# AA Cyclists Highway Code



## growingvegetables (9 Jun 2016)

Anybody seen/read this? https://www.theaa.com/newsroom/aa-news-2016/aa-publishes-cyclists-highway-code.html

Seems to be generating a bit more heat than light (http://www.theguardian.com/environm...code-isnt-bad-but-it-has-scope-for-amendments), so I'll "haud ma wheesht" until I've actually seen what advice it gives (in addition to the basics of the HC) on things like advice on road position and the like. But interested to hear what other people make of it.


----------



## classic33 (9 Jun 2016)

_"In effect, it’s aiming to get more people cycling, not chide cyclists for “jumping red lights” or the other transgressions that some motorists see cyclists doing but ignore when fellow motorists do the same."_

*http://www.motoring.co.uk/car-news/why-did-the-aa-publish-the-cyclists-highway-code_67904*

If it's anything like the last one they were going to publish, then it's the thin end of the wedge. But if the above is correct, then maybe they learnt a lesson or two last time.

AA President Edmund King speaking in 2009
_*Is it ‘them and us’ out there, cars v bikes?*
“We have to get past the ‘them and us’ mentality. Cycle campaigners often do themselves no favour in this respect. And motorists can be just as bad. Let’s not forget, people aren’t welded to their cars 24 hours a day. Motorists have to get out and walk places too. It’s not two tribes at war. Out of their cars and off their bikes, these are the same kind of people. We need better behaviour all round. Motorists see cyclists running red lights. Cyclists see motorists cutting them up.

“We need to widen the social acceptance of bikes. We have to get away from this cultural thinking that says ‘I’ve made it, I need a car.’ It’s not like that in the Netherlands.

“Look, I’m the president of the AA, I never use a car in London. Never. Some people are surprised by that, thinking I’d use a car all the time. No, I use the transport which is relevant for the journey. Sometimes it’s a bike; sometimes it’s a train; sometimes it’s a car; sometimes it’s walking.
_
*http://www.bikehub.co.uk/news/aa-prez-loves-bikes/*

T'aint cheap at £4.99 for what they've admitted is basically sections copied from the Highway Code(£2.50), with a few extra sections added.


----------



## ufkacbln (9 Jun 2016)

... and it isn't going to be a promotional link to their training?


----------



## steveindenmark (9 Jun 2016)

Amongst all the groups I know, cyclists are the ones who hate being told what to do by none cyclists. If this book had been released by one of the big cycling organisations or magazines it would have probably been accepted as a good idea.

But as the enemy released it, there will only be ridicule and suspicion, even by those who have not read it. The idea is a good one but the execution needed a bit more thought.


----------



## Drago (9 Jun 2016)

It's supposed to be reasonably fair and useful.

However, don't the AA mend or tow car for a living, and isn't there already Cyclecraft, imperfect as it is, from HMSO?


----------



## numbnuts (9 Jun 2016)

Off topic, but if the AA want to do something for cyclists extend their break down cover for us I have been asking this for the last 10 + years and they still say no.


----------



## mjr (9 Jun 2016)

growingvegetables said:


> Anybody seen/read this? https://www.theaa.com/newsroom/aa-news-2016/aa-publishes-cyclists-highway-code.html


Nope. It's not in Smiths or Waterstones (unlike the other AA books) and I'm not sure why any retailer would stock it when there's another book for half the price called "The Official Highway Code" - are you?

I'm very suspicious of the AA's motives for publishing this when they claim their goal is "to protect you, the motorist, and put your interests first".



growingvegetables said:


> Seems to be generating a bit more heat than light (http://www.theguardian.com/environm...code-isnt-bad-but-it-has-scope-for-amendments)


Yeah, that's partly the fault of Carlton Reid for inventing reasons why cyclists hate it and then attacking them. I don't attack it because it's not infrastructure - I attack it because an organisation contrary to cycling's interests like the AA should not be portrayed as an authority on it. 

