Driving etiquette………..

Not strictly true. If a cyclist suddenly appears in front of you the tendency is not to run them over but to swerve to avoid them. We drove through Cambridge the other evening & on a couple of occasions cyclists popped out of side turnings without even glancing in our direction. Fortunately I was pottering along & able to avoid them without hitting something or someone else.

winky,

After a really good night out down at our local boozer, with ten pints of Newcastle Brown Ale having passed through my system, I often find it easier to stagger home along that white line they painted along the middle of the A4 Trunk Road. It goes straight past the end of our Avenue.

I've paid my taxes and all that, so I know that I an fully entitled to use the road, any time I want. I am very, very consciencious so I usually, but not always, wear a yellow hi-viz jacket. I don't use much of the road, only about 3 feet either side of the white line, except when getting on and off.

What really pisses me off, is those sodding bloody motorists that I know are out to murder me..................

In the nearside lane, a car pulls up in a slow-moving line of urban traffic near a set of traffic lights at a junction.

The passenger says she'll get out here and meet the driver later after he's found a parking spot. She doesn't expect to find anybody passing between car and kerb - the distance is barely 2 feet wide and it illegal to "undertake" anyway !

She opens the door and swings her legs out and WHAM ! BANG ! some poor, innocent cyclist takes her legs off and puts her in a wheelchair forever..............

Ok, only hypothetical I know. But it can and no doubt has happened to some poor cyclist who has suffered severe concussion and facial injury due to the carelessness of that car passenger.

I'm equally sure that some poor cyclist has has been simply hit by a car door that was opened but before the passenger had time to swing legs, out and therefore he feels somewhat aggrieved at the thoughtless action of the passenger.

Or do cyclists also have some sort of moral accountability for their own safety and that of other road users. Is there some sort of cycling etiquette required ?

I you sure about this, Don?

i'm not aware it is illegal for a cyclist to undertake [ride past] stationary traffic on the approach to a set of traffic lights?, not in the UK anyway, in other countries perhaps?

Perhaps that hypothetical cyclist was quite legally moving past stationary traffic as so to go forward to - stop/wait at the safe reserved cyclist area area while the traffic light is red?

Debs

That's not overtaking on the N/S or "undertaking". It is passing a stationary queue of traffic. It's in the Highway Code. This little gem should be compulsory reading for *all* road and pavement users.

Yes, I did 'provoke' 2 of them (nos 1 and 3) even though I acted correctly (No 1 got prosecuted).

1  He waned to move into the right hand lane on a dual carriage way after exiting a roundabout, I was in the right hand lane.  He didn't see me.  When he started to change lanes I gave a short blast on the horn, and he moved back into his own lane then pulled out behind me, before the next roundabout.  I didn't use a rude gesture as he simply made a mistake and corrected it.

2  I have absolutely no idea why, or what (if anything) provoked him.  Although he was speeding (over 50 in a 40 limit).  I was riding at a reasonable(ish) speed of 40-43 and keeping in the centre of my lane rather than driving in the gutter.  The roundabout had two lanes as it crossed a wider road, he approached from behind me.

3  I was keeping to the speed limit on a deteriorated road surface - as a biker I was aware of the reduced grip level (apparently this was enough provocation for this particular driver).

Huge

i'm not judging and i'm certainly not condoning the conduct of the drivers, it just made me wonder if there was something more to it.

i think everyone has lost their rag whilst on the road for one reason or another, but to hit another road user is totally unacceptable as far as I'm concerned.

Graeme

Debs, Harry

I know the highway code and you are both absolutely correct.

I drafted it to see :-

• how many people would concentrate on the "legal" aspect of events (you two obviously)
• how many would concentrate on the need for car drivers to take responsibility for the actions of their passengers
• how many would suggest cyclists should consider their own safety and carry out this manoeuvre with caution
• how many would suggest that cyclists should think ahead and take into account the consequences of their carelessness on others eg vulnerable passengers or possibly pedestrians (which I didn't mention)

Perhaps others will also comment

Don, you're messing with people's heads.

Good fun isn't it! 

Your strawman argument would be more interesting if it was the actions of the cyclists (other than their choice to use the road) that was contributing to their deaths. But 80% of the time it's not. They're just riding along legally and a motorist runs them down.

Which thread are you referring to Huge ?

I witnessed to mother of all stupid cyclists today.

I post the details later !

Hi Graeme, It's OK, I took it as an enquiry not an accusation, no probs.

I've also had an accident at night where a drunk driver overtook me, lost control of his car and turned it over, scattering debris all over the road - I'm sure he didn't intend to do it but it was certainly culpable, so maybe I am just unlucky.

The cyclist should expect the thoughtless actions of the passenger. Not sure about the legality. May vary by jurisdiction. But the vast majority of "doorings" are drivers' side doors illegally being opened into the path of cyclists. A motorist killed a cyclist in Melbourne a while back by doing this. While legally, these regular doorings are 100% the motorists' fault, any experienced cyclist will have often wtinessed, and should of course expect the idiocy of the motorists (in all circumstances) and act accordingly. I ride as if I expect every single car door to be opened into my path without warning. That's why I don't squirrel along the extreme edge of the road but take the lane as required to be clear of the door zone. I'm usually moving as fast or faster than traffic anyway, but I'm sure I annoy many motorists. Some indicate their annoyance through various means. I have no time for those @r$h0le$ and try not to respond.

