Hi viz doesn't make it safe...

DabDab

Ah mud, splendid
Joined
6 May 2013
Messages
12,572
Visit site
I fully understand the argument that two or three abreast makes cars slow down, but the reason that I would never do it down a country lane with high hedges and blind bends is because of the worst case scenario. If a car comes around a blind bend as I am just on the other side of it then even at 35mph they are not going to be able to stop behind me, but most will be able to swerve to avoid me. A car swerving past me on a country lane is certainly not ideal, but it is far better than it going in the back of me.
 

BethanT

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 March 2011
Messages
652
Visit site
I think this is a difficult subject, I personally wouldnt trot round a bend for fear of a car speeding TOWARDS me as this could happen, and I have seen it happen before with the rider only just beeing able to stop horse in time and driver the car. I think we have an advantage in that most of the time we can hear cars coming so there is no real need to "trot like a billy", as someone put, but can understand why you would.

I would also ride two abreast as some drivers round our way do try to overtake us in the narrowest of lanes. If I'm on my own I tend to ride in the middle for the same reason. But on the bends I ride on the far side so as to give drivers enough time to see me. But that said I always pull over as soon as it is safe.

As for wearing "Young horse" tabbards, they are advised not to be worn because of insurance purposes as you know that there may be a risk. The same goes for wearing a red ribbon in a horses tail. You are actually better to wear green even though it is not correct. Just shows how much people are willing to do to get compensation nowadays.
 

RunToEarth

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 November 2005
Messages
18,550
Location
Lincs
Visit site
The police ride two abreast!

Two horses are still narrower than one whole large vehicle's width and it forces traffic to wait for a genuinely safe place to overtake, more riders should do it as a matter of course. More motorists should also drive sensibly around blind bends in case there is a vehicle, cyclists, horses, scouts group, whatever coming around it the opposite way.

Police horses tend not to ride down narrow country lanes but built up, mostly pedestrianised areas of town/city centres.

Two horses may be more narrow than a car but they go slower. Rightly or wrongly I accept that most drivers do not expect to meet a horse in the middle of the road on a bend and for that reason alone I will not do it. All the rights in the world won't put me in the middle of the road, not worth the risk. There are very few places to overtake two horses on a country lane, which is why I pull my horses into the side and let people past.
 

Honey08

Waffled a lot!
Joined
7 June 2010
Messages
19,008
Location
north west
Visit site
I think that everyone should be safe first of all, and then polite. I wouldn't ride two abreast on a road unless I absolutely had to (child on leadrein/young horse on inside). I sometimes ride more out into the road to be defensive if there is a car coming too fast, I even sometimes make my horse jog and bounce about so it looks a bit out of control (another thing that slows drivers down - they think it may go into their precious BM..), HOWEVER, once they have slowed down, I go back in and thank them genuinely. I try to keep off main roads as much as possible, we are lucky that there are hours and hours of lanes and tracks around here.

Interesting thought that horses shouldn't be on the road unless roadworthy. Quite a good one too.

I also think that by riding two abreast and never giving way you actually encourage people to whizz past at the first chance, or speed up to get past before they get to a bend and get stuck behind. I actually find myself doing that a bit with cyclists that don't give way... thinking, "I must get past them before X bend or I will be stuck behind them for miles.."
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,020
Visit site
Police horses tend not to ride down narrow country lanes but built up, mostly pedestrianised areas of town/city centres.

Two horses may be more narrow than a car but they go slower. Rightly or wrongly I accept that most drivers do not expect to meet a horse in the middle of the road on a bend and for that reason alone I will not do it. All the rights in the world won't put me in the middle of the road, not worth the risk. There are very few places to overtake two horses on a country lane, which is why I pull my horses into the side and let people past.

And that's a judgement on fast country roads and blind places I prefer the two abrest approach it's not to do with rights and by the way to horses side by side are considerable slimmer than a carson there's no way you are in the middle of the road unless it's a very narrow road and that's even more reason to encourage drivers not to pass when they can't see.
Its just a judgement which risk is higher my judgement is that danger is increased when drivers pass where their visibility is not good and by pulling in you encourage that .
I frequently meet riders waving cars past where theres no way they can see round a corner and that's something I never do wave drivers past unless they have slowed because they have seen the horse when visibilites good.
All these things are judgements.
 

