Safe Speed Forums

Not quite. Only the one scenario has been discussed.


I would like to think so, and I’m glad others are so far in agreement – does anyone disagree with that process?
However, the last question of my post is relevant to what kicked this thread into life, and for me that issue is still open.


I repeat: I have cause to conclude you may have misinterpreted or misrepresented earlier statements.
Could you clarify this point Robin?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Agreed. I'd probably come out into primary position a little earlier than Steve, so as not to make any sudden movements, and to give myself more time to pull in or stop if any following vehicle made a dive for the closing gap.

Staying in primary between pinch points? Yes if there are no following vehicles, if one does turn up move Into secondary to let them pass if it's safe for them to do so.

Sensible indeed. It seems we really are not far apart at all, Steve.


Yes, I agree with everything you said there.


Again, I largely agree. As you said, the decision on how long to stay in primary would take on board relative speeds, plus potentially many other factors, but it would have taken a whole book to cover everything.


That's a good question, and worth thinking about. Personally, I'm probably not the most assertive of riders, but I do try to to adopt the principles of "vehicular cycling", and these are some examples (Excuse my indulgence, it really is useful to think about this a bit - and you did ask .)

There is one road on my commute to work that has pinch points (islands) separated by those sorts of distances (probably a bit less less, in fact), and (according to the speed sign) I tend to be doing about 20mph up a slight incline along that stretch; the speed limit is 30mph. I think this is pretty much the scenario you envisaged in your question. On that road, I usually move out for each of the pinch points and back in afterwards. I do occasionally get pillocks (sorry) passing me about a foot away whilst breaking the speed limit (again according to the same speed sign), but that's another story.

On stretches where I can keep up with the traffic, I will generally adopt primary position as a matter of course. This is because if I don't, some git (sorry) will come up the side of me and drive along about 2 feet (or less) away from me because (s)he thinks I am not part of the traffic and therefore am irrelevant. (It happens.)

There are some places where there is hazard after hazard after hazard - pinch points with cars parked in between them, etc. I do have such a place on my commute to work. In this case, it really is impossible to leave primary position without either cycling in the door zone of the parked cars or stopping completely. I end up being in primary for what seems like ages, but is in fact 40 seconds (from my videos). This section I hate, because there is absolutely nothing I can do about it, but people still overtake me when I am overtaking the parked cars and then cut in on me at the next island, some of them sound their horns repeatedly. There really are quite a fewf ignorant bar-stewards out there. The irony is that I always, every single time, catch them up at the next traffic light and the car that was behind them when they were following me, but waited patiently for me to get past the hazards, pretty much always ends up behind them again at the lights, so I haven't actually delayed anyone!

There are some places where I have had a lot of problems and tried different strategies. The one I wrote about in my blog post (when a lane peels off to the left) is an example. In that case, I am in primary for about 10 seconds, and I do typically delay the following vehicle by about 4 seconds. Mostly drivers here are courteous and understanding. But, thinking about the other factors involved in this particular case is useful. First, I think it's fair to say that I should be in the correct lane, which is the leftmost straight-ahead lane. I should not be cycling in the left-turn-only lane when I am going straight on, irrespective of any cycle lanes. Next, I adopt primary position in that lane because if I don't, I get left hooked (more than once a week) by careless motorists going into the left turn lane. The other factor that makes me more comfortable with it is that there are two straight-ahead lanes, so they can pass me if they want to by using the next lane. I also adopt a policy of not filtering to the front at the lights just before this section, so I haven't gone in front of someone and then blocked them. Vehicles that approach me from behind in the queue for those lights can see that there is a bicycle waiting in the queue in primary position and can join the queue in the next lane if they want.

There are lots of other situations with different factors, but I hope this gives an insight into the thinking of just one "vehicular" cyclist. Sorry if it was too long, but hopefully it is a useful contribution.

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange

Very useful thanks Grumps and it just occurs to me that your riding technique and use of PP would also differ to mine because I’m not nearly as fit as you and therefore not as fast anymore.

Thinking about it in a different way you might say I am like a HGV on a motorway and so try to stay left as much as possible. You, Mag and Weep are more like the Suzuki Hayabusa so will be approaching pinch points quicker and need to use PP more, if I can put it that way.

