Rule 163 of the Highway Code. Prompted by this discussion.
The question being this:
There is a similar thing with scooter riders on L plates, are they told to ride a thirty MPH in the middle of the road on unlimited roads, many do !
I could simply have referred to Rule 163 and leave it there, however, there’s more to it than that. My response triggered a somewhat lengthy response. So rather than hijack someone else’s blog, I’ll respond in detail here.
I teach students to ride safely. One of the principles of roadcraft is road positioning. Taking a defensive position in the road to maximise one’s visibility and to minimise the likelihood of being run off the road. The best place, therefore is the middle of one’s lane – to dominate one’s road position. The Highway Code Rule simply says that if you cannot pass a car then you cannot pass a motorcycle (or moped or bicycle). Pretty basic stuff, really. By adopting a dominant road position, the rider is merely enforcing this rule for their own safety. And, of course, minimising the “sorry Mate, I didn’t see you” syndrome.
So, what about the tailgater who tries to bully the rider into moving over? The only answer I can give to riders facing this is to find a safe place to stop and let them pass. The important point here is that it is a safe place for the rider, not a convenient one for the tailgater.
wiggiatlarge seems to think that we are being courteous if we move over to allow others to pass. This is a false courtesy as it places the rider in a dangerous position. He uses the term common sense. Okay, let’s ignore Rule 163 for a moment. What does common sense tell us about road position? Should we adopt a position where other drivers are encouraged to pass in the face of oncoming traffic and minimise drivers’ ability to see us when they emerge from junctions, or should we adopt a position where we can see and be seen and drivers will have to exercise some patience and wait for a suitable opportunity to pass safely? I know what my common sense tells me.
And I am not the only one. The DVSA assess my training. If they caught me recommending riders hug the kerb to allow others to pass, I would lose my license to train and rightly so, because I have actively placed them at risk. Any rider doing this on a test would fail for the same reason. Likewise advanced riding groups and the Police Class 1 riders would advocate adopting an assertive, dominant road position. It’s basic roadcraft.
Indeed, the only one saying otherwise is wiggiatlarge. And why? So that some drivers can shave a few seconds off their journey? Really?
This however is interesting:
And as an ex motorcyclist I am fully aware of the risks in traffic which has I hope helped make me a better driver, so no animosity from me towards any one group of road users.
Then you shouldn’t be asking the question, because you should be aware of the answer. And given that you are actively encouraging dangerous road positioning, I’m not convinced it has made you a better driver.
Oh dear, a bit touchy on this…
No, I’m not touchy. I answered your question. I would expect, having had it explained, you would realise why what you advocate is dangerous and why moped riders are correctly doing as they do. That you are willing to continue to advocate such dangerous practice irritates, sure, but I’m not touchy.
As to quoting the highway code you were not so keen on adhering to that when speed limits were raised in an article some time back when you thought “quote” that speed according to conditions was more important, which to a degree it is assuming, that word again that everyone on the road is aware of those conditions and acts accordingly, but of course they don’t hence speed limits…
Wow! I explain the difference between a safe speed and speed limits. It is perfectly rational to challenge arbitrary speed limits and the obsession with them. A significant proportion of speed limits are not suitable for the conditions and have been placed either because of noise limits or because it was a lowest common denominator in response to someone getting it wrong. Frequently it is possible to travel perfectly safely in excess of a posted speed limit for those reasons, just as there are times when it is unsafe to travel at posted speed limits. Speed limits are not dynamic, road conditions are.
do you tell your students to break the speed limit as that is OK in certain conditions before they pass their test, ending in court and telling the judge I was told it was OK to break the limit after they had run someone over would go down really well ! and yes you did say that .
I’m not going to waste effort responding to this nonsense.
As to what triggered all of this, the driver of the van was entirely in the wrong and the cyclist was perfectly correct in his riding. I understand that the van driver has subsequently lost his job. He should lose his driving licence – and I don’t mean a ban. I mean lose it for life. He has demonstrated that by using a vehicle as a weapon, he is unfit to be in charge of one and should have that privilege permanently removed.
Oops! Different story. AK Haart was talking about Chris Foome. Same applies of course. Running someone off the road is inexcusable.
Update: As Wiggia makes an issue of being unable to find anything about road positioning in the Highway Code and seems to think that therefore, I am wrong here, I quote the relevant passage from the DVSA Guide to Riding, the Essential Skills. Page 118:
As a general rule, keep to the centre of the lane. On a single carriageway (two-way traffic) that is halfway between the centre of the road and the left side…
…Keep clear of the gutter, where there are often potholes and loose grit.
This is what I teach – as do my colleagues. Can we have no more of this bullshit about mopeds staying over on the left, please?
As a car driver, ex motorcyclist and occasional leisure cyclist it scares the crap out of me that there are so many fools with that sort of attitude.
How on earth can anybody disagree with you Mr L?
Kinell.
As a keen cyclist (5000+ miles per year) I see every week driving that both infuriates and scares me. I agree wholeheartedly with the advice to dominate the lane – particularly city cycling where progress is stop-start.
