Category: Hazards

Posted on

38. Staying upright on icy roads

This article remains fundamentally sound. The core message — avoid ice if at all possible; if you cannot, prioritise stability, smoothness, and planning — is still exactly right, and the last update which mentioned less-predictable winter weather continues to be a factor.

That said, a few areas benefit from clarification or modest updating, mainly around modern tyres, electronics, and rider aids, and one or two points where rider folklore still needs firmly nailing down. Many modern motorcycles are fitted with ABS, traction control and sophisticated engine management, and while these systems can reduce the consequences of rider error, they do not change the basic physics of ice. ABS may prevent an immediate front-wheel lock, but it cannot shorten stopping distances on ice and may actually destabilise the bike if it intervenes abruptly. Traction control reacts only once slip has already occurred, and on ice a sideways slip may be unrecoverable. Likewise, modern tyres offer excellent wet-road performance but still provide virtually no usable grip on ice, regardless of compound or tread pattern. Riders should regard electronic aids as a last line of defence, not a licence to continue riding in conditions where grip is fundamentally unavailable.

Staying upright on icy roads

This is another article which has needed a bit of a rewrite, because global warming seems to have spun off some seriously cold winters with snow and ice hanging around for months even in the south east of England. However, just as I wrote when I first put this tip together, the best solution to dealing with ice is to try to avoid it in the first place! I have a ‘bad weather’ clause in my training courses so it’s usually possible two or three days out to get early warning of approaching bad weather – the weather forecasts have improved significantly in the last decade or so. Failing that, take a look out of the window and have a look at car windscreens and the lawn. If it looks grim, take the car, the bus or leave the ride for another day. I was a ‘real biker’ for many years and learned the hard way that two-wheelers and ice don’t mix.

The best advice for riding on icy roads is “don’t”. But if there’s no choice, then do a bit of thinking ahead. Although it can stay frozen all day, it’s usually freezing mornings after a clear night that are likely to be the biggest issue, although the roads can freeze again if cloud clears after dark.

Plan the route to take roads that are more likely to have been treated. Back lanes are far less likely to have seen a gritting truck than main roads, and residential roads roads are more likely to be icy than motorways. Where cars have been running over the road, heat from the tyres will usually melt the ice in the wheel tracks, but if all the surface is icy, the least-polished and grippiest bit of the road is generally in the middle of the lane. A good indicator of a slippery bit of road is that it is shiny.

Remember too, that built-up areas are nearly always significantly warmer than country roads and just because the roads in town have been clear, that’s no guarantee there will be no ice on rural roads. Even if the road appears clear, there may be colder frost hollows or exposed areas where it isn’t – this is the ‘microclimate’ effect talked about in the police handbook, ‘Motorcycle Roadcraft’.

We should also look for ice in shaded patches, behind buildings and under trees, even behind parked high-hided vehicles. If water can pool, such as in dips in the road and at bottoms of hills, we should keep our eyes open. Watch out for run-off from springs and fields – a good clue is an anti-skid surface! Car washes in towns can overspill and burst water mains nearly always accompany really cold weather. Be cautious on bridges – they cool from both sides – and metal access covers can be icy when the road surface is still just damp.

One particularly unpleasant riding condition is ‘black ice’. It’s hard to spot because it looks like a wet road but is actually a sheet of ice. The only clue is that it looks ‘wetter’ than usual, if that makes sense. It usually follows a late evening shower and clearing skies and a frost. Years ago, returning from a blood run at 4am on a January morning, I was passing through the town centre thinking it would be warmer than the country lane route home, when I hit a patch. Fortunately I was upright at the time, because what I thought was a missed gear turned out to be wheelspin. If I’d been accelerating coming out of the corner, I’d have been on my ear. As it was, I was able to roll off the ice and back onto some grippy tarmac.

So if we suspect ice, aim to get any braking and gear changing done upright, and get the bike upright before getting back on the throttle. Make brake, throttle and clutch movements slow and smooth. Keep speeds down so as to reduce steering input and lean angle. Posture is important and we need to try to keep weight off the handlebars. This isn’t easy on a sportsbike but sit forward on the seat, grip the tank with the knees, brace the back and keep shoulders, elbows and wrists loose.

If the bike does twitch, don’t try to fight it. There’s a reasonable chance the bike will regain grip but trying to fight the wobble just makes things worse in my experience. If we do hit ice, the most important thing is NOT to touch the brakes. It’s an incredibly strong instinct to overcome, but touch the front on a non-ABS bike and we’ll be on our ear before we know what’s happened. The rear brake will probably lock the back wheel, but we may be able to save the slide if we’re upright. Even with ABS the bike will be destabilised. I’ve been told to “steer into a slide”, but on the couple of times I’ve hit ice mid-corner, I’ve crashed so quickly I’ve had no time even to think about it.

Which gear should we ride in? The old advice was to ride in a higher gear than normal, but I suspect it works best on old bikes. It applies to 1960’s Bonnies and BMWs with low-revving, slow-revving engines. It’s entirely debatable if it should be applied to modern high-revving, fast-spinning bikes. If we ride in an artificially high gear to keep the revs low, we’ll be using more throttle than usual for the speed. Some years back on my GSX-R750, I was in too high a gear when I hit a slippery surface and the rear wheel lost traction. The bigger-than-usual throttle opening caused the engine to rev, that spun up the rear wheel, the rear back end stepped out sideways and I just avoided a high-side… at about 10mph! Counter-intuitively, a lower gear would have needed less throttle to drive the bike forward at the same speed, and so the wheelspin would have been less violent. And even if you have traction control, it’ll kick in and you’ll almost certainly shut the throttle. If you are riding an older machine that’s not so equipped, then the answer is to make your own traction control – drag the rear brake lightly right through the manoeuvre until the machine is upright again. It’s crude but it stops wheelspin… and it works. I’m not saying ride everywhere in first gear but take any advice to ride in a “higher gear than normal” with a pinch of salt if you’re not riding a Royal Enfield.

Take it easy out there, and stay shiny side up!

Staying upright on icy roads

This is another article which has needed a bit of a rewrite, because global warming seems to have spun off some seriously cold winters with snow and ice hanging around for months even in the south east of England. However, just as I wrote when I first put this tip together, the best solution to dealing with ice is to try to avoid it in the first place! I have a ‘bad weather’ clause in my training courses so it’s usually possible two or three days out to get early warning of approaching bad weather – the weather forecasts have improved significantly in the last decade or so. Failing that, take a look out of the window and have a look at car windscreens and the lawn. If it looks grim, take the car, the bus or leave the ride for another day. I was a ‘real biker’ for many years and learned the hard way that two-wheelers and ice don’t mix.

The best advice for riding on icy roads is “don’t”. But if there’s no choice, then do a bit of thinking ahead. Although it can stay frozen all day, it’s usually freezing mornings after a clear night that are likely to be the biggest issue, although the roads can freeze again if cloud clears after dark.

Plan the route to take roads that are more likely to have been treated. Back lanes are far less likely to have seen a gritting truck than main roads, and residential roads roads are more likely to be icy than motorways. Where cars have been running over the road, heat from the tyres will usually melt the ice in the wheel tracks, but if all the surface is icy, the least-polished and grippiest bit of the road is generally in the middle of the lane. A good indicator of a slippery bit of road is that it is shiny.

Remember too, that built-up areas are nearly always significantly warmer than country roads and just because the roads in town have been clear, that’s no guarantee there will be no ice on rural roads. Even if the road appears clear, there may be colder frost hollows or exposed areas where it isn’t – this is the ‘microclimate’ effect talked about in the police handbook, ‘Motorcycle Roadcraft’.

We should also look for ice in shaded patches, behind buildings and under trees, even behind parked high-hided vehicles. If water can pool, such as in dips in the road and at bottoms of hills, we should keep our eyes open. Watch out for run-off from springs and fields – a good clue is an anti-skid surface! Car washes in towns can overspill and burst water mains nearly always accompany really cold weather. Be cautious on bridges – they cool from both sides – and metal access covers can be icy when the road surface is still just damp.

One particularly unpleasant riding condition is ‘black ice’. It’s hard to spot because it looks like a wet road but is actually a sheet of ice. The only clue is that it looks ‘wetter’ than usual, if that makes sense. It usually follows a late evening shower and clearing skies and a frost. Years ago, returning from a blood run at 4am on a January morning, I was passing through the town centre thinking it would be warmer than the country lane route home, when I hit a patch. Fortunately I was upright at the time, because what I thought was a missed gear turned out to be wheelspin. If I’d been accelerating coming out of the corner, I’d have been on my ear. As it was, I was able to roll off the ice and back onto some grippy tarmac.

So if we suspect ice, aim to get any braking and gear changing done upright, and get the bike upright before getting back on the throttle. Make brake, throttle and clutch movements slow and smooth. Keep speeds down so as to reduce steering input and lean angle. Posture is important and we need to try to keep weight off the handlebars. This isn’t easy on a sportsbike but sit forward on the seat, grip the tank with the knees, brace the back and keep shoulders, elbows and wrists loose.

If the bike does twitch, don’t try to fight it. There’s a reasonable chance the bike will regain grip but trying to fight the wobble just makes things worse in my experience. If we do hit ice, the most important thing is NOT to touch the brakes. It’s an incredibly strong instinct to overcome, but touch the front on a non-ABS bike and we’ll be on our ear before we know what’s happened. The rear brake will probably lock the back wheel, but we may be able to save the slide if we’re upright. Even with ABS the bike will be destabilised. I’ve been told to “steer into a slide”, but on the couple of times I’ve hit ice mid-corner, I’ve crashed so quickly I’ve had no time even to think about it.

Which gear should we ride in? The old advice was to ride in a higher gear than normal, but I suspect it works best on old bikes. It applies to 1960’s Bonnies and BMWs with low-revving, slow-revving engines. It’s entirely debatable if it should be applied to modern high-revving, fast-spinning bikes. If we ride in an artificially high gear to keep the revs low, we’ll be using more throttle than usual for the speed. Some years back on my GSX-R750, I was in too high a gear when I hit a slippery surface and the rear wheel lost traction. The bigger-than-usual throttle opening caused the engine to rev, that spun up the rear wheel, the rear back end stepped out sideways and I just avoided a high-side… at about 10mph! Counter-intuitively, a lower gear would have needed less throttle to drive the bike forward at the same speed, and so the wheelspin would have been less violent. And even if you have traction control, it’ll kick in and you’ll almost certainly shut the throttle. If you are riding an older machine that’s not so equipped, then the answer is to make your own traction control – drag the rear brake lightly right through the manoeuvre until the machine is upright again. It’s crude but it stops wheelspin… and it works. I’m not saying ride everywhere in first gear but take any advice to ride in a “higher gear than normal” with a pinch of salt if you’re not riding a Royal Enfield.

Take it easy out there, and stay shiny side up!

Staying upright on icy roads

This is another article which has needed a bit of a rewrite, because global warming seems to have spun off some seriously cold winters with snow and ice hanging around for months even in the south east of England. However, just as I wrote when I first put this tip together, the best solution to dealing with ice is to try to avoid it in the first place! I have a ‘bad weather’ clause in my training courses so it’s usually possible two or three days out to get early warning of approaching bad weather – the weather forecasts have improved significantly in the last decade or so. Failing that, take a look out of the window and have a look at car windscreens and the lawn. If it looks grim, take the car, the bus or leave the ride for another day. I was a ‘real biker’ for many years and learned the hard way that two-wheelers and ice don’t mix.

The best advice for riding on icy roads is “don’t”. But if there’s no choice, then do a bit of thinking ahead. Although it can stay frozen all day, it’s usually freezing mornings after a clear night that are likely to be the biggest issue, although the roads can freeze again if cloud clears after dark.

Plan the route to take roads that are more likely to have been treated. Back lanes are far less likely to have seen a gritting truck than main roads, and residential roads roads are more likely to be icy than motorways. Where cars have been running over the road, heat from the tyres will usually melt the ice in the wheel tracks, but if all the surface is icy, the least-polished and grippiest bit of the road is generally in the middle of the lane. A good indicator of a slippery bit of road is that it is shiny.

Remember too, that built-up areas are nearly always significantly warmer than country roads and just because the roads in town have been clear, that’s no guarantee there will be no ice on rural roads. Even if the road appears clear, there may be colder frost hollows or exposed areas where it isn’t – this is the ‘microclimate’ effect talked about in the police handbook, ‘Motorcycle Roadcraft’.

We should also look for ice in shaded patches, behind buildings and under trees, even behind parked high-hided vehicles. If water can pool, such as in dips in the road and at bottoms of hills, we should keep our eyes open. Watch out for run-off from springs and fields – a good clue is an anti-skid surface! Car washes in towns can overspill and burst water mains nearly always accompany really cold weather. Be cautious on bridges – they cool from both sides – and metal access covers can be icy when the road surface is still just damp.

