Footballer-turned-driving instructor Ashley Neal has divided opinion online after posting a video in which he beeps his car horn at two cyclists while overtaking them.
Neal, the son of European Cup-winning Liverpool full back Phil Neal, regularly posts videos on his website and YouTube channel, which has over 98,000 subscribers, chronicling his experiences as a driver and instructor in the northwest of England.
Neal, who runs his own driving school business, has often been praised for his even-handed approach to cyclists on the roads, and last year posted a video analysing an incident in which a cyclist was knocked off their bike by a motorist, an act the instructor claimed was “done purposefully”.
Last week’s video, titled ‘Cycling 2 Abreast and Overtaking’, caused a stir in the comments of the video itself and on the road.cc forum, after some viewers claimed that Neal was criticising the cyclists riding two-abreast before “unnecessarily” beeping his horn at them as he passed.
As he approaches the cyclists in the video, Neal says: “Do they need to be taking up a primary position and riding two-abreast at the moment? Yes.
“But I think this is going to cause issues with the new updates to the Highway Code. And that’s if some cyclists choose to ignore the other advice which has been updated to say that they should move back to single file to allow faster moving traffic to overtake.”
On the subject of riding two abreast, the revised Highway Code states: “You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so.”
> Highway Code changes: ‘What about cyclists, or do the rules not apply to them?’
Neal then questioned whether the cyclists’ decision to carry on riding two abreast prevented him “from giving them a proper two metres space on this faster speed limit”, before answering “well, it does”.
The Highway Code updates advise that drivers should “leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists at speeds of up to 30mph, and give them more space when overtaking at higher speeds”, and only explicitly notes that two metres’ distance should be maintained when passing pedestrians or horses on the road.
“Just because you can ride two abreast,” Neal continued, “doesn’t mean you should be doing it always. You should still appreciate the flow from other people.”
Neal then proceeds to pass the cyclists, doing so at a safe distance in the opposite lane, sounding his horn as he begins the manoeuvre. After the overtake, Neal told his viewers to give cyclists “as much space and care as you would do overtaking a car… A little beep of the horn is key, no problems, do it safely.”
> Driver knocks cyclist off bike on purpose – then claims she used to be police officer
While some viewers took to the YouTube comments section and the road.cc forum to express their disgruntlement at Neal’s preference for the cyclists to have ridden single file (though he acknowledged that he wouldn’t have been able to pass in any case), most of the resulting controversy surrounding the video centred on his use of his horn.
One road.cc reader wrote: “I don’t agree with his use of the horn. Imagine if every car that passed you ‘warned you of their presence’ with a ‘friendly’ toot.
“In my view, the only reason to warn someone of your presence is when you think they might need to take some evasive action or look like they might cross your path.”
Another said: “I don’t know what a ‘friendly’ toot sounds like, I cannot remember the last time I heard one. It might be some quaint throwback to the golden age of motoring, but in my experience it just doesn’t happen these days.
“Therefore, any use of the horn will get my hackles and probably my middle finger up. If you’re driving behind a cyclist, however you use your horn will make them jump, which doesn’t seem advisable to me.”
Some viewers on YouTube agreed:
“I’m not sure on beeping before you overtake. If someone beeps me when I’m cycling I assume they are highly offended by my existence. If you force a cyclist to take their eye off the road ahead and look around, especially if they are alongside someone, there is a chance they will swerve enough to cause an issue.”
“I really disagree with the use of the horn in this situation. I know why Ashley is using it, but there are very few road users who consistently use the horn like he does. When I am cycling and hear a horn being sounded from a car behind me, I generally assume that an accident or near miss is about to occur and take defensive actions.”
However, others were more forgiving of the ‘friendly toot’:
“In my opinion the reason for riding two abreast is to get the cars to slow down before overtaking thus reducing potential damage (to me). Once they slow down I move into single file as soon as I think it’s safe to overtake.
“Very occasionally I don’t notice the car behind and a friendly toot is much appreciated. I’m ashamed to admit that aggressive use of the horn just winds me up and the move to single file is much delayed as a result.”
“I’m not totally against a friendly horn toot if a driver thinks I may genuinely not be aware of them. However, if I haven’t already heard you coming, then even a friendly toot is likely to be alarming.
“So if you’re going to do it, I think you need to leave a pause before you then overtake, to account for the cyclist jumping or turning to look – don’t toot while you’re mid-overtake.”
Neal took to the comments section himself to respond to those criticising him for his horn use, telling one viewer to “go read the Highway Code”.
“The horn in this situation is a simple ‘excuse me’,” he wrote. “It’s no different than a signal with an indicator if I was passing a car. If someone might benefit, it’s needed. It’s really sad that the true use of the horn is lost on so many.”
Rule 112 of the Highway Code states that the car horn should only be used “while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively.”
According to Neal, “due to their poor positioning and not going back to single file, [the use of the horn] was absolutely necessary. It’s only the poor perception of what the horn should be used for that’s the problem.
“It’s a non-aggressive way of saying “excuse me” and so many cyclists have problems with it… These cyclists were just riding for themselves and did nothing to work together as they should.”
170 thoughts on “Footballer-turned-driving instructor Ashley Neal divides opinion with use of horn in overtaking video”
Been done.
Been done.
https://road.cc/content/forum/keep-away-ashley-neal-or-youll-get-horn-two-abreast-rant-fest-290649
Ah yes, but why write your
Ah yes, but why write your own articles when you can get the readers of your website to write the content for you?
quiff wrote:
Well, it proves we read the Forum
Seriously though, we do sometimes see threads there started by readers that we think deserve a wider audience, so we will do a story on it – and, as we’ve done near the top here, we’ve acknowledged the forum thread and provided a link to it.
And yes, on those articles we will usually quote some of those forum comments, in this case 140 words out of a total word count of approximately 1,200.
The rest of the article, as you’ll know since you’ve read it, provides background and context as well as quoting Neal and some of the responses on YouTube.
Hope that clarifies.
All fair points, sorry for
All fair points, sorry for being snotty.
Whilst I don’t agree with his
Whilst I don’t agree with his horn use here, I do think Ashley Neal is doing a good job in general with his driver education YT channel.
He is also very active in the comments, which I think is nice to see, even if his replies are sometimes a little, ahem, ‘edgy’!
English road laws
English road laws/recommendations are a bit weird. The legislation here is a bit clearer: https://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2004/0427/latest/DLM303622.html
(5) A person must not, at any time,—
(a) use a warning device on a motor vehicle otherwise than as a reasonable traffic warning;
I used to give a finger to someone using their horn unreasonably but some grey haired old guy took offence and drove me off the road with his car; now I just fill in an online “report a bad driver” form.
The use of the horn is not
The use of the horn is not wrong in the situation but I question its utility, what can the cyclists do with the information, if the answer is nothing what’s the point?
The Highway Code says the
The Highway Code says the horn should only be used to warn others of your presence. An “excuse me”, however politely intended, means move out of my way; it’s a warning of your intention to pass and an instruction to cede. It sounds as though it’s Mr Neal who needs to “go read the Highway Code” here. Someone waiting for a safe opportunity to pass that respects the guidance of the Highway Code doesn’t need to use their horn.
The problem with Neil’s
The problem with Neil’s videos is that he is trying to establish his brand as ‘driver education’. While he’s a qualified driving instructor, he is not entitled to make policy. I’ve watched his videos and in general, however reasonable he sounds, most have a strong dose of ‘driver opinion’ masquerading as education. His ‘cars emerging from a side road’ video is a good example, yes the junction is poor but at the end of the day if the vehicles had been doing that across the carriageway of the road rather then the bike path I think he’s have had a very different opinion.
I’m with Neil. A quick beep
I’m with Neil. A quick beep like that is standard practice in many European countries when a driver is overtaking a cyclist, and it is useful, once you get used to it. It is used to say “I’m coming through, I know you’re there, and I’m giving you room” in a polite manner with no aggression.
I have to say, in that situation, I’d probably have singled out to let the cars past.
If he was not confident that
If he was not confident that the cyclists knew he was there then use f the horn in this way is perfectly reasonable. I tend to appreciate motorists doing that. Unfortunatley many seem to think the use of the horn as a warning device is eqivalent to GBH or a personal assault on their parentage.
Legin wrote:
That is usually informed by experience. My experience is that drivers overtaking properly don’t feel the need to use their horn as they do so, whereas those who do use the horn tend to be the ones who skim my elbow with their mirror.
I see no problem here, it was
I see no problem here, it was a simple toot, I’m here and am about to pass, he is right, if they ride like that, he can’t give them sufficient space, even while passing across the other side of the road.
We use this in professional racing, tooting to let riders know we are passing, as you’ll hear all the time on the TV when cars and/or motorbikes are passing riders, it’s constant toots of the horn. So one toot isn’t going to do any harm. He stayed behind waiting for a good road position to pass, so I don’t think any cyclists can have a problem. Of course, there are always ars***les out there that will make an issue of it….
It’s not really a question of
It’s not really a question of whether you see no problem, it’s a question of whether a professional instructor who is supposedly showing drivers how to behave should be clearly breaking the HC rules regarding use of the horn. A case can be made that perhaps drivers should give a warning of an overtake, but the fact remains that at the moment using your horn to say “excuse me” (a.k.a. get out of my way I’m coming through) is not permitted.
What happens in professional racing on closed roads is, of course, entirely irrelevant to this situation.
Rendel Harris wrote:
I think that’s what bothered me about this particular situation. Ashley felt the riders were at fault for not following good lane discipline (debatable), he felt there wasn’t enough space for it to be a safe pass, so he passed anyway with a beep of his horn.
But if a car was sitting in lane 3 on the motorway and failing to move left and follow good lane discipline (clearly wrong), would he decide to undertake the vehicle, but mitigate this danger by tooting his horn as he did so? Probably not.
I have driven in Spain where a toot before a car overtakes is commonplace, but this then makes horn use more accepted and the cities have noticeably more cars beeping horns when they’re just stuck in traffic or someone is slow to move off at the lights.
