• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Plans to give cyclists right of way when drivers turn lwft
<<
<
7 of 7
>>
>
skinj
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by RobinOfLoxley:
“But I must say that looking over shoulders and using both wing-mirrors are an absolutely vital part of driving.”

Without doubt, it definitely is.
.....But only in situations where you should be expecting another vehicle to be. On a motorway you should always check your blind spot before overtaking someone & ideally the other one when pulling back in to the lane you just left.
On roundabouts too when other drivers get in the wrong lane and stay on left hand side instead of turning off.
The problem is that we have millions of drivers that have been specifically told to do certain things when learning to drive. Checking the blindspot on your left, whilst slowly moving in traffic is not one of them. The re-educating process would cause far more cyclist accidents than we currently have already.
The introduction of the new rule would enhance bad cyclist's belief that they can bomb up the inside without a care in the world, until Geoff who's been driving for 45 years turns left having been signalling for the last 30 seconds & didn't see Tarquin on his Fixie weave into the inside of his car 2 seconds ago.
David (2)
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by skinj:
“Without doubt, it definitely is.
.....But only in situations where you should be expecting another vehicle to be. On a motorway you should always check your blind spot before overtaking someone & ideally the other one when pulling back in to the lane you just left.
On roundabouts too when other drivers get in the wrong lane and stay on left hand side instead of turning off.
The problem is that we have millions of drivers that have been specifically told to do certain things when learning to drive. Checking the blindspot on your left, whilst slowly moving in traffic is not one of them. The re-educating process would cause far more cyclist accidents than we currently have already.
The introduction of the new rule would enhance bad cyclist's belief that they can bomb up the inside without a care in the world, until Geoff who's been driving for 45 years turns left having been signalling for the last 30 seconds & didn't see Tarquin on his Fixie weave into the inside of his car 2 seconds ago.”

Spot on. Blind spot sensors will help (not sure about in thick fog, or at night if the cyclist has no lights, and dressed all in dark cloths, and no street lights), but at the moment a Volvo bliss type system would prolly add about 25% on top the price of my car - which is just not viable until those costs fall - or a cheaper solution is devised.

Just to add, people need to do the over the shoulder checks in any senario where there are multi lanes heading same way. Eg, a one way system with a r/hand and L/hand lane, for a split in the road up ahead. I learned to drive on one such road.
skinj
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by David (2):
“Just to add, people need to do the over the shoulder checks in any senario where there are multi lanes heading same way. Eg, a one way system with a r/hand and L/hand lane, for a split in the road up ahead. I learned to drive on one such road.”

If there is a lane to the left/right that your'e about to move in to, I agree fully.
When there is no "lane" and a cyclist is in the 2ft between you and the kerb I think that's stretching it!
Evo102
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by skinj:
“If there is a lane to the left/right that your'e about to move in to, I agree fully.
When there is no "lane" and a cyclist is in the 2ft between you and the kerb I think that's stretching it!”

That's why it is wise to "close the gap" i.e. wheels in the gutter, especially if you've just overtaken a cyclist and they are likely to come up behind you, to negate that possibility.
skinj
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Evo102:
“That's why it is wise to "close the gap" i.e. wheels in the gutter, especially if you've just overtaken a cyclist and they are likely to come up behind you, to negate that possibility.”

As someone that also commutes in the dryer weather on a bike I wouldn't do that at all. I also move left if motor bike appear behind me so they can easily pass even in traffic.
Deliberately blocking cyclists on encourages them to weave from one side to the other. Ideally as drivers it would be best to know where they are always likely to be.
At the same time I don't think it's much to ask of cyclists to take responsibility of there own actions and anticipate cars turning ahead of them, just as drivers do for other vehicles or cyclist ahead of them.
RobinOfLoxley
10-12-2016
Blocking is not something I do.

OK, it's a pain to keep checking blind spots, when being shadowed or swarmed by cyclist(s).

But it has to be done. Even on single lane roads.
Evo102
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by skinj:
“As someone that also commutes in the dryer weather on a bike I wouldn't do that at all. I also move left if motor bike appear behind me so they can easily pass even in traffic.
Deliberately blocking cyclists on encourages them to weave from one side to the other. Ideally as drivers it would be best to know where they are always likely to be.
At the same time I don't think it's much to ask of cyclists to take responsibility of there own actions and anticipate cars turning ahead of them, just as drivers do for other vehicles or cyclist ahead of them.”

Well if they can't physically come down your inside then you know they are likely to be on your right.

Cyclists are encouraged to 'take the lane' to prevent what they consider to be potentially dangerous overtakes, so what is wrong with drivers doing the equivalent?
skinj
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Evo102:
“Well if they can't physically come down your inside then you know they are likely to be on your right.

Cyclists are encouraged to 'take the lane' to prevent what they consider to be potentially dangerous overtakes, so what is wrong with drivers doing the equivalent?”

