Otherwise known as “cyclist forward areas”… I saw an interesting argument raging not long ago about whether you can stop in these or not. It involved some strange and novel interpretations of the Highway Code.
178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.
In actual fact, this is extremely clear. The stop line for motorists under normal circumstances is the first line. If you are driving along normally and the lights start to change (amber or red), the only line that matters is the first line. The HC says “MUST ” in bold (and red in the paper version), which means you are breaking the law if you drive into the area when you stop at lights.
If you brake and stop beyond the first line under normal circumstances, this is exactly the same as stopping over the line at a normal set of lights. You must not stop in the area reserved for cyclists any more than you should stop part-way into a junction as a result of reacting late or insufficiently. If you do it on your test then it would be a serious fault.
At other times (i.e. if the junction is blocked), if the lights are green and if you have moved into the forward area, but then the lights change, the second line can be used as your stop line. In this case, you should give especial priority to cyclists before moving off again when the lights change back to green. Arguably, having to stop in this area even under such circumstances constitutes poor planning, and it probably warrants a driver fault at least if you did it on your test.
The two situations described in the HC are entirely separate. It should also be remembered that no two on-road situations are the same, and no two examiners are either! But on test it is the examiner’s interpretation that matters, and you shouldn’t be relying on this by getting yourself into situations which are already questionable even before it comes to deciding how questionable.
I’d forgotten this, but last June someone was predicting the “worst winter on record” for 2011/12. I poo-pooed it as bunkum, simply because no one can predict the weather properly. If the Met Office, with its array of supercomputers can’t do it, a bunch of geeky old guys with seaweed and distorted egos certainly can’t.
My opinions upset a few people. I was getting what amounted to hate mail from people defending Exacta – the organisation behind the original forecast.
Well, all you have to do is look at the official statistics for last winter.
December, January, and February temperatures were all well above their respective means, and the whole winter was a mean 4.5°C warmer than the previous three winters, and nearly 1°C warmer than the mean 1971-2000 figure . There was a two-week cold snap at the end of January. Rainfall was 99% of the 1971-2000 average, and sunshine was 113% of the average. It was classed as a mild winter.
So, I rest my case. The story from last June was nonsensical scaremongering, fed by alchemy and pseudo-science.
Winter 2011/12 was NOT the coldest on record. Not by a million pieces of wet seaweed! Just like I predicted.
I dislike the hot weather at the best of times – I much prefer it to be cooler – but I know I am in a minority on that score.
I don’t normally get many pupils cancelling (you get minor epidemics of it a few times a year), but since the sun came out – in other words, over the last three days – I have had at least six “mix-ups”, “illnesses”, and simple “won’t be here” messages.
I wonder what would happen if I texted them the day before their tests and told them I’d got my diary mixed up, was unwell, or simply wasn’t going to be there?
Well, I’ll be reading the riot act a few times over the next week. I only let them get away with it once or twice, then they’ll find themselves looking for a new instructor.
It wouldn’t be so bad if they told the truth, but I know bloody well why they cancelled – they’re going to an impromptu barbecue or other sun-related event that most people in this country flock to zombie-like as soon as it gets a bit warm. And it becomes self-fuelling – I’m just waiting for the sunburn and food poisoning excuses to come out next week.
Incidentally, that isn’t a real forecast in the picture – I just made it look wall-to-wall sunny. In any case, AccuWeather is as reliable as holding your finger in the air to decide what it’s going to be doing tomorrow. In fact, the most accurate thing AccuWeather does is tell you what the weather is doing 10 minutes after it’s done it. Anything on the future timeline simply changes to match the recent past once it arrives.
Someone found the blog on that search term, so here’s where the MPTC at Colwick is located.
First of all, anyone else looking for a test centre can search for it on the DVSA’s website using this link. You type in your own postcode or the town you’re interested in and the nearest test centres are given.
Colwick MPTC comes up as Private Road No. 5 on the Colwick Industrial Estate, with a postcode of NG4 2JU. The Google Maps link will allow you to navigate, but here’s a snapshot of the test centre location:
The industrial estate is just off the A612 Colwick Loop Road. You can join Private Road No. 2 (which starts off as Mile End Road) either at the Colwick traffic lights or the Netherfield ones (near the big, cylindrical fuel storage tanks). The test centre is right at the end of Private Road No. 5 on the left – it’s a really grotty road, with what appear to be scrap yards all around and frequent fly-tipping.
