Rules of the road

964cup

All this from just one London commute:

A. If you are the kind of planet-killing, child-poisoning, obese dinosaur who still insists on driving into work in central London in 2017, recognise that you are part of the problem and cycling is part of the solution. You will be travelling, at best, at an average of 6-8mph. An unfit middle-aged blob can jog faster than that. So:

1. If another road hog is manoeuvering in front of you - turning right, for instance - just wait for them. Your journey will not be shortened by an abrupt veer around them to the left.
2. If you intend to turn left at a junction, position yourself in the left-hand lane. If you do not intend to turn left at a junction, do not position yourself in the left-hand-turn-only lane.
3. That box between the first and second white lines at traffic lights? That's not for your car.
4. That lane down the left-hand side of the road demarcated by a solid white line and with a bicycle painted in it? That's not for your car either.
5. If you choose to park at a junction, on a double yellow line, consider signalling before you pull out. Or consider killing yourself.
6. Do not feel obliged to overtake every cyclist you see if there happens to be a 20m gap in the nose-to-tail traffic; especially if there is a traffic island ahead. You will find that they carry on straight past you again when you reach the back of the next stationary queue.
7. There are helpful road markings indicating lanes on the road. If there is just the one line down the middle, this means there is just the one lane in each direction. Do not attempt to create a second lane; you will feel foolish.

B. If you are, for some unknown reason and despite the Mayor's promises, still driving a massive artic through London in rush hour, we accept that you will be unable to keep track of what is to the left of you. In return for not waiting in your blind spot at lights, we ask only that you drive in a f***ing straight line. Weaving towards the kerb every 30 seconds is unhelpful. If you don't know your lorry/bus/other cyclist-killing machine well enough to be certain that it will fit in its lane, we suggest you seek alternative employment.

C. If you are too idle to pedal, and so insist that your two-wheeled conveyance is powered by internal combustion, some hints:
1. That box (see point A3 above)? That's not for you, either.
2. Considering that box, don't get in the queue of filtering cyclists, then realise you're not allowed in the box and block access for everyone else.
3. If you're going to hoot cyclists then overtake them in a 20 zone when they're doing 22, be sure of your ability to filter through traffic. Otherwise, when you fetch up behind a lorry and lose your bottle, they're going to sail back past you and carry on, laughing or swearing depending on their Zen.

And just to show we're feeling even-handed:

Cyclists:
1. Red lights are for everyone. Yes, we know it's boring and you've heard it before, but every pedestrian who kacks their daks when you miss them by millimetres is another potential member of the anti-cycling lobby.
2. Take your NightVision jacket off. A) it's 8am. it's 25 degrees.
3. We realise that your bicycle is not equipped with mirrors - unless it's also equipped with an electric rear hub, five lights and two cameras, none of which appeared to help. Consider, when manoeuvering, that there may be others around you. Some of them may even be able to pedal faster than you. You will find that rotating your head in your intended direction of travel before changing course enables you to check that the way is clear. If you also considered removing your headphones, or turning down the volume of your banging choons, you might also find that you can hear the warning bell they are considerately sounding.

Pedestrians:
1. At pelican crossings there are some helpful signals. The path between the dotted lines? That's the actual crossing. Don't swear at cyclists if you choose to walk across the ASL instead. The little red and green men? They're a clue to when it's safe to cross. If you looked up from your phone, you'd be able to see them.
2. We are not responsible for the new Archway cycle lane system. We agree that it was clearly designed by someone whose only experience of a bicycle (or indeed a pedestrian) was through the description given in the pub, after several pints, by someone whose cousin thought they might have seen one once, although on reflection it might in fact have been a wildebeest. However, this is what we have been given by our mighty overlords, so it behooves you at least to notice that the strangely ashphalted footway on which you are strolling has pictures of bicycles painted on it and consider moving to the pavement - helpfully distinguished by being, you know, paved - instead. You may also deliberate looking up from your phone, turning down the volume on your headphones, extinguishing your cigarette and using sunglasses that are not actually opaque. Cyclists are indeed known to smell, on occasion, but leaving this as the only sense you have available to detect them may not represent an optimal survival strategy.

craigus89

Did you enjoy your ride to work today? Lovely morning...

supermurph09

Any KOM's?

(enjoyed the rant)

veronese68

Surely all of that is completely par for the course, I'm sure there are many more that can be added to it. Only problem being if I start adding to them I'll get all wound up myself. Good rant, just needs more swearing

MiddleRinger

You didn't die. Sounds like a win to me.

kingstongraham

You have a bell?