Maybe because that's for their safety from unobservant drivers, whereas the other option is just someone being a dick to others.
Evo102
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by skinj:
“Maybe because that's for their safety from unobservant drivers, whereas the other option is just someone being a dick to others.”

No, it is to prevent dangerous undertakes by unobservant/self entitled cyclists.
skinj
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Evo102:
“No, it is to prevent dangerous undertakes by unobservant/self entitled cyclists.”

Sadly the circle of blame and mistrust revolves around this attitude.
You block them, they ride in the middle of the road, you cut them up after overtaking to make a point, they post a video of you doing it on youtube, you reply to the comments and a flame war erupts etc etc etc.
juliancarswell
11-12-2016
Originally Posted by skinj:
“Sadly the circle of blame and mistrust revolves around this attitude.
You block them, they ride in the middle of the road, you cut them up after overtaking to make a point, they post a video of you doing it on youtube, you reply to the comments and a flame war erupts etc etc etc.”

....they do something aggressive, they scratch your car....you do something aggressive, they meet their maker.
blueblade
11-12-2016
From a purely practical view, and all arguments aside, I do find it incredibly helpful when cyclists give left, right or stopping hand signals. But fewer and fewer seem to do so these days. Or at any rate, "ordinary" cyclists perhaps tend to more than the lycra clad ones.

Just a factual observation fwiw.
jonmorris
11-12-2016
We must remember that a lot of cyclists never had any training and won't know the laws, or even basic common sense things.

Look at how people hiring bikes in London ride. Pavements, wrong way down one way streets and no clue to stop at lights. But who told them otherwise? Hand signals? Haha. What are they - besides flipping the bird at someone.

I had lessons at school, but do schools teach bike safety now?
blueblade
11-12-2016
Originally Posted by jonmorris:
“We must remember that a lot of cyclists never had any training and won't know the laws, or even basic common sense things.

Look at how people hiring bikes in London ride. Pavements, wrong way down one way streets and no clue to stop at lights. But who told them otherwise? Hand signals? Haha. What are they - besides flipping the bird at someone.

I had lessons at school, but do schools teach bike safety now?”

Odd really, as many cyclists seem to know the law and highway code as it applies to motorists, inside out. But are apparently unaware of the most basic hand signals employed by cyclists for many decades.

Still, there you go.
tealady
11-12-2016
Originally Posted by blueblade:
“From a purely practical view, and all arguments aside, I do find it incredibly helpful when cyclists give left, right or stopping hand signals. But fewer and fewer seem to do so these days. Or at any rate, "ordinary" cyclists perhaps tend to more than the lycra clad ones.

Just a factual observation fwiw.”

That's because it is important to keep your hands on the brakes. There are a lot more hazards these days, so being able to brake quickly is important.
I rarely signal right, I just make sure it is safe to move lane and that the car behind has slowed (ie knows my intentions) or is miles away. Otherwise I will just stop at the kerb and wait for a suitable gap and resume, then turn right.
Don't think I have ever indicated to stop.
seanf
12-12-2016
Originally Posted by Girth:
“Interesting fact - a higher proportion of Audi owners also own a bike than any other car make.”

I wondered how long until the audi comment was made. My driving never suddenly changed when I upgraded my astra to an audi, I still give way signal and even stop to allow others to pull out in traffic.

Originally Posted by RobinOfLoxley:
“I give way to everyone, if a dangerous, or costly, situation may result, regardless of who is 'in the right'

Usually, I am a very generous and polite driver and aware people make mistakes.

If I think someone, is being deliberately cheeky, I may play a bit of (safe) Chicken with them to prove a point, but I try not to do that too often. Usually in Jams, when everyone takes turns to merge or turn out of a junction then suddenly 4 Audi ( ) drivers don't want to take turns.
I'll edge forward just a bit to frustrate those ones. I'll let two out, but the person behind me can let the next two out.

I certainly don't do it with Cyclists and Pedestrians who may be in a world of their own, and any mis-calculation on my part, even at very low speeds, could be catastrophic.

I don't engage in road-rage with miscreants either, but merely Tut.”

And the second audi dig, and you admit to anti social driving. BTW I don’t think there us such a thing as safe chicken, just slightly less dangerous dangerous driving.
blueblade
12-12-2016
Originally Posted by tealady:
“That's because it is important to keep your hands on the brakes. There are a lot more hazards these days, so being able to brake quickly is important.
I rarely signal right, I just make sure it is safe to move lane and that the car behind has slowed (ie knows my intentions) or is miles away. Otherwise I will just stop at the kerb and wait for a suitable gap and resume, then turn right.
Don't think I have ever indicated to stop.”

When I was a cyclist, I'd hand signal all three - right turn, left turn and stopping, dependent on how much traffic was about. Obviously, on a quiet estate or rural road, with no traffic about, they would be irrelevant anyway. Never experienced a problem with giving any of them, personally.

Your other hand is free for the brake. At the point that a hand signal was necessary, I was never going that fast that a sudden application of both brakes would be needed.
<<
<
7 of 7
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map