as mindful of the motorist as we are expected to be of them. No cycling two-a-breast, using hand signals, obeying traffic signals . . .

Quite legally the reporter was allowed to cycle down the centre of his lane. Motorists are required to allow 5 feet.
If motorists have to wait, then they have to wait, yes.

Contrary to popular belief, motorists do not have control or priority of the road. Cyclists have just as much right to be there as any motorist. (I've been driving for the last 45 years). And they can ride two abreast (and even more) quite legally, if that's how they feel safer.

We motorists have to behave responsibly in respect of all road users.

We do not have priority. The more motorists accept that fact, the more pleasant our road using experiences will be. 

MalMonroe

unforeseen said:

There are lots of 2 lane roads where it is physically impossible to have 5ft clearance if the cyclist is in the middle of his lane. 

I guess we motorists have to be patient and wait for the opportunity to pass in that situation. They do have as much right as we motorists have on all our roads.

af1963

You can cross solid white lines to pass if the cyclist is riding at 10mph or less.

129
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26

I think most drivers don't know this, and even if they do, they have no way to know (reliably) whether a bike is going at more or less than 10mph, so many drivers will try to pass anyway. And then, because the white line is there precisely because there's a danger of oncoming traffic, they often find themselves having to pull back in beside the cyclist to avoid an oncoming vehicle,

I've cycled for 50 years and driven for 40. To respond to your initial question: yes, I think it's safe, or I wouldn't still be doing it.  But part of what makes it safer is selecting the roads I use, staying aware of what drivers may do (legally or illegally), and taking actions like the supposedly "aggressive" riding further out from the kerb when I need to stay obviously visible, or where there's not enough space for a driver to pass safely (but some may try anyway).

I don't think it's aggressive, just discouraging a driver from doing something that will be much more dangerous for me than for them, and I also make a point of visibly pulling in to the left again, and sometimes waving them on, once it does appear safe for any following drivers to get past.  I am just as keen for them to get off my tail as they are to get past me and there's no fun (or safety) in cycling along with a convoy of frustrated and impatient drivers behind.

Norman_Castle

af1963 said:

I don't think it's aggressive, just discouraging a driver from doing something that will be much more dangerous for me than for them

Its not aggressive, its defensive. I've got a full car and motorbike licence and decades of driving experience. I'm capable of deciding if its safe for me to have a vehicle passing me in a given situation. I've had a few cars written off by motorists poor driving including a lorry doing a u turn in front of me and a car parked wholly off the road being hit plus a car from the opposite side of the road knocking down a wall and landing in our front garden so unsurprisingly I don't really trust motorists to make the right decision.

double_dutchy

Many years ago I worked for several years as a cycle courier in central London. I was young and foolish and took more risks than I should have.......but that experience taught me many lessons that I still use to this day.

If you are a confident cyclist you need to control the traffic around you, as others have said. This isn't a selfish action - it tells motorists that you are aware and in control, and helps them negotiate safe passage around you - when necessary I cycle in the middle of the road to prevent overtaking, but alternatively I will slow and pullover slightly to allow overtaking on my terms.

I've cycled all over Europe and never had a serious accident, so I think I might be doing something right!

[Deleted User]

af1963 said:

You can cross solid white lines to pass if the cyclist is riding at 10mph or less.

129
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26

I think most drivers don't know this, and even if they do, they have no way to know (reliably) whether a bike is going at more or less than 10mph, so many drivers will try to pass anyway. And then, because the white line is there precisely because there's a danger of oncoming traffic, they often find themselves having to pull back in beside the cyclist to avoid an oncoming vehicle,

I've cycled for 50 years and driven for 40. To respond to your initial question: yes, I think it's safe, or I wouldn't still be doing it.  But part of what makes it safer is selecting the roads I use, staying aware of what drivers may do (legally or illegally), and taking actions like the supposedly "aggressive" riding further out from the kerb when I need to stay obviously visible, or where there's not enough space for a driver to pass safely (but some may try anyway).

I don't think it's aggressive, just discouraging a driver from doing something that will be much more dangerous for me than for them, and I also make a point of visibly pulling in to the left again, and sometimes waving them on, once it does appear safe for any following drivers to get past.  I am just as keen for them to get off my tail as they are to get past me and there's no fun (or safety) in cycling along with a convoy of frustrated and impatient drivers behind.

I disagree .
It's in the, very, basics of the Highway Code and if someone doesn't know this they should retake the test.

[Deleted User]

baser999 said:

It was an interesting watch as it also featured ‘idiot cyclists’ jumping red lights, going straight across junctions etc - these are the ones that irritate the motorist and give all cyclists a bad name. I was amused in particular to watch the reporter claiming that quite legally he was allowed to cycle down the centre of his lane and that motorists are required to allow 5ft when overtaking. He then promptly pointed the driver who crossed double white lines to pass him; how was he supposed to get past otherwise, or was he expected to wait until the double white lines had ended? Had he not been in the centre of the lane, there’d have been no problem. 

I have no issue with cyclists being on the road, but they need to be as mindful of the motorist as we are expected to be of them. No cycling two-a-breast, using hand signals, obeying traffic signals . . .