964cup

KingstonGraham wrote:

You have a bell?

I have several - not on the same bike, you understand. I got fed up with shouting "ding-a-f***ing-ling" at idiot smombie pedestrians who can't tell a bike lane from a footpath and probably wouldn't give a monkey's even if they could.

Presently I am using Knog Oi's. They are not loud enough. I think I need an airhorn or some kind of siren. Or possibly just a cowcatcher.

On the other hand, their habit of wandering into my path without even a cursory attempt to look around them is helping me practice my skids (and making me/my knees very grateful that I've also stuck with having both brakes). I'm going to have to move away from an even-toothed ratio, though, or my rear tyre won't last the month.

step83

Sounds like a normal commute then, also if this was a single commute in what pub is open (and serving alcohol) at 8AM? I need to note this for future use

964cup

Step83 wrote:

Sounds like a normal commute then, also if this was a single commute in what pub is open (and serving alcohol) at 8AM? I need to note this for future use

Dunno. You'd have to ask the Islington town planner who designed the Archway scheme. I imagine he's in there quite often, as there's no way anyone sober could have come up with that abortion. Not unless it was some devilish scheme of the ABD - in which case they likely gave him the brown envelopes in the pub anyway.

Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if the Boogaloo was serving at 08:00. I saw that Shane MacGowan in there once, and he didn't look like he'd be leaving any time soon (unless feet first).

mamil314

Regarding bells, i am still considering whether i should get one. It's about shared pathways and iPeds. While some understand that it would be used out of benevolent consideration, there are others who think that bell sound is 'imperious' and 'demanding'.
It would be pretty pointless for the road riding, at least a turbo siren needed there.

kingstongraham

mamil314 wrote:

Regarding bells, i am still considering whether i should get one. It's about shared pathways and iPeds. While some understand that it would be used out of benevolent consideration, there are others who think that bell sound is 'imperious' and 'demanding'.
It would be pretty pointless for the road riding, at least a turbo siren needed there.

I think as long as you say a polite "thank you" once someone gets out of the way rather than snarling or swearing at them, you're fine.

veronese68

The Knog Oi mentioned above is quite good in terms of it can be used as a subtle 'excuse me' type ring rather than a 'get out of my way' type ring. But, as also mentioned above, there are times that's not enough. Also it doesn't look particularly like a bell, but it is a bit pricey. Good for shared paths in parks with kids and dog walkers, not good for podestrians that just wander into your path.
I'd rather accept that some fools will just walk out in front of me than have a really loud horn or siren type thing, they are too obnoxious for me.

sungod

"smombie"

hadn't heard that one, but checked the definition

964cup

Veronese68 wrote:

The Knog Oi mentioned above is quite good in terms of it can be used as a subtle 'excuse me' type ring rather than a 'get out of my way' type ring. But, as also mentioned above, there are times that's not enough.

As you say, it's very good for politely requesting that nice polite people nicely and politely step out of the way. It's less effective at making oblivious f***ing idiots get out of my f***ing way before I mow them the f**k down then beat them to f***ing death with the wet end of whichever f***ing limb I can dismember first. Unfortunately I live in London, so it's essentially utterly f***ing useless.

It works better on alloy bars than carbon, incidentally. Which is disappointing.

ps. Was that enough swearing?

pps. I would have got a PR on Archway hill on the way home if the aforementioned witless city planner hadn't made the bike lanes too narrow to overtake. On my steel fixie, too, so I was trying hard until I came upon the mobile chicane. Not her fault, obvs, but capped the day off nicely.

Sutton_Rider

Glad I live in the sticks.

StillGoing

Oh get over it. Some people need motorised transport for their job. Until such time as it becomes illegal to use motorised transport, its an individuals right to choose how they travel. Labeling motorists child killers indeed. How about cyclist handbag/phone/jewelry snatching scumbags?

964cup

philthy3 wrote:

Oh get over it. Some people need motorised transport for their job. Until such time as it becomes illegal to use motorised transport, its an individuals right to choose how they travel. Labeling motorists child killers indeed. How about cyclist handbag/phone/jewelry snatching scumbags?

Not in central London they don't. And I rather thought the whole point about the current diesel furore was that the PM2.5 and nitrogen dioxide emissions are harming children. It's not about rights (how I hate that expression) its about society, and responsibility, and ethics and other things that people who focus on individual rights tend to undervalue. Funnily enough they also often seem to lack a sense of humour.

svetty

philthy3 wrote:

Oh get over it.