Even so, I also object strongly to splitting the population into groups by activity – drivers vs. cyclists. Most people who ride bikes also drive. We’re all road users – it’s just some are ignorant knuckle dragging wankers who care little for others who use the road – be they riding bikes (both types), horses or driving cars. Those who behave in that way and endanger the lives of others should have their license taken away for a very long time.
I also drive a car and ride a cycle.
“As to quoting the highway code you were not so keen on adhering to that when speed limits were raised in an article some time back when you thought “quote” that speed according to conditions was more important …”
Do not the “conditions” include those circular signs with a number inside to show the maximum legal speed? I believe that, being circular, these are know as mandatory signs, as are turn left signs and no entry signs. or are you saying that these also may be ignored because your reading of the rest of the road conditions indicate to you that it is appropriate fro you to do so?
Where have I said anything about ignoring mandatory signs?
Wiggi has taken a comment out of context here. I have frequently challenged speed limits and the obsession with them. I have frequently pointed out that the conditions are a better decider when it comes to an appropriate speed. This does not mean that I am ignoring the Highway Code or inciting others to do so.
Please try to differentiate between a discussion about whether a speed limit is sensible and actively breaking it. The suggestion that I am encouraging students to do so is a figment of his imagination and has no basis in fact. Please stick with the latter.
I am happy to accept that Wiggi took your comments out of context.
If you had continued your statement that “the conditions are a better decider when it comes to an appropriate speed” with the words “within the legal (i.e. maximum) speed limit applicable to the road on which you are travelling” there would be absolutely no doubt as to your meaning.
I’m somewhat surprised that I should have to spell it out. I’d have thought it obvious.
However, expanding on the point; one of the roads I use for CBT ride-outs is a national speed limit rural road. It’s single track with blind bends. Maximum legal speed is 60mph. Maximum safe speed is about 30mph. I use it to drive home the point that a speed limit and a safe speed are not the same thing. Can the driver stop in what he can see to be clear? Is he driving with due consideration for prevailing conditions and hazards and is planning the drive accordingly? If so, then he is driving safely. He might be breaking the speed limit. Breaking the law does not equate to driving unsafely. Indeed, a driver who is obeying the speed limit and is not paying attention is dangerous.
Wiggi has picked up on a similar discussion and woven a strawman from it. Hence my derision at his comment on the matter. I can point out that breaking the law may be perfectly safe without actually condoning or encouraging it. Likewise, I can express contempt for politically motivated speed limits without advocating exceeding them.
A final say as you are trying to do a hatchet job on me on your own blog, at no time have I advocated doing anything that could be construed as dangerous as regards riders “dominating” their position, something you advocate but in no way mentioned in the Highway Code, the photo from rule 163 shows a cyclist in a perfectly normal road position so I have no idea how you can use that ruling to justify what you advocate, anyone who doesn’t believe me look it up, and the wording regards overtaking is as it’s always been.
By advocating this middle of the road domination, another word that does not appear in the Highway Code I would suggest you are actually putting the rider in danger as not all drivers are patient, wrong though that be and eventually someone will say sod this and overtake anyway with perhaps unhappy results, the drivers fault yes, but you would have to ask who put the rider in that position that would eventually antagonise in the first place, you.
I would suggest you are being selective and worse regards what is included in the Highway Code as this is under general driving applying to all…………
keep to the left, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise. The exceptions are when you want to overtake, turn right or pass parked vehicles or pedestrians in the road
keep well to the left on right-hand bends. This will improve your view of the road and help avoid the risk of colliding with traffic approaching from the opposite direction
Rule 169
Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.
No mention again of any of your road positioning and advice on what to do if holding traffic up, this is not just for tractors.
Once again you imply I have driven dangerously or suggest it is alright to do so when I have made absolutely no comment in that direction and never would or do that, as for the speeding issue I suggest you look back in your past posts and see what you wrote, you were wrong then.
When I spoke about having been a motor cyclist I was implying that what it gave me was a greater sense of road conditions ie wet weather than you ever get in a car and this changes how you use the road nothing more.
Finish
No, I’m not. I am responding to your irresponsible comments.
Yes, you are advocating something dangerous here. Replace the moped with a tractor. Drivers will follow the tractor until it is safe to pass. The same applies to a moped. If you can’t pass the tractor in this situation (oncoming traffic, continuous white lines, bends in the road etc.) then you shouldn’t be attempting to pass the rider. The only reason they would move over is to allow drivers to pass where they could not otherwise do so safely. If you can’t pass the tractor, then you should not be trying to pass the moped. It really is that simple. Dominating one’s road space is standard roadcraft. The DVSA book “Learning to Ride” specifically advises against riding in the gutter.
I’ll take their recommendation over yours, if it’s okay with you…
No, I’m not. I’m applying it as it should be.