Lego

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 June 2011
Messages
397
Visit site
I think its so difficult to do the right thing sometimes on the roads... Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

We have to go down a small stretch of busy road to get out of our yard, but go in hi viz and ride 2 abreast to keep traffic from shoving past. We trot on when we can, but part is downhill. Sometimes traffic builds up behind, but we pick our time of day and don't dawdle... I try to be polite but sometimes cars just have to wait a few seconds! Personally I wouldn't hammer it round a blind corner, but ride a little out, with my fluorescent whip sticking out and wiggling-people seem to see the whip and slow down in puzzlement, and then we have time and space to take avoiding action from anything going a vaguely reasonable speed...
 

MerrySherryRider

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 September 2004
Messages
9,439
Visit site
Agree with OP. The two women give riders a bad name. As well as being dangerous, sauntering down a narrow lane oblivious to the traffic they're holding up is incredibly rude.

In that situation, we look out for a quiet moment and then trot briskly forward around the blind bend to gain clearance.
We only really ride two abreast if one horse needs a babysitter, otherwise we try not to hold up traffic unnecessarily.

And you're right OP. No amount of hi viz will keep a rider safe, if she/he doesn't know how to ride on the roads without putting others at risk.
 

Gloi

Too little time, too much to read.
Joined
8 May 2012
Messages
11,227
Location
Lancashire
Visit site
I try and get a car behind me before I go round a blind bend near me and then trot on. If I'm holding up a car until I get round the bend I know that nothing is going to come flying round, not see me, and hit me from behind.
 

indie999

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 January 2009
Messages
2,975
Visit site
Yes it does but its the behaviour of the riders thats at fault not the equipment.
Cyclists are doing this all the time. And if you come round a bend what do you do if there is an accident immediately on that bend. Could you stop?
 

SpottedCat

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 May 2007
Messages
11,668
Visit site
I'm really not sure when everyone forgot that as a road user it is your responsibility to drive appropriately for the road conditions you are on. The speed limit is irrelevant in this case - if it's a truly blind bend you should be going round it slowly enough that you can stop if there is a hazard on the other side. What if someone had broken down round the bend? It's a shame horse riders feel that they should get out of the way when clearly it is the car drivers who are at fault for not taking the corner at an appropriate speed.

This happened to me recently - driving my lorry away from the yard down a single track national speed limit lane with many blind bends. I was going at about 10-15mph as I approached one of them. And thank god I was - a road cyclist flew round the corner, saw me, hit his brakes and lost control of the bike. Bike and person disappeared under the lorry as they slid down the road. But because I was driving at an appropriate speed for a blind bend on a national speed limit road, I was already stationary, and apart from some road rash and a few dents to his pride, the guy was ok (and also extremely apologetic!).

The only person whose responsibility it is to make sure they don't come round a corner and cannon into someone is the driver's - if you are going round a blind bend then you need to slow down, national speed limit or not!
 

oldie48

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 April 2013
Messages
7,027
Location
South Worcestershire
Visit site
The BHS run a riding and road safety certificated course and the Pony club incorporate a similar course as part of the C test.For the record, it is considered inadvisable to trot on bends and corners and you will fail both courses if you do. The course encourages riders to take an active part in controlling the traffic ie if on a road with fast moving traffic, then it would be sensible to ride two abreast to slow the traffic down and to make them wait until a safe place to pass riders. It is up to riders to make sensible decisions about when to ride abreast (never more than 2) for their own safety but at all times they should be looking behind at very regular intervals so they know what is behind them and they should acknowledge and thank drivers for waiting etc with their hand or a nod, depending on which is safest. Riders have a responsibility to take actions to keep themselves safe, this may mean stopping the traffic, asking a car to slow down etc Frankly some of the posts on this thread are really worrying. I know it's not a very glamorous way to spend time and money but the BHS riding and road safety course is worth doing if you aren't sure how to conduct yourself safely on the roads. I did mine after meeting a motorbike rally of over 50 riders on a bank holiday Monday on a busy A road. ( I literally had to cross it in a bit of a dog leg to get home) I did not react to the situation properly and was very lucky not to have been killed as my horse bolted. We never know what we are going to meet on the road and I think I am much better at taking control of potentially difficult situations since doing the course.
 