Agree....

philthy3 wrote:

How about cyclist handbag/phone/jewelry snatching scumbags?

You forgot 'self-righteous'

kingstongraham

philthy3 wrote:

Oh get over it. Some people need motorised transport for their job. Until such time as it becomes illegal to use motorised transport, its an individuals right to choose how they travel. Labeling motorists child killers indeed. How about cyclist handbag/phone/jewelry snatching scumbags?

Try reading it again. It was not labelling motorists as child killers, nor stating that nobody needs motorised transport for their job.

"planet-killing, child-poisoning, obese dinosaur who still insists on driving into work in central London in 2017"

i.e. someone who works in central London, but chooses to drive into work despite there being alternatives. Not someone who is making deliveries of bulky items, nor someone who needs to carry tools to work at multiple sites etc etc.

cgfw201

fully with you on the fat chaps in cars comment.

such a waste of their time and money to sit in a box at 5pm for an hour a day, and does no good for the air or anyone elses journeys.

step83

964Cup wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

Oh get over it. Some people need motorised transport for their job. Until such time as it becomes illegal to use motorised transport, its an individuals right to choose how they travel. Labeling motorists child killers indeed. How about cyclist handbag/phone/jewelry snatching scumbags?

Not in central London they don't. And I rather thought the whole point about the current diesel furore was that the PM2.5 and nitrogen dioxide emissions are harming children. It's not about rights (how I hate that expression) its about society, and responsibility, and ethics and other things that people who focus on individual rights tend to undervalue. Funnily enough they also often seem to lack a sense of humour.

I'd venture a bus driver will need a motorised vehicle for their job, Id imagine a pedal powered bus would be somewhat tiresome.

veronese68

964Cup wrote:

ps. Was that enough swearing?

Much better thank you. For occasions the bell is not enough I tend to shout.

Philthy, as others have said, read the post. He's actually correct about all of it and as I said a lot could be added to it. But you are also correct he needs to get over it and I'm sure he does get over it every day, otherwise he wouldn't ride in London. But that doesn't excuse any of the behaviour mentioned, people need to be more aware of their surroundings and not be so selfish. Besides if you can't have a good old moan about these things on a cycling forum where can you.

veronese68

Step83 wrote:

I'd venture a bus driver will need a motorised vehicle for their job, Id imagine a pedal powered bus would be somewhat tiresome.

To be fair the original post did specify driving to work, so for that a bus driver wouldn't need it. Philthy missed that detail.

paulwood

Great rant. Very funny but all true.

StillGoing

Veronese68 wrote:

Step83 wrote:

I'd venture a bus driver will need a motorised vehicle for their job, Id imagine a pedal powered bus would be somewhat tiresome.

To be fair the original post did specify driving to work, so for that a bus driver wouldn't need it. Philthy missed that detail.

Fair enough, but not everyone is a fan of cycling or has the ability. Someone may drive a short distance to work, but who's to say they aren't an essential user attending other locations during the day. Having to change clothing several times or attend meetings sweating is hardly practical. Some may have to drop or collect kids enroute or have medical conditions that prevent them riding a bike. Euro 5e and 6 vehicles are emissions compliant. Older diesels AND petrol not so.

crispybug2

philthy3 wrote:

Oh get over it. Some people need motorised transport for their job. Until such time as it becomes illegal to use motorised transport, its an individuals right to choose how they travel. Labeling motorists child killers indeed. How about cyclist handbag/phone/jewelry snatching scumbags?

I go into central London once a week or so, in my diesel van , natch!

I have no other choice, I have to carry thirty or forty fire extinguishers and various other paraphernalia connected with my work, there absolutely no way on earth that this can be transported any other way, as for people who say that I should get a non diesel van.......really?? You reckon? Explain why I should get rid of a ten month old vehicle, surely that is more environmentally unfriendly especially considering that my previous van lasted twelve years and over 200,000 miles.

And as I'm always pointing out, the people who want diesel vehicles banned from city centres will soon notice when Pret â manger et al quickly run out of stock!!

ben@31

I once worked with a guy who used to be a 24 hour plumber in London. I imagine that job needs a lot of tools and parts carrying around in a van.