So after all that fighting and falling out we essentially ride in a similar manner then and use PP to protect ourselves one way or another

Weepej just introduced another term "secondary position" which I take to mean near the curb. I think the only way I differ from you then weep is I use SP more than PP. The PP is something I should say I use quite little but at the end of the day it's a personal choice I think and dependant on your fitness level and therefore speed. De gustibus non est disputandum.

Sorry for any offence I may have given over this topic and I hope you continue to join-in on other topics as well.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Thanks for the compliment. I think I am towards the faster end of the MTB/Hybrid commuters, but I often find that after I pass a couple of other commuters, I'm going flat out but feeling very smug, and then someone with 10 inch hips on a carbon fibre road bike will just fly past me. (I don't know about Weepej, but I think Mags would be more like the guy on the CF bike.)

The point is a good one, though. I only re-started cycling (is that re-cycling?) regularly less than a year ago, but all my trousers are 4 or 5 inches too big for me now! I think I may have become more confident on the road through practice, but it probably also has a lot to do with the fact that I can go faster and accelerate better now.

Regarding secondary position, your question raises another point that may be of interest, (though I hesitate to mentioned it for fear of starting another long discussion). John Franklin, in the Cyclecraft book, emphasises that the road positions are not relative to the kerb, but rather relative to the traffic flow. So, he defines secondary position as about 1 metre to the left of the moving traffic, but never closer than 0.5 metres to the kerb. The rationale is that it keeps you sufficiently away from the passing traffic, but still within their field of vision, or rather their field of attention. This is not only in relation to following vehicles, but also vehicles emerging from side roads, whose attention is focussed on the main traffic flow rather than on cyclists who might be coming along by the kerb.

Of course this is the ideal, and therefore isn't always practical, but it does fit in with the highway code guidance to drivers that they should give motorcycles, cycles and horses at least as much room as they would give a car.

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange

---- Note to Forum ...>
Chaps BEHAVE !
Debate the subject and attack points NOT the posters ! Think twice before you hit the Submit button!
----
Right.
To everyone that missed my previous post that answered the question - the B&T's were OFF. Which was my point. This was not an emergency situation, but about better road manners, courtesy and consideration.

I am happy to say what I would do because it was MY real life situation.
What I did. I heard the noise of a large vehicle coming up behind, threw a glance back and established that it was a FE. Decided it was going to be better (manners, and helpful) to stop. I stopped as close to the kerb as possible (i.e within an inch or two) and although still on the bike I leant on my left leg over the (empty) pavement. As the FE went by I got a toot and a very nice wave. They were grateful. Yes I 'controlled' the situation, by not only making it as safe as possible but as helpful as possible too. It only took a moment and as a good driver the FE chap saw and recognised that I had processed the situation, and taken appropriate action to ensure the best outcome for all.
To me thinking about all road users is the right and decent thing to do, to wantonly 'take PP' and ride ahead, places the lorry and all following vehicles at my 'pace'. I do not want to deliberately slow other vehicles if I can avoid doing so. In exactly the same way when I am in my car, or on horse back or on my m/bike, I will try to show courtesy and be helpful to all those around me.
It only takes a little forethought to consider what may happen, and to seek how best I can make the situation, is less stressful, less of a problem for everyone, and usually takes less time than inviting potential conflict.
I do regularly see all types of road users 'clash' during these types of events and yet with just a little forethought and consideration it can all be avoided.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

I think that a very good observation and one that all cyclists adopt to, that we all choose our rate and generally try to cycle in less dense groups for safety. (I am aware of group-cycling and that is most definitely for another thread). I think you are wrong though that it is entirely just fitness. I am trying like others too mention to do more cycling as I enjoy it (used to do average of 150m/wk), and I hope too, that I will become fitter as well. I like to ride at a good pace but as time goes by that will quicken. Now what I find interesting is the 'stopping' issues.