ShadowFlame

Well-Known Member
Joined
6 April 2007
Messages
1,468
Location
West Mids
Visit site
We have a very nasty blind bend by us. We always go two abreast and DON'T hide in the hedgerow - i.e. verging middle of the road. Why? Because it gives drivers an extra couple of seconds to see us.

Horses for courses, but I see it as far more dangerous to be hidden in the hedge. We avoid that bend as far as possible, but sometimes it's a must. Agreed with someone who's already mentioned it - I'm more at ease if we're already holding up a car as we go round the bend.
 

windand rain

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 November 2012
Messages
8,517
Visit site
I'm really not sure when everyone forgot that as a road user it is your responsibility to drive appropriately for the road conditions you are on. The speed limit is irrelevant in this case - if it's a truly blind bend you should be going round it slowly enough that you can stop if there is a hazard on the other side. What if someone had broken down round the bend? It's a shame horse riders feel that they should get out of the way when clearly it is the car drivers who are at fault for not taking the corner at an appropriate speed.

This happened to me recently - driving my lorry away from the yard down a single track national speed limit lane with many blind bends. I was going at about 10-15mph as I approached one of them. And thank god I was - a road cyclist flew round the corner, saw me, hit his brakes and lost control of the bike. Bike and person disappeared under the lorry as they slid down the road. But because I was driving at an appropriate speed for a blind bend on a national speed limit road, I was already stationary, and apart from some road rash and a few dents to his pride, the guy was ok (and also extremely apologetic!).

The only person whose responsibility it is to make sure they don't come round a corner and cannon into someone is the driver's - if you are going round a blind bend then you need to slow down, national speed limit or not!

this is the most sensible post on here but I would guess most of us have seen boy racers of both sexes and all ages that drive like lunatics
Ifo believe there is a numerical maximum about how many cars you can hold up on a road before you must pull over where appropriate
 

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
OP how do you know the horse nearest the hedge wasn't a youngster likely to panic if a car came too close? How do you know if the horses were fully fit and well? For all you know they could have had arthritis or have been coming back into work after injury and not be able to trot on hard ground. So what if there's a queue of cars behind them? How do you know they wouldn't have pulled into a suitable gap or passing place further up the road and stopped to let the cars past? What does it matter that they were chatting, as long as the horses were under control and the riders aware of their surroundings? Horses have a right to be on the road and for whatever reason these two were doing what they thought best which included wearing hi-viz.

I'm not saying they weren't paying attention. I think they were. I'm absolutely with their right to be on the road, and I don't give a hoot about cars being held up for a few minutes. That's really not the point.

The bend in question is LETHAL. It's the kind of bend where there are regular serious accidents, and no-one coming around the corner could possibly see, or expect to find the way blocked by something doing 2mph. I was one of the cars, and at the back of the queue I was S***ting myself waiting for something to run into the back of me. Admittedly as a carriage driver I'm probably more aware of the blind bend risk than most, but still. It was really dangerous, not just for them, but for others.
 

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
Unless I have misinterpreted the OP, it is about hurrying to clear a blind bend so that someone driving along who doesn't know you are there has more chance to slow/stop if required. It's no good taking the 'I am entitled to ride on the roads so why should I hurry to get out of the way' stance when you are just the other side of a blind bend and a driver who hasn't seen you previously, comes driving around at 40/50/60 mph. Surely, as possibly drivers yourselves, you can appreciate that a few extra yards reaction and braking time could be the difference between hitting someone or not? For that reason I prefer to take my safety seriously, take responsibility for myself and show some common sense and regard for other road users. I'd rather trot a few yards than risk a car up my back end.

^^^this exactly^^^
 

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
The police ride two abreast!