One particularly unpleasant riding condition is ‘black ice’. It’s hard to spot because it looks like a wet road but is actually a sheet of ice. The only clue is that it looks ‘wetter’ than usual, if that makes sense. It usually follows a late evening shower and clearing skies and a frost. Years ago, returning from a blood run at 4am on a January morning, I was passing through the town centre thinking it would be warmer than the country lane route home, when I hit a patch. Fortunately I was upright at the time, because what I thought was a missed gear turned out to be wheelspin. If I’d been accelerating coming out of the corner, I’d have been on my ear. As it was, I was able to roll off the ice and back onto some grippy tarmac.

So if we suspect ice, aim to get any braking and gear changing done upright, and get the bike upright before getting back on the throttle. Make brake, throttle and clutch movements slow and smooth. Keep speeds down so as to reduce steering input and lean angle. Posture is important and we need to try to keep weight off the handlebars. This isn’t easy on a sportsbike but sit forward on the seat, grip the tank with the knees, brace the back and keep shoulders, elbows and wrists loose.

If the bike does twitch, don’t try to fight it. There’s a reasonable chance the bike will regain grip but trying to fight the wobble just makes things worse in my experience. If we do hit ice, the most important thing is NOT to touch the brakes. It’s an incredibly strong instinct to overcome, but touch the front on a non-ABS bike and we’ll be on our ear before we know what’s happened. The rear brake will probably lock the back wheel, but we may be able to save the slide if we’re upright. Even with ABS the bike will be destabilised. I’ve been told to “steer into a slide”, but on the couple of times I’ve hit ice mid-corner, I’ve crashed so quickly I’ve had no time even to think about it.

Which gear should we ride in? The old advice was to ride in a higher gear than normal, but I suspect it works best on old bikes. It applies to 1960’s Bonnies and BMWs with low-revving, slow-revving engines. It’s entirely debatable if it should be applied to modern high-revving, fast-spinning bikes. If we ride in an artificially high gear to keep the revs low, we’ll be using more throttle than usual for the speed. Some years back on my GSX-R750, I was in too high a gear when I hit a slippery surface and the rear wheel lost traction. The bigger-than-usual throttle opening caused the engine to rev, that spun up the rear wheel, the rear back end stepped out sideways and I just avoided a high-side… at about 10mph! Counter-intuitively, a lower gear would have needed less throttle to drive the bike forward at the same speed, and so the wheelspin would have been less violent. And even if you have traction control, it’ll kick in and you’ll almost certainly shut the throttle. If you are riding an older machine that’s not so equipped, then the answer is to make your own traction control – drag the rear brake lightly right through the manoeuvre until the machine is upright again. It’s crude but it stops wheelspin… and it works. I’m not saying ride everywhere in first gear but take any advice to ride in a “higher gear than normal” with a pinch of salt if you’re not riding a Royal Enfield.

Take it easy out there, and stay shiny side up!

 

 

Staying upright on icy roads

This is another article which has needed a bit of a rewrite, because global warming seems to have spun off some seriously cold winters with snow and ice hanging around for months even in the south east of England. However, just as I wrote when I first put this tip together, the best solution to dealing with ice is to try to avoid it in the first place! I have a ‘bad weather’ clause in my training courses so it’s usually possible two or three days out to get early warning of approaching bad weather – the weather forecasts have improved significantly in the last decade or so. Failing that, take a look out of the window and have a look at car windscreens and the lawn. If it looks grim, take the car, the bus or leave the ride for another day. I was a ‘real biker’ for many years and learned the hard way that two-wheelers and ice don’t mix.

The best advice for riding on icy roads is “don’t”. But if there’s no choice, then do a bit of thinking ahead. Although it can stay frozen all day, it’s usually freezing mornings after a clear night that are likely to be the biggest issue, although the roads can freeze again if cloud clears after dark.

Plan the route to take roads that are more likely to have been treated. Back lanes are far less likely to have seen a gritting truck than main roads, and residential roads roads are more likely to be icy than motorways. Where cars have been running over the road, heat from the tyres will usually melt the ice in the wheel tracks, but if all the surface is icy, the least-polished and grippiest bit of the road is generally in the middle of the lane. A good indicator of a slippery bit of road is that it is shiny.

Remember too, that built-up areas are nearly always significantly warmer than country roads and just because the roads in town have been clear, that’s no guarantee there will be no ice on rural roads. Even if the road appears clear, there may be colder frost hollows or exposed areas where it isn’t – this is the ‘microclimate’ effect talked about in the police handbook, ‘Motorcycle Roadcraft’.

We should also look for ice in shaded patches, behind buildings and under trees, even behind parked high-hided vehicles. If water can pool, such as in dips in the road and at bottoms of hills, we should keep our eyes open. Watch out for run-off from springs and fields – a good clue is an anti-skid surface! Car washes in towns can overspill and burst water mains nearly always accompany really cold weather. Be cautious on bridges – they cool from both sides – and metal access covers can be icy when the road surface is still just damp.

One particularly unpleasant riding condition is ‘black ice’. It’s hard to spot because it looks like a wet road but is actually a sheet of ice. The only clue is that it looks ‘wetter’ than usual, if that makes sense. It usually follows a late evening shower and clearing skies and a frost. Years ago, returning from a blood run at 4am on a January morning, I was passing through the town centre thinking it would be warmer than the country lane route home, when I hit a patch. Fortunately I was upright at the time, because what I thought was a missed gear turned out to be wheelspin. If I’d been accelerating coming out of the corner, I’d have been on my ear. As it was, I was able to roll off the ice and back onto some grippy tarmac.

So if we suspect ice, aim to get any braking and gear changing done upright, and get the bike upright before getting back on the throttle. Make brake, throttle and clutch movements slow and smooth. Keep speeds down so as to reduce steering input and lean angle. Posture is important and we need to try to keep weight off the handlebars. This isn’t easy on a sportsbike but sit forward on the seat, grip the tank with the knees, brace the back and keep shoulders, elbows and wrists loose.

If the bike does twitch, don’t try to fight it. There’s a reasonable chance the bike will regain grip but trying to fight the wobble just makes things worse in my experience. If we do hit ice, the most important thing is NOT to touch the brakes. It’s an incredibly strong instinct to overcome, but touch the front on a non-ABS bike and we’ll be on our ear before we know what’s happened. The rear brake will probably lock the back wheel, but we may be able to save the slide if we’re upright. Even with ABS the bike will be destabilised. I’ve been told to “steer into a slide”, but on the couple of times I’ve hit ice mid-corner, I’ve crashed so quickly I’ve had no time even to think about it.

Which gear should we ride in? The old advice was to ride in a higher gear than normal, but I suspect it works best on old bikes. It applies to 1960’s Bonnies and BMWs with low-revving, slow-revving engines. It’s entirely debatable if it should be applied to modern high-revving, fast-spinning bikes. If we ride in an artificially high gear to keep the revs low, we’ll be using more throttle than usual for the speed. Some years back on my GSX-R750, I was in too high a gear when I hit a slippery surface and the rear wheel lost traction. The bigger-than-usual throttle opening caused the engine to rev, that spun up the rear wheel, the rear back end stepped out sideways and I just avoided a high-side… at about 10mph! Counter-intuitively, a lower gear would have needed less throttle to drive the bike forward at the same speed, and so the wheelspin would have been less violent. And even if you have traction control, it’ll kick in and you’ll almost certainly shut the throttle. If you are riding an older machine that’s not so equipped, then the answer is to make your own traction control – drag the rear brake lightly right through the manoeuvre until the machine is upright again. It’s crude but it stops wheelspin… and it works. I’m not saying ride everywhere in first gear but take any advice to ride in a “higher gear than normal” with a pinch of salt if you’re not riding a Royal Enfield.

Take it easy out there, and stay shiny side up!

Posted on

36. Aquaplaning – what it is and how to deal with it

Not much to say about this other than to add that tyre condition matters more than tyre type; worn centre grooves, squared-off profiles and under-inflation all seem to be factors associated with increased aquaplaning risk. far more than most riders realise whilst electronic aids Electronic aids such cannot restore grip when a tyre is floating on water. If you do detect the “light, floaty bars” don’t attempt to counter the movement aggressively; that’s a common instinctive error and will just destabilise the bike.

Aquaplaning – what it is and how to deal with it

When I originally wrote this tip almost twenty years ago, my main worry was winter weather. But in the last few years, torrential rain and standing water on summer roads has become just as common and it can be a real hazard. I don’t mean just ploughing into standing water and having the bike stop almost dead, or even finding that the puddle is actually a pothole, but the problem of aquaplaning. So this article explains “what is aquaplaning, how likely is it to happen, how do we recognise it’s happening and what do we do about it?”

Let’s start by explaining what aquaplaning is. I think the term has probably been borrowed from ship design. A ship has to push water aside in front of it, and when that vessel’s speed is sufficiently high, the water cannot get out of the way fast enough. So the vessel tends to rises up and ulimately ‘rides’ on the wave it’s created. That’s the basic principle behind high speed ferries.

Tyres do pretty much the same. When water is sufficiently deep and speed sufficiently high, the tyre cannot displace the water to the side quickly enough. A wave builds up ahead of the tyre’s contact patch and with just a bit more speed and the tyre rides up and ‘floats’ on its own bow wave. And that means it’s lost contact with the road surface, and the tyre has no braking or steering grip!

Here’s the good news. Whilst aquaplaning is quite common when driving a car – the barrel-shaped profile of a car tyre has a broad contact patch that pushes water ahead of it – a motorcycle tyre is U or V-shaped and the relatively long, thin contact patch cuts more effectively through standing water, much like a ship’s bow.

In my experience, aquaplaning is pretty rare on two wheels compared with four. In fact, if we do much motorway driving in wet weather, aquaplaning is quite common. But I can count the times it’s happened on a bike on one hand.

The danger seems to be a road surface just awash with standing water, where we we wouldn’t normally think twice about riding through it at a modest speed. It happened once near Brands Hatch, where the road is wide and flat – it’s an old concrete surface underneath the tarmac skim and so there’s no camber to clear the water, so there was standing water over a considerable length of road. The speed limit is only 40, so it seems that it’s the distance the standing water stretches that matters, rather than flat-out speed. I had a similar incident in the Ardennes in Belgium on a brand-new road that was ‘super-elevated’ – that is, cambered so that the entire road ‘banks’ for each corner. This seemed to trap the rain from a thunderstorm so that rather than flowing OFF the surface, it acted more like a channel of the water.

Hitting a short stretch of deep water doesn’t seem to create the right circumstances for aquaplaning. I suspect this is because the resistance of the water creates a sudden deceleration so there’s no chance for that wave to build. The impact will try to wrench the steering out of our grip, but it’s not aquaplaning. And, let’s face it, if we see a big puddle, it’d be a good idea to avoid it when possible, or slow down when we can’t as we’ve no idea what’s under it.

So watch out for shallow sheets of water, particularly after a thunderstorm or prolonged heavy rain. Look out for places where run-off from a field or an overflowing drain flows into the road. Motorways and dual carriageways are bad because two lane roads like A roads and country lanes normally have a crown that drains water to either side, but the carriageways on a dual carriageway are usually flat, Watch out too for standing water in truck wheel tracks. At speed, and with spray flying around, we may well not see the problem until the last second. So try to keep a good gap, and don’t go excessively quickly.

In my experience, the warning sign that the bike is aquaplaning is that it keeps going in a straight line, but the bars go light and floaty-feeling. They may even move from side to side. It’s a bit like riding on ice, but with one important difference – on ice, the first warning is often wheelspin but when aquaplaning, the rear wheel continues to drive the bike forward, presumably because the rear is often following in the trough cut by the front tyre. It’s front tyre grip that’s compromised.

If we suspect we might be aquaplaning, the best answer seems to be, as is often the case, to keep a relaxed grip on the bars – hanging on for dear life always makes things worse. Lock onto the tank with the knees to keep the weight off the bars and do nothing harsh or sudden. Once again, in my experience, if we simply roll off the throttle gently, the reduction in speed plus the extra loading at the front gets the front tyre to cut back down through the water to regain grip. But don’t apply the front brake – if it’s floating, it could lock. If it’s necessary to brake, use the rear gently. Don’t try to steer until there’s feedback through the bars telling you that the front tyre is back in contact with the road surface.

Posted on

34. Roundabouts routines – straight lines, wide lines, stability, view, advantage and risk

This is likely one of my most contentious posts as my position is very far from the ‘straight lines are stable lines’ approach to riding roundabout followed by many advanced riders and regularly promoted by advanced trainers. Roundabouts are junctions first and foremost, and the dominant risks are not loss of grip or any other issues caused by steering the bike but the potential for misunderstanding, misjudgement, and conflict with other road users. In that sense, a line that reduces lean angle but potentially hides the approaching bike from turning traffic and makes emerging vehicles harder to see at the same time, then increases ambiguity about the rider’s intent is not inherently safer simply because an upright line feels more stable, particularly if the rider then uses the straight line to carry more speed. In the Survival Skills approach, stability is a secondary benefit; predictability, defence, and escape options come first.

