Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Despite criticism London's 'Think! Cyclist' campaign extends to 5 other cities

Flawed advice on passing and advanced stop lines retained

THINK! Cyclist, a campaign designed to highlight to cyclists and motorists ways to share the road safely that has been running in London since September 2012, is to be rolled out to five other cities in England.

Outdoor advertising will be put in place in Birmingham, Bristol, Cambridge, Leeds and Manchester to highlight to drivers and people on bikes alike potential hazards when sharing space.

Developed by Transport for London (TfL) and the Department for Transport (DfT), the initiative aims to reinforce a culture of mutual respect among road users with the aim of improving safety.

When the campaign was launched last year in London, no cycling body endorsed it, and CTC was critical of some of the campaign’s advice.

CTC campaigns and policy director Roger Geffen says the organisation’s stance hasn’t changed.

He told road.cc: “CTC welcomes the posters and has no problem with the imagery, but has long-standing concerns about some of THINK!’s associated ‘tips’, especially its advice to drivers to give cyclists at least half a car’s width.

“This is far less than the overtaking distance recommended in the Highway Code: “…as much room as you  would when overtaking a car" – i.e. far more than half a car's width in most cases.

“CTC also believes that THINK!’s recommendation that cyclists should wear a helmet implies that it is irresponsible not to wear one, advice that could be prejudicial to cyclists in legal cases.

“CTC points out that helmets are not designed to protect riders in the sort of collisions that are likely to happen in fast or heavy traffic and that it is far more important to provide sound advice to road users on how to avoid collisions in the first place.”

While we admit we haven’t exactly been keeping an eye out, the only place in London where we’ve spotted the posters is on bus shelters. The pic at the top, and this one are from shelters on a quiet suburban shopping street close to road.cc’s east London office. Has anyone out there seen them on, say, buses?

The advice

The campaign contains advice aimed at both drivers and cyclists. The advice to drivers includes:

  • Look out for cyclists, especially when turning - make eye contact if possible so they know you’ve seen them
  • Use your indicators - signal your intentions so that cyclists can react
  • Give cyclists space – at least half a car’s width. If there isn’t sufficient space to pass, hold back. Remember that cyclists may need to manoeuvre suddenly if the road is poor, it’s windy or if a car door is opened
  • Always check for cyclists when you open your car door
  • Avoid driving over advanced stop lines – these allow cyclists to get to the front and increase their visibility
  • Follow the Highway Code including ‘stop’ and ‘give way’ signs and traffic lights.

When the campaign was launched, CTC also criticised the phrasing of the advice over advanced stop lines, which is weaker than the instructions in the Highway Code. The Highway Code says: “Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times.”

Cyclists, meanwhile, are advised:

  • Ride positively, decisively and well clear of the kerb – look and signal to show drivers what you plan to do and make eye contact where possible so you know drivers have seen you
  • Avoid riding up the inside of large vehicles, like lorries or buses, where you might not be seen
  • Always use lights after dark or when visibility is poor
  • Wearing light coloured or reflective clothing during the day and reflective clothing and/or accessories in the dark increases your visibility
  • Follow the Highway Code including observing ‘stop’ and ‘give way’ signs and traffic lights
  • THINK! recommends wearing a correctly fitted cycle helmet, which is securely fastened and conforms to current regulations.

British Cycling, which has been lobbying for a campaign to promote understanding between cyclists and other road users for two years, has welcomed the initiative.

Martin Key, its campaigns manager, commented: “British Cycling has long championed the need for a driver and cyclist awareness campaign.

“It is vital when talking about safety on the roads that we don’t get a ‘them and us’ mentality emerging between drivers and cyclists.

"We are all road users and I hope that this campaign can help foster mutual respect between everyone who uses the roads to make journeys safer, more pleasant experiences.

“We hope it will not be long before this this media campaign is launched nationwide.”

We contacted British Cycling to ask what had persuaded them to change their stance and back this year's THINK! Campaign but as yet have had no reply - we will update this article with their response when we get it.

John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.

He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.

Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.

John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.

He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.

Add new comment

36 comments

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to paulfg42 | 10 years ago
0 likes
paulfg42 wrote:

Who, when driving, leaves a car's width between them and the car they are overtaking?

But that's not what the highway code says, is it?

"Leave as much space as you would a car" doesn't make clear whether or not that includes the space the hypothetical car would itself be taking up.

i.e. does it mean leave the same distance between the overtaker's left side and the lefthand side of the vehicle being overtaken? Or leave the same distance between the overtaker's left side and the _righthand_ side of the vehicle being overtaken? As many have observed, the picture implies the former.

Avatar
Colin Peyresourde replied to Tony Farrelly | 10 years ago
0 likes
tony_farrelly wrote:
rogdog wrote:

a car that's stuck behind you for half a mile is as dangerous as one passing too closely!

Surely that depends who's driving it?

if it's an impatient idiot then probably it is, if it's a considerate road user who understands their responsibilities to other, and particularly to vulnerable road users then there shouldn't be any risk at all.

Sort of agree and disagree. It's fine as long as the car overtakes as soon as possible, because one of the cars backing up behind that car is bound to have an arsehole in it.

I always try to wave a driver on ASAP. I don't mind them passing within a couple of foot. Always best to look out for road furniture/holes ASAP so that you can position yourself early and not swerve about too much.

Avatar
Colin Peyresourde | 10 years ago
0 likes

What does the HC say about cars overtaking other cars?

Avatar
giff77 replied to Tony Farrelly | 10 years ago
0 likes
tony_farrelly wrote:
rogdog wrote:

a car that's stuck behind you for half a mile is as dangerous as one passing too closely!

Surely that depends who's driving it?

if it's an impatient idiot then probably it is, if it's a considerate road user who understands their responsibilities to other, and particularly to vulnerable road users then there shouldn't be any risk at all.

I would second that. I've been tailgated by motorists determined to intimidate me out of the way. On the flip side I had a tipper truck follow me for half a mile along an unlit road the other morning. He kept well back and made no attempt to pass me until I turned off at the T when he went the other way. He could quite easily have passed me as others have done before but didn't.

Avatar
congokid replied to banzicyclist2 | 10 years ago
0 likes
banzicyclist2 wrote:

As far as helmets are concerned, my wife's an A&E nurse; over the years she's seen the aftermath on not wearing one compared to wearing one. I'm convinced and never go out without mine.

A popular fallacy - the 'appeal to authority' - that we hear a lot from those who'd like to see the introduction of mandatory helmet laws.

As a point of interest, how often does your wife see head injuries that don't arise from cycling? Would it be more or less than cyclists with head injuries? And in those circumstances, what does she recommend to the victims?

Avatar
WolfieSmith | 10 years ago
0 likes

Bad logic Congo. I would imagine not wearing a helmet on a building site could result in more serious injury than wearing one and hospitals see less head injuries from building sites because helmets are mandatory.

Of course they're mandatory for insurance reasons and I personally would never make wearing bike helmets compulsory. It doesn't mean they don't offer partial protection.

As I've said before on this site. Hit yourself on the head with a hammer whilst wearing a bike helmet and then hit yourself again with without. Remember to make sure you film it so we can see it on YouTube. When you're ready?  45

Pages

Latest Comments