As a good driver/rider I try to position myself as close to the kerb as possible and only take a more dominate cycling position only when absolutely necessary. Also very up for debate as we have been doing. But some of the 'issue' with dominate control is also to do with the lack of desire to stop or even slow. My recent bike purchase was sadly IMHO without the extra brake lever by the handle bars, but I like them, they help do the 'gentle slow' when traffic requires, I don't then need to 'drop' to apply full brake levers. They claimed it was lack of EU approval! However being able to brake really easily will effect when I do so, and the extra effort in doing so will change the behaviour of when and how often.
So I am concerned that there seems to be a tendency for fellow racing bike road users, to possibly be inclined to brake/gentle brake, less, and couple this with, the possibly over emphasis on 'taking a dominate position / PP', this is leading cyclists to being over controlling, when in fact slowing prior to 'the pinch point' (for example) will potential cause a serious or fatal encounter. The expectation of other vehicles who will not expect cyclists to ever be so 'over-dominate', is a problem. The behaviour, as shown precisely with that 'corner and the white van incident', will and did cause a problem, so being predictable is important. Changes to learned behaviours needs all parties to be aware of them and all to receive educating to them thus creating a harmonious and symbiotic relationships.
Motorists need to know what a cyclist may decided to do, as much as the cyclist / horse rider needs to know what other motorists may do too.
The aim of any good road users should, never be to create a worse situation, but to always be the better more competent 'controller' and make things first and foremost safe, to then act pro-actively first, and if at worst then have to rely on a reaction, to do that in the least most confrontational manner.

All road users choose their preferred path according to all our abilities, safety and confidence levels. With cycling and (horse) riding (or H/driving) physical ability and connection with the animal will donate how confident and how we perceive our ability will be to what position we deem safe and sensible.
I tend to be perfectly happy, if a vehicle passes me fairly closely (where roads are narrow or busy e.g London riding). This is not for everyone and I totally recognise and fully appreciate this.
I like to think that I have 'good confidence ability', and that it 'shows', so that motorists are not having to alter too much, to my 'needs' or treat me as a 'major hazard'.
I am concerned that cyclists seem to be showing great 'fear' (even encouraged !) and then to combat that this possibly over-dominate style, that may result in more close-shaves than less. As has been well expressed in previous posts, all road users share the road, and we need to learn to work together in the interests of everyone's safety and well-being. I don't think anyone truly wants to be some 'Bolshoi' selfish driver or rider, road-hogging the lane because it 'suits them'.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Traffic density and volume relates to where and how we position ourselves all of the time. I agree that attention/awareness are crucial rd safety factors, and I think the 'field of attention' is an interesting observation, but it is a flawed concept. If the problem is that road users have started to use 'tunnel vision' the solution is not to then place everything in that tunnel, but to ensure through proper methods that all road users return to better observations that encompass the whole surrounding road environment.
Solving the root cause problem is key.
An apparent solution to a 'factor' may only ever alter it's level of severity (better and worse remember).

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Absolutely Steve. I can confirm that dcbwhaley has indeed misrepresented my earlier statements, presumably because he has misinterpreted them, judging from his past performance. I find it useful to ask posters what they really mean when I am not sure, though weepej seems disinclined to "dignify" such a request for clarification with a response, which I suppose is not really a surprise, again from past performance.

Hope that helps to clarify.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Well, I don't think it's a "flawed concept" - it is actually a very useful concept - but like all these things it is not the be-all-and-end-all. It is one consideration among many. However, it is the case that many many drivers claim SMIDSY when they do something that compromises a cyclist, such as pulling out of a side road or turning left across them. I think it is always wise to hope for the best, but anticipate the worst, and I think your term tunnel vision is a fair representation of the worst, at least as things currently stand.

Your main point is concerned with improving the behaviour and competence of road users generally, and I agree with that entirely. There are a lot of very good drivers on the roads, but there are also some absolutely appalling ones. Some of them lack the competence to drive well, and with others it comes down to arrogance.

Yesterday, I was riding very close to the kerb (too close really) on a busy main road, and a car passed me quite fast with no more than 12 inches clearance, possibly only 6 inches. This road is riddled with holes in the tarmac, particularly in the two feet nearest to the kerb. These days I try not to confront them because you never know who might turn out to be a psychopath, but I did stop by the window of this one and spoke to him. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and took the line that perhaps he didn't realise what he had done, so I said: "excuse me, do you realise that you missed me by only about 6 inches back there?". His response was: "So? I missed you didn't I? I was in complete control the whole time." He said that last phrase twice. He clearly had no idea about margins of error, about the fact that I might not be in complete control, especially given the state of the road. Ideally, this kind of person needs to be re-educated, but I can't see how that can happen.