Roundabouts routines – straight lines, wide lines, stability, view, advantage and risk

A recurring topic is how to deal with roundabouts. Essentially, the problem is that there is a head-on collision between the DVSA approach as taught to new riders which follows the advice in the Highway Code, and advice from advanced sources which often talks about ‘straightening out’ roundabouts. I’ve even seen one highly dubious article which advocated turning left from the right-hand side and turning right from the left-hand side race track style. The justification was ‘more progress’ and you can probably guess by now that I thought that was extremely poor advice because roundabouts are junctions. My first (and last) question to anyone advocating a roundabout as a suitable place to be making progress is “would you speed up through a crossroads?” I think you can guess the answer to that. Here’s my own Survival Skills thinking.

Roundabouts are a kind of junction. And anywhere traffic flows cross each other are potentially dangerous places, particularly where the flow – as is the case at most roundabouts – is regulated by ‘Give Way’ markings. Like any other junction, the point of highest risk is where vehicles on conflicting courses merge and separate again.

Drivers have problems with motorcycles at junctions. Sometimes they look and cannot see the motorcycle because something blocks their view. Sometimes they look and fail to see – there are a number of well-defined reasons for this. And sometimes they see the bike, but misjudge its speed and distance, and commit to a potentially dangerous manoeuvre.

And roundabouts are also places where drivers and riders get confused about each others’ intentions. It’s not always immediately obvious where another vehicle is going.

I didn’t learn any of that from a book. I learned it all by bitter experience as a courier. Put it all together, and my experience tells me that manoeuvres that aim for us to get out the other side a second or two earlier really aren’t very sound ones.

The article in question suggested :

“If you wish to turn left or right at the roundabout then (again assuming there is no other traffic about) you will need to maximise the radius of the turn within the constraints of the road-layout”.

The diagram shows a left-turn line with a far right approach, clipping the inside kerb and exiting near the centre white line, and the mirror image for a right-turn line – a far left approach, clipping the island and exiting close to the left hand kerb.

Need? Do we NEED to maximise the radius of the turn? Of course not.

But beyond whether it’s ‘nice’ or ‘necessary’, let’s have a think about some genuine concerns with this approach.

Let’s start by pointing out that it’s entirely the opposite of the ‘keep left to turn left, keep right to turn right’ approach taught to every new driver. The standard approach is taught for a pair of very good reasons. The first is that our position sends a signal to other road users, just as much as the use of an indicator. So if we’re approaching wide left with a right indicator showing, what’s the driver to think? Maybe that we’ve forgotten to cancel the signal. And maybe he or she will believe the position rather than the signal, and pull out. The biggest plus for following the same Highway Code lines around roundabouts as we teach on basic training is that it sends clear and unambiguous signals to other road users – including pedestrians or cyclists who might be crossing the side roads, let us not forget – about our intentions. If everyone stuck to the Highway Code approach, none of us would ever be confused as to what anyone else intended. The moment we start using a non-standard approach, there’s a significant risk of confusion – other drivers won’t anticipate the manoeuvre. That’s when things go pearshaped!

The second reason is defensive. Anyone who’s ever watched a race, car or motorcycle, will know that a wide approach to a corner leaves a big gap that anyone wanting to overtake will attempt to exploit. Turning left or right from a wide position opens up a huge hole. We’re liable to find a following vehicle attempting to fill it, and if that vehicle’s going straight ahead, we have a major problem.

Someone pointed out that the statement about “assuming there is no other traffic about” means we don’t need to factor in these issues. But how often can we be ABSOLUTELY certain the junction is completely clear? Few roundabouts have perfect views to the left or right, and many have the ahead view OVER the top of the island deliberately obscured, precisely to make us more circumspect about zooming around the roundabout just as someone coming the other way turns right across our path. And did YOU think of pedestrians and cyclists?

And how far back does “no other traffic” have to extend? What if another vehicle appears just as we commit ourselves to this confusing path? When I see riders exploiting these kind of lines on roundabouts, it’s often taken to mean “no other traffic already in my path”. Hmm.

But thirdly, I’d have a concern even on a totally deserted roundabout. What should be our biggest concern after conflicts with other traffic? How about the surface? We could find a change of surface, potholes, poorly-finished repairs, gravel and bits of debris just out of sight. And where could any forward-thinking rider reasonably expect to find a diesel or fuel spill? I’d be looking for it on the wide exit to a left turn and a wide exit to a right turn – right where this article suggests we should plan to head.

And my fourth concern would be changing line if a problem emerges. Does this maximum radius line make it easier or more difficult to change direction if we need to take evasive action? If we use the line to carry more speed, the answer’s fairly obvous. And if we slow down in case we encounter a problem, what’s the benefit of maximising the radius of the turn in the first place? None that I can see.

So I would stick to the ‘keep left to turn left, keep right to turn right’ approach. But what about going straight ahead? Isn’t it safe enough to straighten out a roundabout if it’s clear? Isn’t it possible to approach on on the left, then clip the island mid-roundabout, then exit back on the left?

This is sometimes called the kerb-kerb-kerb (KKK) line and the “if it’s clear” statement is the crucial one.

Some years back, I nearly had two riders – judging by the bibs they were a pair from the local advanced group – buried in the side of my people carrier. I was emerging from a junction, the road was clear to my right so I started to pull forward. Fortunately, I was still checking right because this pair were cutting over the cross-hatched zone designed to force vehicles to the right where they can be seen. The road layout was modified precisely because emerging vehicles cannot see around the hedge belonging to a cottage that’s right on the corner to the emerging vehicle’s right. If I had been less cautious, I doubt they would have avoided me as I pulled out. We would never keep tight to the left passing a side turning on the left because it restricts our view, but that’s what this KKK approach implies. And if you think about it, it also restricts our view of traffic coming around the island from the opposite direction, traffic that might be turning across our path.

On another occasion, it was me using the KKK line and I nearly got taken out by a following Kawasaki rider. Having followed me on my KKK line through the previous three roundabouts, for some reason he tried to out-brake me into the fourth. Fortunately for both of us, I was watching my mirrors and was able to give him room, but had I held my line across the island, he would have speared me. So we don’t just need to think about wringing advantage from a roundabout, but to think how we can use our lines to defend our position.

As you can see, I ride with different priorities on roundabouts.

So on Survival: SKILLS two-day course or my one-day Survival: URBAN course?

I look for defensive approaches, not wringing out some marginal ‘advantage’. The Highway Code approach line, keeping left when we intend to turn left, or keeping right when we plan on turning right, is a ‘blocking’ line with respect to following vehicles, and also helps confirm our indicators by sending a clear signal to other road users about where we want to go. The slower, tighter turn may mean less speed around the corner itself, but keeps us away from the likely location of a diesel spill or gravel accumulations, and also makes it easier to change direction – or even stop – if needed. Avoiding a maximum radius line means less speed mid-corner but gets us upright sooner, just like the Survival Skills ‘Point and Squirt’ – that means we’re back on the throttle sooner, and quicker away from the roundabout.

But I have created a variation on the KKK approach – and it works within the Highway Code instructions.

Let’s start with self-defence. I’ll take the usual Survival Skills approach by analysing what can go wrong. Although we tend to worry about traffic coming round the island from our right, that’s not actually the biggest threat because WE choose whether or not to pull out. What we CANNOT control is the driver of a vehicle emerging from our LEFT once we’re on the roundabout. It’s not a problem if we turning left at the first exit, and it’s not too much of an issue when turning right, because we’re over by the island and relatively far away. But the recommended Highway Code approach to going straight on – keeping left all the way around the outside of the island – puts us at considerable risk from drivers pulling out in front of us. There’s are secondary risk that vehicles may try to overtake or cut the corner on the way off the island. To monitor BOTH threats, we’re looking left and over our right shoulder. And finally, if a vehicle does emerge from the left AND we have another alongside on the right, we’ve no escape route – our only option is an emergency stop.

So here’s the Survival Skills approach. Instead of keeping left to go ahead, keep RIGHT. If there’s a single approach lane, keep right-of-centre. If there are two or more lanes, use the right-hand lane. Arriving at the island, the first thing that does is give us a slightly better view to our RIGHT, to search for oncoming vehicles turning across our path. This makes pulling onto the island slightly easier. But the big benefits happen once we’re on the island. Now ALL the danger is to our LEFT whether a vehicle in the adjacent lane, or a driver who might pull out from the exit ahead of us. That means we only have to look one way until we’re off the roundabout. We’re also further away from the exit to the left – the driver will have to move a long way to get into our path. And there’s one final bonus – if a driver DOES pull out and block our own path, we have an escape route – we can simply do a lap of the island. And if nothing goes wrong, and if our route ahead is clear, we can exit off into the left-hand lane as in the second half of the KKK line. All we have sacrificed is the straightest line onto the island, but if all’s clear we can take the straightest line off. And the right-hand lane approach to go straight ahead IS in the Highway Code so there’s a lowered risk of confusion.

Understanding risk THEN ACTIVELY SEEKING TO REDUCE IT is at the heart of the Survival Skills approach to riding. ‘Progress’ comes as a result of having eliminated risk. We should never seek ‘advantage’ in ways that increase risk. And if we can keep things simple at the same time, then so much the better.

Final point. The impression we make on others matters. If drivers see us ignoring the Highway Code lines, it simply reinforces the negative impressions most other road users hold about motorcyclists, however much we might impress our mates with our lines. Doesn’t advanced riding consider ‘the other fellow’ too?

Posted on

33. Eleven tips for riding in the dark

This article was obviously written before the advent of modern LED lighting, and this has a significant consequence. Low (dip) beams don’t ‘throw’ their light any further ahead than old-school halogen beams, but they do project this high (main) beams rather further. That can encourage riders to use that high beam to ride faster — I’ve heard riders claiming just that. But remember, that low beam won’t support that higher speed, particularly given something I’ve noticed — the sharp low beam cut-off from LED headlights. The actual safe reaction distance is often much shorter than main beam reaches, and that’s a serious issue when we meet an oncoming vehicle with its own ultrabright LEDs. At the same moment we’re dazzled, we dip our own beam and our view of the road ahead vanishes. I’ve also observed that whilst high beam illuminates far ahead, peripheral areas are left in comparatively deep shadow; the sort of shadow that may hide a wild animal. My brother has just fitted auxiliary lights to his own bike for precisely this reason.

I also talk about upgrading lights. Rather bizarrely, motorcycles are outside the legislation restricting the use of LED bulbs to vehicles fitted with a headlight designed with an LED bulb as original fitment. So in theory, you’re good to go ahead and fit an LED to replace an older halogen. Just one problem. Many cheap LED bulbs on the market have poor beam patterns, others are actually dimmer than the halogens they replace. My brother has experienced both issues out in the US. And legally, replacement LED bulbs should be e-marked for use on the road. A buddy of mine bought a ‘road-legal’ Osram LED bulb sold as a straight replacement for motorcycle use, but found the bulb was NOT marked. It appears that it’s not road-legal after all.

Eleven tips for riding in the dark

Once a year, the summer evenings draw in and from October through till March we are often riding in the dark, often to and from work. Once we lose the long daylight hours, how can we sharpen up our night riding? Here are eleven ways to deal with the darkness.

Avoid dark visors – whilst useful riding directly into a low sun, half an hour after sunset they are a liability. They flatten shadows, making it more difficult to spot potholes and damp patches. Whilst it is possible to swap to a clear visor, a far better option is an internal sun shade (but keep it clean and scratch-free) or wear shatterproof sunglasses which can be taken off when the sun goes down.

Fit a new visor – this should be obvious; if the visor is at all damaged, fit a new one. It’s always amazing at how those tiny, almost invisible scratches make it harder to see at night. If I need to replace the visor, I nearly always do it for autumn so I have the best possible vision through the winter. Keep it clean and scratch free. A few years back RiDE advised against using furniture polish claiming it “can make the plastic go brittle”, but for the last twenty years I’ve followed the advice of an Arai helmet technician who should know what he’s talking about, cleaning my visor with Mr Sheen. Spray on, cover with a damp tissue, leave for a few minutes, then wipe off and polish with a soft cloth. The film of wax helps rain drops bead up and run off, and protects the visor from grit and bugs, which lift off the surface more easily – the result is less damage to the antiscratch coating. It’s worked so well that the last visor outlived the helmet. But do avoid Rain-X – it is intended for glass and destroys the antiscratch coating and should be avoided.

Check, clean and adjust the lights – check all bulbs actually work – it might sound obvious but as soon as dusk falls, I see plenty of riders with a missing tail light. Ensure the headlamp lens is clean (the inside too if you can reach it) then get the headlamp aim right. Illuminating tree tops won’t help us see but will annoy drivers coming the other way. Too low and we won’t pick up hazards till too late.