Two horses are still narrower than one whole large vehicle's width and it forces traffic to wait for a genuinely safe place to overtake, more riders should do it as a matter of course. More motorists should also drive sensibly around blind bends in case there is a vehicle, cyclists, horses, scouts group, whatever coming around it the opposite way.

Trust me, they wouldn't on that corner. They'd have done a risk assessment and gone for a cup of tea and a sarnie instead!

There's no way a REASONABLE motorist would be going slowly enough to see them in time where they were. If they'd been two-abreast going towards the bad bend, fair enough (even commendable if it stopped some prat overtaking into it), but not afterwards.
 

BSJAlove

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 March 2009
Messages
1,996
Visit site
I'm really not sure when everyone forgot that as a road user it is your responsibility to drive appropriately for the road conditions you are on. The speed limit is irrelevant in this case - if it's a truly blind bend you should be going round it slowly enough that you can stop if there is a hazard on the other side. What if someone had broken down round the bend? It's a shame horse riders feel that they should get out of the way when clearly it is the car drivers who are at fault for not taking the corner at an appropriate speed.

This happened to me recently - driving my lorry away from the yard down a single track national speed limit lane with many blind bends. I was going at about 10-15mph as I approached one of them. And thank god I was - a road cyclist flew round the corner, saw me, hit his brakes and lost control of the bike. Bike and person disappeared under the lorry as they slid down the road. But because I was driving at an appropriate speed for a blind bend on a national speed limit road, I was already stationary, and apart from some road rash and a few dents to his pride, the guy was ok (and also extremely apologetic!).

The only person whose responsibility it is to make sure they don't come round a corner and cannon into someone is the driver's - if you are going round a blind bend then you need to slow down, national speed limit or not!

Completely agree
 

pip6

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 September 2009
Messages
2,206
Visit site
I'm really not sure when everyone forgot that as a road user it is your responsibility to drive appropriately for the road conditions you are on. The speed limit is irrelevant in this case - if it's a truly blind bend you should be going round it slowly enough that you can stop if there is a hazard on the other side. What if someone had broken down round the bend? It's a shame horse riders feel that they should get out of the way when clearly it is the car drivers who are at fault for not taking the corner at an appropriate speed.

This happened to me recently - driving my lorry away from the yard down a single track national speed limit lane with many blind bends. I was going at about 10-15mph as I approached one of them. And thank god I was - a road cyclist flew round the corner, saw me, hit his brakes and lost control of the bike. Bike and person disappeared under the lorry as they slid down the road. But because I was driving at an appropriate speed for a blind bend on a national speed limit road, I was already stationary, and apart from some road rash and a few dents to his pride, the guy was ok (and also extremely apologetic!).

The only person whose responsibility it is to make sure they don't come round a corner and cannon into someone is the driver's - if you are going round a blind bend then you need to slow down, national speed limit or not!

Excellent post. I thank you for driving like this. I have taught people to drive for 13 years now, & this is exactly what I try to instill in them. It's not about the 99.9% of times you take that familliar bend knowing nothings ever coming the other way so you can do it quickly. It's about anticipating the 0.1% of times where there is a hazard, so you need to drive at a speed for the distance you can see to be clear & can safely stop in. This is the key shift that needs to happen in driver attitudes in this country.

How many of us have ridden a quiet lane, heard the engine revving of a car coming too fast determined to prove what a 'good' driver he is by how well he can handle his car at speed (nb applies equally as much to the ladies). You just want to be under a huge beacon that says 'slow down, I am around the corner you prat'. Next the squeal of tyres as you start praying they don't mow you down.

There may be a very plausible reason why these ladies were side by side. I wouldn't judge them, nor blame them for motorists bad driving. If the corner is a known problem, ask the local council (or Highways Agency if primary road) to investigate it. They may be able to help reduce speeds in that area.