It's fine to speak of "etiquitte" but really, for cyclists this is life and death. Etiquitte is perhaps appropriate to avoid offending delicate motorists' sensibilities ("That idiot pulling out of the slip lane forced me to slow for 15 seconds - how rude!. Why won't that spandex clad cyclist ride in the gutter so I can squeeze past and save 30 seconds? How dare that cyclist move up between a line of stopped cars? He should wait in line like the rest of us. It isn't fair!"). For cyclists it goe far beyond those trivial concerns. It is always fun to bame the victim, though.

Today at about 13:00 hrs BST

Mrs D is driving and I am a passenger. We are driving home after lunch with our daughter. The route is a busy country lane around the perimeter of the disused Greeham Common airbase. There are a couple of cattle grids and the road is comfortably wide enough for two cars to pass in opposite directions, but you need to slow down when faced with a lorry. Overtaking is possible on some sections but the road twists and turns with short hills for much of the route. Speed limit is either 30 or 40, depending which section you are on.

Not a route on which I would cycle, it seems too risky given the murderous intentions of  motorists. Never-the-less, we find ourselves catching up and then driving at c.10mph behind a cyclist. No problem, Mrs D is quite happy accommodate the cyclist and there is no way we could safely overtake, either for his sake or our own or any opposing traffic on a bend.

We notice he has a pair of full panniers so assume he is touring. He isn’t wearing lycra, more a pair of hiking trousers and an open shirt that flutters in the breeze. He is wearing a helmet.

Around his helmet is a pair of headphones and he is listening to something, but glancing around from time to time to see what is behind him. He is wobbling a bit, especially going up a short hill, because he is only holding the handle-bars with one hand and the bike is slowing down a bit due to the incline.

Then we notice why he is only using one hand to ride. He is also drinking a “Costa” take-out cup of coffee.

How he managed to negotiate the subsequent cattle grid without becoming a cropper is a fortunate mystery. The next section of road was straight with no opposing traffic so Mrs D overtook, giving him a wide berth.

I do hope that none of the twenty or so following cars didn’t kill him, either deliberately or accidently.

Don, I think I've spotted a flaw:  Being male he should be referred to as the father of all stupid cyclists!

Actually apart from the coffee (hence one hand) and headphones he's entitled to be there, however, it's still not a road I'd choose to cycle along (I also know it).

Sounds like a plonker, but what's your point?

the overwhelming message iof this thread is that road users all, regardless of mechanism of transport, should familiarize themselves with the rules of the road where they drive (in Britain the Highway Code is revised everu few years, so remembering from your driving test quite a few years won't cover everything - and be aware that there may be some regional differences (anyone been to the Isle of Man, where a white disk with diagonal black stripe means there is no speed limit so you can legally drive at 150 mph - no dual carriageways mind - if you don't drive dangerously?). You then choose consciously which rules you will break and take responsibility for everything that may entail.

But as far as etiquette is concerned, every single road user should have respect for every other one, and try not to cause anyone else any inconvenience or difficulty. I say try, because on busy roads even with the best foresight things can get difficult simply because of the number of road users. And we all make mistakes, hopefully inconsequential - as with etiquette off the roads, the least we can do is apologise to whomever it may have affected, and that may go part of the way to alleviating their annoyance and resultant tension.

The area of study of psychology of driving is a significant one, and even the some of most mild-mannered of people have been found to transform completely behind the wheel (and handlebar), so it behoves everyone else to be prepared and simply, for example, let that idiot who wants to squeeze past and seems uncaring who he/she (but most often a he) endagers do so at the earliest opportunity, as you're safer with them ahead when you can keep your distance. and you never know, on some occasion they may be attending to a genuine emergency, 

Huge, Yes I know he has aright to be there, and he is the "father" rather than the "mother" (but that didn't sound right to me) of all stupid cyclists , and yes it was Bury's Bank Road.

Like you, I wouldn't choose to cycle this particular road, or attempt the cattle grid on a bike, using one hand !

And you?

"Plonker" is too kind a word winky.

My points are.....

• He stood a real probability of coming a cropper on the cattle grid.
• Some irresponsible motorist might have tried to overtake him only to meet another motorist coming the other way and this guy wouldn't have been able to respond to any subsequent manoeuvre due to being effectively deaf as well as out of control of his machine.
• It was entirely up to other people, in this case my other half, to help ensure his safety.

"Plonker" is nowhere near the mark ! All of us, cyclists included, have a responsibility towards our own safety as well as the safety of others. Mrs D displayed that responsibility, this chap didn't. Not all motorists are intent on murdering cyclists, but many cyclists seem committed to suicide.

I don't claim perfection.

I do think that if he had been killed doing that and had died without issue, then yes, it would have actually have been stupid enough to qualify for a Darwin award.

The worst thing is that he could have involved some innocent person (one who was acting in a reasonable manner) to have become involved in his death, result in them inappropriately blaming themselves for what happened.

Take care winky for the next month or so.

Mrs D is flying out to Vancouver tomorrow, then on to Kelowna, but could be driving anywhere in BC or Alberta thereafter. Black CRV. Lady driver. Not certain if she should be on the left or right whist she is out there and likewise for a few weeks after she gets back here. Not funny, but she does her level best to miss cyclists