Upgrade the lights – a 60/55w halogen bulb is the legal maximum, but check that’s what is actually fitted. Some twin headlight set-ups use low power 35/35w or 45/45w bulbs. Check your alternator output but most bikes over 250cc will cope with a single 60/55w bulb. If you have twin headlights, be a little more careful. If, after fitting, you detect no more light it may be you need to fit a relay – some Hondas need this. An easy upgrade to a standard 60/55w bulb are Xenon bulbs – they are a legal 60/55w but offer higher light output – up to 150% according to the advertising – and having tried them they are definitely brighter. Avoid the ‘bad weather’ blue/yellow bulbs if riding on unlit roads. They look cool, and might help to distinguish a motorcycle in urban traffic – see my Science Of Being Seen project – but despite the claims, they really reduce the light output. And don’t fit aftermarket HID kits or LED headlight bulbs. They are illegal if not a standard fitment, and many screw up the focus of the beam too. If you have 6v electrics M&P sell 25/25w and 35/35w halogen bulbs in a variety of fitments which should be a direct replacement for your standard bulb. They also do halogen fitments for bikes with 12v non-standard fitments.

Dawn and Dusk – riding at dawn and dusk is particularly difficult. Something riders tend to forget is the sun. Near the horizon it can be blinding, and during winter it spends more time there than usual. We can anticipate the problem. Shadows reaching towards us show the sun is ahead of us, so if we’re about to ride into the sun, expect to be dazzled. It would be a good idea to slow down early (rather than hit the brakes when we realise we can’t see anything). When riding into the sun, look for road signs to warn of junctions and other hazards. When riding OUT of the sun, we can see clearly but drivers looking towards us are blinded, particularly at junctions. Be particularly careful if the road surface is wet – the combination of direct and reflected light can be absolutely blinding. Immediately after the sun has set comes the most difficult driving time – twilight. The eye is adjusted to the lighter sky, which makes it difficult to see where the shade is deep. Take extra care.

Riding under street lights – where roads are well-lit, it can be almost as easy to see as in daylight, but where the lighting is not so good, we need to pay attention to areas in deep shadow and to remember that other drivers’ lights will be concealing us so we’re harder to spot. But don’t be tempted to ride on main beam “to be more conspicuous”. The glare from the light obscures the bike behind it.

Riding on unlit roads – this presents another challenge althogther. We’re limited by how far our lights show the road ahead, but don’t forget – it doesn’t matter how good our lights are, as soon as we need to dip the main beam, our long view will be cut short. No matter how good the lights, set your speed to ride well within the ‘distance you can see to be clear’. Look as far ahead along the route as possible – don’t just concentrate on the patch of light but search out road markings and signs to help work out where the road goes. Even in the country, it is very rarely pitch black and we can often get a clue where the road goes from the outlines of hedges and trees – but like these clues in daylight just don’t rely too much on them. Other vehicles lights will often give an idea of where the road heads. A glow ahead will usually be warning of a junction or roundabout. A single light often marks a side road. We can try to position to ‘see and be seen’ but remember that our lights probably won’t stand out from vehicles behind us. There’s some evidence that twin headlights can be mistaken for a car a lot further off. There is no point in blaming the SMIDSY driver, and trying to make eye contact in the dark is pretty pointless. We need to be ready to take evasive action. When other vehicles are approaching, try not to look directly at the beams, but to the left and the nearside edge of the road. Having a good idea of what lies ahead comes in useful. A line of tiny lights appearing over a crest is a truck. Dip lights early because the driver sits high above his own lights. Another biking annoyance is sitting right behind the car ahead, when our higher lights shine straight in the back window of the car and blind the driver. But if there are no reasons not to, use main beam – an astonishing number of riders seem to use just dip! Don’t forget that it also warns drivers ahead and out of direct line of sight of our presence.

Learn about cats-eyes and reflective marker posts – if they’re on the road, use them. Amber cats-eyes mark the right edge of the road, red mark the left edge, green ones are found where you can leave (or others join) via a sliproad. White cats-eyes separate lanes. Similarly, white marker posts will always be found on the right, red on the left. If white cats-eyes in the middle of the road get closer together, we’re approaching a hazard – it’s the same as the hazard line. Learn the difference in markings between lanes and slip roads – that will help you avoid the crash I had years ago when I ran off the A1 late at night in heavy spray. Following the left kerb, I went up a slip road leading to a Little Chef and ended up on my backside sliding over wet grass. Kerbs can and do disappear into side roads, bus stops, drive ways and ditches. Watch out too for awkwardly positioned central islands and width restrictor ‘pinch-points’ installed as traffic calming. They are often poorly marked and hard to spot at night.

Avoid ‘advanced’ positioning – a more ‘middle of the road’ line will give us room for manoeuvre if we don’t read a bend correctly, but avoid the temptation to turn in too early. Nor do we want to be braking hard approaching bends – the headlight beam will dive as well as the forks. Get off the brakes and on the gas before steering, so the machine and beam are levelled out before we have to steer. On left-handers, the beam will tilt to light up the outside of the turn and dazzle on-coming drivers. But the part of the beam illuminating the nearside will move back towards us, which doesn’t help in seeing where the road goes. Although most bikes have a reasonable spread of light allowing us to see round corners to some extent, a few – like my old CX500 – are focussed like laser beams. It made a thirty hairpin alpine pass a ‘never-to-be-forgotten’ experience. To see around corners, dip often has a better spread than main beam. It’ll also work a bit better coming over the brow of a hill than main beam. We can get a bit of extra light on dip by using the headlamp flasher button to illuminate main beam too. But only for a second or two – any longer will melt the fuse! And avoid accelerating until it’s clear where the road goes next. The slow-in, late turn ‘Point and Squirt’ approach works just as well in the dark as it does on blind corners – because effectively a dark corner IS a blind corner.

Dealing with cars on main beam – a common problem is encountering a driver with headlights blazing on high beam. If we dip our own lights promptly when we see the lights of a vehicle coming the other way, it’s usually enough to get the other driver to return the courtesy. If they still forget, a quick flash of main beam usually wakes them up. But in some cases, the problem is a car with badly-adjusted beams or which is heavily loaded.

If we’re not seen, we might be heard – even though it’s technically illegal to use the horn in a built-up area between 11:30pm and 7:00am, if I thought a driver hadn’t seen me, I know what I would do!

If you need some help on getting used to riding in the dark, why not check out the Survival Skills ‘Basics’ course? We start just before it gets dark, ride through the twilight and into full darkness to see how our perception of the road changes and have a chance to employ the strategies in this article.

Posted on

32. When the Two Second Rule is not enough

Were I to start this article again (and I may at some point do that), the following observations would call for some revision:

  1. Two Second Rule: The explanation is accurate as a minimum safe distance, but it’s worth noting explicitly that it assumes a fully alert rider on a dry surface, nor does it scale well at speeds over 45 mph – that needs to be crystal-clear.

  2. Stopping distance calculations: The math is correct but actual deceleration is rarely as high as 0.9G for most street riders. 0.6–0.7G is more realistic, as I noted later. Also, poor surface conditions can reduce effective deceleration to 0.3–0.5G and whilst modern ABS helps a rider make the most of available grip, they cannot compensate for poor spacing or delayed reaction, or – and this is crucial – a rider who is not confident / competent to engage the ABS in an emergency.

  3. Reaction times: Updating from 0.5–1 second to 0.7–1.5 seconds for typical riders (and 2–3 seconds for surprise events) is consistent with modern human factors research.

  4. Motorcycle vs. car braking: while a sportbike may match braking distances achieved by cars, that’s under ideal conditions and the skill required to consistently achieve this is significant, and errors are common in real-world scenarios.

A very useful comment was added to a previous version of this particular item; “Whilst the ‘dead stop in the road’ scenario would initially seem to be somewhat rare, in actuality it is very common. Of course, what I am referring to the moment a vehicle turns across our path. I realize that the two-second rule has no bearing on the above situations. Just thought I’d point out that one shouldn’t get so involved with counting seconds that they don’t see the car about to transform itself into that dreaded ‘brick wall'”.

When the Two Second Rule is not enough

The original version of this particular article almost dates to the earliest days of the internet, because I wrote it following a discussion on the Go Ride Forum on CompuServe – that should serve to date it accurately enough. But well over twenty years later, whenever I’m out driving a car, running training courses or simply watching other riders, one recurring error is following the vehicle ahead far too close. And whilst motorcyclists worry about being tailgated themselves, a surprising number of collisions happen when it’s the rider running into the back of the vehicle ahead. It seems some rider errors never change.

The Highway Code says sensibly enough that we “should ride at a speed that allows us to stop in the distance we can see to be clear, and at a distance that will allow us to stop if the vehicle in front stops suddenly”. It then goes onto quote some following distances and braking distances.

The trouble is that it doesn’t really matter whether those distances are in feet, metres or car lengths, our biggest problem is trying to visualise these distances. It’s tough to think just how far 75 feet or 23 metres or 6 car lengths at a standstill, let alone on the move at 30 mph. This is clear when performing demonstration emergency stops. I’ll often get the trainee to make where they THINK I’ll stop if I hit the brakes at 30 mph. That usually puts them on the back foot, and it’s rare to find anyone who moves confidently to mark their chosen spot.

Not uncommonly, I have to remind them of the 23 metre stopping distance. And then they often stand about half that distance away.

And that may be a clue as to why riders follow too close on the road. If we can’t judge a short distance like 23 metres to within 50% at a standstill, what chance to they have on the road? (The way I judge it is that it’s just over the length of a cricket pitch.

But there’s a solution, also in the Highway Code. It’s the Two Second Rule. We watch the vehicle in front as it passes a fixed object (a lamppost, a tree, a shadow or even a seam in the road) and start talking: “only a fool breaks the Two Second Rule”. In theory, that takes about two seconds to say, so if we have passed this point before we’ve finished talking, we’re too close. If we get it all out without gabbling, we’re far enough back. And in the wet, we double the Two Second Rule to four seconds.

So does it work? Whilst it’s likely to be adequate around town, there’s also some bad news that neither the Highway Code nor any of the other manuals or riding tips has made clear.

the Two Second Rule is not a target – it’s a MINIMUM safe distance and should be extended at all times whenever traffic conditions allow

the stopping distances are based on a rider braking AS SOON AS the vehicle ahead slows – even an alert rider can be caught by SURPRISE! and that is well-known to delay our response

stopping distance does not increase in a straight line with speed – if we double our speed, we QUADRUPLE stopping distance

It’s the last point I want to focus on because it means there is a cross-over point beyond which we cannot stop even with a two second gap. My old buddy Steve Kelly got his trusty calculator out and we fed some data in. We travel 13 metres or 44 feet each sec at 30mph. Stopping (reaction and braking) distance at 30mph is quoted in the Highway Code as 23 metres or 75 feet. A modern motorcycle on decent tyres can brake much harder than the Highway Code allows. So we made two initial assumptions:

  1. an alert rider can react in around 0.5 second

  2. braking hard, a rider can achieve around 0.9G of braking force (more on that in a moment)

And we ignored wind resistance, poor road surfaces and all rolling friction. So here are the braking figures:

At 15mph

In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 44.0ft
Your stopping and reaction distance is 19.4ft
Your margin for error is 24.6ft
Your impact speed is n/a

At 30 mph

In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 88.0ft
Your stopping and reaction distance is 55.4ft
Your margin for error is 32.6ft
Your impact speed is n/a

At 45 mph

In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 132.0ft
Your stopping and reaction distance is 108.0ft
Your margin for error is 23.8ft
Your impact speed is n/a

At 60 mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 176ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 178ft

  • Your margin for error is -2.0ft

  • Your impact speed is 0.6mph

At 75mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 220ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 264ft

  • Your margin for error is -43.9ft

  • Your impact speed is 12.5mph

At 90mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 264ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 367ft

  • Your margin for error is -103ft

  • Your impact speed is 25.2mph

At 105mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 308ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 486ft

  • Your margin for error is -178ft

  • Your impact speed is 38.5mph

I think you can see what is happening – at 60mph, maintaining a 2 second gap, you will crash at walking pace even if you are wide awake and brake as quickly as possible. At 90 (not an unusual motorway speed, you will have a serious accident with a big impact. (And at 150mph, you would hit the brickwall at a frightening and almost certainly fatal 80.2mph!)

What if we’re caught by SURPRISE! and our reactions are a bit slow? If we double the reaction time to a not-unlikely one second (more on that in a moment too), here are the figures.

At 15mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 44.0ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 30.4ft

  • Your margin for error is 13.6ft

  • Your impact speed is n/a

At 30 mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 88.0ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 77.4ft

  • Your margin for error is 10.6ft

  • Your impact speed is n/a

At 45 mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 132.0ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 141.0ft

  • Your margin for error is -9.2ft

  • Your impact speed is 2.9mph

At 60 mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 176ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 222ft

  • Your margin for error is -45.7ft

  • Your impact speed is 12.4mph

At 75mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 220ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 319ft

  • Your margin for error is -98.9ft

  • Your impact speed is 23.3mph

At 90mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 264ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 367ft

  • Your margin for error is -169ft

  • Your impact speed is 35.1mph

At 105mph

  • In 2 seconds at constant speed you will travel 308ft

  • Your stopping and reaction distance is 563ft

  • Your margin for error is -255ft

  • Your impact speed is 47.6mph

The important point is that now the crossover point is now 45mph.