HoarseMann wrote:
I remember when travelling many years ago, either in China or Sri Lanka, it was customary to beep before overtaking. It also seemed to be customary to overtake at all times. Quite loud.
Gkam84 wrote:
looked like enough space to me, how much does he have to give?
1.5m is fine, he was not driving at high speed.
Trying to remember the last
Trying to remember the last ‘friendly’ toot I received. Nope. Failed. Lots of ‘get the [heck] out of my way’ because I’m in primary or on the offside of the lane coming up to a pinch point, turning right, overtaking a slower cyclist, or avoiding the door zone.
So however well-intentioned, Mr Neal is at best going to get the finger. I got ears. I can hear cars behind me.
The use of the horn is
The use of the horn is completely unnecessary. Cars are not silent we can hear when one is behind us. Sounding the horn is more likely to startle cyclists by thinking they are about to be hit. As per another comment on this page, Neal is trying to force his incorrect opinionated driving on to the uninitiated.
Also disagree with his comments about riding two abreast. Why should the cyclists move in this occasion? The road was clear for him to pass on the other lane.
“go read the Highway Code…
“go read the Highway Code… The horn in this situation is a simple ‘excuse me’,” he wrote. “It’s no different than a signal with an indicator if I was passing a car. If someone might benefit, it’s needed. It’s really sad that the true use of the horn is lost on so many”
Just because you can honk doesn’t mean you should be doing it always. You should still appreciate the safety and hearing of other people.
I’m guessing he doesn’t give cars a friendly toot when he’s overtaking though?
I would argue that most
I would argue that most motorists are so used to being an insulated shell with only visual aids (i.e. mirrors) to make them aware of their surroundings, a friendly toot when overtaking another car might actually help make them aware of the maneuvre!
Car Delenda Est wrote:
That’s the part I would question.
The HC is clear that the horn should be used to warn other users of your presence … nowhere does it say anything about an “Excuse me”. Maybe I am just weird, but in my experience, people use “Excuse me” when they need you to move a little in order to let them past, e.g. when blocking a doorway, taking up the whole pavement having a conversation, etc. If the doorway is clear, or the conversation has left me plenty of room to get past, I don’t feel the need to say “Excuse me”.
The HC says nothing about using your horn to tell cyclists they need to move to facilitate your overtake, which feels like what he is saying here.
I am also not particularly keen on the idea of every single car tooting their horn to warn me they are going to overtake me, which again is what he seems to be implying here.
If there is room to overtake me safely, just do it.
The fact it has divided
The fact it has divided opinion is exactly why you shouldn’t use your horn in this way. At the very best in a tiny minority of edge cases it is marginally acceptable HWC wise.
If you have a 50% chance of scaring, intimidating, or even just pissing people off with an unnecessary action – don’t facking do it
FFS
I think we need to be more
I think we need to be more discerning about our reactions to horns. Going back to the video in which Ashley Neal uses his, I’m wondering, ‘would I use it like that?’ probably not; does that mean all drivers should not use the horn like that? Less sure. He has already demonstrated his respect for other road users by following at a distance for a reasonable distance.
I hate the ‘it’s a grey area’ response, because it’s a bit like ‘we should all just learn to get along and look out for each other’. But, genuinely, we need to accommodate the possibility that other drivers are just trying to be helpful, and they’re doing something in a way we might not do it. I don’t think short honks, when you’re changing from following (for a considerable distance) to overtaking is UNacceptable.
GMBasix wrote:
I’m not sure that “we” need to do anything as a group. The point is that horn use around cyclists is unnecessary, and can be intimidating and frightening. As a driver you cannot be sure how a rider will be affected.
Therefore to advise drivers to use the horn is shit, and against HWC (he’s being disingenuous when he says he’s warning of presence – he really means get out of my way….please)
He should take the action that will be most beneficial, with the least risk.
The use of horn around riders is of no benefit, v real risk of aggravation, or intimidation. Doesn’t pass the risk-benefit analysis to me, which is why I don’t use the horn around riders.
Captain Badger wrote:
Having watched the video, I don’t think this is the case. Although it is the case for most drivers beeping at cyclists
I think a lot of the issue is that drivers don’t realise just how much louder the horn souds to people outside of cars, particulalry just in front of the car or beside the bonnet.
wycombewheeler wrote:
Certainly agree that drivers have no idea of the effects of using the horn – another reason to keep your hands off it
I’m less charitable regarding Ashley’s intent. He wanted the riders to get out of his way. That’s why he used it. He questioned them riding abreast, and cos he wanted to get past sounded the horn.
This was not simply “I am here” (eg approaching a blind corner).It was most definitely:
“I am letting you know I am here with the express reason of encouraging you to get out of my way….please”
I tend to agree with you over
I tend to agree with you over the personal choice iof using the horn. But we also need to reflect on the fact that the horn remains a valid piece of equipment (indeed, it’s mandated on cars), and there are valid cases for its use.
It shouldn’t be used aggressively; it is intended as an emotionally neutral warning. The fact that it is rarely used like that is neityher here nor there in the context of somebody advising onits use as a warning.
We are in danger of circling each other’s points, but I return to this: that there is a grey area where we, as cyclists, might not need to be made aware of a car’s/driver’s presence, but the driver may not be sure of whether we are aware of his presence and may use the horn accordingly. This could be interpreted as aggressive; and it could be. Very often it is in the situation and the execution.
The video example, I suggest, is not aggressive. It’s hard to tell how it was taken: Ashley reports a wave in the video; on replay, there is a gap between front and rear views, and it looks to me no more than a scratch of the nose – but he could be right. there was no hostile response to the horn on view.
I just think we need to be more tolerant where the use of the horn is positive or ambiguous.
In contrast, I like the idea of a ‘soft horn’. We’ve lost the ability to give a throttled bip because most horn buttons seem to have a resistance to a gentle push. Since there is no advised use of a friendly sound, and there are regulations on the construction of horns, any such device would be retrofitted and probably illegal. Yet I think there are good reasons for positive communication options in a car, over and above just not putting other road users at risk.
GMBasix wrote:
I agree that we are probably tiptoeing around the grey area that always exists regarding edge cases. In addition my perspective definitely has consideration of teh fact that AN is an ADI, and is viewed as an authority. This means that he should be extraordinarily careful of his message. Advocating beeping at riders, whilst also stating (in this thread) that he has little modern experience of riding shows a unilateral view of use of the public highway.
Regarding whether a rider needs to be made aware of the presence of a driver behind, I’d say that pragmatically I don’t need to be aware of a driver that is posing me no risk (assuming that I’ haven’t heard them anyway). If the driver is posing me a threat, I’ll ask why, and wouldn’t the appropriate course of action be to stop posing a threat, rather than continue and beep teh horn?
If I can drive safely without using the horn around people on bikes, why can’t Mr Ashley?
IMO the horn as you overtake
IMO the horn as you overtake a cyclist comes from either a place of ignorance or aggression. Ignorance, because some assume that a cyclist ‘needs reminding’ or ‘being made aware of your presence,’ when a car is approaching from behind; however, we’re ALWAYS blatantly aware! My ears are always perked to catch the merest whistle of an accelerating car engine.
I do believe that some motorists are genuinely ignorant of the average cyclist’s experience and perceptions of the road, so would actually benefit from a cyclist awareness course (or, as some commentors have stated in other forums, some time riding a bike on public roads). However, this follows that if someone IS aware of how a cyclist perceives the road and DOES know that they can hear cars approaching without sounding a horn, it follows that the horn is used as an act of petulance or aggression. Ashley Neal surprises me because he strikes me as someone who does understand cycling, but continues to perpetuate this weird friendly horn stance.
I was caught completely
I was caught completely unawares by an electric bus overtaking me once. Didn’t hear a thing as it approached, was a bit of a shock!
Electric vehicles are much harder to detect by just listening so if the riders hadn’t looked in his direction the horn would be justified IMHO.
That’s fair enough. Maybe I
That’s fair enough. Maybe I am more hyper-aware – I’ve had several near-contacts due to close passes, one actual crash (forced off the road and into a fence, overtaken with millimetres to spare – my fractured left hand still isn’t at full strength) and several instances of needing to perform an emergency stop, all in the past few months. When I did drive I was one of those drivers who checked mirrors at very regular intervals. While Neal may not have expected the cyclists to be as conscientous, I think using a horn that is seen to be used aggressively more often than not is all-advised in this case.
With an ICE vehicle I’d
With an ICE vehicle I’d definitely agree but in an EV they may genuinely not have known he was there.
I agree that horns are usually used aggressively but there is a time and place for appropriate use and I think this is one of them.
I’d certainly prefer his approach of a toot and a courteous pass in comparison to the more usual standard of driving we encounter!
Rich_cb wrote:
Hard to argue with that!
EVs at 30mph do make alot of
EVs at 30mph do make alot of tyre noise on roads, they’re still audible, but the whole thing about hearing on a bike,its only one of the senses you use to ride with, if you dont hear that well because of wind noise or lack of hearing you use your eyes more to compensate. When I cant hear stuff i tend to look more, the reason being its completely in my own interests to know exactly what is behind me to keep me safe.
And the scenario we are presented with is Ashley feels he needs to beep his horn to overtake cyclists at a 2metres gap on an empty road. So does he do this for every cyclists in a group he overtakes just to tell them he is there, or only the ones he thinks arent riding as he wants ?
That’s why I dont like this video the scenario presented really doesnt match the dialogue or points he wants to make, which might be completely valid in some other situations,but not this one, and anyone who overtook me like that would be getting a hand signal,just not the one they might expect however friendly they thought they were being.
Awavey wrote:
Not sure. Does it matter? Does it make a difference to advising people to use their horn to warn others of their presence? TBH, it seems like a thank you for moving out of his way so quickly. But I wasn’t there. A thank you isn’t within the meaning of the use of the horn, but it rarely does any harm.
Yes, EVs at 30 still make a noise. I’m not convinced that the cyclists – and therefore the EV – were doing 30. When the EV accelerates to overtake, it’s the difference in the speed and action that is significant, and may be less noticeable.