A story from Scotland culled from another pointless FOI request reveals the staggering figure of 46 accidents involving learners on test since 2008.
Simple arithmetic doesn’t seem to be the strongpoint of the author, who wants to make a big deal out of the fact, in spite of it only equating to 10 accidents a year. Considering that there are in the region of a quarter of a million tests or more conducted in Scotland annually, it means nothing.
The FOI data don’t identify WHO was to blame for the accidents, either.
Making matters worse is some jackass from one of the “associations” who reckons that a learner making a mistake isn’t ready for test. That’s bullshit! And so is this nonsense about the word “accident” – three little syllables convey all the necessary meaning in any normal conversation. It doesn’t need some pseudo-academic trying to enlighten us to imagined philosophical connotations of the word.
Without knowing the specific details of each accident – and even insurance companies and the police often never get to the bottom of that – you cannot automatically blame the learner for any they might be involved in. Accidents DO happen – and they happen to innocent parties.
At least someone at the DSA has got their finger on the pulse (instead of up their backsides):
…thankfully accidents on test are extremely rare.
Precisely.
Even big-nuts advanced drivers who are mouthpieces for some of the organisations were not perfect when they first passed their tests. They continued to learn once they got their passes. It’s always been like that… and it always will.
I saw some interesting comments recently which claimed that people can “do two totally different tasks at once”. It was part of a discussion about teaching techniques (as usual, the DSA was cast in the role of villain by one of them, but that’s another story).
When I’m teaching pupils, and particularly at the beginning of their training, absolutely the worst thing they can try to do is more than one thing at once. That’s because no one can do two or more things simultaneously – it just looks like they can once they become better at certain aspects of driving.
People mistakenly believe that “multitasking” means doing different things at the same time. When you analyse any such situation, it doesn’t mean that at all.
A good example is computer multitasking. Admittedly, with modern multi-core processors it IS possible for computers to perform tasks simultaneously – because the cores can behave as separate computers. However, the original multitasking approach was that the CPU would time-share and would cycle through various tasks a bit at a time. It did it quickly and efficiently, so that over a typical period of a few seconds it would appear to have simultaneously carried out several major tasks to completion. But in reality it had done them in small steps, dovetailing each step from one task with those from other tasks, creating an impression of having done several things at once.
Mind you, computers don’t have to think about what to do or how to do it. Humans – particularly new drivers – do. So when a pupil is steering round a corner, then decides to try to change gear or cancel the indicator, something usually has to give – and the steering is usually it!
This is one reason why novices often steer badly on bends and corners – they are trying to do several things simultaneously when they can’t yet do any of them properly! I often find that those who have simply been allowed to “drive” without any proper tuition or correction are the worst ones for it, and the longer they’ve been allowed to get away with it the harder it can be to break them of the habit.
This issue of multitasking comes into play when teaching manoeuvres, for example. Think of the stages involved in the first part of a turn in the road:
select gear
gas/bite
check it’s safe
respond if it isn’t
handbrake off
control speed
full lock
check it’s still safe
respond appropriately
watch the kerb
control speed
straighten and stop
handbrake
select reverse
Many pupils will start overlapping these when they first try it, and as soon as they take the handbrake off, if they move too fast they simply stop steering. Likewise when they look around, if they’re still steering at the time their hands just freeze.
I do a simple demonstration using a pen. I start the car moving slowly, pick up a pen, then do various things like removing the cap, replacing it, putting it on the dashboard, reading the writing on it, etc. All the time the car is moving at an absolute crawl.
Then I get the pupil to do it. Usually, the car speeds up and they can’t manipulate the pen.
I then explain how I am cheating. Whereas they are trying to control the car and the pen at the same time, what I do is as follows:
set the speed
pick up the pen
control the speed
remove the cap
control the speed
put the cap back on
control the speed
read some text
control the speed
put the pen on the dash
control the speed
and so on
This is proper multitasking, the way humans have to do it. It also illustrates why the MSM routine has to be done in plenty of time in order to prevent a new driver from changing gear when they should be concentrating on steering, or from looking in the mirrors when they should be slowing down.
