This Is Why Motorcycle Riders Have To Be Alert When Riding - Please Think Bike!!!

[Blink Blink]

are you allowed to ride at the speed limit when filtering?

No (not a law just common sense). That would always result in a crash instantly if a car changes lane in front of you or if something crosses your path. The police would definitely frown against anyone filtering at the speed limit in traffic

 

[Nigel]

are you allowed to ride at the speed limit when filtering?

Rule 88 of the UK Highway Code:
"... Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low."

Depends if you think that traffic was slow-moving and if you think his speed was low...

I would expect that if there had been an accident and it had gone to court then the motorcyclist would be take 99% of the blame.

 

[jokiin]

No (not a law just common sense). That would always result in a crash instantly if a car changes lane in front of you or if something crosses your path. The police would definitely frown against anyone filtering at the speed limit in traffic

in this case I don't think your speed was an issue itself, but your speed relative to the other vehicles was a lot greater, that's the thing that will bring you undone when someone does change lanes on you and wipe you out, being technically in the right isn't all that comforting when you're in hospital, bikes tend to come off second best in situations like this

 

[jokiin]

I would expect that if there had been an accident and it had gone to court then the motorcyclist would be take 99% of the blame.

even if not at fault, doesn't fix your bike when you get hit

 

[Blink Blink]

in this case I don't think your speed was an issue itself, but your speed relative to the other vehicles was a lot greater, that's the thing that will bring you undone when someone does change lanes on you and wipe you out, being technically in the right isn't all that comforting when you're in hospital, bikes tend to come off second best in situations like this

If my speed was a lot greater, the discussion we would be having would be different. Bikes always come off worse in any crash which is why I quoted the phrase 'think bike' to at least plant the seed into other road users minds that may stumble on the video.

 

[jokiin]

If my speed was a lot greater, the discussion we would be having would be different. Bikes always come off worse in any crash which is why I quoted the phrase 'think bike' to at least plant the seed into other road users minds that may stumble on the video.

not sure the video does you any favors, I do agree that cars need to be more aware of bike riders, I've been a rider for many years so know first hand that cars don't see bikes, unfortunately on a bike you do need to ride like you're invisible and do the thinking for the car drivers

 

[Nigel]

If my speed was a lot greater, the discussion we would be having would be different. Bikes always come off worse in any crash which is why I quoted the phrase 'think bike' to at least plant the seed into other road users minds that may stumble on the video.

You are not supposed to filter unless the traffic is stopped, or slow moving, eg < 5mph, and when you do you must keep your own speed slow, eg 5mph and take care, which I don't think you were.

In your video, due to the lane markings, I'm not sure you were filtering, I would count that as overtaking and you certainly weren't following all the rules for overtaking, for a start you are not allowed to overtake on the left.

Take note of the view of the insurance companies on accidents resulting from filtering: "many insurers will refuse to accept any liability because filtering could be considered as an unnecessary risk and that you’ve placed yourself in unnecessary danger by undertaking the move."

 

[flank]

The guy made a perfectly legal lane change, don't know what the crying is about. Looks like you gunned it when he signaled a lane change so you would have some footage to whine about.

 

[jokiin]

You are not supposed to filter unless the traffic is stopped, or slow moving, eg < 5mph, and when you do you must keep your own speed slow, eg 5mph and take care, which I don't think you were.

similar sort of rules here, plenty of bikes doing it in situations where they really shouldn't though

 

[Nigel]

similar sort of rules here, plenty of bikes doing it in situations where they really shouldn't though

What makes it really dangerous here is that there are not many bikes doing it, people do not expect it and nobody will check several vehicles back in case a bike is approaching at speed. Even at 5mph, overtaking people on the left, as in the OP, is dangerous even though not illegal like it is at higher speeds, much safer on the right.

Overtaking the other motorcycle while it was indicating right was against the rules:

 

[Blink Blink]

You are not supposed to filter unless the traffic is stopped, or slow moving, eg < 5mph, and when you do you must keep your own speed slow, eg 5mph and take care, which I don't think you were.

In your video, due to the lane markings, I'm not sure you were filtering, I would count that as overtaking and you certainly weren't following all the rules for overtaking, for a start you are not allowed to overtake on the left.