I agree, when the auitory senses are hampered e.g. by wind or deafness, we should compensate by looking even more than we should already. That said, knowing a car was there or not wouldn’t make much difference to their ability to do anything about that fact. The move to overtake is a quick transition, one which is quite likely to be between even frequent shoulder glances; so observation is quite likely to miss the fact that the driver was going to overtake.
It’s nothing to do with them not riding as he thinks they should – he spends some time explaining what they’re doing and why.
Is his honk necessary? Probably not. Unless I had cause to think the cyclists might suddenly wander into my path (in which case, should I overtake at all?), I probably wouldn’t. But it is done with a particular purpose in mind and it is a valid one, in accordance with the Highway Code.
Does he do it for every group of cyclists? I expect it depends on the circumstances, as most of our driving/riding should.
If somebody honked then passed me with due consideration, having been behind me for some considerable time, I’m not sure I would rush to assume it was hostile.
They do make some noise but
They do make some noise but it’s nowhere near the noise of an ICE vehicle. Add in a bit of wind and it can be impossible to hear an EV. I’ve been crept up on by an electric bus before! EV drivers may have noticed this so perhaps they’re more inclined to use their horn as directed by the HC?
As I’ve said elsewhere on the thread I’d happily be tooted at every time I was overtaken if the overtake was as safe and considerate as the one in the video.
Awavey wrote:
I’ll second that. At 30mph and above I find tyre noise is the dominant sound from most modern cars, particularly those with wider tyres. It’s even more prominent in the wet.
A Tesla passed me in a 30 mph this evening (drizzling all day). I couldn’t tell it was an EV without looking but was conscious of it approaching as it made plenty of noise. The driver passed approaching traffic lights that were on red. A Nissan Leaf is quieter but so are most other small hatchbacks.
Those tiny ebmws are the
Those tiny ebmws are the quietest ecar, narrowest tyres I have seen on a modern car, but it was done for efficiency. Much less tyre noise.
ktache wrote:
This is the direction I wanted VW to take 15 years or so ago with their Bluemotion range, which was really a badging exercise while they put the real R&D into cheating emissions tests and promoting go-faster cars like the TT with ever more powerful engines and monstrous death trap SUVs for the school run.
I want a car with a similar weight and size to my dear departed MK II Polo at <800kg. I don’t want stupid electric windows or other ‘clever’ gadgets – my hands can do that! I want skinny tyres that are half or even a third of the price of those fat hoops and won’t need power-assisted steering. Though I’d wish for better brakes and will acknowledge that cleaner and more efficient engines require some digital wizadry that you can’t get with a carburettor.
Was someone trying to
Was someone trying to communicate?
I think the horn was
I think the horn was unnecessary, more likely to be perceived as aggressive than friendly, and contrary to the highway code.
The highway code says the horn should only be used when “you need to warn other road users of your presence”.
If the cyclists were already aware of his presence (and it seems to me highly likely that they were) then clearly there is no need to warn them of his presence.
Furthermore, if the overtake is conducted safely (as the overtake itself was) then again I don’t see a need to warn the cyclists – even if they weren’t aware, a safe overtake should not cause undue surprise and requires no change in behaviour from the cyclists. So why does it matter if they weren’t previously aware?
I’ve had one or two
I’ve had one or two discussions with Ashley Neal on his channel. I commented on this video, too, early on.
I don’t think his use of the horn was ill-advised in this case. He had been tailing the cyclists for some time, and he was about to change the dynamic by overtaking. In that sense, he was warning of his presence.
I think we have to be able to allow some tolerance for differences of opinion of what amounts to a legitimate warning. Some of us may think, “I don’t need telling there’s a car behind me”; but does a driver know that? In that clip, Neal is driving a Tesla. They’re not silent, but on a windy country lane, the fact that he has started to overtake is a nuance that may not be apparent. The characteristic of the horn use is made more obvious by the nature of the overtake. Do the cyclists need warning that the car is overtaking? Perhaps not, in our view; but is it worth it to a good driver to make somebody in front aware that he is about to pass? It could be.
Now, unfortunately, Ashley Neal has a tendency to polarise his point when critics come along. He has resorted to generalistions at times; and he has mixed the message at times (when a good video will, perhaps, nod to other issues that creep in to a real-life video, but stick to the key point). In this case – and I haven’t exhausted the comments since I made mine – he may have watered down the good example of patience and acceptable use of the horn with less tempered explanations. And if he has said in comments that the cyclists “failed” to go single file, he has misunderstood the requirements upon cyclists both pre- and post-change in the Highway Code.
I think Ahsley Neal offers a positive contribution on YouTube. He’s not perfect, and I’ll happily have those conversations with him.
But I also think we should calm ourselves down a little: hearing a horn is not automatically a bad thing. All too often it is, and we’ve become accustomed to rejecting all use of it as aggressive. But we should understand when a ‘toot’ is intended as a helpful effort. I miss the old days where a gentle tap of the horn yielded a more affable sound.
GMBasix wrote:
I caught Ogmios zen driving on bbc3 last night, loved his “gentle horn”
GMBasix wrote:
Well, it was either:
I think Captain Badger nailed it, the difference of opinion shows that on balance, in this particular situation, the use of the horn is ill-advised.
I just worry that his advice is going to translate into people thinking they can close pass me if they give a beep to warn of the danger.
Horns and Bells – damned if
Horns and Bells – damned if you do – damned if you don’t.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
Especially this lot.
mdavidford wrote:
That lot are just Damned 😉
If you take the sounding of
If you take the sounding of the horn by another road user as its default meaning, i.e being nothing more than alert of presence then there is nothing to take offence at.
On a country road I don’t object to a vehicle coming up behind to use a quick beep to let me know they are there. When the wind is whistling through your helmet you often cannot hear the approach from engine and road noise alone.
As to what I do with that information:
I can acknowledge the presence of the other road user.
I have no wish to be in their way. I’d far rather they were past and up ahead as an advanced crumple zone against oncoming traffic.
I will make best attempts to help facilitate a safe overtake.
I won’t be caught unawares if they do make a poor pass.
If it is aggressive and followed by aggressive driving it gets sent to the local Police traffic team https://youtu.be/nS1Rnwjzdl4 and, as we have learned from multiple annecdotes, the best response at the time is no response at all lest HM Constabulary take offence or indeed the poor time pressed motorist just has to stop up ahead and create a scene because they were so upset about you saying a naughty word or making a rude hand signal in response to fearing for life and limb.
I don’t see an issue with the
I don’t see an issue with the quick pip in this case, this was not agressive. IMO and clearly the cyclists were not unhappy
IMO he could (and should) have overtaken sooner there was good visibility and reasonable room.
Talk of not being able to give 2m seems strange because the entire other lane is clear. what does the highway code say?
“leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists at speeds of up to 30mph, and give them more space when overtaking at higher speeds”
Note when overtaking at higher speeds, not when overtaking on roads with faster speed limits. So the driver is at liberty to overtake at 1.5m (which is available) as he has already slowed down. If he was blasting past them at 60mph (because he reached them on a long straight road that was clear at the time) then 2m
mightwould be appropriate. There is nothing in this example where the cyclists have prevented faster moving traffic from passing.IMO
the actions of the cyclists are fine the driver can overtake safely
the actions of the driver are fine, he did overtake safely
The following car could complai he didn’t overtake sooner, the road wasn’t straight but there was clear visibility ahead.
I have zero issue with horn
I have zero issue with horn use in that situation, sometimes you don’t hear a vehicle behind you. It’s not like he’s leaning on the horn screaming out the window.
I also didn’t see him inferring they shouldn’t be riding two abreast and actually stated in that situation they should be. If anything he raised an interesting point that in some cases on a fast road two abreast would put cyclists closer to overtaking traffic when the vehicle is doing so fully in the other lane. I feel this is valid in the case of a couple of cyclists, obviously less so or not at all for a large group.
Adam Sutton wrote:
Not having found it myself, I think he may have suggested in BTL comment replies that they should have singled out
You can kinda tell how
You can kinda tell how aggressive a bib is meant to be but my reaction is always the same (although with some nuance). Cheesey grin and a wave. If they meant the bib as a friendly ‘I’m here’ they’ll think I’m being friendly in return. If they were trying to intimidate they’ll think I’m taking the piss.
IanMK wrote:
I really wondered what you meant by “bib” then!
Because an aggressive bib is how mine fits under the jersey!
(Is a friendly honk, ‘bib
(Is a friendly honk, ‘bib shorts’?)
I didnt want to repeat my
I didnt want to repeat my points from the forum on this, but I feel I need to, I dont agree there is ever such a thing as a friendly toot and imo Ashley Neil was wrong to use the horn the way he did in his video, he was wrong on the space he needed to pass, wrong that he couldnt overtake safely and wrong that the cyclists needed to single out for him. Though I’m willing to accept the general rounded safety driving points he was making about needing to wait to give space if it isnt there and cyclists should be mindful of their surroundings on the road and consider all those things he raised and that its very difficult on happenchance dashcam video to perfectly film the exact scenario you want to show people.
But cyclists arent some form of R2-D2 mechdroid who communicate in beeps & toots, most cyclists experience drivers beeping at them as a form of “get out of my way”, and car drivers maybe because they are sound proofed off from the world dont appreciate that actually we can perfectly hear vehicles approach behind us without them leaning on the horn, they have loud engines, revving normally, they have tyre noise, they have stereos, what possible benefit to aid communication between us is using the horn, I know you are there, you dont beep when you overtake a tractor or beep behind a horse rider, why assume beeping a cyclist is helpful.?
And if I havent noticed any of the giveaway sounds a vehicle is behind me, or used my eyes, what do you think a short blast of 100dB of noise is likely to do right beside you, it will likely make me jump which means a loss of control of the bike just as you are overtaking. Exactly the same way pedestrians react when cyclists use their bells beside them.
Stay off the horn in a car unless you are about to crash into something, because I will have no idea if you are trying to thank me, warn me or threaten me with your behavior.