The underlying problem, though, is one of culture. We have a very unhealthy culture on our roads in this country. Years ago, I had the pleasure of cycling in France on a few holidays, with our two young children sometimes as well. I have to say that it was fantastic. I wasn't aware of terms like "primary position" then, but I really didn't need to be because the cars would all pass leaving about 2 metres clearance; people would give me priority even when it wasn't really mine. The only times there were problems were when the vehicle had a sticker on the back bearing the letters "GB". I was told by a local that this was due to their rules of presumed liability; if anything happened it was assumed that the motor driver was at fault. I think this may have been a factor, though I also suspect it was at least as much to do with the French love of cycling. This was a long time ago, so I don't know what it is like now, but the contrast then was amazing.

The thing is that, when I am cycling to work, I am trying to get there in one piece on that particular day, given the way people drive now, with, in some cases, their tunnel vision. It is not in my power to change the culture of the British roads; only to try to survive another day and hopefully enjoy my journey to work and back in the process, which I usually do. This is what that book is trying to help me with; it isn't about trying to change the motoring culture.

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange

I know you said a lot more, but I thought I'd just pick up on this specific aspect. I think it's true that cyclists are often reluctant to slow down if they (we) can avoid it, and it is interesting to look at the reason for that.

If we slow down to half the speed, we lose half the momentum because momentum is proportional to velocity (for a given mass). However, because kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the velocity, we will lose three quarters of the kinetic energy, which we will then have to pump back into the bike (and ourselves) using our muscles. There is also the problem that, whilst going through a pinch point without slowing may delay someone a little, slowing right down and then having to get up to speed through the pinch point on a busy road will probably delay another person (or persons) far more, once we eventually find a big enough gap in the traffic to get moving again.

That's not to say that we shouldn't consider our safety, others' convenience, our own convenience, etc., but it provides a bit more insight into the issues that cyclists face.

BTW. I hope Steve liked that; I know a bit about physics myself .

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange

Not at all. What do you mean by obstruction?

I see that this is on BBC1 now !

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Yes, it's competing with Coronation Street for the longest running soap, I can't wait for the repeat on Dave though....

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Well can you solve the equations of Quantum Chromodynamics at energy scales relevant for describing atomic nuclei please because me, Steve and DCB have been working on it all day.

Nice to have you here Grumps, if I haven't said so already, and you too of course Mag, if I may call you that

It's not the Ogre or cycle-hating place people make it out to be, honestly, and I'm glad we found some common ground

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Already answered. Can you please answer the question posed to you?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

It is good to see we do have common ground, but I still question the logic of some of the cycling I have seen.


Hmmmm, I can see myself disagreeing to an extent. Let's see.

I did some numerical testing today.
If the pinch is 12ft wide, and only normal cars are wishing to pass, then I will leave that door open.
You may think that crazy, but filtering motorbikers manage exactly that with 12ft wide lanes (and can pass both sides of cars).
Wider vehicles don’t get that luxury, but they wait anyway.

On roads without pinch points: to the left is my default position, as left as practicable.


It is possible for a driver to underestimate the speeds of faster cyclists, and I suspect you are one of the faster ones.

I also retain PP when keeping up with traffic - I’m not one for wasting a good slipstream


I agree the door zone is a real concern. Don’t get me wrong, I have a good friend who has suffered from such an incident, so I’m not going to bury my head in the sand about it.
If there is little in the way of following traffic (not a busy road) and the biker is making progress, then I would deem it reasonable to widen the gap, but only by the width of the door; no more is necessary. However, if the road is busy, and if one is genuinely that concerned about the door zone, then one should consider slowing such that each vehicle can be properly checked on approach (which also mitigates the outcome if it still happens), as well as investing in good daytime lights (much like motorbikers do).