Not surprisingly some objections were raised during discussions.

“Rider over-reaction to a perceived emergency is a greater hazard in many situations than the actual emergency itself”. I can’t argue with this having done that myself and fallen off on several occasions, and it’s why ABS is compulsory on new bikes in the EU.

“It is well known that a modern motorcycle with good tyres can stop from 60 mph in under 110 feet; this is comparable to only a few automobiles such as Porsche, Corvette, Ferrari, etc. In the vast majority of situations where maximum braking is needed, the bike will be able to come to an absolute stop, well before the standard car or truck.” A biking myth. It may just possibly have been true in the past, but with four wheels on the ground and ABS to boot (literally), I’m far from convinced that even a well-handled bike will out-stop a car. Few riders practice emergency stops and even with ABS too, braking a motorcycle at the absolute limit requires a degree of skill and machine control that a car driver simply doesn’t need.

All this, of course, assumes good traction. Our friend stated: “When the surface is less than optimal, it affects other vehicles as well. If the rider is a capable bike-handler, he/she should still be able to outbrake and/or steer past a standard car or truck, as the mass of the vehicle determines its kinetic energy when speed is equal”.

“I don’t think the Two Second Rule results in such dire consequences as the calculations imply. One is assuming a fixed object towards which one is braking. In reality, emergency braking is initiated in response to a vehicle ahead, also braking. That vehicle must decelerate from its velocity just as you do, so the Two Second Rule simply provides adequate reaction time to initiate your braking in response to the emergency ahead.” It’s another fine theory that as speeds rise and traffic spreads out, we can see and react to vehicles braking further ahead, but theory isn’t always right. I can think of three incidents in front of me:

  1. on a motorway, the car ahead of me drifted to the right, dipped its right front wheel in the gravel drain at the edge of the outside lane and was swung straight into the Armco barrier in the centre of the motorway. It immediately rolled over a couple of times and slid to a halt on the roof in front of me. That stopped pretty quick

  2. my brother was driving with me in the passenger seat when the car in front of us colliding head-on with a vehicle coming the opposite way that had drifted into our lane. That blocked the road ahead as the cars both stopped almost instantly.

  3. I was following a car when its offside suspension collapsed, and it spun 180 degrees and stopped dead in the road facing me

THESE are the situations the Two Second Rule is designed to rescue us from.

And here’s something else to think about. A study of emergency braking revealed that instead of our assumed 0.9G of deceleration, a typical rider is more likely to generate 0.6G. I’ve haven’t repeated the calculations but I’m sure you realise that wil add SIGNIFICANTLY to all the stopping distances.

We also originally banked on a reaction time of an alert rider of 0.5 of a second and double that for a rider caught by surprise. In fact, 0.5s is right at the top limit for reaction time. A more typical figure is around 0.7 sec for an alert driver. But even our 1s reaction time turns out to be much to optimistic in a real emergency. When we’re taken by SURPRISE! our reaction time can become even longer. Two, even three seconds is common. It’s almost certainly this delayed response that explains why many urban riders don’t avoid junction collisions even when the accident investigation says they should. It wasn’t that they were speeding (the more usual conclusion) but that they simply failed to react to the emergency because they were taken by SURPRISE!

As I’ve said before when discussing my advanced motorcycle training courses, that brings me to the need to PLAN for things to GO WRONG. We must be pragmatic if we are to have genuine Survival Skills.

So if you’ve religiously adhered to the Two Second Rule till now, you may be a bit concerned to find it doesn’t work as we go faster. Even though I knew stopping distances quadruple as speed doubles, I was a bit startled to discover the crossover point was so low. As Steve said: “I’ll think about this a lot more when I’m next travelling along a motorway”.

Thanks to Steve Kelly for doing the mathematics.

Posted on

30. The Limit (or Vanishing) Point – is it enough?

Years after I wrote this, and even now after I updated it, I still think that the belief that the Limit Point is of prime importance when setting our speed in corners is massively overstated. What I would add now is that there is a distinction between the static Limit Point — where road edges converge at any particular instant — and the dynamic Limit Point — how is our sense of how this point is moving back and forth as our bike moves along the road. And — in my opinion at least — it should never be the sole determinant of speed into a corner. It’s often hard to detect road irregularities on fast sweeping bends until we’re much closer, the gaps in hedges where other vehicles may appear frequently only ‘uncloak’ well after the Limit Point is reached, and there’s no guarantee that any hazard that reveals itself via the forward movement of the Limit Point is actually stationary — if it’s moving towards us, we could easily run out of braking distance. To me, these are blindly obvious limitations. Yet decades after I first wrote about them, they are rarely covered in any discussion of the Limit Point. Treat is as one tool among many; a guide to road direction and potential speed adjustments, rather than a definitive target for acceleration, braking or — most crucially of all — stopping! For riders of all levels, it’s integrating “what we can see” with “what we can’t see” and being ready to deal with the latter, by thinking well beyond the Limit Point that is paramount to safe cornering.

The Limit (or Vanishing) Point – is it enough?

As soon as we take a look at post-test motorcycle training, one of the concepts we’re likely to come across is something called the Limit Point or the Vanishing Point (or Convergence Point or Visual Point – call it what you like, it’s the same thing). It gets particular focus in UK-based post-test training because it appears in the police handbook ‘Motorcycle Roadcraft’. And because the police manual discusses it, it’s a feature of the IAM’s own RoadSmart ‘Advanced Rider Course’ and in the training delivered by RoSPA instructors and virtually anyone else who bases their training on UK police practice. Not surprisingly, it also regularly pops up on advanced riding videos and guides in magazines and on the internet. It’s also been adopted abroad. So just how useful is it? And just how do we set our speed for a bend? Is it ONLY based on ‘limit point analysis’?

Because the Limit Point has been explained so many times and done to a crispy turn on the internet, I left it the topic alone for many years – why add another article to an already-sizeable pile that say much the same?

So what changed my mind?

Have a read of this. It’s a post made on the bike forum I used to moderate by another advanced instructor with impressive ex-police credentials:

“The main thing you have to learn about safe riding is the visual point or vanishing point. I teach this to clients all the time. Some tell me in detail how or what they look at at and when I take them out on the road it seems no one understands it too well. All police riding is based on this because if you know how to use it, it gives you everything you want. Position on the road, speed on the approach to any bend, how fast you can enter the bend, how much power to apply to the throttle, where to move the bike from the corner for the next position. In my experience it is not the technique that is hard but the believing what you see and having confidence to use it anywhere in the world. It is very exciting once you know how it works.”

The writer continued by explaining the ‘stop in the distance we can see to be clear’ rule, and explained that as the limit point is as far as we can see, that’s where we need to be able to stop.

“Everything you want”?

Really? Not in my book it doesn’t.

Firstly, it’s assuming that any obstacle in our lane revealed by the receding Limit Point will be stationary. Of course there’s no guarantee that’s the case as any biker who has ever misjudged an overtake approaching a corner and gone into it on the wrong side of the road will know. The narrower the road and the tighter the corner, the more likely we are to encounter a vehicle crossing into our lane, and in the worst case, driving towards us in it. It’s important that we add the extra words that are actually clearly stated within ‘Roadcraft’ – and that is that we must actually be able to “stop WELL WITHIN in the distance we can EXPECT TO REMAIN clear”. That’s a significant difference.

Secondly – and this is not mentioned explicitly in ‘Roadcraft’ – there’s always the possibility of an oncoming car turning across our path. Now, if we’re rounding a left-hander, we’ll see that car appear a few moments before we can see the junction it’s aiming for on the inside of the corner – our line of sight always unveils the outside of the bend before we see the corresponding point on the inside of the corner. What that should tell us is that we won’t know if there’s an emerging car on the inside of the bend, even though our formal Limit Point is already beyond it. The reverse applies on a right-hander. We’ll see the junction to the inside of the bend, but the oncoming vehicle about to cross our path into it will be out of sight. Just as ‘Roadcraft’ says – without explaining why – we MUST be able to stop well before we reach the Limit Point.

Here’s a third issue that isn’t mentioned either. Let me introduce you to what are sometimes called ‘Surprise Horizons’. A Surprise Horizon is any point which lies between us and the Limit Point, from which another vehicle (or cyclist, pedestrian or even an animal) MIGHT EMERGE and BLOCK OUR PATH. And that means we actually need to do is be able to STOP at that point, NOT at the Limit Point. And that is a very different concept. The term Surprise Horizon comes from a book called ‘Mind Driving’ by Stephen Haley, a car trainer.
Even though we might have a clear view of the Limit Point itself, a Surprise Horizon can lurk unseen in any blind area. Even on a near-straight road, a slight kink in the hedge, the narrow gap between two buildings, an opening between parked cars, or a blind crest all have the potential to conceal anything from a tractor tugging a trailer to a sheep.

So what’s my conclusion? That used sensibly it works well with other observation links but that it should be considered just one tool in your box of tricks to read corners, not the “be all and end all” of your cornering technique.

Anyway, I posted something to this effect on the forum and two wags read it and replied…

“So isn’t the “Vanishing point” simply the farthest you can see down the road? Or is that too simple?”

“Way, Way too simple. This is technical stuff we’re talking about here. The vanishing point is the point where the left and right verges appear to converge, or in other words, the farthest you can see down the road. Does that make it clear?”

I had to laugh… sometimes a simple, useful technique that should be obvious and straightforward can be elevated to semi-mystical status!

The Surprise Horizon concept is one that really should be added to ‘Roadcraft’ and to any explanation of how to apply the Limit point concept to judge speed. If we simply see the road as guaranteed to stay empty between ourselves and the Limit Point, we really are risking a nasty SURPRISE! And remember…

No Surprise? No Accident!

Posted on

29. Avoiding diesel and other slippery spills

Unusually this is an area where things genuinely have improved for motorcyclists. Improvements in commercial vehicle design, tighter fleet maintenance standards, and just possibly a faster clean-up of reported spills mean that streaks of diesel on roundabouts and bends are now far less common than they were in my courier days, even in the early part of my instructing career. Police collision data has long suggested that fuel spills are blamed for more crashes than they actually cause, and reduced exposure has only reinforced that trend. However, this does not mean slippery contaminants have disappeared altogether. We still need the same level of anticipation, observation, and margin — if anything, newer riders are likely to be less aware of the issue than those of us with a long backstory of dodging diesel. And it’s always worth remembering that ANY liquid will have less traction that the dry or uncontaminated tarmac.

Avoiding diesel and other slippery spills

My first introduction to the slippery nature of fuels spilled on the road came soon after I’d taken my 125 up to London. I stopped at a pedestrian crossing, three bikes came flying past me, turned right and promptly formation-crashed. As I pulled away, the 125 span the back wheel. Even that early on in my riding career I knew that wasn’t quite right and took the corner rather more slowly than the other bikes. A truck was parked halfway up the hill with a split tank and some fireman throwing bags of sand around it. The slick reached right down the hill to where the bikes had crashed. That was a while ago, and on purely observational evidence, it seems to me that fuel spills are much less common than when I was a courier. Moreover, evidence from police accident investigations suggests that despite the popular belief that oil and diesel cause bike crashes, the real crash numbers are low. That might be why in a long discussion on the problems of diesel on one of my favourite forums most of the correspondents had mates “who have crashed on diesel”, yet surprisingly few actually put up their hands and said “I’ve crashed on it myself”.

Nevertheless, it’s as well to be on the alert. As with all hazards, the first thing to consider is where we might find it, secondly how to spot it, and thirdly and to have some idea of what to do if we do spot ANY oil, diesel or petrol spill – they are ALL slippery.

Where might we find diesel and petrol (it’s slippery too) spilled on the road? The obvious answer is where vans, trucks and buses start with full tanks. And that means ports, industrial estates and bus depots, particularly in the morning. Leaving aside the random spills from a split tank, or from the van that had taken off its sump on high kerb round a traffic-calming ‘pinch point’ (it didn’t get far but left quite a slick for half a mile), keep an eye open where vehicles change direction – corners, junctions and particularly roundabouts are likely problem areas.

Combine a roundabout with exits marked INDUSTRIAL ESTATE and we should be on alert. Back when I was a trainer in Lydd, my homeward route took me round the Ashford ring road, which has a dozen industrial estates round it. Just as I was slowing for a right turn at one of the roundabouts, a guy on an R1 flew past signalling right as well. Knee out, he vanished around the back of the island but never reappeared. Going round rather more cautiously, I avoided the big streak of diesel and stopped to lend a hand. Rider unhurt but bike rather sad, having flipped over after sliding into the kerb. I left him arranging a van ride home. If we’re apply the ‘stop in the distance we can see to be clear’ rule, don’t forget it applies to road surface too.

