Footballer-turned-driving instructor Ashley Neal divides opinion with use of horn in overtaking video

Secret_squirrel wrote:

Horns and Bells - damned if you do - damned if you don't.

Especially this lot.

mdavidford wrote:

Secret_squirrel wrote:

Horns and Bells - damned if you do - damned if you don't.

Especially this lot.

That lot are just Damned

GMBasix wrote:

I've had one or two discussions with Ashley Neal on his channel. I commented on this video, too, early on.

I don't think his use of the horn was ill-advised in this case.  He had been tailing the cyclists for some time, and he was about to change the dynamic by overtaking.  In that sense, he was warning of his presence. 

I think we have to be able to allow some tolerance for differences of opinion of what amounts to a legitimate warning.  Some of us may think, "I don't need telling there's a car behind me"; but does a driver know that?  In that clip, Neal is driving a Tesla.  They're not silent, but on a windy country lane, the fact that he has started to overtake is a nuance that may not be apparent.  The characteristic of the horn use is made more obvious by the nature of the overtake.  Do the cyclists need warning that the car is overtaking?  Perhaps not, in our view; but is it worth it to a good driver to make somebody in front aware that he is about to pass?  It could be.

Now, unfortunately, Ashley Neal has a tendency to polarise his point when critics come along.  He has resorted to generalistions at times; and he has mixed the message at times (when a good video will, perhaps, nod to other issues that creep in to a real-life video, but stick to the key point).  In this case - and I haven't exhausted the comments since I made mine - he may have watered down the good example of patience and acceptable use of the horn with less tempered explanations.  And if he has said in comments that the cyclists "failed" to go single file, he has misunderstood the requirements upon cyclists both pre- and post-change in the Highway Code.

I think Ahsley Neal offers a positive contribution on YouTube.  He's not perfect, and I'll happily have those conversations with him.

But I also think we should calm ourselves down a little:  hearing a horn is not automatically a bad thing.  All too often it is, and we've become accustomed to rejecting all use of it as aggressive. But we should understand when a 'toot' is intended as a helpful effort. I miss the old days where a gentle tap of the horn yielded a more affable sound.

I caught Ogmios zen driving on bbc3 last night, loved his "gentle horn"

GMBasix wrote:

I think we have to be able to allow some tolerance for differences of opinion of what amounts to a legitimate warning.

Well, it was either:

1. Warning! Cyclists beware, highly experienced and careful driver about to make a safe and wide pass, don't do anything rash now!
2. Warning! I'm a bit annoyed you're not going into single file, even though you don't have to, so here's a beep to let you know I think you did something wrong.

I think Captain Badger nailed it, the difference of opinion shows that on balance, in this particular situation, the use of the horn is ill-advised.

I just worry that his advice is going to translate into people thinking they can close pass me if they give a beep to warn of the danger.

I was caught completely unawares by an electric bus overtaking me once. Didn't hear a thing as it approached, was a bit of a shock!

Electric vehicles are much harder to detect by just listening so if the riders hadn't looked in his direction the horn would be justified IMHO.

That's fair enough. Maybe I am more hyper-aware - I've had several near-contacts due to close passes, one actual crash (forced off the road and into a fence, overtaken with millimetres to spare - my fractured left hand still isn't at full strength) and several instances of needing to perform an emergency stop, all in the past few months. When I did drive I was one of those drivers who checked mirrors at very regular intervals. While Neal may not have expected the cyclists to be as conscientous, I think using a horn that is seen to be used aggressively more often than not is all-advised in this case.

With an ICE vehicle I'd definitely agree but in an EV they may genuinely not have known he was there.

I agree that horns are usually used aggressively but there is a time and place for appropriate use and I think this is one of them.

I'd certainly prefer his approach of a toot and a courteous pass in comparison to the more usual standard of driving we encounter!

Rich_cb wrote:

I'd certainly prefer his approach of a toot and a courteous pass in comparison to the more usual standard of driving we encounter!

Hard to argue with that!

EVs at 30mph do make alot of tyre noise on roads, they're still audible, but the whole thing about hearing on a bike,its only one of the senses you use to ride with, if you dont hear that well because of wind noise or lack of hearing you use your eyes more to compensate. When I cant hear stuff i tend to look more, the reason being its completely in my own interests to know exactly what is behind me to keep me safe.

And the scenario we are presented with is Ashley feels he needs to beep his horn to overtake cyclists at a 2metres gap on an empty road. So does he do this for every cyclists in a group he overtakes just to tell them he is there, or only the ones he thinks arent riding as he wants ?

