Flinching pedestrians

[Honest John]

I get really quite upset when pedestrians appear to be assuming I'm about to mow them down.

Latest incident - yesterday evening, leaving Waterloo station via the cab route.
Over the speed bumps, round the bend under the bridge with a taxi outriding on my RH rear, to the lights, which are red.

I stop. Taxi stops.

Pedestrian about to cross in front of us sees me and seems to jump out of his skin, then walks tentatively across the road. And you can bet your boots he regaled his mates about how he was nearly run over by a cyclist.

WTF did he look startled when he saw me? Lights on, pied a terre and stationary.

And why do I never see this behaviour among pedestrians in other countries?

Harrrrrumph.

[hubner]

It's not surprising, the fact is most cyclists in London ride around like dicks, dodging through a pedestrian crossing when masses of people are still crossing on a green man is a matter of routine.

I always wait for vehicles to stop before crossing the road on a pedestrian crossing. Usually 2 or 3 cars will go through on red when the lights change.

[Honest John]

It's not surprising, the fact is most cyclists in London ride around like dicks.

In the rush hour, perhaps, but at 6pm on a Sunday?

[Biggsy]

Pedestrians do not ever flinch from me - because I give them respect and plenty of room and time*, even when they are on the pavement going in the same direction as me.  Pass close and fast, then of course they flinch.

* Except if they are deliberately taking the mick from me specifically, then I steer towards them 

[Julian]

They may have been hit in the past.  I broke a rib when an RLJing cyclist hit me when I was on foot (it didn't do him much good either, but I'm less worried about that).  I flinched at bikes for a while after that, and I sincerely hope he flinched at pedestrians. 

I've had the same experience when I've been driving.  There's a particular bad junction in Ealing which is prone to motorists thinking "Sod this jam, I'll take the rat run," and suddenly hauling off left without indicating or checking their mirrors (I mean, they're in a traffic jam!  There's nothing coming because the traffic's not moving, amirite?)

Driving sloooooowly down that road and intending to turn left, I checked my mirror, noticed a cyclist, indicated as he came past, making sure to leave him plenty of space down the inside, still had the handbrake on, and watched in my mirror as his face screwed up and he did the sort of emergency stop that practically bounced.  He'd just assumed I hadn't seen him and was about to pull a daft maneouvre. 

[Manotea]

Then there are the peds who wander across the road without looking...

[Kim]

Happens to me fairly regularly at pedestrian crossings.  They tend to assume I'm not going to stop, especially if my brakes squeak, it's dark (I suppose my lights make it harder to judge what I'm doing), or I'm crawling slowly towards the crossing on the basis that there's a good chance it'll be clear and the lights will change before I reach the stop line.

Over-reliance on hearing to judge whether there are any vehicles coming before crossing seems to be a factor.  They don't expect silent vehicles, so don't look, and are shocked when a bike appears 'out of nowhere'.  Bring on the electric cars!

They're not usually too bad on shared-use paths, but I do tend to do an audible warning with the brakes/gears before passing them (tends not to be misinterpreted as agressive, unlike a bell).  They often double-take if I'm on the 'bent, but that's normal.

[bobb]

This sort of thing used to piss me off - not so much at crossings but on shared use paths. But it doesn't any more because I often find myself doing it when I'm in pedestrian mode.

I can't help it! It's just an instinctive thing....

[Honest John]

Pedestrians do not ever flinch from me - because I give them respect and plenty of room and time*, even when they are on the pavement going in the same direction as me.  Pass close and fast, then of course they flinch.

* Except if they are deliberately taking the mick from me specifically, then I steer towards them 

In this case, I'd stopped , behind the stop line, at a red light (as I usually do). Stationary. Standing still. Not moving. Foot on the ground.

Said ped still behaved as though the last thing he'd expect to see on the road was a bike.

[Honest John]

They may have been hit in the past.  I broke a rib when an RLJing cyclist hit me when I was on foot (it didn't do him much good either, but I'm less worried about that).  I flinched at bikes for a while after that, and I sincerely hope he flinched at pedestrians. 

I was 10ft from him and stationary.

I've had the same experience when I've been driving.  There's a particular bad junction in Ealing which is prone to motorists thinking "Sod this jam, I'll take the rat run," and suddenly hauling off left without indicating or checking their mirrors (I mean, they're in a traffic jam!  There's nothing coming because the traffic's not moving, amirite?)

Driving sloooooowly down that road and intending to turn left, I checked my mirror, noticed a cyclist, indicated as he came past, making sure to leave him plenty of space down the inside, still had the handbrake on, and watched in my mirror as his face screwed up and he did the sort of emergency stop that practically bounced.  He'd just assumed I hadn't seen him and was about to pull a daft maneouvre. 

That was probably a wise move - never trust a man with four wheels.

In this case, there was little traffic on the main road (the A23 Westminster Bridge Road) and the only vehicles queuing at the lights to join - on the cab road, Leake St - were me and a black cab.

[Honest John]

Happens to me fairly regularly at pedestrian crossings.  They tend to assume I'm not going to stop,

I once stopped at a zebra on my commute where a lady was about to cross the road. I sat there for about 30secs and she still wouldn't cross (nothing in sight approaching).

After another 30 secs I urged her to cross. Just as she crossed a RAV4 roared past me about 10mph over the speed limit (Bob knows why he didn't realise why I'd stopped at a zebra crossing) and had to do a very messy emergency stop.

So if the lady hadn't been so paranoid about a cyclist who couldn't do her much damage and obviously wasn't going to anyway, by virute of being stationary, she wouldn't have almost got herself splatted by a 4wd.

Don't they realise it's the cars that kill people?