Another good rule-of-thumb is that diesel spotted on one corner will probably reappear on the next. Another courier followed me carefully round one left-hander leading out of one London square as we both avoided the diesel. He overtook me, and promptly crashed on the left-hander leading into the next square just few hundred metres further on. As I stopped to help him untangle the bike from the railings, he said: “I didn’t expect diesel on that bend too”.

Err, right. So where did you expect it?

Most spills either come from overflows on over-filled tanks (much rarer now) or when drivers forget to put the filler cap on. Don’t laugh – I forgot to put the bike filler cap on once, because the tank bag covered it. A lapful of fuel reminded me, but the driver won’t know. The fuel is likely to be be spilled outwards so look for it on the outside of the lane – near the centre line on a left-hander or the kerb on a right-hander. But don’t forget a oncoming vehicle could slosh it our side of the centre line on a right-hander too.

Watching the surface is one reason for not trailing a vehicle ahead too close. If we see temporary slippery road signs or even police SLOW triangles, take care – it could be a spillage or even accident ahead, and there may well be a slippery cocktail of detergent, diesel, engine oil and antifreeze on the road.

See if you can spot the spill. In the rain, oil produces the familiar rainbow effect. It looks scary because the rain washes the oil right over the road, but in fact the rainbow effect is produced by a layer just one molecule thick. A single drop of oil can produce a big circular rainbow patch. It’s slippery but not lethal – the tyres will cut down to the surface. But if we see the rainbow right across the road, then it’s a bigger spill. Try to see which way the rainbow’s being washed – the source is probably in the other direction and that’s the area to keep clear of.

Unfortunately, in the dry, there’s no warning rainbow. The best advice I can give you is that fresh oil and diesel is very wet-looking and very shiny. It’s looks like ‘very wet water’ for want of a better description. A big diesel spill in the dry can often be smelled. So use your nose. A dulled black streak is almost certainly an old spill, and unlikely to be particularly slippery. But it’s worth knowing that if it rains, old spills can be ‘reactivated’, particularly by a short shower after a long dry spell.

Don’t forget petrol can also be spilled. It’s just as slippery as diesel but harder to see – it looks like water. Whenever possible, keep clear of any unusual wet-looking patches.

Interestingly, in that forum discussion, there was little useful advice, beyond declarations that “it’ll will have you off if you hit it” statements.

Ideally, we do want to stay off it if possible. It’s just a matter of having the speed and lean angle in hand to change line and direction. But sometimes we simply have cross a spill. It’s straightforward enough if we can avoid leaning and braking (the usual instinct) as we cross it, and instead keep the bike as upright as possible. For that reason if I find a spill mid-corner, I tend to steer INSIDE it, even if that means sacrificing my view round the bend. Why? I may have to cross it. If I’m on the inside, I can pick the machine up and cross it upright, before leaning over again back on clean tarmac. But if I’m on the outside and need to cross it, I actually need to increase my lean angle. Not a good plan. And don’t forget that the tyres will take a moment to clean off – don’t bang the bike straight over on its side, but ease it over.

Look ahead, think ahead, plan ahead, and oil and diesel should be no more than a minor – if potentially dangerous – irritant.

Posted on

27. Cornering Problems 4 – Set up the brakes to stay out of corner trouble

Written originally before the widespread adoption of ABS and the current enthusiasm for trail braking, this piece has arguably become more relevant rather than less. Modern braking systems reduce the consequences of error, but they do not eliminate the need for judgement, preparation, or margin. In fact, on increasingly unpredictable road surfaces, relying on late or reactive braking strategies leaves the rider more exposed, not less. “In too fast” remains a dominant failure mode and has turned up in multiple recent crash studies, UK DfT KSI summaries, and police collision reconstructions. The bike is usually capable but the rider’s speed management is the failure point. Nothing in rider aids has meaningfully changed that. It’s still a knowledge gap vs skills gap issue. Braking studies have shown that most riders don’t think to brake for corners until too late.

Unfortunately, the false binary “good riders don’t brake” versus “bad riders use brakes” thinking is still present, even if it far less common than when I penned this piece. Brake preloading as an anti-surprise strategy aligns extremely closely with modern human-factors research on startle response and task switching. The principles discussed here are not about rejecting modern technology, but about using it as a safety net rather than a primary plan — and about preventing the ‘in too fast’ error before electronics are ever asked to intervene.

Cornering Problems 4 – Set up the brakes to stay out of corner trouble

Even in the years that I’ve been an advanced rider coach is the rider, I’ve seen a lot of change to motorcycle design and the technology that comes with them, and the UK’s training and testing regime has changed a lot too. Now, when accident studies look at crashes result from the ‘in too fast’ error, it’s nearly always the case that the BIKE could have made the corner. But in my time in training cornering crashes are much the same as they ever were. It’s not even a blink of the eye in terms of human evolution, and so it’s not surprising the rider always was and remains the weak link. But we can do better if we learn the appropriate skills. So given our propensity to find our way into trouble in bends, why aren’t we taught how to avoid one of the most common cornering crashes; running into a corner too hot? If getting the bike sorted for a bend really is as simple as getting back on the throttle before we try to steer, why do riders get themselves into such a muddle on corners by making the ‘in too fast’ error? Here are two answers.

The first involves the lack of time spent working on corners on basic training. As the test itself is conducted mostly on urban roads with a sprinkling of dual carriageway work, it’s unlikely that manys rider on the bike test will have to ride more than a mile or so along a reasonably twisty road. Not surprisingly, basic trainers tend to focus on the kind of roads the test will be conducted on, and whilst many will do some training on the twisties, it’s rarely ever in much depth. Even the technique of counter-steering is not guaranteed to be covered.

In my experience as a rider coach, many ‘cornering’ issues turn out to be a lack of confidence with the brakes. Why? Well, braking ahead of a bend is rarely taught on basic training for the reasons mentioned above, and how to break it’s largely left to the trainee to work out for themselves. Not having been taught how to brake before a corner, few riders ever practice braking upright before a bend. It’s a double-whammy.

But here’s a weird thing. We ALL know modern bikes can brake very hard in a straight line, most of us because our basic trainer spent hours teaching emergency stop technique. But for some reason, we never seem to appreciate that it’s the same basic ‘front first, rear second, progressively harder squeeze of the front’ approach that works wherever we need it – avoiding collisions, braking for red traffic lights or on the approach a roundabout…

…and approaching corners.

So for most riders – there are exceptions – it’s not a SKILLS gap, it’s actually a KNOWLEDGE gap perhaps because it was never made explicitly clear – no-one told them they can brake hard ahead of a corner.

But I also believe we also have problems at post-test level because riders are still being discouraged from braking for corners. Have you ever heard it said that “a good rider shouldn’t need to touch the brakes”? I have, and much too often for my liking.

I first read it back in my courier days, in articles written about the IAM test. It didn’t make a great deal of sense to me then, but when I put myself into the IAM’s hands towards the back end of my sixteen year stint as a courier, I was exposed to the thinking first-hand. Out with my observer on one of my favourite cross-country routes in Kent, it wasn’t long before I was pulled up. I was told “you are braking on the approach to corners”. Yes, I knew that so a “what’s wrong with that” debate followed. To keep it short, I was told that if I was “judging corners correctly”, I wouldn’t need to use the brakes – I could do all my deceleration with a closed throttle and judicious use of the gears. As I already knew, this was explained as ‘acceleration sense’.

The use of gears as a substitute for brakes is a topic for another day, but I turned the question-and-answer game around and got him to explain why he’d thought I wasn’t judging the corners simply because he’d seen me braking. I asked if I had gone into any of the corners with the brakes still being applied, off-line or at an inappropriate speed. He had to admit the answer to all these questions was “no, you didn’t”.

So I asked how it was, that if I wasn’t making these errors, that I was reading the road incorrectly? The answer was:

“Because you had to brake on the approach to a bend.”

You should be able to see that’s a circular argument, and totally unsupported by any logical thinking. It’s simply a repetition of a mantra: ‘acceleration sense good, brakes bad’.

The proper debate should have been about the proper timing and the relative effectiveness of the two techniques – acceleration sense or positive braking – at getting the speed sorted out in such as way as to prevent the ‘in too fast’ error.

So let’s do that by looking at the ‘in too fast’ problem. In the ideal world of advanced riding, we’d assess every stretch of road correctly. We’d read each bend perfectly. And we’d never make the ‘in too fast’ mistake.

Back in the real world, I am happy to admit that I do cock up. I am not a perfect rider, and every once in a while I do discover myself arriving too fast for the next corner. And here’s a truth none of us should ever forget. If we DO make a mistake and end up arriving too fast for the bend, we’ll be lucky if we get away with a horrible line round the corner. If we’re not so lucky, then the likelihood is we’ll run wide. On a right-hander, that’s likely to be off the road. Been there, done that. And if we happen to run wide on a left-hander, that takes us into the oncoming lane. Been there, done that too. And I don’t want to repeat it because it’s pure chance if we get away with it. The Grim Reaper could easily be driving a Scania coming the other way. Running wide on a left-hander is one of the killer crashes on UK rural roads.

So I prepare to deal with the ‘in too fast’ mistake rather than make an assumption that I got it right. And the easiest way to do this on the the approach to a bend is to roll off the throttle AND apply the brakes lightly rather than rely on engine braking alone.

Why? Quite simple. As soon as the throttle is shut, that’s the limit to our deceleration. There’s nothing left unless we start forcing the bike down through the gears.

By contrast, braking lightly at the same time as decelerating ‘sets up’ the brakes ready to use them. We can apply anything from a feather touch which barely slows the bike any more than engine braking alone, right up to a full-on emergency stop.

At this point, the critics usually pop up.

“Ah, but if you’d read the road ahead correctly you wouldn’t need to brake.” Well, most corners in the UK are blind as we enter them, and whilst I’m pretty good at asking “what if…” and preparing just in case, I’m not prescient and what I expect to happen and what actually appears isn’t always the same. I’d rather be prepared for getting it wrong than patting myself on the back for getting it right.

“But you can also brake even if you’re using acceleration sense.” Absolutely we can. But if we’re shutting the throttle with our fingers on the twist grip, we have to disengage them and reach over to the brake lever, then we have to start squeezing progressively. If we are ALREADY braking lightly, we have eliminated the delay and we can go straight into positive braking. By removing this delay, we can either stop in a shorter distance or we can brake less hard than a rider who’s had to switch from decelerating using the engine to using the brakes.

“But you’re more likely to grab the front brake if you’re dangling your fingers over it.” This one actually makes some sense but it’s a misunderstanding of just why we’re using the ‘setting up’ technique. As you’ll know from my work on ‘No Surprise? No Accident!’ the trigger for the panic reactions that cause many motorcycle crashes is the SURPRISE! that results when we’re caught out by a situation developing in a way we didn’t expect. Keeping fingers off the front brake is no guarantee we won’t give it a huge handful as soon as we panic. By contrast, the action of switching from engine braking alone to the ‘set up’ approach which pre-loads the brakes with light pressure indicates we’ve already switched to a mindset where we are anticipating we might have to brake harder. And that means we’re far less likely to suffer SURPRISE! when the bend doesn’t do what we hope.

“OK, but you’ll slow down too much.” Remember, we’re only applying a feather-touch to the brakes on the approach to the corner. That’s not going to slow us dramatically – in fact, we probably won’t be any slower into the corner because we know we can lose speed rapidly if we need to. And if nothing reveals itself? Then we simply release the brakes and roll back on the throttle to get the bike balanced before we turn in to the corner itself. And in any case, it’s much easier to regain speed in a corner if we rolled in a bit too slow than it is to shed speed mid-corner if we ran in too hot.

And once again, I’m not the only one advocating this technique. The ‘setting up’ technique is routinely taught on the approach to unpredictable hazards in Australia.

Hopefully I’ve now persuaded you the ‘setting up’ approach to a corner has some genuine benefits and no real drawbacks. This isn’t about ‘riding perfection’ but all about being pragmatic. If it can go wrong, it WILL go wrong sooner or later – that’s the assumption at the foundation of Survival Skills advanced motorcycle riding courses. So if in ANY doubt, SET UP the brakes.

Posted on

21. Cornering Problems 1 – Lean or Brake?

Everything in the article still stands. However, a modern complication worth noting is that today’s rider is no longer dealing solely with human drivers. Many cars now use lane-keeping assist, collision avoidance braking, and steering interventions that attempt to keep the vehicle rigidly centred in its lane. These systems may trigger braking or steering inputs that are unpredictable from a rider’s point of view. And here’s something to think about when trying to hold a wide position approaching a left-hand bend (in the UK) we’ll be close to the centre line and if a vehicle appears coming the other way, the driver’s instinct may be to edge left. At that point the lane assist feature may kick in — I had that happen myself on a narrow road. When I steered towards the grass verge to make maximum room and the lane assist feature detected this as me leaving the lane and attempted to steer me back again. It’s worth thinking about, since relying on other road users to “make space” is less reliable than it once was.