So Edmund King says warm words about it, but one day he'll be gone and the motorists-first goal will remain. If he wants to do something nice for cycling, he should reform the AA to be more cycling-compatible (extending the breakdown cover to cycling like @numbnuts asks is an obvious first step) and not merely engage in public relations exercises like this and their mirror-obscuring stickers (and a bigger problem is that some motorists don't even look at their mirrors): talk is cheap - deeds not words.

It's rather disappointing to read in the Guardian article that Cycling UK is now bending over to the AA's publicity stunts, rather than opposing them like they did the AA's helmet-giveaway a few years ago.


----------



## classic33 (9 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> It's supposed to be reasonably fair and useful.
> 
> However, don't the AA mend or tow car for a living, and isn't there already Cyclecraft, imperfect as it is, from HMSO?


WHSmiths also sell it.


numbnuts said:


> Off topic, but if the AA want to do something for cyclists extend their break down cover for us I have been asking this for the last 10 + years and they still say no.


They did do, only what you paid wasn't worth what you got. No recovery to home or somewhere that could fix your bike/trike/quad. Roadside repairs weren't that great either.


----------



## Inertia (10 Jun 2016)

steveindenmark said:


> Amongst all the groups I know, cyclists are the ones who hate being told what to do by none cyclists. If this book had been released by one of the big cycling organisations or magazines it would have probably been accepted as a good idea.
> 
> But as the enemy released it, there will only be ridicule and suspicion, even by those who have not read it. The idea is a good one but the execution needed a bit more thought.


Probably because they get told what to do by lots of different people who are usually more interested in getting the cyclist to do things to make their own life easier.

I dont see the AA as "the enemy" but they do speak on behalf of motorists and not cyclists.

Having said that, the AA book apparently isnt too bad as it just repeats the highway code's advice and gives tips for newbies on puncture repair, useful gear etc.


----------



## classic33 (10 Jun 2016)

Inertia said:


> Probably because they get told what to do by lots of different people who are usually more interested in getting the cyclist to do things to make their own life easier.
> 
> I dont see the AA as "the enemy" but they do speak on behalf of motorists and not cyclists.
> 
> Having said that, the AA book apparently isnt too bad as it just repeats the highway code's advice and gives tips for newbies on puncture repair, useful gear etc.


Copied/borrowed from the Official Highway Code and the bikeability training.


----------



## oldstrath (10 Jun 2016)

If the AA really cared about cyclists they'd be ramming the Bikeability advice on positioning down the throats of their members, not offering up patronising tosh to cyclists.


----------



## classic33 (10 Jun 2016)

oldstrath said:


> If the AA really cared about cyclists they'd be ramming the Bikeability advice on positioning down the throats of their members, not offering up patronising tosh to cyclists.


I'm waiting on the one that comes with the DVD.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Jun 2016)

I don't think it's patronising, there's some good stuff in there on maintenance. Young riders don't need to know about parking and m'way rules, this is tailored for them.


----------



## Drago (10 Jun 2016)

I'm looking forward with great anticipation to British Cyclings forthcoming tome, "How Not To Drive Your Car Like A Nob." Should go down well.


----------



## classic33 (10 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> I'm looking forward with great anticipation to British Cyclings forthcoming tome, *"How Not To Drive Your Car Like A Nob." *Should go down well.


Where's that part in the Highway Code then?


----------



## glenn forger (10 Jun 2016)

There's no end of fun to be had comparing two wildly different things.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (10 Jun 2016)

I wouldn't buy it for myself but I'd consider buying it for a new rider, as a primer for Roadcraft. Edmund King at least is not a petrolhead, being more of an appropriate transport man - which, I gather, means bike much of the time in London. I'd rather have the AA closer to the cyclist's side than be in an antagonistic position. And perhaps it might be good to get all the bikeability and HC info together in the same place.


----------



## mjr (10 Jun 2016)

classic33 said:


> Copied/borrowed from the Official Highway Code and the bikeability training.