Take note of the view of the insurance companies on accidents resulting from filtering: "many insurers will refuse to accept any liability because filtering could be considered as an unnecessary risk and that you’ve placed yourself in unnecessary danger by undertaking the move."

I was filtering and not overtaking (filtering is making progress in slow moving traffic and there is no where it states anywhere in the law this has to be done when traffic is stopped or slow moving so please don't try to confuse anyone viewing your comment with what filtering is). Also the view of insurance companies to filtering can be confirmed online because your statement in bold is wrong, seriously wrong.

It brings to question your views about this post cos the footage I posted was a way to bring awareness to the risks of filtering and how it may have ended badly.

 

[Blink Blink]

What makes it really dangerous here is that there are not many bikes doing it, people do not expect it and nobody will check several vehicles back in case a bike is approaching at speed. Even at 5mph, overtaking people on the left, as in the OP, is dangerous even though not illegal like it is at higher speeds, much safer on the right.

Overtaking the other motorcycle while it was indicating right was against the rules:

View attachment 37172

The other motorcycle was not indicating right, it had it's hazard lights on to filter through the traffic (very convenient of you to take a screenshot of the part with only the right light showing) . I have taken a clear screenshot showing both lights on (the hazard lights)

Also that road is the A13 stretch, everyone is aware motorcycles filter on this road due to the volume of traffic between 5.45am and 10am (motorcycles filter all the way to Canning Town before branching off to blackwall tunnel or lime house link)

 

[Blink Blink]

similar sort of rules here, plenty of bikes doing it in situations where they really shouldn't though

Unfortunately he was wrong. This link from the UK government website answers everything about filtering and the 'think bike' slogan
http://think.direct.gov.uk/motorcycles.html

 

[BBorell]

So are we saying using our indicators mean we are allowed to change lane into the path of another road user? Cos I had to use my brakes and move all the way to the right to avoid going into the BMW

Where you in a lane at the time? Looks to me as if you were lane splitting thus not in a lane so BMW had every right to the lane.

 

[Blink Blink]

Where you in a lane at the time? Looks to me as if you were lane splitting thus not in a lane so BMW had every right to the lane.

For us in the UK we call it 'filtering' which is a looked at a little bit different to 'lane splitting'. However for this circumstance, the BMW indicated right (which I saw), I slowed down and moved a little to the right so I can be more visible in his mirrors and also in case he decided to still change lanes even though I was in his line of path to merge to the right. He then moved to the right and I slowed down to avoid a crash and then continued on my way.

 

[jokiin]

Unfortunately he was wrong. This link from the UK government website answers everything about filtering and the 'think bike' slogan
http://think.direct.gov.uk/motorcycles.html

when I was referring to situations where they shouldn't I wasn't talking about legalities, sure it might be legal but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should, no point being right and dead

 

[Rajagra]

I have to say, I've not been strongly against filtering in principle. God knows, I did it enough myself before it even had a name.
But in recent weeks, I've been getting increasingly annoyed at HOW bikers are filtering on A roads.

Here is the problem. Bikers are constantly bleating "It's allowed, it's allowed" as if that means they can ALWAYS do it. And they've brainwashed themselves into thinking it's not only acceptable at all times, but that it is safe. Wrong.

1) It's only "allowed" if it's done safely. If done recklessly it's illegal on that basis alone.
2) When you are squeezing between vehicles - pay attention here - YOU ARE NOT IN A LANE OF YOUR OWN - you DO NOT have rights as if you are occupying a lane of your own. You ARE NOT SAFE as if you were in a lane of your own.
3) The UK does not have big ass roads and lanes like the USA. When you squeeze between vehicles you have little or no room to manoeuvre. That means when vehicles ahead of you behave NORMALLY AND REASONABLY you are likely to find your path ahead closing with no warning. You have to be able to react to this, and that means not traveling with a huge difference in speed.
4) Bad driving is common. Cars don't just pull out in front of bikes, they pull out in front of other cars, vans, coaches and lorries.
5) You don't even have justification for filtering unless traffic has been slowed by congestion. If you filter to overtake vehicles that are doing the speed limit you are taking the piss.

