Ashley Neal's 1st ride video (he gets left hooked)

This!  Think you have politely covered the pertinent points for me.  At the end of the day, we're all on the road together*.  We're not all in cars together though.  That means people inside boxes necesssarily have both far less risk from others and have less awareness (pillars in vision, reduced sound from outside).  Different modes have different visual size to other and different manouevering characteristics too (motorbikes...?).

As for "creating division" I think that's pretty meaningless, apart from the built-in differences noted above.  Are people who sometimes cycle more of a hive mind than drivers?

To Ashley - I'm sure your general driving advice would be of benefit to motorists who choose to engage with that.  Not everyone wants to continue to develop their skills unfortunately.  Indeed there are a minority who are at best reckless with the safety of others.  I doubt they read road.cc or watch videos by you or even CyclingMikey!

* Until we sort out appropriate infra for cycling - but even then a large proportion of road space will accommodate both cars and cycles (which could be wheelchairs, bakfiets, mobility vehicles, scooters, children on their way to school ...)

Agree with all you've said Ian.

I would also say that I do understand Ashley's position, he is an educator and therefore is naturally trying to fix problems on the road through education. That is not a bad thing and a lot of his advice is spot on (cycling stuff excepted).

However, he places too much emphasis on this and has the opinion that it is not the vehicle that is dangerous, but the driver. He constantly draws false equivalences between the actions of cyclists, pedestrians and drivers, with the unrealistic aim that if everyone acts within the law and with respect for others, then safety is guaranteed.

Anyone who has spent any length of time cycling on our roads knows that with the absence of crumple zones and airbags, cyclists need legislation and infrastructure to protect themselves. Just riding legally and respectfully is not enough.

Cycling is without doubt more dangerous, but I've never been close to being hit in 30+ years of cycling on the roads. What does this tell you? and it's not that I'm just lucky! I don't need better infrastructure (although it would be nice for the less able)

I'm always told that a majority of cyclists are drivers, well if that's the case I can tell you a majority of drivers are poor. Anyone in this thread up for a free assessment drive with me? Time to put your cards on the table.

What do you class as being close to being hit?

For example in the one posted above, you almost get left hooked and was forced to brake (close to being hit). It is a carbon copy of the recent NMOTD. So are you stating that cyclist didn't feel he was close to being hit?

And the one from early lockdown, someone pulled out on you from a junction (close to being hit). In the latter, you even took pains to show that the actual view from your camera distorted how far away the car was from you and it was actually alot closer. 

So I'll ask again, how close does a car have to be for you to class it as close to being hit?  

Ashley Neal wrote:

I'm always told that a majority of cyclists are drivers, well if that's the case I can tell you a majority of drivers are poor. Anyone in this thread up for a free assessment drive with me? Time to put your cards on the table.

I'm pretty sure that almost everybody here is already aware that the majority of drivers are poor, so I'm not sure what that would be proving. That's kind of a large part of the problem.

[Though your logic is a bit flawed - even if every cyclist was a poor driver, they still wouldn't represent a majority of drivers. The fact that most drivers are poor doesn't have much to do with whether or not they're cyclists.]

Indeed - or whether they're poor cyclists!

All I'm getting at is that poor practice is carried over to whatever vehicle you operate.

Ashley Neal wrote:

All I'm getting at is that poor practice is carried over to whatever vehicle you operate.

I'd agree, though there is an additional enforced learning factor that comes into play with cycling. Poor cycling often leads to loss of control and usually pain, whereas poor driving doesn't tend to affect the driver.

A family member of mine innocently killed a cyclist 25+ years ago who rode recklessly. How do you think their life has gone?

Ashley Neal wrote:

A family member of mine innocently killed a cyclist 25+ years ago who rode recklessly. How do you think their life has gone?

Difficult to comment on this without specifics.

Ashley Neal wrote:

Cycling is without doubt more dangerous, but I've never been close to being hit in 30+ years of cycling on the roads. What does this tell you? and it's not that I'm just lucky! I don't need better infrastructure (although it would be nice for the less able)

I'm always told that a majority of cyclists are drivers, well if that's the case I can tell you a majority of drivers are poor. Anyone in this thread up for a free assessment drive with me? Time to put your cards on the table.

I'm not sure many drivers in the UK would pass their driving tests today, so maybe your offer is a little loaded.

As a driver, a weekend cyclist and jobbing commuter I can tell you that I consider myself 'hyper aware' when cycling. I've never caused an accident in a car, but I've been hit a couple of times (while stationary), I've also had a car pull out on me when riding my bike through my local town which led to some lasting injuries for me, a couple of dented panels on the Jaguar and a very apologetic driver. I have no malice towards the driver, he just didn't look properly when he pulled out of a junction, a minor infraction, a couple of seconds of innattention for the driver, a potential major injury for me the cyclist. If I wasn't 'hyper aware' of the situation it would likely have been a lot worse, within a couple of seconds I'd slowed, shouted and made an evasive manoeuvre to lessen the impact. 

I'm not sure if you are saying that you have been a road cyclist for 30 years or if you have ridden a bike for 30 years? I personally have been riding on roads for 40years and have driven for 20 would I pass my test today, who knows.. but I do know that I'm 'aware' of my own inattention when driving at times, it's a concious decision I make, I'm fully responsible for my own actions in a car and I believe that the self awareness is learned from riding a bike, far too many 'jeezus christ that was close' moments and the odd truly aggressive driver acting with malice. 

If you want to assess my driving, you're welcome to come to Leamington, but I really don't understand what it'd achieve for you, I, or anyone else. I feel it'd be far better for you to join me or one of my road.cc pals on one of our daily commutes. Not in London, that's an odd place, but a normal 'could be anywhere' town. I think everyone's point on here is that our safety (as a group which considers themselves law abiding and even righteous cyclists) is compromised often daily by bad drivers. And the stats of cyclists being injured and or killed on the roads each year define that danger.

Ian's point about 5000 miles in a car compared to 5000 miles on a bike is an interesting one. We'd be on the roads about four times longer than a car would be to cover the same distance. And in that time we'd see much more traffic, maybe consider that we actually do have a better perpective of road saftey than a motorist? It's certainly a different one.

I've only seen that one video of yours with the horn the other month, it was just fine up to that point, honestly, beeping a horn close to a cyclist is more often than not a bad thing to do, it basically makes us jump and fires the adrenaline instantly. I'm sure I saw an article a while ago which was about a brand of HGV trucks having two horns, one for other steel wrapped drivers and one for pedestrians and cyclists (one being quieter obvs). That's the sort of good beeping idea which I can get behind. 

Lol, an assessment drive would be fun, but it's not really going to tell us anything. My suspicion is cyclists make better drivers, but assessing a handful of people is not going to tell us anything. Perhaps a survey that asks regular cyclists how many points they have on their licence compared to those who are not regular cyclist would be interesting! Difficult to do though.

Cycling is not inherently dangerous. It's interacting with motorised vehicles that make it dangerous. It's not always the bad drivers either (but it is mostly!) anyone could suffer a mechanical failure or medical episode behind the wheel.

You might say you don't need segregated infrastructure, but surely you would agree it's less dangerous for cyclists where it exists? (caveat: and is implemented to a high standard!)

Hi Ashley

Ashley Neal wrote:

 Cycling is without doubt more dangerous

A quick canter through the stats shows that this is not true. More cyclists are harmed, but it is not the cycling that does it, it's driving. It is therefore driving that is dangerous, however the risk is transferred to the vulnerable around them.

It also would not be appropriate to say that each (cyclists and drivers) are as bad, when the causes of KSIs in cycle+driver incidents are the fault of only the driver in the majority of cases. When cyclists do exhibit fault, the results are rarely serious: more pedestrians are killed on the footway by drivers than by cyclists anywhere.

I'm happy with a lot of what you're saying on this article, but this statement isn't fair, appropriate or "without doubt".

Incidentally, I'm sure a free assessment would be great (no sarcasm), but it could sound like the other team providing the referee.