Of course, as people get better some things can be done without thinking (cancelling indicators, for example). But while such things need conscious thought it is vital to keep them separate – particularly since the indicators are self-cancelling, and avoiding collisions is of much higher priority than unnecessarily cancelling a signal.
Multitasking in humans is an illusion created by doing single small tasks – each part of larger, more complex tasks – in an efficiently structured way. MSM is a prime example.
What is interesting is how you can see this potential for multitasking confusion spill over with certain pupils. You occasionally get one whose brain seems to be on fire, and the simple act of changing gear can result in attempts to signal, pull on the handbrake, reach for things which aren’t there, and so on. They’re all different, and finding ways to deal with the problem is what makes this job so interesting.
Another interesting aspect is how the old adage about women being better at multitasking doesn’t apply to driving in this respect. Women are better at juggling many things in their heads, whereas men tend to want to focus on single tasks. It’s why women can often be frustrating to men when they keep changing subjects, for example. In driving, everyone has the same problems with multitasking, with some – from both sexes – handling it better than others.
Jumping between tasks without completing the previous one can be a hindrance. Perhaps this is partly why men tend to pass in fewer lessons and have higher pass rates in the driving test.
The DSA has come up trumps with this reminder to cyclists about how THEY should behave on the roads.
Rule 66
You should
keep both hands on the handlebars except when signalling or changing gear
keep both feet on the pedals
never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
not ride close behind another vehicle
not carry anything which will affect your balance or may get tangled up with your wheels or chain
be considerate of other road users, particularly blind and partially sighted pedestrians. Let them know you are there when necessary, for example, by ringing your bell if you have one. It is recommended that a bell be fitted
It’s almost laughable in some respects. You could probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of cyclists who are even aware that there are rules they’re supposed to follow, let alone be prepared to abide by them.
The Spandex boys – the ones who think they’re athletes, but aren’t – are the worst offenders. This year already seems much worse than usual. The Olympics has got them all worked up, I guess.
I mentioned these a few months ago, but I saw something this week that made me smile.
Reference points – when established BY the driver FOR the driver – can be very useful. In fact, everyone uses them one way or another no matter how much they might try to deny it.
But I had to laugh the other day when I saw this on someone’s fence when I was on my way to pick a pupil up for a lesson.
From what I can gather, the lady’s husband put it there so that she doesn’t reverse into the garage when she parks on their driveway.
On the one hand, it is a good idea. But it could fail when you consider what might happen if the driver were to drive into her driveway forwards. It would need another sign to cover that eventuality.
And it still doesn’t allow for the different seating positions of a 5’ female compared with a 6’ 3” man, or the variation that would be introduced by distance from the fence.
As long as the stopping position wasn’t right up to the garage door then they’d probably get away with it, but it does illustrate the dangers of over-egging the reference point concept.
To be honest, all the husband had to do was put a small mark on the fence and say “don’t go further back than this”. But I have to admire his more literary approach to the situation.
Another one of the DSA’s timely reminders about parts of the Highway Code, this time concerning roundabouts.
Rule 186
Signals and position
When taking the first exit to the left, unless signs or markings indicate otherwise
signal left and approach in the left-hand lane
keep to the left on the roundabout and continue signalling left to leave
When taking an exit to the right or going full circle, unless signs or markings indicate otherwise
signal right and approach in the right-hand lane
keep to the right on the roundabout until you need to change lanes to exit the roundabout
signal left after you have passed the exit before the one you want
When taking any intermediate exit, unless signs or markings indicate otherwise
select the appropriate lane on approach to the roundabout
you should not normally need to signal on approach
stay in this lane until you need to alter course to exit the roundabout
signal left after you have passed the exit before the one you want
When there are more than three lanes at the entrance to a roundabout, use the most appropriate lane on approach and through it.
Read all the rules about roundabouts (184-190)
As I’ve mentioned previously, it’s a great idea to circulate this kind of information. Whether it works or not is another matter entirely – the understanding of roundabouts among the general public (including many of those who think they’re “advanced” drivers and can therefore drive around them any way they feel like) is appalling.
Also, don’t forget my own articles on roundabouts here and here.