My day job is highway engneering (designing roads). If you build roads with great visibility, people exceed the speed limit which they percieve to have been set 'too low'. It seems like Joe Public think that roads should be designed so that the speed limit is the max speed it is possible to drive the road at. Well, no, that's not actually how it works. The speed limit just means that by going at that speed or below (unless it is a minimum speed limit) you wont get prosecuted for speeding. You can still be done for things such as dangerous driving, driving without due care & attention etc. So as designers what do we do? Do we limit visibility & build 'dangerous corners' where motorists can't see through brick walls to force them to slow down (wouldn't work, blind bends on country roads prime example), good visibility roads with restrictive speed limits where everyone perceives they can drive it faster so choose to disobey the law? That's why there are so many of the dreaded calming measures like humps about, we all hate them but they do help. Answers on a postcard please!
 
Last edited:

applecart14

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 March 2010
Messages
6,269
Location
Solihull, West Mids
Visit site
... to ride two abreast on the far side of a blind bend on a 60mph road.

Yesterday evening I was apalled to see two mounted ladies taking up the whole road just the other side of one of the most dangerous corners in the area. Far from trying to clear the road, they were in a leisurely walk with a queue of cars behind them. They seemed oblivious to the risk of someone ploughing into the back. Bright pink or otherwise, they were a liability.

I have to ride that corner from time to time with the children, and we trot like billy-o to put as much distance between us and the corner before something comes along behind. Surely that's just common sense?

I think its sad when bad riders give the rest of us name by riding in the way they do. I always try to remain alert, and am constantly on the listen for cars speeding either towards me or behind me. If I am approaching a dangerious bend I will (where its safe to do so) trot. If its downhill I will try to either tuck in very close to the verge, or go very wide so drivers can see me in time. If I am riding towards a bend on a narrow country lane (there are many by us like this) and I can hear a car approaching from the opposite direction I will push my horse into the verge and stop dead. Its amazing the reaction time of drivers EVEN WITH flourescent on, let alone without. :O

And I NEVER hack out without my phone, knee boots on my horse and of course flourescent. And recently I've started writing down my route in case of emergency so if I fall off and the horse comes back without me they know where to look for me, or if I or Bailey are badly injured on the road I won't have to try and remember road names or my route when I am heavily concussed (God forbid it should ever happen).

People just laugh at me as they think I am OTT, but I don't care.

Flourescent has been PROVEN to give drivers three seconds of thinking and braking time compared with horse and rider that do not wear flourescent. At 30mph that equates to the length of a 20x 40m dressage arena. This really is the difference between life and death.

Those that don't wear flourescent in my opinion are very naive and extremely dangerous with their 'it won't happen to me' attitudes.
 
Last edited:

MerrySherryRider

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 September 2004
Messages
9,439
Visit site
The BHS run a riding and road safety certificated course and the Pony club incorporate a similar course as part of the C test.For the record, it is considered inadvisable to trot on bends and corners and you will fail both courses if you do. The course encourages riders to take an active part in controlling the traffic

This part of your post is really worrying, I'm so glad I haven't done the BHS road safety course.

While all traffic should read the road and travel only at a speed that they can stop at if the road ahead has a bend or dip, I'm not prepared to risk the chance that all drivers know how to drive correctly.

That's why I'll continue to check for a clear road before trotting smartly on around a blind bend- and no, I won't hug the hedge because that lessens visibility and gives me no where to go if a car does bomb around the corner.

If it takes 15 seconds in walk, to get clear of a bend, I'd rather trot on and be clear of the hazard in 5 seconds.

And no, I won't be controlling traffic unless its an emergency. Waving traffic on around bends could cause an accident. I'll let the driver decide when they have enough visibility to overtake.
 

AshTay

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 September 2010
Messages
953
Location
East Mids
Visit site
It's the responsiblity of every road user to be aware of the road ahead of them and to be prepared to stop in an emergency - it might not be horses, it might be an accident scene, or wildlife, or a breakdown. Blind bends should always be driven at a reduced speed because of these possibilities.

The riders in the original post were wearing hi viz and riding 2 abreast, both of which you could argue were steps taken to ensure they were seen a second/split second sooner than they would have been if they were riding in single file with no hi viz.
Trotting on might have further reduced the risk but it might not have been safe to do so for other reasons in this situation.

The only really safe way to deal with blind bends is to not ride them (I avoid one in our village for this reason as it's a steep downhill slope so I'd have to walk slowly and I don't trust 90% of drivers to be able to stop in time if they came up behind me - an accident wouldn't be my fault but I'd still feel responsible for putting us in that position knowing the danger).