What's the % of cyclists involved in KSI incidents compared to motorists?

Ashley Neal wrote:

What's the % of cyclists involved in KSI incidents compared to motorists?

It's all detailed here: https://www.pacts.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/PACTS-What-kills-most-on-the...

Not sure off the top of my head, but that isn't the measure of what is dangerous: it's a measure of vulnerability.
If I step into a tiger's cage, I am not dangerous.

GMBasix wrote:

Not sure off the top of my head, but that isn't the measure of what is dangerous: it's a measure of vulnerability.
If I step into a tiger's cage, I am not dangerous.

Good point - although it's clearly not how "most people" think about this (assuming they think about it at all of course...).  What you tend to hear - if conversations even get this far - is "ah but the cyclists are *causing* accidents".  Sadly I don't have figures or details - if they are recorded.  Which is what we really need at this point in the discussion.  If there are any motorists recorded as being injured in collision with cyclists this may be because the bicycle / cyclist came through their windscreen.

Kind of like the tiger choking on your femur.

chrisonatrike wrote:

Sadly I don't have figures or details - if they are recorded.  Which is what we really need at this point in the discussion. 

Oldish figures (2012) but I don't suppose much has changed: according to CTC police attributions of blame in fatal accident/serious injury investigations tends towards about 50% driver at fault, 30% both driver and cyclist at fault, and 20% solely cyclist at fault.

https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/chris-peck/whos-to-blame-in-crashes-betwe....

Cycling isn't dangerous. The danger comes from distracted, irresponsible motorists and a sprinkling of aggressive ones. Surveys regularly determine that something like 75% of people who would like to cycle are put off by the dangers presented by motorists. Lack of infra is also a close second. If we took the bull by the horns and started to build robust, joined up infra we would see more people making those short journeys by foot or bicycle. The result would be less congested towns and cities. Fitter people   And shops starting to thrive. 

Far to many motorists have forgotten how to drive with care, consideration and courtesy and some have moved to being more aggressive than they should be and this is directed at all road users. You have a role to play with your YouTube channel. Your insights  have been invaluable regarding my road craft on both bicycle and behind the wheel. And it has been good to deal with some bad habits that have crept in. 

As road users regardless of our mode we all have a responsibility to use the roads to ensure the safety of others. Sadly many motorists have forgotten their responsibilities to those more vulnerable. I feel that most on this forum are responsible as cyclists. We just want to see people stop  being killed and injured on the roads. 

One of my riding friends cycles from Olton into central Brum. She's been knocked off 3 or 4 times in the past 3 years, drivers setting off at roundabouts, forgetting there is a cyclist ahead of them, drivers entering roundabouts ignoring her, drivers undertaking her on the pavement, simply driving into her on straight bits of road because they think the road is empty as they simply haven't seen the cyclist in front of them. Most of these have been low speed because of congestion.

She rides cyclo-cross, so has good bike skills, she helps train riders, she leads rides. She expects drivers to do daft things, yet she is often surprised by drivers that take it to the next level. I mean, if you are stationary at a roundabout entrance, haven't moved because of traffic on the roundabout, what defensive technique do you use against being rear-ended by a car that was queueing behind you?

Ashley Neal wrote:

Cycling is without doubt more dangerous, but I've never been close to being hit in 30+ years of cycling on the roads. What does this tell you? and it's not that I'm just lucky! I don't need better infrastructure (although it would be nice for the less able)

It tells me you don't ride many miles, come back when you've ridden 150,000 miles in 30 years and tell us how many times you've come close to being hit.

I'm sorry but that sort of post is offensive, even if you don't recognise it.

Look up Tony Slatterthwaite - a fellow club member. All he did was cycle on a bit of road at the wrong time, the time being when a Porsche driver with his young lad in the car decided he'd drive at 60mph in a 40mph winding road. Tony got scraped under the car as he lost control. But of course he didn't have your superior skills to predict it.

Please stop the willy-waving. It is a matter of fact that road users of all types are continuously put at risk by substandard driving. Pretending a cyclist or driver can protect themselves by defensive riding is just you kidding yourself.