Context is everything, I
Context is everything, I think you would have an idea how it was intended. But it is also important for us to keep some perspective, otherwise we become unnecessarily hostile to those around us.
That doesn’t mean they’re not out to get us; but some of them aren’t, and we should be open to that idea.
The horn is not restricted to imminent disaster, it is to warn of your presence. We are effectively arguing in this case about whether it is necessary to warn of our [drivers’] presence. Just like to is our [cyclists’] decision to decide whether it is safe to single out or move to the left, so it is a driver’s decision whether or not it may be helpful to warn another road user. I think we [cyclists] may have to allow them [drivers] the discretion to give an emotionally neutral warning sound.
That is not a reason not to use a horn. For the driver: if there is a legitimate cause to use one, use it; if the intent is hostile, don’t. For the cyclist, the context will tell you if a driver was being hostile. If we jumpt to conclusions, we’ll be just as bad as the driver Ashley Neal could have been if he’d just sat there stewing about cyclists in his way.
I had a case just last week
I had a case just last week as I turned and rode onto a single track road that’s up a hill, which I knew I was going to be slow up, I heard a car join behind me.
So I chose to get out of their way straight away and gave them space to overtake so they wouldnt sit behind me pressuring me up the hill, they beeped as they accelerated past me.
Was it a thankyou ? a warning they were there ? or the hostile anger for holding them up even only briefly?
I move over on single track roads a fair bit to let traffic past very few ever beep me for it, most people use hazard lights or signal with their arms thanks the majority normally completely ignore you, and if I moved out of their way I obviously know they are there so it only leaves the angry motorist, but I’ve no idea which one it was, though I suspect it was as always triggered by anger.
Awavey wrote:
Stay off the horn in a car unless you are about to crash into something, because I will have no idea if you are trying to thank me, warn me or threaten me with your behavior.— Awavey
To me this is so wrong I can’t believe you’re serious. Two quick beeps on the horn are, in my opinion, perfectly acceptable if done at a reasonable distance. I accept it as information that a vehicle is coming. A long loud blast of the horn is hardly friendly. As Mr Mungegrundle points out below, wind noise can be very loud and cover the sound of vehicles approaching from behind so a warning is fine. As for only using the horn when you are about to crash is plain silly.
IMHO the biggest issue with
IMHO the biggest issue with horns is they have tended to get louder to be heard through car soundproofing…
Of course this is almost impossible to retrospectively fix. As you would almost certainly need to mandate an upper limit on soundproofing (a sound of x DB at y m must be above z DB at drivers seat.) and then eventually an upper limit on volume once most can hear it…
There are now horns that are 110db+. Depending on whose data you use this is above the point sounds cause mild pain. Even at minimum safe following distance (which most drivers don’t keep) it is still too loud. So an alert of presence generally should be done well before.
Unfortunately I don’t have video of an ambulance with its (quieter though piercing) sirens demoing this – used sirens well in advance allowing me to locate it, and travel ~30-50 m to pull in safely without it having to slow down when approaching at 3-4x my speed… (next point was narrow humped bridge where clearly they wouldn’t be able to safely pass a cyclist regardless)
A friendly toot is one I
A friendly toot is one I recieve when pulling over to let a lorry pass or, if in a group, line up to wave them on. I consider a toot from behind as an indication to get out of the way…
EM69 wrote:
I don’t want anyone using the horn beside me, it’s terrifying, too loud, and I don’t know if they are warning me they are aboiut to move into my space.
Once they are in front a single flash of the hazard lights, is better.
Or a single left, right on
Or a single left, right on the indicators. That’s classy driving.
Motor vehicle horns are too loud, they are for communicating to others in big metal boxes, insulated for sound. Please don’t do it Ashley.
Last time someone used their
Last time someone used their horn like that with me it was followed by an extremely close, deliberate punishment pass because I didn’t instantly vaporise and the van driver had to wait for oncoming traffic to clear before overtaking. Linc’s Police have the footage, and have confirmed action is being taken, but it will no doubt become a NMOTD once they are done.
The morals of this story are:
1. a cyclist cannot tell the intent of a driver when they blow their horn
2. the presence of a vehicle behind me is not something I can do anything about, it is the driver’s hjob to avoid me
3. I will decide when it is appropriate for me to assume primary or secondary, single out etc.
4. Just wait you impatient pr!ck
PS you were nowhere near as good as your dad.
Classy comment
Classy comment
.
.
Bitter, twisted much?
.
Or just very immature?
.
.
.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
I believe the only appropriate response to this is –
I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?
I’m not sure what the problem
I’m not sure what the problem is – he’s even explained why, and the thinking, and the Highway Code; sadly, far too many people are unaware of what horn is for.
From the clip, I’m not convinced the cyclists knew he was there – they never appeared to look over their shoulders, which is a bugbear I have with a lot of cyclists; they never check what’s around them.
I do think regardless of the
I do think regardless of the points people are bringing up,and ignore what the highway code says for a moment.
If a car sat behind me for that long with an obvious clear gap to overtake and when it finally did, beeped at me.
I would probably be asking the driver what his ‘kin problem was as he passed.
Nice to see my use of the
Nice to see my use of the horn being actively discussed and remember not every motorist is out to get you. My last point is to the author Ryan Mallon. What was your thinking behind the “Footballer” title? It has no relevance to road safety or to the video, and it seemed a bit “Tabloid” to me. I asked the same question on the Twitter post without you answering.
It’s true that not every
It’s true that not every motorist is out to get you but enough are or are incompetent that you pretty much have to assume they all are.
I suspect it was just what
I suspect it was just what came up on a google search.
Nice to see you in the comments on road.cc, but does this mean Ryan needs to change the headine to ‘Driving instructor-turned-cyclist’?!
If it’s used to drum up more
If it’s used to drum up more interest in the subject that’s fine by me, but having worked for the press and lived with them in the back of my mind throughout my life I think there was a different motive. Anyway, that’s not important but how we treat and interact with each other on the roads is critical. Get rid of the saltiness I say! What do you think Ryan?
Yep, you’re right the
Yep, you’re right the football reference is not relevant here. I do think it’s more likely included as an interesting fact, rather than any other motive, but I can see it could be read a different way.
.
.
Ashley, you should realise that many of the commenters here on Road.cc LIVE for that saltiness! It’s what gets them off.
.
I thought the same, but not
I thought the same, but not being into football (sorry) it was lost on me.
Worth also remembering that some motorists are also cyclists. Something that seems to often be lost on here. I thought your comment towards the end was on point, we are all just human. Something that seems very pertinent lately globally for so many reasons.
Hi Ashley,
Hi Ashley,
I’ve come across a few of your videos and found them almost universally enlightening. As a motorist I have nearly 40 years experience, a full motorcycle licence and sporadic IAM advanced driver training, even a short stint as a motorcycle instructor. In all that time and maybe half a million miles I can count genuinely frightening experiences and aggression from other road users in terms of low single figures. I have run cameras on my cars for several years and have nothing worth posting in terms of near misses or being put at risk.
However, on a bicycle there are a small minority of drivers who’s incompetence at a simple overtaking manoeuvre, inability to think further ahead than the end of their car bonnet, in-attentiveness and in some cases downright malign aggression have to be witnessed first hand to truly understand.
Personally I have no problems with a good old fashioned courtesy beep on the type of roads I regularly cycle, but I can understand how the everyday experiences of others in different traffic environments give them a less charitable understanding of car horns.
Hope you become a regular contributor on road.cc
I certainly will, as the
I certainly will, as the regular cyclists perspective is always an interest to me. I still cycle myself but very occasionally nowadays.
Ashley Neal wrote:
I don’t believe the people who comment here represent “regular cyclists”. As with most media, you’re looking at a minority audience who are self-selected by the stories covered, which mainly revolve around tabloidesque Brexit, Tory and motorist-bashing.
FWIW, I wouldn’t appreciate a beep of the horn when being overtaken, and think it’s rather discourteous.
Lance Strongarm wrote:
One of them (or is it 6?) certainly doesn’t.
If it’s a genuinely necessary action to say “I am here” then I have no problem with it, though a tram-style bell might be better.
Lance Strongarm wrote:
OK: I’ll bite, Nige.
Kindly define ” regular cyclist”.
One who’s getting their
One who’s getting their dietary fibre?
I didn’t say “regular cyclist
I didn’t say “regular cyclist” I said “regular cyclists”, i.e. a representative cross-section of the cycling population based on underlying society, with the diversity of viewpoints that population would hold.
Just like you cannot define “Mr & Mrs Average”, a “regular cyclist” doesn’t exist, but is simply a median reflection of the population. Because of the partisan topics covered on Road.cc, comments are generally skewed away from this median towards more extreme beliefs, as I already detailed.
I hope that answers your question.
Wasn’t worth it, was it?
Wasn’t worth it, was it?
Sniffer wrote:
Nope, really not.
Their response means that their talking about “regular cyclists” is utterly meaningless.
I think they mean that the fact that most commenters on road.cc cycle more than the average, and have stronger opinions about road safety type matters, means that our opinions don’t count (?).
Apparently road.cc needs to recruit more commenters who don’t cycle at all, or only cycle one day a year while on holiday at Center Parcs or something, before our opinions count…
brooksby wrote:
One who agrees with him…. Good luck on finding one
I think you’ll find you’re
I think you’ll find you’re wrong.
I commute by bicycle and
I commute by bicycle and every day, I constantly experience close passes by motorists, used to passing other vehicles with a few inches to spare and do the same to cyclists; it’s unnerving and puts most people off bicycle commuting but motorists don’t do it to ‘punish’ cyclists in the main.
Not every motorist is out to
Not every motorist is out to get you.
That’s an interesting perspective. My personal view is about 1 in 100 motorists is either dangerously incompetent or dangerously malicious. In a typical 60 mile bike ride, statistically I know I am going to meet at least a couple.
Now that malicious or incompetent driving isn’t necessarily reserved for cyclists. As a driving instructor, I am sure that you interact with a similar number, some of whom will be triggered by the L plate, others by your mere presence on the road where they would like to be, or they are simply unfit to drive. On this site we have a thread of cars that drive into buildings (oddly drivers never seem to be involved) and it is roughly a daily occurrence just for those that make the press. UK Dodgy drivers is able to fill a weekly video of drivers jumping red lights, driving up pavements, not giving way at roundabouts and so on.
My point is, as defensive riders, we cannot assume that an interaction is going to be a good one so any action a good driver takes that matches that a bad driver might make will be assumed to be that of a bad driver. As most competent drivers manage to wait for their opportunity and pass wide without sounding their horn, the rare driver who thinks they are using advanced communication skills by using their horn is not understanding the other road users perspective. Impatient drivers often sound their horn where the only meaning often is “Please will you kindly dive into the hawthorn hedge so I am not delayed”.
Save sounding your horn for when riders are about to endanger themselves or others through their own actions, not simply to make your own journey more efficient.
Again this is very poor
Again this is very poor underatanding of what the horn is for. It had nothing to do with my journey and all to do with thinking “I’m going to let these guys know I’m coming past”. Sad to see tbh.
My point was perspective –
My point was perspective – you know why you think you are doing it, do you know why the person on the receiving end thinks you are doing it? Are you going to be able to educate a critical mass of cyclists to understand your perspective, and are you also going to be able to educate all the drivers around the UK who misuse the horn so that your interpretation is unambiguous?
Do you think it is necessary to sound your horn to make a pass safe?
If no, then why sound your horn?
If yes, what behaviour are you trying to trigger in the cyclists, and what is it that they need to do to allow you to pass? Put simply, if it is necessary to sound your horn as you pass, then by definition it is not a safe pass.
This is the important bit (and I do know how irritating it is having a post pedantically being pulled apart, but I do think it is in line with other comments you’ve made but feel free to say it is not what you meant!) ‘ “I’m going to let these guys know I’m coming past”‘
If they have not done what you need, why are you only sounding your horn as you commit to the pass, not in preparation? For example, have you followed normal advanced driving practice of pulling out, only then accelerating once you have established that the overtake is on? Have you accelerated at all before sounding your horn? FWIW, I do understand why you believe you are correct in alerting the cyclists, but you then need to go through a few more steps to make the horn part of a system of passing cyclists.
So, taking a general case, you see a cyclist who you are not comfortable passing. Why? Is it that they are in primary and you don’t understand why? Is it their body language? Is it erratic road positioning? Is it the banana in one hand, drink bottle in the other? Can you assess the road surface – is the cyclist avoiding poor surface – often cyclists know the roads and plan ahead for poor road surfaces? Might they need to move out further – have they got a desire line to avoid a parked car? Is it windy (which not only affects handling, it affects hearing), are they cycling fast (generating their own wind so oblivious to road noise of a car?). We will assume there are no junctions around because you wouldn’t be considering overtaking. Is there a steep hill up or down (a descending cyclist will want the whole lane to themselves at 30+mph, and on extremely steep sections a cyclist will be unstable at low speeds).
What is the process? I would suggest that firstly, as you are not in a position to overtake as you are not confident, you should adopt a distant follow. If you are convinced that the rider is not aware of you, you could, from that distant follow sound a horn. (If they are behaving as if they are aware of you, then sounding a horn is wrong). Then, having established that the cyclist is aware of you (do they reposition, do they give a friendly/unfriendly(!) acknowledgement, are they shoulder checking, have they delliberately moved to a secondarly position?) have the circumstances changed? If there is sufficient visibility and room to make a pass, you can approach the cyclist and take up a closer follow position for a pass (iwthout being intimidating). Is there sufficient room for a safe pass? Yes, move out and then accelerate moderately – your passing time will be low and the relative speed less, no, pull back in until circumstances change.
One of the classic driver mistakes is leaving a big run up – it is bad enough for passing cars and considerably worse for cycles – one of the reasons why a close pass is intimidating is the speed at which many drivers pass – they spot a cyclist in the distance and accelerate as they believe this guarantees them getting ahead (and you can usually hear cars accelerate firmly behind you well before they pull out) – but it means that they are totally committed if the circumstances change as due to the speed differential they cannot brake behind the cyclist – the usual result is the squeeze as they try to recover from their misjudgement. The advanced driving principle of positioning close behind a cyclist at a matched speed, then pulling out then accelerating is even more important – you are going to want to run into the back of a cyclist less than a car.
Do you see how I’ve tried to approach this from the advanced driving perspective? What I am challenging you on is to see if you have thought through what the complete system is for passing cyclists and where sounding the horn fits in with that.
Absolutely agree that not
Absolutely agree that not every motorist is out to get me when I’m on my bike (or indeed, on foot or in the car). In fact, I’d go so far to say it is a tiny minority. Unfortunately though, it only takes one.
I’m on the fence for the informative ‘toot toot’… in theory it should be fine, in practice I don’t think there are many situations where I need to be made aware of the car behind me so it can come off as impatience. But, if it’s a double toot and it is followed up with some form of acknowledgement by both parties then it’s ok.
I’ve never understood why the double toot is friendlier than the single toot. There must be some psychology behind it. I’m enjoying how much I am using the word toot this morning.
I also don’t understand why acknowledgment whilst driving seems to have fallen out of favour. It’s a much more pleasant driving experience to acknowledge someone who let’s your, even if it is your priority. Nod, raise your finger (not that finger!), smile, raise hand… whatever, but have some damn courtesy. I genuinely think there is a correlation between dangerous motorists and ill-mannered motorists.
Rant over
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote
I would guess because it implies some degree of control – if the hoot is coming from a place of aggression, frustration, anger, etc. then it’s more likely to result in the slamming of a hand into the horn and a single long blast.
Ashley Neal wrote:
I’d agree with teh sentiment that has already been posted – largely your videos are helpful
Instructing other drivers that it’s ok to beep at people on bikes is not. There is not a situation where it is useful to me when I’m on a bike – please don’t do it. I know you’re there. If you can pass safely do so. If you can’t, simply wait..
As I mentioned elsewhere (and not just on this thread) a sizable proportion of riders share the view (developed through direct experience) that it’s aggressive, intimidating and frightening. All horns sound the same, with very few if any having any kind of volume modulation, so regardless of your intent, that IS how it comes across.
Lastly remember you’re not just instructing drivers to beep at “mamils” (no that that that would be ok ), you are instructing them to beep at anyone (male/female, young/old) that they believe is “in their way”. Drivers who regular sound their horn at people on bikes are intimidating women, children and teh elderly as well. I don’t need to tell you this IS against the highway code, and is one of teh factors that deters parents allowing their children teh freedom to cycle, and also sets up barriers to women cycling;
Among those who didn’t ride, the most common barriers to cycling participation were that roads in the area were not safe (39%), had no bike lanes (30%), and a lack of confidence while cycling (27%).
and of course the lack of confidence and feelings of not being safe comes primarily from interactions, or the fear of interactions, with motorists
In short, sounding your horn at people on bikes is sexist too – I’ll turn round and tell you to do one. Women are deterred from cycling altogether.
Please actually think how use of the horn affects those it’s directed against, and please stop enabling the idea that horn use is ok against vulnerable road users
So, I should not use the horn
So, I should not use the horn correctly because others don’t?! You better never ride again then!
Ashley Neal wrote:
No, use of horn around cyclists is unnecessary and intimidating. Don’t use your horn around cyclists.
It’s interesting that in spite of being informed of the effects of horn use around vulnerable road users, you are intent on using it against them.
If you think that pip of my
If you think that pip of my horn was intimidating you’ve got loads to learn, and this is evident with you saying “using it against them” when in fact it was for them. Not all “toots” are in aggression, not all motorists are out to get you and not all cyclists just think of themselves.
Ashley Neal wrote:
Again, you’ve been informed on teh effect it has on people. Your view is that they have to understand that
You state yourself that you know next to nothing about regular riding
But its others have much to learn, and have to work around you….
TBH, it hasn’t yet been
TBH, it hasn’t yet been established that you are using the horn correctly. You think you are, others are questioning that certainty.
Obviously I am just some guy on the Internet. Do you have access to a top level advanced instructor to discuss this with? Have you thought of asking the Manchester cycling commissioner? I would think that the answer is not black and white, much like whether you should only signal if you know there is someone there to see it (as an observational aid – but for example some will recommend always signalling on a roundabout to avoid having to signal if the situation changes).
I’m a former traffic cop in
I’m a former traffic cop in Australia, so perhaps the rules are different, but the ONLY time a motorist should use their horn is to warn other road users of their presence if the other road user is presenting a danger; an obvious example is when the other road user changes lanes, unaware of your presence alongside.
The rule in the UK is more
The rule in the UK is more ambiguous, in that it leaves out the bit about the other road user presenting a danger. However, it does contain one important word that’s been overlooked in much of the debate – it says that you should only use it when you need to warn others of your presence. Not because you want them to be aware of it, or even because you think they might like to be aware of it, but when you need to.
If you’re a driver following cyclists and wishing to overtake, there are two possibilities:
So, in short, in this situation, you should not be using the horn.
mdavidford wrote:
It might not specifically mention danger, but use of the word ‘warn’ implies danger.
I agree with you that if the pass is safe, there would be no danger and no need for a warning.
Yes – that wasn’t the
Yes – that wasn’t the distinction I was making, though. According to grOg, the Australian version is specific about the danger being posed by the other party. The UK version is ambiguous inasmuch as it doesn’t specify whether it means ‘look out, you’re about to put yourself in / cause someone else danger’, or ‘look out, I’m about to put you in danger’. However, since you shouldn’t generally be doing something that would put someone else in danger*, it can be inferred that you shouldn’t generally need to use it in that way.
* There are certain circumstances where you could potentially argue that posing a potential danger is unavoidable – as someone else mentioned, a narrow humpback bridge might be an example. They’re very much the exception, though, and ‘wanting to overtake’ certainly isn’t one of them.