In other words, it probably contains prejudice-led unsubstantiated bike-bashing and it's the DfT's fault as well as the AA's. (edited to remove autocorrect error)


----------



## jonny jeez (10 Jun 2016)

May


Inertia said:


> Probably because they get told what to do by lots of different people who are usually more interested in getting the cyclist to do things to make their own life easier.
> 
> I dont see the AA as "the enemy" but they do speak on behalf of motorists and not cyclists.
> 
> Having said that, the AA book apparently isnt too bad as it just repeats the highway code's advice and gives tips for newbies on puncture repair, useful gear etc.


Maybe we should all club together and write our own version...

...no, wait


----------



## classic33 (10 Jun 2016)

mjray said:


> In other words, it probably uncontains prejudice-led unsubstantiated bike-bashing and it's the DfT's fault as well as the AA's.


As in they'd nothing to add so chose to borrow/copy the material for their version. Which is twice the price of the official version.


----------



## srw (10 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> I'm looking forward with great anticipation to British Cyclings forthcoming tome, "How Not To Drive Your Car Like A Nob." Should go down well.


BC are far too busy promoting professional racing as the one true cycling. But CTC/cycling UK have obliged....

http://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/driver-training-testing-licensing


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Jun 2016)

I wonder what percentage of adult folk who ride bikes aren't also motorists. Anyone?


----------



## oldstrath (10 Jun 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> I wonder what percentage of adult folk who ride bikes aren't also motorists. Anyone?


I've seen 15 - 20% quoted. Depends in part on whethet you mean don't drive or don't have a driving licence.


----------



## jefmcg (10 Jun 2016)

oldstrath said:


> I've seen 15 - 20% quoted. Depends in part on whethet you mean don't drive or don't have a driving licence.


Too many variables here. As well as the definition of "driver", what is the definition of "cyclist" (eg how many times a week/year/month do you need to cycle to be regarded as a cycle rider?) 

I wouldn't be surprised if more cyclists were drivers than the general population, as many people who can't drive for medical reasons probably don't cycle either - though there are some noteworthy exceptions on CC.


----------



## mjr (10 Jun 2016)

If I remember correctly, motorist is usually has a licence and access to a vehicle (insured for them and so on) and cyclist is usually anyone who rode in the last month.

I know the government can suspend your driving licence for medical reasons. How can they stop you cycling?


----------



## srw (10 Jun 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> I wonder what percentage of adult folk who ride bikes aren't also motorists. Anyone?


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/8933/nts2010-02.pdf

From that, even though the stats are about 5 years old, I'm pretty confident in saying that about 90% of cyclists also hold a driving licence. Many of them won't drive regularly, but are still legally allowed to drive.


----------



## jefmcg (10 Jun 2016)

mjray said:


> I know the government can suspend your driving licence for medical reasons. How can they stop you cycling?


It was speculation. People tend to stop doing things like cycling without much encouragement. I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

(I know my parents were still legally allowed and able to drive when getting on a cycle would have been beyond them, mostly because they hadn't ridden in 60 years, but still, they are not atypical)


----------



## Fab Foodie (10 Jun 2016)

Boardman's had a hand in it so I'm hoping for the best ...


----------



## jefmcg (10 Jun 2016)

Just for the (rather inaccurate) record.

In 2014, there were 45,500,000 license holders in the UK. In 2011, there were 52,000,000 people over 15.

Still, tons of assumptions to be made  Let's assume that by 2014, there were at lease 52 million over 18. That means that the percentage of people old enough to be drivers who are drivers is 87.5%. So about the same percentage of cyclists are drivers as for any other road user. So it makes as much sense to shout "you don't pay road tax" to a train or bus passenger or pedestrian as it does to a cyclist.

(I'm taking 10-20% of cyclists are drivers as true. Someone else can google that.)


----------



## Drago (10 Jun 2016)

James Herriott had a hand up a cow's arse and nothing good ever came of that...


----------



## classic33 (10 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> James Herriott had a hand up a cow's arse and nothing good ever came of that...


Give it a go sometime, upto the shoulder.