Before anyone can take issue with that, 2 questions must be answered:
1) Is it right to force many to slow down so one can go faster?
2) When filtering past the left side of stationary traffic, should one cycle at speed, or should one instead slow in case a passenger decides to alight? I’m sure we all appreciate the hypocrisy of one who makes progress passing queued traffic within the door zone, yet noisily insist on being clear of the zone when passing parked cars.


Or risk going into their blind spot

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Has anyone been killed, murdered or had an air/train disaster or got married amongst this thread yet? cos if not coronation street is way ahead!

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

If a cyclist rides by using the flowing traffic as their guide the cyclist will be taking paths that are less than ideal or under their decision, plus using a 'moving' reference which changes, cannot be relied on. I do appreciate that he is not being this literal, but I fail to see what this improves if anything at all. I can see problems however.
How do you see it as being useful? And in what way?
Whilst some considerations can be useful to provide alternative sometime previously unconsidered potential solutions or be a part of further research and developed ideas that have been honed, to show some good solid working solutions and ideas.
The HC showing a half meter from the side means that cyclists are encroaching into the 'main stream' of traffic flow, and that seems like an un-necessary potential conflict of road users. Why advise an 'out' position if the inner 'kerbside' position is safe and sensible. When appropriate an occasional and necessary 'out' position is required then it should be done with knowledge and skill. One problem with a 'new idea' is that it can be over-used, hence why new concepts need to be carefully researched to ensure the introduction is worthy and will be of good benefit.
I can't say that I have heard much about this and I have been visiting many cycle shops (in London and many parts of the UK), over the last year, and there were no leaflets or information even to those they might wish to impress, never mind all the rest of the road users!
The Bikeability site shows this PP method, but I wonder how many people properly understand it and what ongoing research is taking place to observe what effect it is having on bike users and to road safety?
Do they? what makes you say that ?
A 'failed to see' is not a SMIDSY of course, but a 'he appeared from no-where usually is. A product that was introduced to Paul that I have here, can help drivers place a plastic strip beside the A pillar (the vertical side pillars of the windscreen), which helps to show hidden objects that are in the blind spot. A good product but I'd rather know that better education to regularly advise all motorists to lean forwards to see around blind-spots and to look out carefully for all possible road activity before moving. Learning techniques to verify a 'clear path' should be encouraged.
I agree people can sometimes provide a 'reason' that quickly becomes an 'excuse' and never look for how to improve and learn from mistakes they have made. When road safety fails to ask that all road users try to develop their skills abilities and knowledge to help improve safety, it fails in it's very purpose. That lack of overall improvement has a knock on effect degrading road safety from the top down and for extending periods of time until resolved.
I do agree. There are ways to develop road skills that can make 'hoping' almost totally defunct and by gaining knowledge this can become and has for many people, a journey that barely ever has a single event of any surprise or even hard braking. Those abilities to understand traffic can help whatever mode of transport. To be cautious on the road is wise a
Some road users are frustrated by bad design and bad traffic management, that needs to be better suited to genuine road safety than political pressure.
Feeling fear on the road is never pleasant. Not confronting is very wise too. His comment is interesting, did you ask him to explain- I assume not or you would have stated it. It might have been that he had been embarrassed about how close he had got. However I always like to think that we have to be not only responsible for our own actions but also, be prepared to allow for others actions/inactions. On reason that close proximity can upset us is that to ever invade another's space is considered rude and potentially aggressive by action, so it tugs at our core instincts. Knowing whether they have really seen you and understood your road environment concerns is a worry, but it becomes less so when you can establish your safety by better awareness of their approach, considering if someone come s close when up ahead you have a hazard and taking more lifesaver glances to allow for pulling out. Travelling at a pace that you can stop in the distance that you know to be clear is extremely important. If you 'fear' that you may have to react suddenly then that would tell me that you are possibly going too fast to react to your environment.
Public messages and info films perhaps nowadays using You Tube etc are all ways in which good road user safety advice can be publicised. I can think of a host more too.
I don't get this? There was a policy consideration that all motor vehicles would be to 'blame' if a cyclist was involved in an accident, but this isn't what you have said, nor has it been Gov adopted either ? The UK doesn't have these rules? or do you mean UK cyclists are riding how they choose assuming that others will 'give' to them (sort of behaviour)?
sorry what book? the safer we can make each road user the safer our road will become.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.