The reality is that the so called advanced driving standard should be the minimum standard for driving on the road - after all it is observation, selecting the correct speed for the road and courteous safe driving. I doubt there is one element that should not be essential for any road user. The fact that the vast majority of road users have never attained that standard is clearly part of the problem. When I am driving I see all sorts of driving, switching lanes to go through red lights, excessive speed, stunningly careless lane changes. These are every day occurrences. When you are on a bike, you interact with the same people, without the benefit of a safety cage.

My rule of thumb is that 1 in 100 motorists is on a mission to teach cyclists not to be in their way. Add on the criminally incompetent who regularly appear in court having their excuse of momentary lapse of attention to hand then any cyclist who rides on the road cannot help have poor interactions, regardless of their own standard - and why should cyclists be held to some higher standard when we, as a nation, are not prepared to hold motorists to a basic level of competence?

Ashley Neal wrote:

Cycling is without doubt more dangerous, but I've never been close to being hit in 30+ years of cycling on the roads. What does this tell you? and it's not that I'm just lucky!

Literally all this tells us is that you have been extremely lucky.
Cycling itself is not more dangerous. Having to share the roads with many dangerous drivers is what creates the danger for cyclists.

This. 5 years of cycling to work, ended up sprawled on the floor twice due to drivers knocking me off through crap driving, and a number of hits by drivers using their vehicle as a weapon (including use of horn) because they didn't want to share the road with me.

I have been hit while waiting for a gap in traffic at a roundabout, when completely stationery.

I have been hit from behind after passing a junction. Apparently, according to her, I was riding too slowly. It was near the top of a hill.  And no, I was not on a TT bike, which for some reason, to some posters here, make it much more likely.

Can anyone tell me how superior bike handling skills or complete awareness of my surroundings could have possibly prevented either of these incidents.

Last time I had it out here with someone over "we should all just get along" and "certain cycle-cammers are causing road rage" I asked how (given I don't run a cam) that led to some folks in a car (opposite side of the road) throwing a drinks can at me, or some others accellerating past me at a "pinch point" while shouting out the window.  I don't recall an answer but it just goes to show er... how corrosive posting stuff about bad driving on the internet is.  Or maybe how well most ("otherwise law abiding") people do at repressing their rage at cyclists and we should be grateful for that.  Or something.

But maybe it's really showing up my deficient road skillz?  (Such as cycling at night in a city, maybe?)

Ashley Neal wrote:

Cycling is without doubt more dangerous, but I've never been close to being hit in 30+ years of cycling on the roads. What does this tell you? and it's not that I'm just lucky! I don't need better infrastructure (although it would be nice for the less able)

I'm always told that a majority of cyclists are drivers, well if that's the case I can tell you a majority of drivers are poor. Anyone in this thread up for a free assessment drive with me? Time to put your cards on the table.

Any time, I'll take you for a cycle too.

You may have cycled for 30 years but,no offence, you don't look like you do a lot of it!

Ashley Neal wrote:

Cycling is without doubt more dangerous, but I've never been close to being hit in 30+ years of cycling on the roads. What does this tell you? and it's not that I'm just lucky! I don't need better infrastructure (although it would be nice for the less able)

I'm always told that a majority of cyclists are drivers, well if that's the case I can tell you a majority of drivers are poor. Anyone in this thread up for a free assessment drive with me? Time to put your cards on the table.

I think you'd have a different experience after cycling in Birmingham for a few days. The drivers are absolutely trying to kill cyclists.

To be fair, it's not just cyclists, they are not very keen on drivers, motorbikes or pedestrians either, and there are regular suicides by car too. Last year we had one 14 year old rolled a car and killed himself in a momentary lapse of attention, and 4 or 5 young people managed to drive into the M42 at about 60mph - unfortunately the builders hadn't allowed for a 5 metre high ramp at the end of a residential cul-de-sac.

To be even fairer, having seen his videos, they are littered with local scallys doing the same sort of driving round his way, so I suspect he doesn't need the road trip to find out for himself.