Ah, yes, see what you mean
Ah, yes, see what you mean now. If anything, it’s odd the Australian law doesn’t mention the ‘I’m about to put you in danger’ case. Because there are some, such as the narrow bridge and even situations such as brake failure, but as you say, very much the exception.
Ashley Neal wrote:
Worth pointing out that, just like the ‘Not every man’ argument when discussing men who assault and rape women, it’s impossible to remember that ‘not every motorist’ is going to make a dangerous pass, cut you up, or cause you to crash, when a small but notable minority of them do do so. People on bikes have every right to be fearful or respond negatively to a horn, regardless of the intention behind it, because intentions can’t be read or seen out in the real world. Not your fault or well-intentioned motorists’ fault, but doesn’t change the effect that it has.
Bottom line – I say stop advising people to perform a maneuvre that might scare or threaten other road users.
vthejk wrote:
Quite. Not all motorists are out to get cyclists But all those out to get cyclists are motorists.
On iteration, you might scare or threaten becomes you definitely will
Captain Badger wrote:
I think you’re probably right. I’m sure some might appreciate the horn (and have said as much) but it seems as if the majority don’t. Should be reason enough not to use it.
Captain Badger wrote:
That is a good point. It’s probably why most police advice I have seen regarding overtaking cyclists warns against using the horn…
HoarseMann wrote:
Nice one HM. Even teh police advise against sounding your horn behind people on bikes
Learn to read each toot on it
Learn to read each toot on it’s individual merits then, and interpret danger accordingly, which is quite ironic I’m saying this considering your comment.
Exactly how would I “read
Exactly how would I “read each toot on it’s individual merits” when there no settings for a horn nor any agreed standards ? Seems you are just asking cyclists to have pyschic powers.
Or you could get on a bike and have car drivers pass you sounding their horns to demonstrate this concept of tooting then post a video of it.
I will do a video this
I will do a video this weekend on how different use of the horn may be interpreted differently. I will use my example with the cyclists I overtake and a different one. Hopefully you will tune in and you can work it out. It’s actually not that complicated.
The video will not be any
The video will not be any good unless the cyclist is the subject who has the camera and is doing the recording whilst other parties do the driving and hooting.
I see you skipped over the concept of a standard. Are you assuming that all drivers and cylists know about your standard and apply it ?
You don’t really seem to be taking on board any points raised by experienced cyclists here.
Ashley Neal wrote:
Learn to drive in such a way that you pose no danger or intimidation to others using the public highway – it really is easy with the right mind set and a little empathy
At this stage you are starting to look like someone who is intent on using the horn against vulnerable road users, in spite of the fact that a number are informing you it really isn’t helpful, and is actually unpleasant.
This is really straight forward – you are in a position when driving that you are easily able to endanger and intimidate those who are not, regardless of your iintent.
Would you signal to overtake
Would you signal to overtake a vehicle? Yes, of course. What is different about a cyclist? It’s a simple way of alerting them to my presence as they have no mirrors (and they didn’t acknowledge me following and wishing to overtake by moving back to single file). It’s not complicated! but it is to some!!
This is Rule 112 in its entirety.
The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn *while stationary on the road *when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am (except when another road user poses a danger.)
It doesn’t matter in the slightest how the “toot” was perceived, that is the problem who don’t follow the rules and advice in the HC. How did I know these cyclists had seen me, and would that be a guarantee for every cyclist that is approached from behind? If these two were truly that observant they could have done plenty to help out, but instead the did nothing. The “toot” had it’s desired effect as they looked, and only then was I comfortable to overtake even though the space was tighter than I would have liked.
Perhaps next time I should follow your advice. Not “toot”, overtake anyway, then discover as I’m passing that the cyclist he has earphones in just as he swerves to avoid a manhole cover and I take him out.
Ashley Neal wrote:
Why are you driving so close that you would hit a cyclist in those circumstances, bearing in mind you should always allow for cyclists to swerve due to weather and road conditions.
Because they didn’t move back
Because they didn’t move back to single file as the HC advises! Did you not watch the video? That’s what it was all about, explaining there are dangers in this situation if cyclists stay 2 abreast.
Ashley Neal wrote:
Ashley, I’ve posted both here and on your channel about why I thought your video was reasonable. But I find ^^^ this ^^^ comment disappointing. It’s cherry-picking parts of the advice to the cyclists. The following points are worth noting:
1) You drove in their vicinity with due respect to the cyclist for a some time. You slowed on your initial approach; you kept a respectable distance behind them, not crowding them; you overtake with reasonable care and planning once it was safe. Your purpose for posting appears to be about teaching people how to behave around cyclists who may be cycling two abreast. You kept it safe. All good so far.
2) The advice to cyclists about when to ride two abreast, as in Rule 66, 2nd bullet, says:
The advice that they may ride two abreast is a complete sentence; it stands in its own right for the meaning of the advice specifically on riding two abreast, and it is clear that cyclists are entitled to do so (don’t think I’m dwelling on entitlement, but it is part of the picture). The sentences before and after advise on considerations of courtesy to others. But they do not actually advise cyclists to single out; rather that is one of two, non-exclusive solutions to allow drivers to overtake. It is also conditional on when the cyclists “feel it is safe to let [drivers overtake]”. A third option is that they remain two abreast and keep a good line once the road straightens to allow a safe overtake in the opposite lane.
Therefore:
i) the cyclists need to balance the consideration of allowing drivers to overtake, and their own safety while doing so. The former is self-evidently a lower priority.
ii) it is advice to cyclists, not the driver behind; in other words the driver plays no part in that advice and is not in a position to determine when the cyclists should single out.
3) Rule 72 also gives advice on road positioning on a cycle. It says,
In the section of road you show, where the road is narrow and additionally winding (enough that it would not be safe to pass a single cyclist within the lane), that advice would be relevant; and indeed it is taught in the National Standard for Cycle Training (Bikeability).
By that advice, even if the cyclists had singled out, they would have occupied enough of the lane that you would have had to cross the white line completely in order to pass safely. There is therefore no advantage in them singling out, and the advice for them to consider doing so has no value in the circumstances.
4) You said, “That’s what it was all about, explaining there are dangers in this situation if cyclists stay 2 abreast.”
In the intro to your video, you also said,
That’s not the same thing. First of all, taking the last sentence: in any given situation, give and take is not always equal, nor is the responsibility for managing the safety. If a faster vehicle approaches a slower vehicle(s), there is a courtesy in the latter allowing the former to pass; but it is a legal duty for the rear vehicle to exercise care for the vehicle in front. All have a duty of care, but the greater duty is on the rear vehicle. In the video, all parties exercise their their duty satisfactorily.
I don’t think your video set out to say that there are dangers of cycling two abreast – it certainly did not show any. I think it set out to show drivers how to deal with cyclists cycling (perfectly legally and within the guidance) two abreast. I think either you are now projecting additional messages that you did not originally intend, or you did not convey the message effectively. Good job, too! Because, as above and absent other factors, the danger is not in cycling two abreast, it is purely with a driver not handling that safely.
5) Should they have singled out? It’s worth noting that they never did – you overtook (safely) while they were still two abreast. And that is fine.
Throughout the video, it would have been unsafe to pass them riding two abreast. It would also have been unsafe to pass a single cyclist, since it would have required crossing the line to the other side of the road to pass safely, putting the car in the path of potential oncoming traffic hidden by bends in the road.
The cyclists emphasised the need for the car to pass wide, and that it was unsafe to pass.
6) We should, as drivers, be emphasising to each other that our journeys may incur delays. It could be traffic lights, other junctions, obstructions, collisions (all potentially requiring complete stops); it could be slower vehicles (slowed progress, but still progress). As good drivers, we should factor those into our journey times, and we should be in control of our emotions accordingly. That’s it. A failure to do otherwise is a breach of our duty of care. (I’m not saying that because I think you need to hear it – you say it often enough yourself; but it’s a relevant lesson from your video.)
On your channel, I calculated the delay you incurred , and it is insignificant. You are still moving, and, even though your time behind them was over a minute, the delay was no more than a minute – less than the time a driver will wait at some traffic lights without much thought.
That is the real value of your video.
Should cyclists single out? On occasions; but this vodeo did not demonstrate any need to do so. It demonstrated two road users using the road and a careful driver demosntrating how it’s done.
So, in summary,
Nicely structured comment. I
Nicely structured comment. I don’t always agree but it’s always appreciated. The main thing that I am disappointed that not many have mentioned is the thought for other road users apart from yourself. You know very well that selfishness on the road doesn’t sit well with me. Keep safe.
Ashley Neal wrote:
I wouldn’t consider their riding selfish at all. There was enough space to make a safe pass, and if there wasn’t, beeping the horn wouldn’t make it safe unless you waited for them to single out.
Hang on, who is being selfish
Hang on, who is being selfish? The cyclists who rode two abreast as they are allowed to do and you were able to pass anyway? Or the person in the big metal box with an armchair next to him and a sofa in the back who, regardless of still being wider than the two cyclists put together, was still able to overtake?
Ps thanks for contributing to the discussion and defending your viewpoint. Hopefully you can see why others have a different point of view
Ashley Neal wrote:
Yes. I use indicators. They inform teh vehicle behind of my intention. I also use them when o/taking people on bikes
When o/ting cars I don’t use the horn. Do you?…
So the intent was “get out of my way” They don’t need to acknowledge your presence by promptly singling out when you arrive
It is at the discretion of the rider when it is safe for them to single out – it is not for you to tell them when they should do so.
You proceeded to o/take with them abreast – are you saying there was no need for them to single out? Why then use the horn?
We’ve established that your intent was to instruct them to single out – this wasn’t “I am here”. Therefore this isn’t in line with HWC
Yes, it very much does matter how it is perceived. If a significant number of people find car use of the horn unpleasant and intimidating, that is exactly what it is – regardless of your intent.
You don’t , which is why you need to hang back with a suitable stopping distance ( at least 12m at 20mph) and wait for a safe opportunity.
again demonstrating that your intent wasn’t “I’m politely alerting you of my presence for your safety and comfort”, rather instruction and remonstration
Then you should have waited for a safe opportunity….