Your reference to the image is irrelevant – it’s just an image illustrating the distance needed to pass safely. Dominating one’s road position is standard roadcraft – as I have mentioned and is applied by all leading road safety groups including the DVSA who are the standards setting body. The Highway Code rule is simple enough – you allow the same room to pass a two-wheeled vehicle as you would a car. That means going out as wide as if you were passing a car.
Oh, my… The “left” is the left side of the white line. Not the gutter. An advanced rider will move about in that space to maximise their view of the road ahead and minimise their exposure to hazards. A learner is not yet ready to manage that, so they are advised to stick to the middle of the lane as this keeps them equidistant from hazards in most circumstances.
Which, if you bothered to read my comments is precisely what I have advocated.
I have made no such suggestion. That is pure imagination on your part. You have, however, recommended repeatedly that vulnerable road users place themselves in a position of danger, despite having had it explained in great detail.
As for the comments on speed, you are creating a strawman. I am well aware of what I have said and at no time have I advocated breaking the law. You are unable to differentiate between an illustration and advocating lawbreaking. I am perfectly capable of challenging attitudes to speed and using a hypothetical illustration without actively advocating breaking the law. So, no, I am not wrong on this one. You are.
Clearly. Because you have learned nothing about maximising distance from hazards, safe positioning and the risks faced by vulnerable road users.
Might I suggest you go out on a restricted moped sometime and try doing as you advocate? It might prove educating. Do it in front of a DVSA examiner and you will fail your test and rightly so.
What surprises me here, is that having raised the point, and had it explained to you, you persist in trying to argue that it is okay. It is not. The whole weight of road safety expertise is against you on this one, yet you obstinately continue with it. You are wrong here. Dangerously so.
That’s probably the most sensible thing you have said in this discussion. When in a hole, stop digging.
What about left hand bends then wiggia? ALL motorcyclists are taught to move to the right hand side so that they can see what is around the bend.
Keeping left as also a bad idea given the atrocious state of many of the roads. So on most suburban roads, one has no choice BUT to be in the middle of the road. Keeping to the left on such roads is open invite for a car to try and squeeze past and causing all sorts of problems for me, especially when approaching a road junction on the left. It’s just not worth the danger to myself. On motorways I will usually use the left hand lane in low traffic density. In all cases when I can use the left hand lane then I will as it gets me out of the way of speeding drivers in the centre and overtaking lanes. Having also done a BikeSafe course with the Met Police, they also advocated precisely the same as Longrider. It’s why I’m still alive.
Yup. This too.
There are a lot of dumb bikers around who think the law is a force field around their bikes. The biker in this video was doing what he should have been doing and the driver should have been charged with using a vehicle as a weapon. Not sure what the penalty is for that but he deserves the maximum for this.
The guy is obviously crazy.
I am thinking of the guy on the BMW K1600GT on the M25 yesterday who thought it okay to weaving between vehicles travelling at 60mph. Made my blood run cold…
When I started motorcycling over fifty years ago (sh1t!) we tended not to ride in the middle of the lane in order to avoid the crud, oil and grease, dropped by cars and lorries. This was when MOT tests were just coming in. Now I ride in the middle and protect but never defend my space.
I do believe that treating all other road users as potential assassins in the pay of my ex-wife has kept me on my toes and alive so far.
“There are fast bikers and there are old bikers, but there are no old fast bikers.”
Sometimes I have to defend that space to protect my ducklings…
I understand your position as an instructor. I tend to avoid riding in large groups as the risk factor increases beyond my comfort level.
Outside of instructing, I do the same and for the same reasons.
Not having seen your original discussion –
I have always agreed with you about arbitry speed limits and the road conditions being a more important factor.
Road conditions also apply in this case. What the van driver did was wrong, absolutely, but there’s no reason at all for a cyclist, a very slow moving vehicle, to dominate the entire lane and not allow other users to pass.
I believe this cyclist was not hogging the lane for safety reasons, but acting as an ‘entitled’ cyclist. He should have moved over
I wouldn’t worry about the speed stuff as none of it is controversial and I’ve not said anything that can be construed as incitement to break the law. Wiggia is trying to build a strawman in order to insinuate hypocrisy. It won’t wash because there is none.
As for entitlement; the cyclist is entitled. He is entitled to all of the tarmac from the kerb to the white line as are we all. Going by what we can see from the video, I would say that his positioning was correct as he was attempting to discourage a dangerous overtaking manoeuvre. The van needed to cross continuous white lines on the approach to a bend and oncoming traffic. Yes, you can pass a cyclist and cross continuous white lines. However, you need to consider why they are there and refrain if it is not safe. Clearly, in this instance, it wasn’t and the cyclist was correct in maintaining his road potion. Lack of width is not an entitlement for others to use that space in order to pass – especially if there is oncoming traffic.
I was told that the Highway Code contains Rules, and not Laws, therefore, are only advisory. Was this interpretation correct?
Yes and no. Some rules are law – you will see the relevant part of the RTA below the rule. If you are involved in an accident and the police press charges, breach of the Highway Code will go against you in court.