There are always idiot bike riders as well as idiot cyclists*. I find it's largely the riders such as delivery people, not cyclists, who jump red lights which is ironic as they are the ones who need to be fit and healthy to make a living. However, in my experience, drivers are incapable of processing what they see properly. If a guy on a bike jumps a red light, a typical Clarkson type will say to his mates "oh look, another bloomin' cyclist jumping red lights, they're all like that". When the same driver sees a car jumping a red light they just say "what a clown" and don't see it as typical of all car drivers. Indeed they probably are the type to speed up to try and get through on amber or follows through on red and don't see it as an issue. The same types who go through road works lights as they don't wait to wait despite causing tailbacks for drivers coming the other way. You can apply that to any scenario that drivers do - joke about a BMW driver up their bumper in the "fast lane" when they were already doing 80; clock a white van man on his mobile and tut about it; see the hordes of middle lane hoggers on motorway (and maybe do it themselves) and ignore it; tolerate having a pint or two more than they should on a night out. The list goes on and on. It's extremely tribal and very much an us and them attitude.

If I pointed out that TfL did research over 10 years in London looking at red light jumpers and found that riders were responsible for just 4% of all incidents of pedestrians KSI following a collision, but cars were responsible for 71% would you then consider that maybe cars are the problem on the road, not riders?

I cycle 12 miles a day for work, I could name at least 4 junctions, probably more, where you could put a red light camera and make a fortune from the number of drivers who jump reds. There is a junction where turning is banned to protect the bike lane and pedestrians and most weeks I catch (and report to the police with footage) a driver turning up there as they can't be bothered to take the longer route. Another junction is clearly marked as stop because it crosses the lanes and drivers routinely go through it without stopping if they think they can join the main road risking the lives of riders (and pedestrians) or even stop across it rather than wait behind the line. Delivery drivers routinely park in the bike lanes; if someone breaks down, instead of staying on the road, they put the car on the bike lane so as not to inconvenience other drivers because they don't care about riders.

In terms of white lines - yes you should wait. The solid lines are there because the safety data says overtaking there is dangerous. If you want the rider to squeeze left so you can force your way through, assuming you leave even 1m and are partially in the other lane, what do you think will happen when a car comes the other way? You will swerve left to avoid a collision - right into the rider and kill or seriously injure them by forcing them off the road even if you don't hit them. So yes, wait until it's safe and obey the law. Ironic that you castigate riders while simultaneously wanting to break the law.

*the two are different, a concept the Dutch understand perfectly - a fietser is a bike rider or utility rider - think of granny going to the shops or a vicar pootling down to church etc. A wielrenner is a cyclist - someone who takes riding seriously as a hobby for example.

kinger101

[Deleted User] said:

af1963 said:

You can cross solid white lines to pass if the cyclist is riding at 10mph or less.

129
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26

I think most drivers don't know this, and even if they do, they have no way to know (reliably) whether a bike is going at more or less than 10mph, so many drivers will try to pass anyway. And then, because the white line is there precisely because there's a danger of oncoming traffic, they often find themselves having to pull back in beside the cyclist to avoid an oncoming vehicle,

I've cycled for 50 years and driven for 40. To respond to your initial question: yes, I think it's safe, or I wouldn't still be doing it.  But part of what makes it safer is selecting the roads I use, staying aware of what drivers may do (legally or illegally), and taking actions like the supposedly "aggressive" riding further out from the kerb when I need to stay obviously visible, or where there's not enough space for a driver to pass safely (but some may try anyway).

I don't think it's aggressive, just discouraging a driver from doing something that will be much more dangerous for me than for them, and I also make a point of visibly pulling in to the left again, and sometimes waving them on, once it does appear safe for any following drivers to get past.  I am just as keen for them to get off my tail as they are to get past me and there's no fun (or safety) in cycling along with a convoy of frustrated and impatient drivers behind.

I disagree .
It's in the, very, basics of the Highway Code and if someone doesn't know this they should retake the test.

You might disagree, but most drivers won't know the finer points of this rule re. horses and bikes going less that 10 mph.  I'd just though it meant no overtaking.  I don't see the point in being pious.  It's possible to drive safely while not being able to recite the highway code verbatim.

Disagree with cyclists waving drivers on though.  Just because the cyclist thinks it's safe for me to overtake, doesn't mean it is.

kinger101

Norman_Castle said:

af1963 said:

I don't think it's aggressive, just discouraging a driver from doing something that will be much more dangerous for me than for them

Its not aggressive, its defensive. I've got a full car and motorbike licence and decades of driving experience. I'm capable of deciding if its safe for me to have a vehicle passing me in a given situation. I've had a few cars written off by motorists poor driving including a lorry doing a u turn in front of me and a car parked wholly off the road being hit plus a car from the opposite side of the road knocking down a wall and landing in our front garden so unsurprisingly I don't really trust motorists to make the right decision.

I much prefer the defensive cyclists to be honest.  You know they're much more confident on the road and are less likely to do something unpredictable, as they've read the road ahead.  

frugal90

I will always take the centre of the lane for my own protection. If you don't then you put yourself at risk, especially when there is on coming traffic. Cycling is a big part of the solution if we get the infrastructure right.

It should be compulsory for everyone to go and do some cycling in the Netherlands.