That's why I dont like this video the scenario presented really doesnt match the dialogue or points he wants to make, which might be completely valid in some other situations,but not this one, and anyone who overtook me like that would be getting a hand signal,just not the one they might expect however friendly they thought they were being.

Awavey wrote:

Was it a thankyou ? a warning they were there ? or the hostile anger for holding them up even only briefly?

Not sure. Does it matter?  Does it make a difference to advising people to use their horn to warn others of their presence?  TBH, it seems like a thank you for moving out of his way so quickly.  But I wasn't there.  A thank you isn't within the meaning of the use of the horn, but it rarely does any harm.

Awavey wrote:

EVs at 30mph do make alot of tyre noise on roads, they're still audible, but the whole thing about hearing on a bike,its only one of the senses you use to ride with, if you dont hear that well because of wind noise or lack of hearing you use your eyes more to compensate. When I cant hear stuff i tend to look more, the reason being its completely in my own interests to know exactly what is behind me to keep me safe. And the scenario we are presented with is Ashley feels he needs to beep his horn to overtake cyclists at a 2metres gap on an empty road. So does he do this for every cyclists in a group he overtakes just to tell them he is there, or only the ones he thinks arent riding as he wants ? That's why I dont like this video the scenario presented really doesnt match the dialogue or points he wants to make, which might be completely valid in some other situations,but not this one, and anyone who overtook me like that would be getting a hand signal,just not the one they might expect however friendly they thought they were being.

Yes, EVs at 30 still make a noise. I'm not convinced that the cyclists - and therefore the EV - were doing 30.  When the EV accelerates to overtake, it's the difference in the speed and action that is significant, and may be less noticeable.

I agree, when the auitory senses are hampered e.g. by wind or deafness, we should compensate by looking even more than we should already.  That said, knowing a car was there or not wouldn't make much difference to their ability to do anything about that fact.  The move to overtake is a quick transition, one which is quite likely to be between even frequent shoulder glances; so observation is quite likely to miss the fact that the driver was going to overtake.

It's nothing to do with them not riding as he thinks they should - he spends some time explaining what they're doing and why.

Is his honk necessary?  Probably not. Unless I had cause to think the cyclists might suddenly wander into my path (in which case, should I overtake at all?), I probably wouldn't. But it is done with a particular purpose in mind and it is a valid one, in accordance with the Highway Code.
Does he do it for every group of cyclists?  I expect it depends on the circumstances, as most of our driving/riding should.

If somebody honked then passed me with due consideration, having been behind me for some considerable time, I'm not sure I would rush to assume it was hostile.

They do make some noise but it's nowhere near the noise of an ICE vehicle. Add in a bit of wind and it can be impossible to hear an EV. I've been crept up on by an electric bus before! EV drivers may have noticed this so perhaps they're more inclined to use their horn as directed by the HC?

As I've said elsewhere on the thread I'd happily be tooted at every time I was overtaken if the overtake was as safe and considerate as the one in the video.

Awavey wrote:

EVs at 30mph do make alot of tyre noise on roads, they're still audible

I'll second that. At 30mph and above I find tyre noise is the dominant sound from most modern cars, particularly those with wider tyres. It's even more prominent in the wet.

A Tesla passed me in a 30 mph this evening (drizzling all day). I couldn't tell it was an EV without looking but was conscious of it approaching as it made plenty of noise. The driver passed approaching traffic lights that were on red. A Nissan Leaf is quieter but so are most other small hatchbacks.

Those tiny ebmws are the quietest ecar, narrowest tyres I have seen on a modern car, but it was done for efficiency.  Much less tyre noise.

ktache wrote:

Those tiny ebmws are the quietest ecar, narrowest tyres I have seen on a modern car, but it was done for efficiency.  Much less tyre noise.

This is the direction I wanted VW to take 15 years or so ago with their Bluemotion range, which was really a badging exercise while they put the real R&D into cheating emissions tests and promoting go-faster cars like the TT with ever more powerful engines and monstrous death trap SUVs for the school run.

I want a car with a similar weight and size to my dear departed MK II Polo at <800kg. I don't want stupid electric windows or other 'clever' gadgets - my hands can do that! I want skinny tyres that are half or even a third of the price of those fat hoops and won't need power-assisted steering. Though I'd wish for better brakes and will acknowledge that cleaner and more efficient engines require some digital wizadry that you can't get with a carburettor.

I think we need to be more discerning about our reactions to horns. Going back to the video in which Ashley Neal uses his, I'm wondering, 'would I use it like that?' probably not; does that mean all drivers should not use the horn like that? Less sure.  He has already demonstrated his respect for other road users by following at a distance for a reasonable distance.