Running our of road or losing control in a bend is a primary cause of bike-only accidents in the UK and also in many other countries. The problems start when riders run into the corner too fast. So an oh-so-common question is: “when I’m running into a bend at speed and see I’m running out of road in my lane, is the proper response? Should I lean more? Or should I be braking?”

The answer, as it is so often when we’re talking about motorcycles, is: “it depends”; there is rarely a ‘one size fits all’ solution. I’m going to suggest three options, explain the advantages and the risks of each, and then you will hopefully have a better understanding of how to make a sound choice in your own emergency.

I’ll take a moment to remind you of Keith Code’s ‘Survival Reactions’. In his ‘Twist of the Wrist’ books, US rider coach Keith Code explained how Survival Reactions are unplanned and unwanted reactions to a fear of personal harm. Examples are freezing, over-braking and target fixation. Typically they put us deeper in trouble rather than helping. Survival Reactions are triggered by a failure to predict the problem. When caught by SURPRISE!, and suddenly find ourselves in a mid-corner emergency, even if we have had excellent training, the fact is we’re unlikely to react any more effectively than a rider with only basic skills.

Recent research into crash avoidance suggests the answer is not more skills training but a better understanding of both what can go wrong and which strategies give us a chance to get out of trouble. This is effectively what Survival Skills has been teaching since my first course in1997, and I’ve more recently discovered it’s known as ‘Insight Training’. So to have a change of getting out of trouble mid-bend is that first we need to understand how errors happen, second we need to be know which strategies can to get us out of trouble, and thirdly we have to look at the road ahead to see just what COULD go wrong rather than believe we’re going to get things just right. This is the ‘No Surprise? No Accident’ approach to riding.

Here are two other things to remember:

:: the bike is almost always better than the rider – with the exception of some cruisers with limited ground clearance and my forty year-old classic on skinny skinny tyres, modern bikes will almost always lean beyond the point where the rider is getting uncomfortable

:: the front tyre almost always has more STEERING grip than we’ll ever use – even on wet roads, it’s rare to lose front end grip simply by steering. It’s not impossible and I have done it, but most cornering crashes result from mixing lean angle with braking. Or simply running out of road, of course.

Here’s a quick reminder of counter-steering, because that’s one of two skills we need. Push left, go LEFT. Push RIGHT, go right. Push harder, ROLL quicker, and change direction FASTER. Many riders put very gentle inputs into the bars and the result is glacially slow changes-of-direction, which won’t help one bit of we’re running out of road. Remember – trust that front tyre to grip, use positive inputs and steer the bike quickly.

So what are the three options I talked about?

Option A:- KEEP IT SIMPLE AND STEER

As I’ve just mentioned, most of us arrive in a bend with lean angle in hand. So that being the case, we can can usually exploit it:

:: keep the thottle gently open to keep the steering neutral and avoid loading the front tyre with decelerating forces

:: look through the corner towards the way out (the ‘exit’ of the bend) and NOT at the problem in front of you

:: push HARDER to add an extra counter-steering input to generate extra lean angle to make the turn on a tighter line

All we need is lean angle in the bank.

Option B:- SIT UP, BRAKE AND LEAN AGAIN

If there’s space we may be able to:

:: counter-steer the bike upright

:: use both brakes hard in a straight line

:: counter-steer to lean the bike over again at the reduced speed

This solution has been recommended in some books on advanced riding, and I’ve also been told personally on a training course that it’s the ‘correct’ response to an ‘in too fast’ issue. However, from experience, I’d say there is rarely room to apply this approach on the road. On a left-hander, it almost guarantees we’re going to run into the oncoming lane, and on a right-hander there’s little room before we run off into the hedge or over a cliff. In fact, if we want to get the MAXIMUM straight line space across the lane, we have to turn the bike at a tangent across the corner FIRST…

…and if we can do that, couldn’t we just keep steering?

Option C:- SLOW DOWN IN THE TURN

Slowing down IN the turn is the option most often frowned but in fact motorcycle cornering dynamics is on our side. When leaning, if we keep the lean angle fixed, the bike will turn on a progressively tighter line as the machine slow without us having to add any extra lean angle.

So we can slow in one of three ways:

:: roll off the throttle – straightforward provided we don’t slam it shut and destabilise the machine, a smoothly closed throttle will create engine braking and thus deceleration, but it does depend on the bike. Big twins will slow quite dramatically, small capacity two-strokes will barely decelerate at all. Mid-sized four cylinders like my 600 are in between. The gear matters too – rolling the throttle closed in a high gear will provide less engine braking than a lower gear, which is a good reason for not rolling along a twisty road in a high gear at low regs.

:: apply the rear brake only – if engine braking isn’t providing sufficient deceleration (and I wouldn’t try to force more deceleration via a downchange at this point – tt’s no coincidence many bikes now have slipper clutches to prevent lock-ups on clumsy downshifts on a closed throttle) we can apply the rear brake. This has always been the advice on UK basic training, but with the throttle already shut, we’re already creating a braking force via the rear wheel and even a modest amount of rear brake can take us over the limit of grip. It’s not too much of a problem if we have ABS but it’s still best not to trigger it if possible – most riders react in surprise when the ABS kicks in and let off the brake again. .

:: apply both front and rear brakes smoothly and progressively – modern tyres deliver far more edge grip, and unless we are already sliding the front tyre into the corner, then there IS grip left at the front for a small application of front brake. This is the concept sometimes called the ‘Traction Pie’, where the tyre splits its grip between braking and steering. If we’re braking upright, we’re using some tyre grip for braking but none for steering. If we’re rounding a corner at constant speed, we’re using some tyre grip for steering but none for braking. Between the extremes we can ‘mix and match’, just so long as we don’t bang the brakes on suddenly – that makes most road bikes sit up and go straight on. With both brakes on, even lightly, we’ll lose speed more rapidly than with engine braking along, and the bike’s line mid-corner will tighten more rapidly too. I’ve been told that this is not a technique for novices, but in reality it’s not as difficult to master or as risky as usually claimed.

So here’s how we use both brakes combined with bends:

1 – BRAKING INTO THE CORNER (trail braking) – we brake conventionally before entering the bend, but as we enter the corner, but progressively ease off the brake pressure as the lean angle increases. This sorts out a bend that we’ve entered too fast.

2 – BRAKING MID-CORNER – now we’re cornering conventionally off the brakes but mid-bend we apply the brakes lightly and as the speed comes down and the lean angle reduces, we brake progressively harder. This allow us to deal with a bend that tightened up or an encounter with a hazard such as a stopped vehicle that was out of sight when we entered the bend.

Whenever we enter a bend it’s important we avoid being caught by SURPRISE!

Some years ago, I nearly put my GSX-R750 in the River Exe when I discovered the fast left-hander ahead was actually a sharp right-hander. Having changed direction I was about to run out of room and even as I was saying to myself “lean more, don’t brake”, I hit the front brake hard which stood the bike up – I was lucky that there was some run-off into a riverside viewing point. With some progressive braking mid-bend I’d have got round without the drama. But what that anecdote should tell you is that even mid-lean, the tyre gripped when I braked!

Two final tips. If we release the front brake suddenly mid-corner, the bike will topple into the bend – ease it off progressively. If we need to come to a complete halt, turn the bike at the last moment to get it upright – this will prevent us stopping off-balance and toppling over.

To sum up, practicing quick steering and mid-corner braking is a big help when we need to make mid-corner corrections, but the real benefits come when we begin to plan ahead to deal with a bend that doesn’t go where we expect, and to hold ready in our heads the understanding that we may need to tighten our line on ANY bend. Pre-planning for the Worst Case Scenario helps prevent the panic reactions that cause crashes.

Of course, some people will read this and say that the proper answer is “don’t go into a bend too hot in the first place”. Whilst that’s useful in hindsight, it’s not much use until after we’ve RECOVERED the error, is it?

We all make mistakes, sooner or later. That’s why it’s well to know how to get out of trouble just as much as we try to use ‘better biking’ techniques to keep us out of it.

Posted on

20. Filtering – what’s legal and how to do it

Although this article was revised in 2019, the principles behind safe filtering have not changed. UK law still does not define filtering as a specific manoeuvre; instead, riders are judged on whether their behaviour would be considered reasonable and competent in the circumstances. What has changed is traffic density, and possibly driver distraction from in-car systems like GPS. And riders also need to pay attention to and the frequency with which vehicles move unexpectedly within queues.

A modern complication is the rapid spread of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) such as lane-keeping assist, blind-spot monitoring and adaptive cruise control. At the time of the 2019 update, these systems were far from widespread. It’s likely they do not reliably detect filtering motorcycles, particularly at higher closing speeds or when the bike is offset from the centre of the lane. Some were never tested against motorcycles. It’s likely they change driver behaviour. Many drivers may now rely on warning lights rather than mirrors, make lazy steering inputs because the car normally ‘looks after’ lane position, or make sudden movements when automation disengages in slow traffic. The result is that filtering riders can no longer assume they are dealing with fully attentive human drivers. With autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicle trials already under way in the UK, this trend will only increase. As a result, filtering today demands even more emphasis on anticipation, stopping distance and the assumption that we will not be seen—because legality offers no protection once physics takes over.

Filtering – what’s legal and how to do it

This is another tip I’ve completely rewritten for 2019, because filtering past or through slow-moving or stationary traffic is one of the most hotly-debated topics in biking. Please note that this article refers ONLY to UK practice. Whilst other nations have legalised filtering (Belgium for example) and lane splitting is legal in California (which has produced a code), it’s up to you to determine what the law is if you’re not a UK reader. And don’t forget to reverse left and right if you ride on the wrong side of the road.

So, here in the UK Motorcycle Roadcraft explains that filtering is a form of overtaking to make progress past stationary or slow moving traffic but gives no real advice on where or where not to do it. Filtering and other road users’ response to filtering motorcycles is also laid out in the Highway Code, which says in the section about ‘Road users requiring extra care’ that:

“It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are coming up from behind, coming out of junctions, overtaking you or filtering through traffic. Always look out for them before you emerge from a junction; they could be approaching faster than you think. When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing. Be especially careful when turning, and when changing direction or lane. Be sure to check mirrors and blind spots carefully.”

There is also guidance on the Highway Code which refer to overtaking, but can be applied by extention to filtering. Let’s mention the places you must not overtake first.

You may not:

cross solid white lines except to pass an obstruction or to overtake a slow (10mph), horse, bicycle, local authority vehicle (with its amber beacon flashing)
overtake after passing a No Overtaking sign, until you reach the end of restriction sign
overtake the vehicle nearest a pedestrian crossing
However, you may overtake vehicles where there is a solid white line on your side of the road if you can pass the vehicle without crossing or straddling the white line with any part of your vehicle.

You may:

enter a hatched lane divide as long as it has dashed boundary lines and it is safe and necessary to do so
pass traffic on the left (ie undertake) queuing or slow moving traffic but you should not change lane in order to gain an advantage
pass traffic on the left if the vehicle is indicating to turn right
pass traffic on the left if you are turning left in a dedicated left turn lane
pass traffic on the left in a one way street

So whilst there are some places we must NOT filter, there are no clear legal guidelines about HOW to filter. Unfortunately, some years back a wholly inaccurate article on filtering claimed to explain the law. As is the way of the internet, search engines turn it up from time to time, whereupon it’s ‘rediscovered’. I’m not going to tell you were to find it because it’s inaccurate but I will tell you why you shouldn’t trust it.

The article’s starting point was that a filtering crash should always be the driver’s fault. Commenting on a case, probably Leeson vs. Bevis Transport (1972), where the motorcyclist was found equally responsible for a collision with a van driver emerging from a side road, the article was penned in a way that implied that a filtering collision was always the other driver’s fault:

“I mean, you’re filtering past stationary cars and some clown t-bones you and you have to pick up half the bill?””

The Survival Skills approach is always to look at why things go wrong on the road, and I always encourage riders to see a situation from the other road user’s perspective. We could easily rewrite that statement:

“I’m trying to pull out of a side-turning into a busy street with parked vehicles on either side making it almost impossible to see, and some clown filtering past the bus that has kindly let me out t-bones me and I have to pick up half the bill?”

But it got worse. The writer then claimed that the law on filtering ‘changed’ after a case was heard in the Court of Appeal in 2006. The writer said:

“…in the case of Davis vs Schrogin, the judge found that “a filtering motorcyclist passing stationary or very slow moving traffic could not be to blame if a collision occurred if the rider had no chance to take avoiding action”, then jumped to the conclusion: “Ladies and Gentlemen, filtering past stationary traffic is no longer a grey area – it’s completely legal”.

First of all there was no ‘change in the law’ for the very simple reason that there was – and never has been – any road traffic law that defines filtering or how to go about it.

You may be wondering how do courts make a judgement on a filtering crash? The answer is based partly in terms of how each road user behaved. The question asked is “did the rider or drive behave in a way that that a competent driver or rider could be reasonably expected to drive or ride?”

Where it gets complicated is that a previous judgement (‘precedent’) by a magistrate’s court, crown court and county court is not binding. Although judges will look at previous decisions if the case is sufficiently similar, each case will be judged on its merits. However, higher court judgments (except in the House of Lords, where the Lords can change their minds) including those from the Court of Appeal, are binding on themselves and lower courts, UNLESS it can be shown that a new case has enough differences that it should be decided on its own facts. In that case, the judge can distinguish it from the previous case by pointing out the relevant differences and thus not be bound by precedent.

So the second error is to argue that a judgement in a single court case defines how other cases might turn out. Whilst case law sets a precedent, that precedent only applies in identical circumstances and the assessment of each individual case will depend heavily on statements and witnesses. There’s no ‘law making it legal’.

In any case, being on the right side of insurance claim doesn’t mean much if being in the legal ‘right’ doesn’t stop us being carted off in a pine box! So, let’s move on to looking at filtering from a practical perspective.

Above all, we need to be aware of where we might need to stop suddenly. What we mustn’t do is treat empty road ahead of us as a ‘motorcycle lane’ whether we’re filtering down the outside of a queue of traffic against oncoming vehicles, or (to use the American term) ‘lane splitting’ between queues moving in the same direction.

And that determines our speed. We have to be able to stop in the distance that we can see is clear AND EXPECT TO REMAIN CLEAR. So what’s the ‘right’ speed? Well, it’s all down to the physics of stopping. Two issues. The first is ‘double your speed, quadruple your stopping distance’. The second is ‘three-quarters of your braking distance loses one-quarter of your speed’.

In the collision between Messrs Schrogin and Davis, Mr Schrogin was stopped in a traffic jam in his car on a straight road, whilst Mr Davis was overtaking the stationary queue on his motorcycle. As nothing was coming in the opposite direction, Mr Schrogin decided to execute a U-turn and failed to see the approaching bike. Mr Schrogin accepted that he had looked the wrong way but argued that Mr Davis was contributory negligent. Mr Davis admitted seeing Mr Schrogin’s car moving towards the kerb in preparation for the U-turn but claimed that as he was no more than five cars’ length back from the point of impact, he had no chance to stop.

What surprises me is that when the case went to the Court of Appeal, it held that Mr Davis was so close to the point of impact that he could not have avoided the collision, so there was no basis for a finding of contributory negligence. But could the rider have stopped, given the quoted five car lengths?

Let’s do a quick sum. Something like a Vauxhall Astra is around 4.5 metres long, and that’s a fairly average sized car. Multiply that by 5 and you get 22.5 metres. Add a metre gap between the five vehicles and we probably have at least 25 metres in which to stop. When I demonstrate emergency stops, I can bring the bike to a standstill on a reasonable surface in the dry in around 10 metres from 30mph. So could a competent rider be ‘reasonably expected’ to stop too? if Mr Davis was accurate in his memory of distance (and post-crash, most witnesses are hopelessly inaccurate) then I’d say “yes, a competent rider could be reasonably expected to stop”…

…if he wasn’t taken completely by surprise by the event! If you’ve read Keith Code’s ‘Twist of the Wrist’ books, you’ll know all about ‘Survival Reactions’, the unplanned response to emergencies. They’re triggered by SURPRISE!, something you can find out more about by looking up our ‘No Suprise? No Accident’ campaign. If we’re not predicting something to happen, then SURPRISE! kicks in and triggers the Survival Reactions, which include freezing and ineffective braking. So the problem is really our expectations about that happens next. Is it really unexpected if a pedestrian steps out from between two vehicles? Or a door opens into our path? Or a car swaps lanes? Or a van pulls out of a side turning. Or a car starts to make a U-turn. Of course not. At least, not if we’re planning for the Worst Case Scenario, rather than looking at the empty tarmac as a motorcycle lane.

If we can see what’s happening ahead – a car edging the left in a queue is a great clue that the next movement will be the driver swinging out to perform a U-turn, whilst a gap being left between two vehicles is an equally fine clue that someone’s leaving space for an emerging vehicle or for someone to cross the road – we just have to interpret what we see. But the moment our view ahead is restricted – perhaps by a bus – then we have to assume that whe might have to stop level with the front of that vehicle – and down comes the speed.

You may read that so long as you keep to a 15 mph speed differential with the vehicles you’re filtering past, you’ll be safe. I know where that claim came from, and what they ignored was the physics. If we’re filtering past stationary traffic at 15 mph, our stopping distance is about a metre. If we’re filtering past traffic moving at 10 mph at 25 mph, our stopping distance is about six metres. By the time our speed climbs to 55 mph, filtering past traffic moving at 40 mph, our stopping distance is out to 35 metres or so. That’s a huge distance back from where things can go wrong. It’s already too late to worry about the cars we’re passing NOW.

Now, if you take a look at the shape of a braking graph, it takes us around half the total stopping distance to lose (very, very roughly) one-fifth of our speed. And we lose approximately three-quarters of our speed in the final quarter of the available braking distance. The result is that if we can’t stop, impacts are MUCH harder than riders intuitively expect. We only need to run out of space by one-quarter of the distance, but we hit with three-quarters of the impact of not braking at all. And the higher our starting speed, the worse the impact. Only considering traffic speed differentials is a really nasty filtering trap. Once traffic is moving at around 20, I’ll be back in the traffic stream. You certainly won’t see me lane splitting at motorway speeds.

What other tips can I give you?

Most important of all, assume you will NOT BE SEEN. Don’t expect to be seen in a mirror. Just like you, drivers are watching the traffic ahead when it’s moving in queues, so that they don’t run into the back of a vehicle that stops suddenly. Mirror use is erratic at best, the view is often blocked by the next vehicle back, and as soon as there is the slightest curve in the road, the mirror won’t show a filtering motorcycle until the last second in any case. All the hi-vis kit in the world, even riding with lights on main beam – makes no odds if the bike’s not visible. And loud pipes? When I’m driving, it’s not uncommon that the first time I hear them is when the bike is alongside. They project the engine sound backwards, not forwards. They do not save lives. So we need to look forwards and be ready to change our plans and even take evasive action. And keep a thumb near the horn – it might just stop a driver moving into your path.

When passing stationary traffic on a single carriageway road, where possible move into the opposite carriageway and stay wide – it gives us a better view of emerging and U-turning vehicles. But don’t be tempted to carry too much speed – as we’ve seen, it may be necessary to stop suddenly so watch out for junctions, where pedestrians might cross and only filter past after checking it’s clear. Don’t be tempted to go the wrong side of a solid line on your side of the road or Keep Left islands, it’s an offence and a guaranteed nick if you’re spotted. When confronted with oncoming traffic it’s still possible to filter IF there is sufficient margin, but as we get closer to the vehicles we’re filtering past the speed must come down – could we stop if a door opened? Eventually, when further progress cannot be safely made, we should find a space and move back into the queue. Don’t forget we should never force another vehicle to swerve or slow down – this could count as grounds for a prosecution.

What about filtering on the left? First of all, there is no offence of ‘undertaking’ if you pass the left of slower traffic on single carriageway roads, dual carriageways or motorways. But… like all filtering or lane splitting, if done in a way that inconveniences other road users, specifically forcing them to change speed or direction to avoid us, it can be construed as careless or even dangerous driving, offences which carry points, a fine and even a custodial sentence if dangerous enough.

Legal or not, fltering to the left of a queue is generally riskier for several reasons. The first is because – bar the odd foreign vehicle – the driver is sitting on the far side of the vehicle and is much less likely to see a bike coming up in the passenger side mirror. Keep a good eye out for side turnings and entrances, and watch for vehicles turning left into it. We’re also at risk from oncoming vehicles turning right through stationary or slow-moving queues because we’re blindsided by the vehicles we’re passing. And don’t forget emerging vehicles too – drivers often miss spotting cyclists as well as bikes filtering alongside the pavement because they’re busy looking at the queue of traffic and working out whether someone will let them out. Although some bus lane allow motorcycle access at any time and it’s perfectly legal to use them when not in use – check the sign boards at the beginning of the lane – we’re now passing slower traffic to our right and the same problems apply. It’s not difficult, if there’s a turning to be see or a gap to the right, then look for – and respond to – the turning vehicle. Slow right down, expect NOT to be seen and be prepared to Give Way.

When lane splitting on any dual carriageway including a motorway, we’re always passing to the left of a stream of traffic, so the same mirror issues appear. Where there are three lanes, passing between lane two and lane three (the right-hand lane) is usually the best bet. HGVs are not allowed to use the outside lane so there’s a bit more space, a slightly better view, and you won’t be lane-splitting between two trucks too often. As a rule of thumb, look ahead for gaps in each lane big enough for a vehicle to move into – if there’s a space, someone will aim to take it, and it’s usually the driver on our RIGHT who, because they are usually moving to a slower-moving lane – is least likely to see us approaching in the passenger side mirror. Be particularly careful when lanes move at different speeds. It’s called ‘lane shear’ and drivers will do exactly what we’re doing – try to get to the faster lane to make progress. Be ready for lane swapping to the faster-moving lane. Watch out too near junctions and services. Drivers will generally move left through the lanes to get to an off-ramp, and after we pass the on-ramp, they’ll be moving to the right. And don’t forget, there are junctions where drivers can turn right across a dual carriageway.

Plan as far ahead as possible. Be particularly cautious passing long vehicles. The driver’s view from the cab is often not very good, they need space to turn on bends and at junctions and may swing wide, so hang back till you know what they are doing, and pass when they’ve straightened up. Watch out for buses parked at an angle in a bus stop – if you can’t see the mirror, the driver can’t see you. Make sure you spot left or right turn lanes so you can anticipate turning vehicles. Look for obstructions like traffic islands and bollards, pinchpoints either side of the road, or cyclists – they will all make vehicles change position and possibly ‘squeeze’ our space. Watch the surface for cats-eyes and painted lines, potholes or slippery surfaces which could make braking or steering difficult. Look for lane markings approaching junctions to predict traffic movements, and watch traffic lights to judge the sequence – we may be able to slip to the front whilst they are red, but we may need to look to slip into a gap in the queue so we don’t get stuck against the island when they turn green.

Watch out for legal traps too. Just because you see lots of other riders breaking laws, don’t imagine they all get away with it. Don’t get caught out by cycle lanes bounded by a solid line, and be aware that we’re not supposed to use the advanced cycle stop box at lights. In practice, nearly everyone on a bike uses them, but riders do get nicked – some are monitored by CCTV. Likewise active bus lanes are often monitored too. Passing in a zone marked with a broken line and cross hatching is allowable if “safe and necessary”, but it’s illegal to enter a zone with chevrons and a solid line. Be careful about moving back and forth to the fastest moving lane on a multilane road to make progress in heavy traffic. A traffic cop told me that he was shown a video of a motorcyclist moving at speed from lane to lane on a busy motorway on a training course, and was asked for comments. He thought that the rider was safe enough, although a little closer to some of the cars than he’d like, but that generally he had no problem with what he saw. So he was surprised that the video evidence had been used to prosecute the rider, who’d be found guilty of dangerous driving and handed a ban!

Try to be courteous to other road users, even the ones holding you up. Don’t harass them with rev bombs or drive a centimetre behind with lights on stun. Even if your impatient bahaviour doesn’t trigger an equally aggressive response, it can distract them into making a mistake that puts you at greater risk. Give drivers a chance to see you – a highly-manoeuvrable bike can cut through traffic and really DOES appear from nowhere. Back when I was a courier, the best despatch riders used to move through traffic almost imperceptibly – but they were always there at the head of the queue. And if you’re from a big city, don’t try the same filtering techniques out in the sticks. What works on the Euston Road in London is asking for trouble in a small Scottish town.

If you are not confident you can do it, don’t! And don’t copy other riders if you’re not sure what you’re doing either. You’ve no guarantee they have a clue what they’re doing. If there’s one rule to follow, look for places it’s easy to filter – wide roads, stationary traffic. Avoid it where it’s tricky – narrow lanes, against heavy oncoming traffic. You might see someone else taking a risk, but a little caution, a little extra time on your journey will mean you arrive at your destination by bike rather than at hospital by air ambulance.

Taken cautiously, filtering can be relatively low risk and we can still make good progress by combining excellent observation with careful planning. I spent sixteen years as a courier, and covered half-a-million miles, so I must have filtered tens of thousands of miles through London, and the worst that happened was hitting a taxi driver’s door when he opened it to empty his ashtray just as I was filtering past. His door caught my clutch lever, which broke one of my fingers. But as I point out in my Urban Survival Skills advanced motorcycle courses, filtering isn’t ‘safe’. It’s one of the main killers of riders in big cities, usually because riders become complacent. Nothing ever went wrong before – but it only needs to go wrong once, and we’re in the KSI stats.