oh dear steve, well you did say you still learn something... "que jumping" actually its called filtering and is quite legal, pulling out and not looking on the otherhand is not,assuming that is the bike was not travelling at excessive speed which is normally less than 30mph in moving traffic of 10mph and above.Did the policeman not mention this whilst you were making statements?i assume you made written statements? as clearly the police were called so somebody will be at fault,statements surely were taken, either the biker for undue care if travelling too fast or car driver for not using his mirrors? and imagine you learnt that what you call que jumping! is actually called filtering when on a m/ bike and is legal!!!!!!!!!
below i have pasted some info on filtering.
Filtering is legal – as highlighted below in the Highway Code.
On Page 28 of the Highway Code, under rules for drivers and motorcyclists (88), Filtering is mentioned as follows:
‘Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers can see you in their mirrors. Additionally when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.
Remember: Observation – Signal – Manoeuvre’.
The Highway Code recognises that filtering by motorcycles in traffic is an accepted and legally recognised practice. However, interpretation by police, insurers and courts of exactly what constitutes ‘filtering’ is a ‘grey area’.
Definition of Filtering and Lane Splitting (or Sharing)
In broad terms, filtering by motorcyclists is defined as moving between traffic when other surrounding traffic is stationary. This is standard motorcycle practice and necessary for safe motorcycle travel.
Lane splitting is defined as moving through traffic when other traffic is in motion. It can also refer to overtaking within the same marked lane in moving traffic.
Sometimes lane splitting and filtering are used intermittently without full comprehension of the differences in each mobility activity. This results in problems for policy makers, motorcyclists and enforcement agencies during policy formation and implementation.
According to the document by the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (VACC), ‘the primary advantage of motorcycle transportation is the narrowness and acceleration capacity of a motorcycle which allows a rider to overtake and filter past other traffic.
Filtering is useful in heavy traffic flow conditions and facilitates road space management and mobility policy through use of road space unable to be occupied by vehicles such as passenger cars.
Thus filtering contributes to road safety as it can increase the road space between motorcyclists and other mixed traffic.
Furthermore, filtering is a defensive driving measure that increases motorcyclist visibility to car drivers and prevents ‘rear end’ motorcycle collision’.
2003 data from Transport for London examined 6,469 powered two wheeler casualties in London. In this report, Powered two wheelers refer to mopeds, scooters and motorcycles up to and including 125cc and those over 125cc. When comparing PTWs in fatal collisions with other types of vehicles, the statistics found lane changing contributes to only 2% of the casualty total.
This result implies the low risk nature of filtering.
In 2004, the results of the first complete European study of motorcycle accidents were released by the Association of European Motorcycle Manufacturers (ACEM). The Motorcycle Accident In- Depth Study (MAIDS) aimed to understand the nature and causes of motorcycle accidents in France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain. 921 accidents were examined and showed around 2000 variables including human, environmental and vehicle factors.
Most of the accidents were founded on human error, the most common being a failure to see the motorcycles in traffic.
Over 70% of car driver errors were due to failure to perceive the motorcycle. Hence being conspicuous is the prime factor in accidents as opposed to filtering activity.
Previous research from the American Hurt report (1981) confirms the current European findings. In multiple vehicle accidents, the driver of the other vehicle (mostly passenger cars), was found to violate the motorcyclists right of way and was responsible for causing two thirds of all motorcycle accidents.
Thus, motorist failure to recognise motorcycles in traffic is the dominant cause of motorcycle accidents.
The Hurt research also verifies higher safety levels for motorcyclists who are able to traffic filter.
MAG believes that motorcycles should be able to move freely in a traffic lane as part of a low risk safety measure.
For example, moving to the front of a traffic queue enables a motorcyclist to avoid rear end collisions safely, as traffic is moving in the same direction.
Furthermore, as highlighted in the VACC document, ‘being unable to filter means a motorcycle would potentially contribute to greater congestion problems rather than responding to congestion reduction.
In the instance of slow moving traffic, filtering is important in the prevention of accidents particularly if a motorcycle is overtaking another slow-moving vehicle’.
Use of bus lanes for motorcyclists has been recommended in cities throughout the UK.
Other findings suggest a reduction in motorcycle accident numbers and motorcycle side swipe accidents with permitted bus lane use and improved safety benefits for motorcyclists.
The promotion of alternate lane use involves filtering activity, so prohibiting filtering limits the safety options offered by multi lane transportation models.
Existing policies in many countries tend to apply road capacity management to motorcyclists as a general road user rather than incorporating specialised measures to meet capacity management needs.
Therefore, more enquires into motorcyclist behaviour is needed to establish an integrated view of motorcyclist user requirements, mobility function and safety issues.
Existing research is further limited in its application because of small sample sizes, and past research suffered from a lack of theoretical foundations, resulting in faulty variable measurements.
However, an overriding issue is the lack of data from the motorcyclist’s perspective as highlighted in the European Agenda for Motorcycle Safety produced by the Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations (FEMA).
In such instances, research has assumed the driving environment is similar for motorists and motorcyclists.
This assumption potentially undermines the relevance of past findings and at worst, guides road rule policy toward an unsafe driving environment for motorcyclists and other road users.
MAG RECOMMENDATIONS?
Below are some recommendations I have been working on.
Please pass these out to your local group members for comments and feed responses to myself to the MAG Office or via email (preferred) at
general-secretary@mag-uk.org
MAG recommends a commonly understood and practical set of definitions so that consistent policies can be introduced and maintained when considering these issues in the future.
MAG UK therefore recommends that the definition of ‘filtering’ be that of ‘moving between traffic when other surrounding traffic is stationary or slow moving (no more than to 20 mph)’.
A further definition of ‘Lane Splitting’ could be introduced which is that of ‘moving through traffic when other traffic is in motion over a speed limit of 20 mph’. (It can also refer to overtaking within the same marked lane in moving traffic).
This would help policy makers, police and insurers to separate and define safe riding practices from unsafe riding practices.
Trevor Baird
General Secretary MAG UK
GEM Motorcycle Filtering Leaflet
Here
References:
Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce (VACC) Submission January 2006 National Transport Commission Australian Road Rules Amendment Package 2005 Draft Regulatory Impact Statement.
Transport for London Street Management London Road Safety Unit 2004 ‘Powered Two Wheeler Causalities in Greater London’.
ACEM, 2004 ‘Maids- in depth investigations of accidents involving powered two wheelers’ Final Report
http://maids.acembike.org
Hurt, HH Ouellet, JV Thom. DR 1981 ‘Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures’ AKA The Hurt Report’ Traffic Safety Center University of Southern California Los Angeles California
www.cs.wisc.edu
Elliot, MA, Baughan, CJ, Broughton, J. Chinn, B, Grayson, GB. Knowles, J Smith, LR Simpson H. 2003 ‘Motorcycle safety: A Scoping Study’ prepared for Road Safety Division Department for Transport
Advisory Group on Motorcycling 2004 Final Report to Government
www.dft.gov.uk
Department for transport 2005 ‘The Government’s Motorcycling Strategy’
VACC Submission January 2006 National Transport Commission Australian Road Rules Amendment Package 2005 Draft Regulatory Impact Statement.
Buche, T. Williams, S, Tyra A. Motorcycle Safety Foundation , Irvine, CA 2004 ‘ A proposal for Defining, Measuring and Documenting the Effects of ‘Safety Renewal’ A Concept whose Time has come’ A paper for the 5th ifz Motorcycle Conference ‘ Safety- Environment– Future’ Munich Germany.
Facebook
Twitter