Again, it is your responsibility to overtake safely allowing for sufficient space for such a situation. It would be your fault if you hit someone in such a situation.
HWC 213
……
Motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.
Of course, the same rule also states
[On narrow or quiet roads] It can be safer for groups of cyclists to ride two abreast in these situations. Allow them to do so for their own safety, to ensure they can see and be seen.
This started as an attempt to express that sounding the horn around people on bikes is unnecessary and unpleasant, and really that statement says it all, in spite of all the going and froing.
I’m sorry you feel unable to accept that, it’s a real shame.
Carry on choosing which part
Carry on choosing which part of the HC you are going to follow then that suits your standpoint. I follow it all.
The “toot” necessitates the third paragraph of HWC 213 that you quote.
“Motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.”
Ashley Neal wrote:
But it says give them plenty of room, not give them the horn!
…and you did give them plenty of room Ashley. It would have been a perfect pass if wearing noise cancelling headphones! 😉
Ashley Neal wrote:
What parts of the highway code am I not following when I drive Ashley?
I can’t see the bit where it says that if someone doesn’t do what you want you should use the horn and barge through anyway. Perhaps you can point out out to me…..
No Ashley, you clearly don’t “get” the highway code.
This conversation is turning into a demonstration of why people who ride bikes terms to have better and safer driving attitudes.
Have a great weekend old chum.
You don’t get the use of the
You don’t get the use of the horn obviously. And regarding your comment of “people who ride bikes have better and safer driving attitudes” is clearly questionable with some of the comments on this thread.
As normal with everything it’s 5% of the cohort that cause 95% of the problems. This is true about motorists, football hooligans (both of which I am more than qualified to judge) and most definitely cyclists.
I hope your ears don’t bleed the next time a motorist pips the horn near you on your bike. I would also like to thank you for the inspiration for a video that I’m going to complete this weekend on our main discussion point regarding the use of the horn. I do hope you tune in.
its not about getting the
its not about getting the “use” of the horn, we all get that really, its about how most cyclists experience the use of that horn. In an ideal world where everyone drives around safely and nicely and uses the horn no more aggressively than Noddy does with a little parp parp in Toytown, it would be fine, but thats not how cyclists experience life on UK roads.
So you have to factor that element in that actually 99% of the time a horn is used when passing a cyclist, its used in anger, so we are always naturally on the defensive, because we have to be, to survive.
the moment I let my guard down enough when Im riding that when someone hoots to let me know they are passing me, and its something I hadnt already taken account of, is the moment Im probably going to be another KSI statistic.
How can you read each toot
How can you read each toot “on its merits”? How can a cyclist possibly know if the driver means “here I am and I am going to overtake you” or “you’ve held me up for 10 seconds already I’m coming past regardless of any other dangers and I’m going to do it fast and close cos you stupid mamil road vermin make me so cross and I’ve had a bad day at work”?
Hi Ashley – if you’ve worked
Hi Ashley – if you’ve worked in or around the press you’ll also know that the author doesn’t always come up with the headlines, and in this case that was my decision not Ryan’s!
HoarseMann has pretty much nailed why we chose to go with ‘Ex-footballer’ in the headline, it’s simply what I thought would reach the most people – and I think in this respect it could have been right, almost 25,000 people have read the story and a lot of them through Google Discover. That’s not bad at all for a cycling website.
You’re right that the fact you played pro football isn’t relevant to the debate about the use of the horn, but I think that your background carries weight as to why we would decide to run the story. Perhaps your name and the subject matter alone was enough to get the story into the search engine feeds of people outside of our usual audience and I was wrong, so I promise that if you make the news again we’ll drop ex-footballer. 🙂
Even with the “ex-footballer”
Even with the “ex-footballer” descriptor, I’ve still no idea who he is, and why his views are seen as important.
I’m glad then that it’s
I’m glad then that it’s helped increase the reach as it’s an important point of road safety as a whole to treat cyclists with care and consideration. It’s just not something that I’ve ever used to push my agenda. If there is anything I can do to help going forward don’t hesitate to get in touch. 🙂
Just remembered Jack, I’ve
Just remembered Jack, I’ve got another video out next week that addresses the issue with groups of riders riding in one direction and motorists travelling the other. This produces a conflict of space even more than I highlight in the “2 Abreast” clip. If might be worth covering as some of the comments I’ve replied to on this post have a lot to do to reduce risk for themselves.
.
.
Ashley, how DARE you suggest that Road.cc commenters take steps to reduce risk for themselves?!
.
“Why should I, when I am in the right? So what if I come off worst in any incident – right is on my side”.
.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
A couple of years back I took every step possible to protect myself, reduce risk and use the road responsibly. Legal lights, reflective clothing, good road positioning. Yet on a well lit road. On a clear, cloudless morning with better than perfect visibility.
YET a motorist opted to come barrelling out of a side street. T-Bone me and left me for dead in the middle of the road. They never handed themselves in despite appeals for them to do so
I’m back to cycling and to be honest. When I hear that harsh acceleration behind me my heart occasionally goes cold. I’m also incredibly wary of motorists who brake late at junctions to my left because of their over reliance on their modern brakes and the seemingly new phenomena of being taught to brake late at junctions.
I don’t go round declaring right is on my side. I and others here though, would rather have certain motorists place a greater value on our lives
Flintshire Boy wrote:
A following driver should not be making a choice that creates a risk to cyclists, so there shouldn’t be anything for them to mitigate. Sounding the horn to suggest that they ‘reduce risk for themselves’ is therefore either superfluous, or an indication that the driver is about to do something stupid and probably illegal.
Ashley Neal wrote:
Of course in this situation, if the oncoming cyclists are 2 abreast and there’s not enough space to pass safely, the motorised vehicle ought to slow to a stop and allow the cyclists to negotiate their way past.
Sure the cyclists should have been in single file if the road is that narrow, but as a driver, you have to be prepared to stop for anything in the road ahead. Could be a cow, combine harvester, group of 20 boy scouts etc.
More than 2 abreast. Good job
More than 2 abreast. Good job I try to encourage motorists to fix the lack of common sense. Please tune in!
Ashley Neal wrote:
Will do Ashley, it’s a really important point to look out for people with a lack of common sense!
Just last night I came across an unlit cyclist on a country lane, as we passed my son said it looked like one of the kids who was on his DofE expedition. I was driving to the conditions and saw them in plenty of time.
Some of the weirder things I’ve come across around a bend on a country road in the middle of nowhere have been a homeless chap with a shopping trolley full of stuff, out of control coming down a hill unable to stop it until it got wedged in a hedge. Two ladies pushing toddlers in buggies, walking 2 abreast, with 4 Alsatians spread across the whole lane. A man dressed in black, laid down in the middle of the road, in the dark.
I think that when a cyclist
I think that when a cyclist gets behind the wheel of a car they already have in their minds that they will encounter someone out on a bike be that individual being responsible or not and are already prepared to deal with it. This spills over to expecting the unexpected when out on the road whatever mode is being used.
As a cyclist, approaching
As a cyclist, approaching pedestrians, on a shared path, I can ring my bell, but this is met with a similar divided opinion.
The other option, which I usually employ, is to use a friendly vocal greeting – this is much more sociable and almost universally well received.
Maybe it’s about time cars are fitted with an second “warning” button, that causes the car to emit a jolly “Yoo-hoo!” or something similar…
https://www.google.com/search?q=leslie+phillips+hello&oq=leslie+phillips+he&aqs=chrome.2.0i512j69i57j0i512l5j0i22i30l2.15444j0j7&client=ms-android-motorola-rev2&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:1967bce3,vid:oW410_FCsrs,st:0
I absolutely will not use my
I absolutely will not use my bell anymore. It incites violence. Whilst that is completely unreasonable, I’m a skinny middle aged woman and the last time I used it, on a shared use path being blocked by à group of five or six men, one of them, built like a brick shithouse, threatened to kill me whilst the others cheered him on. An extreme example but not the only one where people seem to get enraged by a bell. I’ll try shouting ‘excuse me’ in my nicest voice and proceed with caution when I can. A bit like a vehicle behind bikes… oh… yeah….
Thugs and yobbo’s will use
Thugs and yobbo’s will use any excuse to threaten and harass people; I don’t use the bell, mainly because so many people have earplugs in, so can’t hear a bell or a call; I just slow down to walking pace, edge alongside until they see me with their peripheral vision and most instinctively move aside at that point.
As I noted somewhere below,
As I noted somewhere below, the buses in Paris have a delightful chiming bells that they use to warn cyclists when they are coming up behind them in the many shared lanes in that city, it works incredibly well, I’ve cycled a lot around there and you get a polite warning without feeling attacked. A polite “hello I’m here” bell on cars would work wonders for driver – cyclist/pedestrian interactions, I think.
I think context matters – if
I think context matters – if Paris has this prevailing culture of friendly warning bells then it follows that Paris residents would expect bells to be friendly. Conversely, travel to India and the horn is almost universally (and very frequently) used as a gesture of impatience. I don’t think any warning sign or bell from road users in Britain could be seen friendly anymore, as the prevailing culture here is for horns showing aggression or impatience.
Well, Paris buses used not to
Well, Paris buses used not to have bells and they would give one the horn, if you’ll pardon the expression, regularly, so people can adapt. It might also help if we adopted the French horn laws: within cities it is illegal (€35 fine rising to €150 for late payment) to use the horn for anything except to warn of immediate danger, and this is enforced, it’s really noticeable these days how much quieter the streets are (in the old days the joke was how do you define a millisecond – it’s the time between the traffic light turning green and a Parisian driver hitting the horn).
Maybe I’m an old (all of 27)
Maybe I’m an old (all of 27) cynic – but that does sound positive! All it’ll take now is some sensible legislation…I’ll hold my breath.
belugabob wrote:
Not universally, have had a woman complain about calling good evening from a reasonable distance behind (so as not to startle her) and she claimed to have been startled and we should have used a bell.