I'm not sure why hi viz was mentioned in the title of this thread as it clearly isn't the main issue here but maybe the OP wanted to re-start the hi viz debate again...
 

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
I'm really not sure when everyone forgot that as a road user it is your responsibility to drive appropriately for the road conditions you are on. The speed limit is irrelevant in this case - if it's a truly blind bend you should be going round it slowly enough that you can stop if there is a hazard on the other side. What if someone had broken down round the bend? It's a shame horse riders feel that they should get out of the way when clearly it is the car drivers who are at fault for not taking the corner at an appropriate speed.

This happened to me recently - driving my lorry away from the yard down a single track national speed limit lane with many blind bends. I was going at about 10-15mph as I approached one of them. And thank god I was - a road cyclist flew round the corner, saw me, hit his brakes and lost control of the bike. Bike and person disappeared under the lorry as they slid down the road. But because I was driving at an appropriate speed for a blind bend on a national speed limit road, I was already stationary, and apart from some road rash and a few dents to his pride, the guy was ok (and also extremely apologetic!).

The only person whose responsibility it is to make sure they don't come round a corner and cannon into someone is the driver's - if you are going round a blind bend then you need to slow down, national speed limit or not!


I don't disagree with you. However, this is one of those roads which has been there longer than cars have existed, and so hasn't been designed with sight-lines etc in mind. As a result, unless they know the road well, a driver wouldn't realise until it was too late. In this situation there is a common sense obligation on a rider, who is (whether we like it or not) presenting a hazard to minimise the risk to themselves and others by getting away from the danger area as soon as possible, and allowing others to do so.

I also agree with those who say they like to have a car behind them on a blind bend. So do I. Sometimes, if I have to go around this one, which is near home, I even ask my husband to follow my carriage in the car until I'm clear of it - but I wouldn't force him to loiter on the far side as a sitting duck for any longer than absolutely necessary.
 

MotherOfChickens

MotherDucker
Joined
3 May 2007
Messages
16,641
Location
Weathertop
Visit site
I'm really not sure when everyone forgot that as a road user it is your responsibility to drive appropriately for the road conditions you are on. The speed limit is irrelevant in this case - if it's a truly blind bend you should be going round it slowly enough that you can stop if there is a hazard on the other side. What if someone had broken down round the bend? It's a shame horse riders feel that they should get out of the way when clearly it is the car drivers who are at fault for not taking the corner at an appropriate speed.

This happened to me recently - driving my lorry away from the yard down a single track national speed limit lane with many blind bends. I was going at about 10-15mph as I approached one of them. And thank god I was - a road cyclist flew round the corner, saw me, hit his brakes and lost control of the bike. Bike and person disappeared under the lorry as they slid down the road. But because I was driving at an appropriate speed for a blind bend on a national speed limit road, I was already stationary, and apart from some road rash and a few dents to his pride, the guy was ok (and also extremely apologetic!).

The only person whose responsibility it is to make sure they don't come round a corner and cannon into someone is the driver's - if you are going round a blind bend then you need to slow down, national speed limit or not!

you are completely right, but we don't live in an ideal world, too many people are oblivious to other road users. So I ride defensively-that means trotting on around blind corners, up through blind summits, riding towards the middle of the lane if it makes it safer, wearing hi viz and letting trafic past as and when I can etc. I drive the roads I ride on and know them very well. Many cyclists are also riding defensively and after spending years as an undergrad being bike-powered I understand why.

There are roads I avoid completely as I feel it an unfair risk to my horse or other road users for me to be on it. For that reason, I don't hack on the roads during the morning rush/school run-I just don't think people are thinking about horses at 8am in the morning.