----------



## classic33 (10 Jun 2016)

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/AA-rel...ode-cyclists/story-29366617-detail/story.html
The quiz on here appears to be in the book


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Jun 2016)

If the vast majority of adults who ride bikes are also motorists then the AA may legitimately claim to speak for people on bikes. Same people, different mode.


----------



## Drago (10 Jun 2016)

Their customers also crap on toilets, but that doesn't make the AA an expert on bleaching behind the rim.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (11 Jun 2016)

@jefmcg & @mjray I'm in this situation right now and spot on, a driving licence can be revoked or voluntarily surrendered whereas it is down to personal recognaisance and self determination on cycling. Casualty consultant and my GP both strongly advised I do not cycle on roads while investigations into my collapse are ongoing - not only for me falling under vehicle wheels but if I did go down and forced a swerve to avoid me that instigated another collision.... I've been voluntarily road free for 3 months now in all forms of transport and am getting on with off road and non canal towpath bike routes.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (11 Jun 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> If the vast majority of adults who ride bikes are also motorists then the AA may legitimately claim to speak for people on bikes. Same people, different mode.


Hmmmm, they may be able to extrapolate it into a claim to speak for people who own a bike, it's not quite the same thing.


----------



## classic33 (11 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> @jefmcg & @mjray I'm in this situation right now and spot on, a driving licence can be revoked or voluntarily surrendered whereas it is down to personal recognaisance and self determination on cycling. Casualty consultant and my GP both strongly advised I do not cycle on roads while investigations into my collapse are ongoing - not only for me falling under vehicle wheels but if I did go down and forced a swerve to avoid me that instigated another collision.... I've been voluntarily road free for 3 months now in all forms of transport and am getting on with off road and non canal towpath bike routes.


Assuming the worst for this part.
It's been shown that you're less likely to have a fit, whilst you're doing something you like.
Pointed that bit out years ago to the specialist and he agreed.

Hope you get some good news soon on this.


----------



## swansonj (11 Jun 2016)

classic33 said:


> http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/AA-rel...ode-cyclists/story-29366617-detail/story.html
> The quiz on here appears to be in the book


Hmmm. The % answers given by respondents confirm that the UK use of the "cyclists dismount" sign as advisory not mandatory is poorly understood and therefore unhelpful.


----------



## Drago (11 Jun 2016)

And while we're about it, what does Monsigneur Boardman know about roadcraft/cyclecraft?


----------



## Poacher (11 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> James Herriott had a hand up a cow's arse and nothing good ever came of that...


Point of order: it wasn't actually the cow's arse, although it may have looked that way.


----------



## classic33 (11 Jun 2016)

swansonj said:


> Hmmm. The % answers given by respondents confirm that the UK use of the "cyclists dismount" sign as advisory not mandatory is poorly understood and therefore unhelpful.


Last question is worded kinda odd as well.


----------



## Drago (11 Jun 2016)

Poacher said:


> Point of order: it wasn't actually the cow's arse, although it may have looked that way.


It wasn't his hand either!


----------



## classic33 (11 Jun 2016)

Poacher said:


> Point of order: it wasn't actually the cow's arse, although it may have looked that way.


What'd he bring out? As getting clear in time is important.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (11 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Hmmmm, they may be able to extrapolate it into a claim to speak for people who own a bike, it's not quite the same thing.


The vast majority of cyclists that I know are also regular frequent car drivers. (Shame too many of them bring their motor-centric mind-sets out on their bikes with me but...)


----------



## shouldbeinbed (11 Jun 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> The vast majority of cyclists that I know are also regular frequent car drivers. (Shame too many of them bring their motor-centric mind-sets out on their bikes with me but...)


Agree entirely but to extend coincidental car and bike ownership to a motoring oriented organisation speaking for cyclists is a stretch too far.

I own a cooker and a car, does this empower the AA speak for me on culinary matters?


----------



## classic33 (11 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Agree entirely but to extend coincidental car and bike ownership to a motoring oriented organisation speaking for cyclists is a stretch too far.
> *
> I own a cooker* and a car, does this empower the AA speak for me on culinary matters?


Gas or electric?


----------



## classic33 (11 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Agree entirely but to extend coincidental car and bike ownership to a motoring oriented organisation speaking for cyclists is a stretch too far.
> *
> I own a cooker* and a car, does this empower the AA speak for me on culinary matters?


Gas or electric?


----------



## classic33 (11 Jun 2016)

User said:


> Dual, it appears


They(AA) were owned by British Gas at one stage.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (11 Jun 2016)

classic33 said:


> Gas or electric?


Just to be fancy both. Brand new rangemaster delivered yesterday ready for the new kitchen


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Just to be fancy both. Brand new rangemaster delivered yesterday ready for the new kitchen



well if we're in a cooker frame of mind I got my fleabay bargain Falcon big bertha last week. The oven doesn't have the 6 different modes of the latest model, but since I only use "getting hot" mode and have got flumoxed in the past by "which bloody setting makes it come on" this isn't a great loss, especially as I've now got an extra two grand in my pocket compared to a new one


----------



## machew (11 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> James Herriott had a hand up a cow's arse and nothing good ever came of that...





Poacher said:


> Point of order: it wasn't actually the cow's arse, although it may have looked that way.


From the good man himself “There is more to be learned up a cow’s arse than in many an encyclopedia”


----------



## Poacher (11 Jun 2016)

machew said:


> From the good man himself “There is more to be learned up a cow’s arse than in many an encyclopedia”


Good job he became a vet rather than a gynaecologist!


----------



## glenn forger (12 Jun 2016)

_wipe the dirt from wheels”_ (really? who does that?) weekly—yes, _weekly_
_
http://singletrackworld.com/columns/2016/06/bugs-in-the-code/_


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

glenn forger said:


> _wipe the dirt from wheels”_ (really? who does that?) weekly—yes, _weekly_
> _
> http://singletrackworld.com/columns/2016/06/bugs-in-the-code/_


I do the tyres at least once a week(helps you see anything that may cause problems). Wheels, depends on what I've ridden through.


----------



## snorri (13 Jun 2016)

This new book could be of benefit to cyclists too young to hold a driving licence and who are unlikely to trawl through the Highway Code for the parts solely applicable to cyclists.
Perhaps.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

snorri said:


> This new book could be of benefit to cyclists too young to hold a driving licence and who are unlikely to trawl through the Highway Code for the parts solely applicable to cyclists.
> Perhaps.


Only if they've learned from their mistakes on the previous one they were going to bring out. It's aimed at adults though.

Too many "should's" replaced with "must's". John Franklins Roadcraft came out shortly before it.


----------



## glenn forger (13 Jun 2016)

Having read those excerpts is does seem a bit rum.


----------



## Drago (13 Jun 2016)

Cyclists to young to drive are unlikely to either join the AA, or go hunting through Waterstones for their publications.


----------



## glenn forger (13 Jun 2016)

In a statistic I've just made up 76.4% of drivers haven't a Danny what a mandatory cycle lane means, an explanation would have been helpful.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

glenn forger said:


> In a statistic I've just made up 76.4% of drivers haven't a Danny what a mandatory cycle lane means, an explanation would have been helpful.


It's that line some councils paint down the edge of the road, where everything ends up, so that they can say "we're giving you somewhere safe to ride your bikes".


----------



## GrumpyGregry (13 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Agree entirely but to extend coincidental car and bike ownership to a motoring oriented organisation speaking for cyclists is a stretch too far.


Coincidental?

and clearly not a stretch too far in the AA's pov even if it is seen as such in the tiny corner of cycling that is cc.


----------



## Drago (13 Jun 2016)

Interesting about the AA's past association with British Gash (sic) considering how woeful they both are for their customer services.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> Interesting about the AA's past association with British Gash (sic) considering how woeful they both are for their customer services.


Bought by British Gas and then sold on when they'd had enough.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Jun 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Coincidental?
> 
> and clearly not a stretch too far in the AA's pov even if it is seen as such in the tiny corner of cycling that is cc.



Co-incidental rather than oooh what a coincidence.

Owning either a bike or a car does not mandate ownership of the other. Nor does it enable the *Automibile* Association to usurp BC or whatever CTC is now called.

A commercial organisation trying to extend its reach and income streams: wow, hold the front pages.....

They've be stupid not to try to muscle in on cyclings supposedly representative bodies territory, with the increase in interest (good and bad).

That doesn't mean that it's necessarily right for them to do so nor that they are doing it for the right reasons. They have a very real membership renewal imperative not to aggravate their core motoring membership & not to break a model that works for them, that is massively predicated on motor vehicles with bikes when AA put them in mainstream focus largely relegated to publicity stunt giveaways that reinforce the victim blame mentality that a plastic hat and a yellow vest are essential cycling attire.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

shouldbeinbed said:


> Co-incidental rather than oooh what a coincidence.
> 
> Owning either a bike or a car does not mandate ownership of the other. Nor does it enable the *Automibile* Association to usurp BC or whatever CTC is now called.
> 
> ...


If they are serious, then maybe they can start offerring insurance to cyclists and bring back the breakdown cover they had for cyclists. Only this time on an equal footing as motor vehicles. Meaning they don't leave you at the roadside. 
The RAC cyclists cover did the same though.


----------



## snorri (13 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> Cyclists to young to drive are unlikely to either join the AA, or go hunting through Waterstones for their publications.


No, but I was thinking parents might be attracted to buy on behalf of their offspring.


----------



## mjr (13 Jun 2016)

snorri said:


> No, but I was thinking parents might be attracted to buy on behalf of their offspring.


Yes, scare them out of that silly cycling and get them into motoring ASAP... but it doesn't matter because it's not in Waterstones yet and I'm unconvinced it ever will be, at twice the price of the full Highway Code.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

mjray said:


> Yes, scare them out of that silly cycling and get them into motoring ASAP... but it doesn't matter because it's not in Waterstones yet and I'm unconvinced it ever will be, at twice the price of the full Highway Code.


Waterstones do have it.


----------



## Drago (13 Jun 2016)

snorri said:


> No, but I was thinking parents might be attracted to buy on behalf of their offspring.



It's a lovely thought Snorri, but I can't see many parents buying it, and even less kids putting down their X station controller to read it.


----------



## mjr (13 Jun 2016)

classic33 said:


> Waterstones do have it.


Pics or it didn't happen!  (It's not in King's Lynn or Cambridge branches AFAICT and the website said it was "not in warehouse" which usually means they'll only order it when someone does.)


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

mjray said:


> Pics or it didn't happen!  (It's not in King's Lynn or Cambridge branches AFAICT and the website said it was "not in warehouse" which usually means they'll only order it when someone does.)


Website also takes payment for it.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

mjray said:


> Pics or it didn't happen!  (It's not in King's Lynn or Cambridge branches AFAICT and the website said it was "not in warehouse" which usually means they'll only order it when someone does.)


Website also takes payment for it.


----------



## mjr (13 Jun 2016)

classic33 said:


> Website also takes payment for it.


Yes and they'll just order it from the wholesaler when they've got an order. It doesn't mean it's in the shops.


----------



## jefmcg (13 Jun 2016)

Drago said:


> It's a lovely thought Snorri, but I can't see many parents buying it, and even less kids putting down their X station controller to read it.


From what I gather from this excellent article, that might be a good thing ...


glenn forger said:


> _http://singletrackworld.com/columns/2016/06/bugs-in-the-code/_





> Really? I mean, _really?_ Hey, kids: I know you’ve been reluctant to ride a bike, but here’s a book with 70 pages of rules, some sort of exam, and a list of weekly chores. Thanks, dad.


----------



## classic33 (13 Jun 2016)

One review on Amazon






Edited to ask "No one on here, I presume?"


----------