The reality is that anything
The reality is that anything you do behind people startles them and their instinctive reaction is to be cross. My system on country is to call very loudly “Cyclists behind” from very far away, and they only just hear me and become aware that something is happening. Hopefully they are then far enough away that as they glance round they then gather their thoughts.
What actually disappoints me is the number who stop walking and take to the verge as if we are manic Range Rover drivers intent on ploughing them down.
Damned if you do, damned if
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I regularly get grief from pedestrians on a shared-use path for calling ‘Excuse me – d’you mind if I pass?’ etc. I just wish that we had a culture of quality shared-use and segregated infra, well-trained car drivers and a recognisable system of warning signs and calls. We wouldn’t be in this mess then.
AND another thing
AND another thing
Or of course, you could wait for it to be safe to o/t and do so with no fuss….
And here is the problem. The acute level of entitlement that motorists feel that nothing can impede their progress in the slightest way is the underlying cause here, and leads drivers to believe that any action ( right or wrong, against teh HWC or police advice, or vulnerable road users request) is justifiable.
Ashley, you could have pointed out to your followers;
” the cyclists are riding safely and in accordance with the law, and posing no risk to others. It should be remembered that the main hazard on the road are the motor vehicles that we are in control of. Waiting patiently until it is safe to overtake will take a few seconds, and won’t delay our journey overall”
Well said, Cap’n!
Well said, Cap’n!
I was taught to drive using
I was taught to drive using the horn as a tool to alert other road users to your presence, with the exception of horses riders. It was never to be used as a road rage tool, which seems to be what most drivers think it’s there for. Any cyclist will attest to the fact that wind travelling over your ears makes it almost impossible to hear approaching vehicles. So a driver giving a short “toot” on his horn alerts cyclists to their presence, and allows for them to get prepared for the imminent overtake and do things such as compensate for any road surface issues (pot holes, gratings, etc) plus get into single file where appropriate. I have for some time been considering starting a campaign using the slogan “Toot You’re Aboot” to educate drivers on horn use. I know from personal experience that life threatening situations I have been involved in would have been less traumatic is a toot had been given. Let’s hope driving instructors take this onboard and instruct their pupils on the benefits if proper use of the horh. It could help to prevent unnecessary injuries and also h we plan driver/cyclist relations.
Was taught much the same. The
Was taught much the same. The horn was never to be used after an incident in anger which as you say seems to be the norm nowadays.
I think that as cyclists we have become so accustomed to someone leaning on their horn as they pass or when they’re behind for about 30 seconds. That we now perceive in many cases the use of the horn as being aggressive.
I’ve no issue with a quick toot from behind to make me aware or as they’re preparing to pass. It really doesn’t bother me. I do think that with the huge uptake in EVs that instances like the one in Ashley’s VT the use of the horn is a way forward. Maybe not so much in the urban environment but the rural setting where roadies will find themselves. Wind blowing through ears, wearing of skull caps all of which dampen ambient noise, especially when a competent cyclist is hitting speeds of up to 20mph. This coupled with EV’s being much quieter at higher speeds and also having a much more responsive and silent acceleration. The use of a horn may be useful. Having been caught out by Teslas lately has been unnerving and a quick beep would have been helpful.
I’m old enough to have learnt to drive in a car with the horn on the indicator stalk and owned a couple with the same set up. I’ve found that the modern horn in the centre of the wheel is more difficult to control as you have to really push down with some force as opposed to the quick finger tap of old. Maybe that is something to do with the more aggressive use.
‘I was taught to drive using
‘I was taught to drive using the horn as a tool to alert other road users to your presence’.. you have left out the important proviso for using the horn; read the whole reason; ‘The function of the horn is to alert other road users to your presence, when another road user poses a danger’. You should not use the horn to notify someone you are passing them.. it reeks of ‘get out of my way, I’m coming through’.
In the highway code, there’s
In the highway code, there’s a subtle, yet important, difference in the wording between using a bicycle bell and a car horn…
A bicycle bell can be used to let people know you are there, a car horn is to warn of your presence. ‘Warn’ infers that there is some danger to be aware of, it’s not just a simple ‘I’m letting you know I’m here’.
Is it ok to do something that creates danger as long as you use your horn first? Maybe. I think the hump-backed bridge is one example where there really isn’t another option. But for overtaking cyclists, IMO it’s either safe to pass or it isn’t.
Even using a bicycle bell is a dilemma, as discussed in this old guardian article, so using a car horn really has to be a last resort.
That raises another
That raises another interesting point, the advanced driver recommended way of dealing with a blind bridge is to wind your window down and turn off any sound system because there is no point hooting if you can’t hear another car do the same.
So in a cycling example, if a motorist thinks an audible warning is appropriate, what actions should a motorist take to be aware of any audible warnings from a cyclist – after all if a motorist heard the panicked cry in a group of “CAR DOWN” after hearing a call of “Car up – car through” they’d know the cyclist had spotted a serious threat.
Don’t use the horn; it should
Don’t use the horn; it should only be used to warn of danger and most motorists use the horn behind cyclists illegally, because they are aggravated and want to harass the cyclist.
Funnily enough, is forgotten
Funnily enough, I’d forgotten that about 10 years ago I tried one of these:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Air-Zound-Rechargeable-Bike-Horn-XL-115db-Loud-/304372941536?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l49286&mkrid=710-127635-2958-0
An AirZound rechargeable air horn. Lightweight, 115db (loud!). Strangely enough, none of the motorists seemed happy when I used it to alert them to me when they were pulling out of side streets in front of me. In part they were totally baffled by a blast from the invisible cyclist, but none of them seemed to appreciate its appropriate use. After one particularly belligerent motorist who tried to drive on my bit of road through Worcester threatened physical harm because I used it (even though I ended up pinned against the kerb avoiding him), I decided that it did more harm than good.
I’m tempted to get it out of the loft and see what effect it has on close passes now the highway code is clearer. Somehow, I doubt our tin boxed friends will appreciate its appropriate use as a warning that they are too close.
Re Neal’s bleating about
Re Neal’s bleating about being identified as a former kickball player: when some knuckle-dragging mouth-breather on Twitter is delivering a knowledge-free rant about cyclists, it’s a safe bet he’ll have a football team affiliation in his bio.
Football fandom is a community based on tribalism. I won’t say it’s inherently toxic, but it’s not really surprising that it contains more than its fair share of people who bring their toxic tribalism to the roads too.
MiserableBastard wrote:
You’re right about football’s toxic tribalism. Anyway, don’t listen to anything Neal says, he used to play for Brighton.
Buried in the thread is a
Buried in the thread is a comment that Ashley is not very aware of cyclists and one thing he seems unaware of is that many cyclists do actually have mirrors. One of his arguments is that as we do not have mirrors, he must toot to let the cyclist know he is there, but he doesn’t realise that aside from ears, a good many cyclists have mirrors – either on the bar end, on the frame or on their helmet. I’ve been riding with a mirror since the 1980s, originally a nasty Raleigh one, but these days I use one of these:
https://www.bike-eye.com/index.html
so you would not see me looking around, you would see me looking down (and possibly cocking my leg!). About 50% of the group I ride with have mirrors, and many casual cyclists I see have one.
I’d actually be quite happy for mirrors to be compulsory as they are for cars.
Another fact to consider, nearly all adult cyclists are drivers, probably less than 5% of drivers are regular cyclists*. Which group will have a good perspective of the issues from both sides?
*Presumably not members of this forum.
ooh eck, BlackBeltBarrister
ooh eck, BlackBeltBarrister has weighed in on this now…
https://youtu.be/7lGz2SqPB7Y
HoarseMann wrote:
It all starts out with reasoned comments – though almost entirely “get over it cyclists, horns just mean ‘I am here’ obvs!”. Which does seem to ignore an important chunk of reality. Not far down and we’re already into “how to identify these unaccountable cyclists and pedestrians” though…
EDIT – and then we’re into bingo (or satire): e.g. “council’s have spent hundreds of thousands of pounds putting in cycle lanes and duel use pavements to give cyclists a safe place to ride, away from traffic and they still insist on riding down the road right next to a cycle lane.”
Yep! But this has got me
Yep! But this has got me thinking, are we on the brink of a revolution in horn use? Just like Daytime Running Lights for cars have encouraged more cyclists to use day bright lights, will cyclists adopt an audible warning for approaching drivers, notifying them of their presence on the road ahead (arguably more of an issue with in-car distractions these days).
If all cars now ‘toot’ to warn of their presence when overtaking, surely it’s only right that cyclists can ‘toot’ a vehicle that’s about to overtake? I’m thinking of a couple of loud air-horns aimed to the rear, hooked up to a Varia radar. Two short pips for a vehicle approaching at a normal speed and a long blast for one going a bit too quickly!
HoarseMann wrote:
There were a couple of thoughtful comments that didn’t disagree with the use of the horn (“as a cyclist myself”) but did point out that horns have got louder and noise pollution is a thing.
Along with members of the
Along with members of the forum here should be prosecuted for spreading misleading information. Seems like Putin has still got access to YouTube.
IanMSpencer wrote:
I believe he wishes to deny to others what he allows for himself.
the first 5 secs, he is using
the first 5 secs, he is using a clip thats at least a few years old out of context so Im not going to watch the rest of it to boost that guys youtube algorithm
I’m a bit “meh” on the whole
I’m a bit “meh” on the whole issue given that Ashley at least gets the basics right. And given I’ve seen evidence of pretty shoddy driving by driving instructors both here and in real life. And it’s all publicity and if some of that washes off into better driving…
I’ve my doubts about his views on the horn, it sounds like he feels “but now because we MUST give a certain clearance that means that motorists are just completely trapped! Unless the cyclists single out all we can do is beep”. It does seem rather an overreaction, a lack of pragmatism.
I think Captain Badger / GMBasix and others have nailed it – if it’s not appropriate for a car then probably not for a bike. Otherwise it comes over a bit like men trying to demonstrate their “feminism” by dodging round women and opening the door for them “to let them know that you’re looking out for them”.