I have to emphasize point 2. When you are filtering, don't act as if a new lane has been magically created for your personal use.

 

[Rajagra]

I was filtering and not overtaking

Not the first time I've seen this ridiculous interpretation. Filtering IS overtaking, done in a specific way.

Unfortunately he was wrong. This link from the UK government website answers everything about filtering and the 'think bike' slogan
http://think.direct.gov.uk/motorcycles.html

Which part are you getting at? I see lots of good advice on how to avoid taking stupid risks.
I don't see anything making bikers exempt in any way from the usual rules on overtaking.

 

[Rajagra]

At the risk of banging a drum, let's look at EVERYTHING the Highway Code says about filtering.

Rules for motorcyclists Rule 88 Manoeuvring. ... When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.

Using the road Rule 160 ... be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be filtering through the traffic.

Road users requiring extra care Rule 211 It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are ... filtering through traffic.

Nothing here says "it is allowed" or you have been granted a right to do it. It is not condoning or encouraging the practice at all.
Each and every reference is pointing out the risks and the need for risk management.

And let's just throw in

Rule 163 Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should
not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake
only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left
Rule 165 You MUST NOT overtake
the nearest vehicle to a pedestrian crossing, especially when it has stopped to let pedestrians cross
Rule 167 DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works

All of which are routinely ignored by cyclists and motorcyclists these days, since they think they are above these rules.

 

[Rajagra]

Oh, what the hell. Let's break out the whole drum kit, namely the Berkeley report on "lane splitting" (filtering in the UK)...

Safety implications of lane-splitting among California motorcyclists involved in collisions

we found significant variation in the manner in which lane-splitting was done. Lane-splitting was done in traffic flowing at a range of speeds. The motorcycle speed almost always exceeded the traffic speed by a small margin but, in many cases, exceeded it greatly. We compared the proportion of collision-involved, lane-splitting motorcyclists with injury across several body regions by whether the lane-splitting was done only in traffic flowing at 30 MPH or less and that the motorcycle speed should exceed the traffic speed by no more than 10 MPH. We found that the proportion with each injury type was high when the lane-splitting was consistent with neither speed component, was lower when it was consistent with one speed component, and was lower still when it was consistent with both speed components.

From table 9 of http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/tr.../California Lane Splitting Crash Analysis.pdf

Fatal injury collisions while lane-splitting: 16
Non-fatal collisions while lane-splitting: 1147
Probability of death given that you are lane-splitting *and given that* you crash = 16/(16+1147) = 1.38%

Fatal injury collisions while _not_ lane-splitting: 204
Non-fatal collisions while _not_ lane-splitting: 6388
Probability of death given that you are _not_ lane-splitting *and given that* you crash = 204/(204+6388) = 3.09%

1.38% is less than 3.09% right? And 16 is much less than 204! So doesn't that prove that lane-splitting is safer? NO! It does not take account of the probability of crashing during each of the two options (lane-splitting or not.)
This is a bit like reading that fewer people die each year from shark attacks than from dog attacks and concluding that a shark is less deadly than a dog.

For demonstration's sake, what if there were a total of 200 million miles travelled by motorcycle, and 5% (10 million) of those were spent lane-splitting? We get:

Fatalities per million miles of lane-splitting = 16/10 = 1.6
Fatalities per million miles of not lane-splitting = 204/190 = 1.07
This would show that lane-splitting is about 50% more likely to lead to death!
(Note that the total mileage drops out of the equation when looking at the relative risk - we can assume any amount and we'd still get that 50%.)

To repeat, that 5% value is made up - but it illustrates the point. The Berkeley report does not prove that lane-splitting has less chance of death.

And here is the bottom line (not speculation). The magic figure is around the 7.2% mark.

If more than 7.2% of motorcycle miles are spent lane-splitting, then lane-splitting has been shown to have less chance of fatality.

If less than 7.2% of motorcycle miles are spent lane-splitting, then lane-splitting has been shown to have more chance of fatality.

We don't know which it is BECAUSE THE PERCENTAGE OF MILES SPENT LANE-SPLITTING HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED!