Compulsory bike bell law could return (bikebiz)

A lot of the shared use paths around us are clearly marked with a pedestrian lane and a cycle, with the strict understanding that cyclists must stick to their lane while pedestrians can be in either or both. I still don't see how that benefits anyone. 

Wouldn't it make sense with shared paths to have some sort of protocol like on a 2 way road?  i.e. stay on the left unless overtaking.

Well I witnessed a crash between a pedestrian and a cyclist on the way in this morning.

The cyclist came up behind the pedestrian, who was walking in the centre of the path, and said "on your right" on the approach.

The cyclist intended this as "I am passing on your right" but the pedestrian took it as "get on your right" and went to his right and straight into the path of the cyclist.

Yes you may be able to convey more information by voice, but only after you have got their attention and at close quarters (unless shouting). You would have to be going at walking pace or slower for this to actually be effective. I truly believe that if the cyclist had alerted to pedestrian to his presence earlier by means of a bell enabling him to move to one side it would not have mattered which side he went to as the cyclist would have had plenty of time to adjust accordingly.

On shared use paths I prefer to use my bell when walking, get some great reactions .......

but maybe people should actually read the article quoted before getting too hot under the collar about it ...

I use a Knog Oi on my road bikes, more than adequate. If it's not loud enough, it can be because it's not fitted properly, took a bit of tweaking on the tension to get just right

they're so indespensible to me now that I find my thumb twitching in the supermarket when I'm pushing a trolley and someone walks into my path!  

don't forget signage.......

Question is, where's the best place to stick your bell?

Right or left side of the bars?

Stem mount?

Steerer mount?

Somewhere else?

RHS of the bars for me, so I can slow the bike with the rear brake (theory being that if you need to haul the front brake to avoid them, it's probably too late anyway)

"The 1999 requirement that all new cycles have to be sold with bells – but with no compulsion to fit them – came after a partially-sighted woman's guide dog was hit by a cyclist, and she organised a petition for the restoration of bells on all cycles. "

This is why I have bells fitted to both bikes, one  Brompton with P bars (bell is a little feeble) and and Alexander Grahame Bell fitted to the drop-bar bike.

The latter is particularly clear and useful on towpaths, shared paths through parks etc - I've seen people 50 yards away turn when they hear a single "ping" from this one! Supplemented by voice  when a bit closer ("Good Morning").

Wlaking down the same paths - its pretty obvious tht a "Ding Ding" is an approaching bike, whereas a "Good Morning" could just be someone walking  behind you saying hello, or even just chatting on his/her phone - ie the bike sounds like you expect a bike to sound. Something that those who think a white noise generator fitted to electric cars would make them sound like cars should consider - they won't, they'll probably sound more like wind in the trees or somesuch, they won't sound like cars at all. They should.

Road cycling I see NO use for a bell whatsoever.  Shared use paths, I find my voice to be more useful than a bell "I'm on your left/right" as it imparts more info than a bell could.  It either works perfectly or (in the case of those wearing headphones) not at all.  Bells have NO effect on dogs - although they are more predictable in their behaviour than headphone wearers.

If someone wants to design something that interrupts someones music stream with "pay attention cyclist behind you" then that might be a workable solution.

As has been mentioned, nobody should ever be travelling faster than their stopping distance allows for... the best way of achieving this is to have your fingers on the brakes - NOT a bell.

Lastly before the police are given MORE vaguely unenforceable laws to police we should work out how to combat some real killers like mobile phone use in cars.

I have a bell and use it regularly. I often use a shared path on my rides, and find that a bell ring when far back from the people walking in front works well. The important point is using it early enough that the people in question have time stop in the middle of the path, turn around to see if the bell they heard really was a cyclist, and then slowly move to the side to allow you past. I then make sure to thank them in a cheery voice and usually all goes well. There are the odd ones that seem to object to having to move out of the way, but that happens whether you have a bell or not. The only time I witness agression towards the bell is when other riders have rung it at the last moment, which then makes it more of a 'get out of my way' type thing instead of the early use that comes across more as a polite request to pass safely. I wouldn't personally have an issue with compulsory bells, but as has been pointed out above, there are many many FAR more important issues to be resolved before the gov't starts taking such measures.

If you have a bell on your bike it does not stop you using your voice as well/instead of your bell. If you do not have a bell on your bike it does stop you being able to use the bell as well as/instead of your voice.

As a few posters have pointed out, there are going to be some grumpy pedestrians who are going to complain regardless of what method you use to alert them. There is not much you can do about that type of person.

As far as aesthetics and positioning go, I have found (as have other posters) that a stem mounted bell is pretty good on both counts and well worth a try.

There are several occasions when I am glad I have a bell which include:

If the person in question is too far away to alert with my voice without shouting (especially if they have dogs off the lead as it's best to give as much notice as possible here)

When cycling through the park during the busy summer as your voice can get lost in the background buzz of conversations.

If I have been riding hard and do not have the puff in me to verbalise anything.

If I am fighting off a cold and have lost my voice.

I tend to follow my ping on the bell with a "thank you" or "cheers" as I go past to ensure that the ping was not taken as aggression.

If I do need to ping with aggression though I use a rapid fire of pings which seems rather effective.

Cyclisto, the point you made about having to move your hands around the bars to ring a bell on a drop handlebar bike - Do you ride the entire time without moving your hands? I rather doubt that. If you are moving your hands around during the course of your ride, then moving it on occasion to ring your bell is not really any more dangerous than the rest of your ride.

This is not about a bell, or about 'safety' or about anything else positive, in fact.  This is about another legal constraint applied to cyclists to make cycling less attractive.  The compulsory helmet law will be in place within a year or two.   Hi-viz will be made obligatory around the same time.  I suppose we should be grateful that all of the moped crime isn't taking place on bicycles, because Paul Dacre would already be working towards having cycling banned if they were. 

I have a bell on my road bike stem. On one of our regular rides there’s a 2 mile stretch of great, really quiet road, popular with hiking groups. It’s so quiet they often fill it. The bell really helps announce our pending arrival from distance, followed by good natured greetings. Wouldn’t go out without it for that purpose alone.

My commuting single speed has two bells. One mellow (again, on the stem) for ‘Hi, I’m here’, the other more harsh (on the drops) for more urgent warning. I mainly shout when the shit goes down though.

I also wear a helmet. 

Should you not have a bell, or not wear a helmet, I couldn’t give one shit.

Perhaps someone can come up with a funky 'ring bell' app for smartphones (with virtually infinite adjustments for pitch, decay and overtones, of course) and raise $25,000 on kickstarter or some such nonsense.

antigee wrote:

and as to the house of lords debate - just pointless noise - the issue is why are are cyclists on the pavement not what pointless controls to add 

I took issue with my MP after he wrote in the local rag about dealing with pavement cyclists a few months ago. Tried to explain that, as well as the minimal risk to life & limb, some of the serious issues encountered when riding on the road.

Meanwhile, in nearby Telford, I bet this bloke didn't have a bell while on the cyclepath!

https://twitter.com/TelfordPatrol/status/1008845583627554820

Could come in handy to ding for assistance after cycling into a giant pot hole.

From experience...

Conversation 1:

Cyclist: 'Scuse me!

Pedestrian: Don't you have a bell? In the old days, every bike had one! <grumble, grumble>

Conversation 2:

Cyclist: <rings bell>

Pedestrian: Don't you go ringing that F*&king bell at me, pal!

This isn't going to happen.  A couple of Peers talking rubbish in  a Lord's debate is along way away from legislation coming.

It does highlight the complete lack of understanding they have about how bike transport could be used / encouraged.

PS I commuted this morning.  Drop bars and a bell.  Shared use areas, used it.  Nobody listened.  Slowed right up and slipped past those walking dogs on extendable leads four a breast.  My bell didn't really help.

Wont bother me if it becomes law and there's some good bells out there these days

Even if it becomes law to have one fitted it dosent mean people will use them, like indicators on a car are a legal requirement but not everyone indicates (im an Audi driver who indicates before the usual Audi/Bmw comments come lol)