Proposed changes to the Highway Code?

[exportmanuk]

“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”
– Douglas Bader

And look what happened when he broke the rules

[Unpublished accounts suggested that, when his case came in front of the military tribunal, he was advised that he didn't have a leg to stand on ]

Lost on anyone under 60

[Horse]

Here to help

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Bader

Group Captain Sir Douglas Robert Steuart Bader, CBE, DSO & Bar, DFC & Bar, DL, FRAeS (/ˈbɑːdər/; 21 February 1910 – 5 September 1982) was a Royal Air Force flying ace during the Second World War. He was credited with 22 aerial victories, four shared victories, six probables, one shared probable and 11 enemy aircraft damaged.[1][2]

Bader joined the RAF in 1928, and was commissioned in 1930. In December 1931, while attempting some aerobatics, he crashed and lost both his legs. Having been on the brink of death, he recovered, retook flight training, passed his check flights and then requested reactivation as a pilot. Although there were no regulations applicable to his situation, he was retired against his will on medical grounds.

...

While very fast for its time, the Bulldog had directional stability problems at low speeds, which made such stunts exceptionally dangerous. Strict orders were issued forbidding unauthorised aerobatics below 2,000 feet (610 m). Bader took this as an unnecessary safety rule rather than an order to be obeyed.

After one training flight at the gunnery range, Bader achieved only a 38 percent hit rate on a target. Receiving jibes from members of a rival squadron (No. 25 Squadron RAF), Bader took off to perform aerobatics and show off his skill. It was against regulations, and seven out of 23 accidents caused by ignoring regulations had proven fatal. The CO of No. 25 Squadron remarked that he would order Bader to face a court-martial if Bader was in his unit. The COs of Bader's unit, Harry Day and Henry Wollett, gave the pilots more latitude, although Day encouraged them to recognise their own limits.[29]

No. 23 Squadron had won the Hendon Air Show "pairs" event in 1929 and 1930. In 1931 Bader, teamed with Harry Day, successfully defended the squadron's title in the spring that year.[30] In late 1931, Bader undertook training for the 1932 Hendon Air Show, hoping to win a second consecutive title.[31] Two pilots had been killed attempting aerobatics. The pilots were warned not to practise these manoeuvres under 2,000 feet (610 m) and to keep above 500 feet (150 m) at all times.[32]

Nevertheless, on 14 December 1931, while visiting Reading Aero Club, Bader attempted some low-flying aerobatics at Woodley Airfield in a Bulldog Mk. IIA, K1676, of 23 Squadron,[33] apparently on a dare. His aircraft crashed when the tip of the left wing touched the ground. Bader was rushed to the Royal Berkshire Hospital, where, in the hands of the prominent surgeon J. Leonard Joyce (1882–1939), both his legs were amputated—one above and one below the knee.

A mate was a saddler, used to work on leather work of Bader's legs and storage bags. Apparently he was a miserable bloke to deal with.

[crr003]

I have a feeling that in Germany (and some other places) it is actually illegal to cross on the red, not just a matter of rules or social behaviour.

Well here you go: (from the "IAM expat site"......)

https://www.iamexpat.de/lifestyle/lifes ... ad-germany

Nope, I'll just plead British ignorance if I get there again.

[TR4ffic]

With regards to drivers turning left or right and cyclists under/over taking having priority, I feel that in this situation the person with the better view of what is happening and/or potentially going to happen should have the responsibility to give way or be flexible ...so, in these cases, it is the cyclist coming up from the rear who has the better field of view. The driver has to rely on the limited view in his/her mirrors and may also have to deal with vehicles/pedestrians in and around the junction when making the left turn, and the same for a right turn with oncoming traffic added to the mix.

Also the cyclist is the more vulnerable so purely from a self-preservation perspective should proceed more cautiously.

No point in turning up at the Pearly Gates moaning, '...but I had right of way!"


Nick

[Strangely Brown]

There is no point bringing logical, lucid, well thought out and clearly articulated arguments to this discussion. No, sir. That will just not do.

[Triquet]

I fear that it not be long before a cyclist, determined to exercise his right of way up the nearside of an HGV, will come to a sticky end.

[jont-]

With regards to drivers turning left or right and cyclists under/over taking having priority, I feel that in this situation the person with the better view of what is happening and/or potentially going to happen should have the responsibility to give way or be flexible ...so, in these cases, it is the cyclist coming up from the rear who has the better field of view. The driver has to rely on the limited view in his/her mirrors and may also have to deal with vehicles/pedestrians in and around the junction when making the left turn, and the same for a right turn with oncoming traffic added to the mix.

Also the cyclist is the more vulnerable so purely from a self-preservation perspective should proceed more cautiously.

No point in turning up at the Pearly Gates moaning, '...but I had right of way!"


Nick

Although in many of those situations the car will most likely have just overtaken the cyclist, so should be aware of their presence. The exeception will be turning left from a queue - where I would agree that the cyclist (as the overtaker) should take more responsibility.

[sussex2]

Just shows how out of touch I am. I remember a time when cars were to give way to pedestrians, cyclists and riders on horseback. I must have missed when the Highway Code changed this.

With the number of cyclist, and I constantly experienced this in my cycling days, who have had cars turn in front of them, without the driver checking their mirrors or giving adequate timely warning with signals (not realising that it takes more distance/time for a cyclist to stop to avoid hitting into them as they turn in front of them) I can perhaps understand why there is a need for drivers to think and look more carefully accepting their responsibility towards more vulnerable road users.

With regard pedestrians waiting to cross, could it be that they have in mind those with sight or hearing problems?

What is a shame is that because of deteriating attitude of drivers this kind of legislation is necessary at all.

There is an excellent old video concerning your 2nd paragraph - entitled something along the lines of 'Watch out they'll run you down'.
I will try to track it down.

[sussex2]

I welcome the changes and they bring the UK into line with many of the neighbouring countries.
The last time I visited the UK I was shocked to be reminded of just how few facilities there are for pedestrians to cross safely. The darting across the road like frightened rabbits, a unique trait. Or, having to reverse course because a car happens to come along.
I have to remind visitors (luckily very few of them) not to cross the road like the English do.
It is time the old 'car first' attitude changed.

It is not extreme examples such as Holland with millions of bikes or Germany with strict rules. It is a general attitude that needs changing and this will take time; less time than many suspect I think.

[jont-]

It is not extreme examples such as Holland with millions of bikes or Germany with strict rules. It is a general attitude that needs changing and this will take time; less time than many suspect I think.

Half the problem in the UK is expecting centuries old infrastructure to deal with modern life. By all means wrap it up in a museum somewhere, but otherwise I'm not sure why we insist on making life so unpleasant for ourselves by living in outdated cramped cities where wholescale knock down and rebuild would be more appropriate (and if it's so historic, what about the forests/fields that were there before the buildings were put up in the first place? )