[Biggsy]

Maybe you look funny

[rower40]

I'm concerned on how the "Roads/Cars are Dangerous" message is being broadcast.

I've been escorting a group of runners (ages 13-17 or so) each Monday evening; I ride my tandem acting as sag-wagon.  When they get to one particular zebra crossing, they will NOT go across it if a car is approaching, no matter how far away it is, and how far clear of the crossing they will get by the time the car reaches it.  They seem to HAVE to wait until the car has actually stopped.  This delays/annoys the car driver (who, 9 anna half times out of ten has eased-off the power to arrive the crossing to go behind the runners - who then refuse to move!) such that the driver might not bother slowing down next time.

[Jaded]

That's down to the loss of priority to pedestrians, tied to the loss of Zebra Crossings.

I'm sure there are fewer pedestrian deaths at crossings now, but at the expense of pedestrian priority across the road network.

[Nightfly]

Use an Airzound?

[Cudzoziemiec]

That's down to the loss of priority to pedestrians, tied to the loss of Zebra Crossings.

I'm sure there are fewer pedestrian deaths at crossings now, but at the expense of pedestrian priority across the road network.

Which in turn is probably down to the fact that pedestrians splatted at crossings can be counted, but those using the crossings or crossing the road elsewhere, and more so those deciding not to do so, are far, far harder to count or even guess at.

The antidote is to take them to India, where they will soon notice that the green man coincides with the traffic on that road having the green light.

They're not usually too bad on shared-use paths, but I do tend to do an audible warning with the brakes/gears before passing them (tends not to be misinterpreted as agressive, unlike a bell).  They often double-take if I'm on the 'bent, but that's normal.

There's a shared-use path in Bristol (the Frome Way) which I use twice a day to take my son to/from school, as well as usually twice a day on my own returning from dropping him off / going to pick him up. There's no silly line down the middle, it's just a path with a nice tarmac surface which can be used over its whole width by pedestrians and cyclists, and it's not on a pavement either - completely off-road. It's quite busy when we're going to school in the morning, but there's never any problem as the part we use has decent sight lines and if we happen to be in the middle of the path then we go one way and the cyclist goes the other. But today one bloke called out when he was about ten metres behind us "Watch your backs!" No, it didn't make me flinch, but it was oddly jarring. It came across as rather rude in the context, which is at odds with the behaviour of other cyclists and pedestrians on that path.

[Honest John]

Maybe you look funny

Considerably less funny (peculiar or ha-ha) than many cyclists of my acquaintance 

[Greenbank]

I always wait for vehicles to stop before crossing the road on a pedestrian crossing.

Legally they don't have to stop unless you've moved on to the crossing itself (the pavement either side is not part of the crossing) but that's the line between legal requirements and being considerate to other road users.

The only MUST in HWC Rule 195 is that "you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing." The bits of pavement by a crossing are not legally part of the crossing.

The first bit of Rule 195 ("look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross") is not backed up by a law.

[Jaded]

In London my approach at crossings has been the same for decades.

Approach the crossing, peripheral vision aware of what is coming.
Appear not to look and move purposefully on to the carriageway, obviously ready to pull back
Cross as the Taxi that wasn't going to stop has actually stopped because it thought you weren't looking.

[Honest John]

In London my approach at crossings has been the same for decades.

Approach the crossing, peripheral vision aware of what is coming.
Appear not to look and move purposefully on to the carriageway, obviously ready to pull back
Cross as the Taxi that wasn't going to stop has actually stopped because it thought you weren't looking.

+1

[Honest John]

I always wait for vehicles to stop before crossing the road on a pedestrian crossing.

Legally they don't have to stop unless you've moved on to the crossing itself (the pavement either side is not part of the crossing) but that's the line between legal requirements and being considerate to other road users.

The only MUST in HWC Rule 195 is that "you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing." The bits of pavement by a crossing are not legally part of the crossing.

The first bit of Rule 195 ("look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross") is not backed up by a law.

Yes, that's generally my attitude when cycling. If I see someone waiting to cross but not on the crossing, I'll slow down or stop if I have the time and distance to do it, although motor traffic behind me is a worry in these circs.

When I'm walking, I tend to walk onto the crossing pretending not to look if there's motor traffic coming.

[Bledlow]

The first bit of Rule 195 ("look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross") is not backed up by a law.

No, but you'll fail the video part of the test quite spectacularly if you aren't aware of it.

And yes, I know that most current drivers passed their tests before that part was introduced.

[Cudzoziemiec]

The first bit of Rule 195 ("look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross") is not backed up by a law.

No, but you'll fail the video part of the test quite spectacularly if you aren't aware of it.

And yes, I know that most current drivers passed their tests before that part was introduced.

Erm - I didn't even know there was a video part.

Another  to Jaded's method, too. In similar vein to my "walk straight at the motorbike on the pavement" technique for India - really pisses them off!

[Kim]

Erm - I didn't even know there was a video part.

Relatively recent addition.  I did mine in 2004, soon after it came in.


This site has some example videos:

FREE online hazard perception test, mock hazard test, hazard perception clips, videos, demo clips


You sit at a computer (which you also use to answer the multiple-choice theory questions), it shows you videos like that, and you have to click the mouse button when you see a developing hazard.  The skill is in calibrating your idea of a developing hazard against that of the test designer - you will fail if you click too often, or if you miss too many developing hazards.

It's not an entirely stupid idea, but does seem a bit arbitrary.

[hellymedic]

I have known Rule 195 or its predecessor since 1970 and tackled it by putting one foot on the crossing and waiting.
Nowadays, David pushes my wheelchair into the crossing ahead of him when he deems it appropriate.
This has been without incident so far but is a tad worrying...