Although it may well be their fault, that wouldn't bring back my horse if I failed (as in my horse's safety is my responsibility) to be as safe as I can. I am a bit odd, I love doing roadwork but then my lot are exceptional in traffic (bar one, who doesn't go on the roads), we have some spectacular views and am pretty rural.
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,020
Visit site
I only give signals if they are relevant to my control of my horse, for instance straight road good width no on coming traffic car coming from behind at fiftyish mph if they start to slow I may wave them on as I dont need them to crawl past
Or I will give a signal to slow down If I need them to but I don't tell them it's safe to overtake on bends it's not my responsibility to decide if theres space for a car to go past.
As a driver I totally ignore riders telling me its safe to pass on bends if I can't see I don't go of course if a rider indicates they wish me to stop I do but that's different .
 

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
I'm not sure why hi viz was mentioned in the title of this thread as it clearly isn't the main issue here but maybe the OP wanted to re-start the hi viz debate again...

Really not:/

As I said before, it struck me that these were responsible adults, clearly safety aware (hence the hi viz), but presenting a real life-threatening hazard to other road users.

It's interesting to see from the responses here - all from thoughtful intelligent adults - that there are a real range of opinions and tactics to try to keep ourselves alive.

I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all. Riding 'out of the hedge' to be seen is valid. So is riding two abreast to present a visual barrier and make cars think about their speed.
Sometimes I'll ride on the wrong side of the road on a narrow lane to get 50yds additional line of sight on a dodgy bend (especially if the kids are behind me). In fact there's one steep hill near me where the only safe approach is probably to ride into the traffic on the RHS, as though you were a pedestrian. That way if a car has to weigh anchor suddenly at least they're going uphill...

If provoking debate makes one person ride or drive safer, it's worth doing.
 

pennyturner

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 August 2006
Messages
2,594
Visit site
I only give signals if they are relevant to my control of my horse, for instance straight road good width no on coming traffic car coming from behind at fiftyish mph if they start to slow I may wave them on as I dont need them to crawl past
Or I will give a signal to slow down If I need them to but I don't tell them it's safe to overtake on bends it's not my responsibility to decide if theres space for a car to go past.
As a driver I totally ignore riders telling me its safe to pass on bends if I can't see I don't go of course if a rider indicates they wish me to stop I do but that's different .

^^Definitely^^

The children are inclined to try to signal to traffic out of politeness, and of course they may be able to see around the corner, but do not have the experience / road sense to judge all situations, so I tell them not to - apart from the stop thing. Thankfully we don't need that very often, as nothing that would frighten my lot would be allowed on a public road.
:)
 

AshTay

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 September 2010
Messages
953
Location
East Mids
Visit site
Really not:/

As I said before, it struck me that these were responsible adults, clearly safety aware (hence the hi viz), but presenting a real life-threatening hazard to other road users.

It's interesting to see from the responses here - all from thoughtful intelligent adults - that there are a real range of opinions and tactics to try to keep ourselves alive.

I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all. Riding 'out of the hedge' to be seen is valid. So is riding two abreast to present a visual barrier and make cars think about their speed.
Sometimes I'll ride on the wrong side of the road on a narrow lane to get 50yds additional line of sight on a dodgy bend (especially if the kids are behind me). In fact there's one steep hill near me where the only safe approach is probably to ride into the traffic on the RHS, as though you were a pedestrian. That way if a car has to weigh anchor suddenly at least they're going uphill...

If provoking debate makes one person ride or drive safer, it's worth doing.

Agree!!
We're all life-threatening hazards to each other on the road and it's true that there are different ideas as to which practices are safer in each situation. If you asked a set of non-horsey drivers how you'd prefer riders to behave in certain circumstances I bet you'd get a range of responses from "horses shouldn't be on the road" to "i'd prefer them out where I can see them in the middle of the road bedecked in dayglo pink".
You do have to adapt to the road layout/time of day/type of users, etc.
 

StoptheCavalry

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 August 2012
Messages
809
Visit site
We have quite a lot of windy, hilly roads near me and I agree I actually prefer riding 2 abreast, I know I feel safer and it really does have a marked effect on those people flying round the country lanes. There are also times when I feel it isnt appropriate to trot round the corners and I would much prefer to have a few cars patiently wait behind than risk my horse slipping on the tarmac. I always make sure I thank them for waiting. I also feel it is a bit of a protection barrier from having someone ram the back of my horse.
 
Top