However, points A2 and A6... My biggest problem is cars overtaking me whilst I'm out cycling then immediately turn left, often Im cycling past the back of their car as they turn into the junction. It amazes me people are so lazy they cant wait 2 seconds (for it to be safe) when on a 15 to 20 minute car journey. They dont get to the destination significantly quicker, they're only as quick as the car in front or red traffic lights.

vinnymarsden

Cars and Cyclists... WE CAN COEXIST...both sides... if that's how you want to view them need to reflect on their own personal behaviours.There is no "correct" way to deal with cyclists as a driver, anymore than a correct way to deal with other motorists...the basic laws of good manners/a calm approach and attention to your surroundings...on BOTH sides is all it takes, unfortunately society has become a "now" culture, we are all guilty, we fuel it with next day delivery, 24hr shopping, online/social media bombardment in every area of our lives.I recall just arranging stuff when I was younger...and then just doing it..no checking the venue/timetable/traffic conditions/weather/every other conceivable app to totally dilute any element of a "seat of the pants" fun experience...and based on this approach we want it all straightaway..now..because we think it's normal..hence we can't/won't wait for anything, least of all each other!!!

priory

my uncle Arthur was a plumber in hilly Stockport. He never owned a car . He went to his customers within at least a 5 mile radius on a bicycle with his toolbag on the rear carrier, bits of lead tied all over the frame , brass blow-lamp hanging on the handlebar and a ladder strapped to the frame with a little gap to allow the front wheel just enough movement. When I was a kid he fitted central heating throughout our house, coming 4 miles every day on his bike. And slim he was not! He must have been a champion pie-eater.

kingstongraham

crispybug2 wrote:

Explain why I should get rid of a ten month old vehicle, surely that is more environmentally unfriendly especially considering that my previous van lasted twelve years and over 200,000 miles.

Depends whether you are looking at the global environment or the local environment.

Scrapping your existing vehicle would use more energy and resources than letting you keep using it, so it would be more "environmentally friendly" to keep the existing one - on a global scale. But if you are forced to buy a new vehicle that does not pump out poisonous particles like your existing one, then that would be more "environmentally friendly" on a local scale.

964cup

I'm kind of hoping we'll see a growth in cargo bikes and a return of the local economy, at least in London, if Khan's proposed emissions charging policies go through. Smarter distribution would mean lots of local hubs for overnight van/lorry delivery, then daytime delivery rounds by bicycle. Much like a postal service, in fact. We can then use electric vans (because local = short range) for heavy/bulky items only. We have to get away from the current delivery free-for-all - it's an example of untrammeled market economics not working (because the externalities aren't priced in). Same answer, up to a point, for tradespeople who need to carry tools - bike/e-bike unless you have to shift a lot of parts or big tools, in which case e-van.

Internal combustion (while it's still necessary) for large goods vehicles only, and only at specified hours. Big challenges remain in construction (overnight spoil removal isn't really an option, nor is delivery of materials) - but the more bikes and pedestrians we have relative to vehicle traffic, the easier it will be to enforce safety rules in design and operation of the remaining vehicles.

Private cars should be aggressively discouraged in cities; in London there's already more than adequate public transport (it can always use improvement and investment) but we need to see the end of the diesel bus. Ideally we'd have more, more frequent, smaller electric or hydrogen-fuelled PSVs, combined with an Uber-style dial-a-ride service for the disabled. Other cities need serious investment in public transport infrastructure; we also need much stronger financial incentives for people to walk or cycle. The remaining problem here is leisure visitors - Oxford-style park'n'ride schemes really aren't ideal for visiting families with luggage and small children, but perhaps that's habit as much as practicality.

I will say that, having originally driven everywhere until five years ago, I now cycle to any meeting within 20 miles of my start point and take the train for longer journeys. So far, no client has batted an eyelid at my turning up by bike (some of them even accept me arriving in lycra) and I've found the train markedly less stressful than driving for longer trips. I'm fortunate that the additional cost (at least the additional *apparent* cost) of train travel isn't a preventative for me - this is something we absolutely have to fix. How can it possibly be cheaper to drive (or fly!) to Manchester or Edinburgh from London than it is to take the train?

Yes, this will cost money. There will be pain. But we have to remember the human cost of doing nothing. Until we price in the environmental and health damage from continued over-dependence on private powered vehicles, we are fooling ourselves that what we do is sustainable. And no, electric cars are not the answer. The road and parking infrastructure, additional generating capacity, environmental damage from mining, production and shipment required to make a serious dent in the current population of IC vehicles is immense - enough, I suggest, to pay for decent social housing, better public transport and efficient delivery systems if we can wean ourselves off needing to travel in splendid isolation all the time.