[Griff500]

There was a rather worrying notice appeared yesterday in the French press. The notice announces the ban of “Vélos Couché”, on all roads where the speed limit is more than 50kph (31mph). Although no clarification on the definition of “Vélo Couché” was given, the term normally applies not only to recumbent pedal cycles, but also to the hand powerd recumbents used by paraplegics. I have often encountered recumbents in France, and regularly see them on serious climbs such as Ventoux, which it seems they will no longer be able to access. 

“Rules of the road:  Starting in October 2022, bicycles will gain two additional categories: the vélomobile (bicyles with protective panelling) and the vélo couché (horizontal bicycles). As these bikes are lower to the ground and more difficult for motorists to detect, they will not be allowed on roads where the speed limit exceeds 50 km/h.”  

Topic

[Sriracha]

handcyclist wrote:

handcyclist wrote:

…perhaps assuming that because they can read them in two languages (french and flemish) the changes apply to France and Belgium?

…except that they are referring to different changes in each country. Confuddling.

[handcyclist]

Merci!

Merci!

It does look like the changes are in Belgium only and the press have got it wrong, perhaps assuming that because they can read them in two languages (french and flemish) the changes apply to France and Belgium?

Looking forward to carrying on riding in France, I still haven’t cycled the Ventoux from Malaucene, perhaps next year…

[Sriracha]

Well, the Frogs have a forum
Well, the Frogs have a forum for recumbents, and on it they are discussing the developments in Belgium, yet I can’t find any mention of any changes in France itself. You’d have thought they’d be all over it if they were about to be banned!
http://velorizontal.1fr1.net/t27274-les-velomobile-et-velo-couche-reconnus-par-le-code-de-la-route-belge

[handcyclist]

It looks like there are

It looks like there are changes in both Belgium and France. From what I can see in Belgium it seems the changes are sensible as you’ve said above, larger velo mobiles and recumbents can choose to use the road or cyclepath on roads up to a 50km/h limit whereas upright cyclists must use the cyclepath or shared use path: https://www.code-de-la-route.be/fr/nieuws/entree-en-vigueur-de-nouvelles-regles-dans-le-code-de-la-route-au-1er-octobre-les-10-changements-les-plus-importants~ntwif2jyud

The changes in France seem to be different, I can’t find anything in the legal definition of their highway code that suggests these new categories will be banned. This French government site doesn’t mention anything about the new categories though it might not have been updated yet: https://www.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/reglementation-liee-aux-modes-de-deplacements/velo/regles-de-circulation-pour-les-cyclistes

[Sriracha]

Well yes, your link says
Well yes, your link says quite different to MacMichael’s link at the top of the thread. Yours is as you say, banning recumbents from roads over 50km/h.

I realise one source is from Belgium, the other from France. If you mash the two together you’d have that recumbents may choose to use the carriage way rather than being obliged to use the cyclepath on roads up to a 50km/h limit, but they are banned from roads over that limit. Doesn’t specifically say they can’t then use the cyclepath for the faster roads…

[handcyclist]

I’m particularly interested

I’m particularly interested in this news as a paraplegic recumbent handcyclist who loves riding in France.
I’ve found another article (in french) https://actualitesfrance.info/conduire-en-france-comprendre-le-nouveau-code-de-la-route-francais/ that I read as saying that velomobiles and recumbents are banned from roads with speed limits over 50km/h – that’s an awful lot more restrictive than the Belgian article suggests.
I’ve asked a friend who lives in France to see if he can find out if this is correct but I’ve seen nothing in any handcycling groups about it.

[chrisonabike]

Makes sense I guess –

Makes sense I guess – although only in the normal “motorists aren’t going to look for stuff properly” sense.  However doesn’t this just displace the issue?  The motorist should deal with crossing traffic from the cycle path, then move up to the road.  If they didn’t spot a recumbent on the first there’s no guarantee they’d see them on the second.

I think there’s some sense in David Hembrow’s idea (clearly not a majority view) that when crossing an actual connector road (e.g. not in a “continuous footway / cycleway scenario crossing a minor street / limited residential access street) cyclists should not have priority.  That then means cyclists understand it’s on them to ensure their safety.  So they’re not expecting the cars to slow / give way for them.  The point is to put your own safety back in your hands.

Of course this only works where everything else is done properly.  If the level of traffic on the road is too busy / speeds to high / no visibility at the crossing then there shouldn’t be this type of crossing anyway.  It should be at least signalised or ideally grade-separated – that’s totally safe!

In my last and current recumbents my head would be above bonnet level of all but a pickup / tall SUV.  But then are drivers merely looking out for upright bikes?  And what about lower ones?  Drivers should be checking to the sides, but…  Also – they shouldn’t have crept right up on the crossing.  I bet there’s a fair bit of that though, more so if the side road junction doesn’t give sufficient visibility.

[Sriracha]

It’s like Flâneur says, this
It’s like Flâneur says, this ruling actually gives [i]more[/i] rights to recumbent riders than regular cyclists – quite the opposite of banning them. It gives them the right – denied to regular cyclists – to cycle on the main carriageway rather than being obliged to use the adjacent cycle lane where one is provided. The reason is that traffic approaching side-on at junctions may not see the recumbent in the cycle lane – by using the main carriageway they increase their visibility.

I guess the scenario is a motorist waiting at a side road T-junction Give Way or Stop line. The recumbent using the cycle lane and passing in front of the waiting motorist would be below their line of sight over the bonnet, hidden from view. Whereas further away, on the main carriageway, they should remain visible.

[Flâneur]

But that doesn’t ban

But that doesn’t ban recumbents/velos couche either? – just says they can in future stay on a 50km/h road “for visibility” where upwrongs would still be compelled to use a parallel bike path (didn’t know this was a thing in Belgium)

[Simon_MacMichael]

Yep, my source was The Local,

Griff500 wrote:

Yep, my source was The Local, under the heading “Understanding The New French Traffic Laws”.  No mention of Belgium.

That’s the point I was making.

There is no French source other than The Local, and they don’t provide a link or citation.

The article from Belgium I linked above quotes Georges Gilkinet, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Mobility. I think The Local has picked this up from Francophone Belgian press and incorrectly stated it is a change to the French Code de la Route.

Unless Belgium and France are making the same change simultaneously, which I very much doubt, I reckon they’ve got it wrong.

[chrisonabike]

Any more word on this?  I

Any more word on this?  I appreciate it’s a very small niche but it’s not the sort of thing any rider would take lying down.

[Griff500]

Simon_MacMichael wrote:

Can you supply a source, please? The only people I see reporting this in France are The Local, and I think they’re mistaken – it seems to be Belgium that is making this change, not France.

https://www.moustique.be/actu/belgique/2022/09/13/code-de-la-route-voici-les-changements-qui-apparaitront-ce-1er-octobre-2022-246866

Yep, my source was The Local, under the heading “Understanding The New French Traffic Laws”.  No mention of Belgium.

[Simon_MacMichael]

Caqn you supply a source,

Can you supply a source, please? The only people I see reporting this in France are The Local, and I think they’re mistaken – it seems to be Belgium that is making this change, not France.

https://www.moustique.be/actu/belgique/2022/09/13/code-de-la-route-voici-les-changements-qui-apparaitront-ce-1er-octobre-2022-246866

 

[chrisonabike]

Further – given that

Further – given that motorists frequently can’t detect houses, bridges, bollards, police cars covered in reflectives, cyclists in front of them on straight roads in daylight… why should recumbents be singled out?

Again – common sense applies but this particular ruling doesn’t seem to  have much to do with that.

[chrisonabike]

Why?  Any actual incidents

Why?  Any actual incidents driving this?  I believe there may be local restrictions on using roads where cycle paths are provided (presumably not many places).

This is pretty startling!  Not welcome news because even with my recumbent (slow for the class) 30mph is very achievable downhill.  Having said that the opposite would apply for me were I to try going up Ventoux on it…  That ruling would appear to particularly remove a lot of the joy of velomobiles – assuming speed limits apply to cycles or there’s a French version of “cycling furiously”?  Those folks can spend time above 30mph more regularly.

Common sense applies of course but at least in daylight I’ve never had issues being seen (on mid-racer 2 wheelers) – rather the opposite.  (Drivers trying to drive alongside and take pictures / lots more beep and wave.)  Since I’ve mirrors on mine my own vision is better than I’d have in a car (similar head height to driver) although less than an upright, where you can see over cars.

News in English (paywalled) here: https://www.thelocal.fr/20220926/driving-in-france-understanding-the-new-french-traffic-laws/

Law (French) here: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGITEXT000006074228/

[Author]

Replies