I hate the 'it's a grey area' response, because it's a bit like 'we should all just learn to get along and look out for each other'. But, genuinely, we need to accommodate the possibility that other drivers are just trying to be helpful, and they're doing something in a way we might not do it.  I don't think short honks, when you're changing from following (for a considerable distance) to overtaking is UNacceptable.

GMBasix wrote:

I think we need to be more discerning about our reactions to horns. Going back to the video in which Ashley Neal uses his, I'm wondering, 'would I use it like that?' probably not; does that mean all drivers should not use the horn like that? Less sure.  He has already demonstrated his respect for other road users by following at a distance for a reasonable distance.

I hate the 'it's a grey area' response, because it's a bit like 'we should all just learn to get along and look out for each other'. But, genuinely, we need to accommodate the possibility that other drivers are just trying to be helpful, and they're doing something in a way we might not do it.  I don't think short honks, when you're changing from following (for a considerable distance) to overtaking is UNacceptable.

I'm not sure that "we" need to do anything as a group. The point is that horn use around cyclists is unnecessary, and can be intimidating and frightening. As a driver you cannot be sure how a rider will be affected. 

Therefore to advise drivers to use the horn is shit, and against HWC (he's being disingenuous when he says he's warning of presence - he really means get out of my way....please)

He should take the action that will be most beneficial, with the least risk.

The use of horn around riders is of no benefit, v real risk of aggravation, or intimidation. Doesn't pass the risk-benefit analysis to me, which is why I don't use the horn around riders.

Captain Badger wrote:

 

Therefore to advise drivers to use the horn is shit, and against HWC (he's being disingenuous when he says he's warning of presence - he really means get out of my way....please)

Having watched the video, I don't think this is the case. Although it is the case for most drivers beeping at cyclists

I think a lot of the issue is that drivers don't realise just how much louder the horn souds to people outside of cars, particulalry just in front of the car or beside the bonnet. 

wycombewheeler wrote:

......

Having watched the video, I don't think this is the case. Although it is the case for most drivers beeping at cyclists

I think a lot of the issue is that drivers don't realise just how much louder the horn souds to people outside of cars, particulalry just in front of the car or beside the bonnet. 

Certainly agree that drivers have no idea of the effects of using the horn - another reason to keep your hands off it

I'm less charitable regarding Ashley's intent. He wanted the riders to get out of his way. That's why he used it. He questioned them riding abreast, and cos he wanted to get past sounded the horn.

This was not simply "I am here" (eg approaching a blind corner).It was most definitely:

"I am letting you know I am here with the express reason of encouraging you to get out of my way....please"

I tend to agree with you over the personal choice iof using the horn. But we also need to reflect on the fact that the horn remains a valid piece of equipment (indeed, it's mandated on cars), and there are valid cases for its use.

It shouldn't be used aggressively; it is intended as an emotionally neutral warning. The fact that it is rarely used like that is neityher here nor there in the context of somebody advising onits use as a warning.

We are in danger of circling each other's points, but I return to this:  that there is a grey area where we, as cyclists, might not need to be made aware of a car's/driver's presence, but the driver may not be sure of whether we are aware of his presence and may use the horn accordingly.  This could be interpreted as aggressive; and it could be.  Very often it is in the situation and the execution.

The video example, I suggest, is not aggressive.  It's hard to tell how it was taken:  Ashley reports a wave in the video; on replay, there is a gap between front and rear views, and it looks to me no more than a scratch of the nose - but he could be right.  there was no hostile response to the horn on view.

I just think we need to be more tolerant where the use of the horn is positive or ambiguous.

In contrast, I like the idea of a 'soft horn'.  We've lost the ability to give a throttled bip because most horn buttons seem to have a resistance to a gentle push.  Since there is no advised use of a friendly sound, and there are regulations on the construction of horns, any such device would be retrofitted and probably illegal.  Yet I think there are good reasons for positive communication options in a car, over and above just not putting other road users at risk.

GMBasix wrote:

I tend to agree with you over the personal choice iof using the horn. But we also need to reflect on the fact that the horn remains a valid piece of equipment (indeed, it's mandated on cars), and there are valid cases for its use.

It shouldn't be used aggressively; it is intended as an emotionally neutral warning. The fact that it is rarely used like that is neityher here nor there in the context of somebody advising onits use as a warning.

We are in danger of circling each other's points, but I return to this:  that there is a grey area where we, as cyclists, might not need to be made aware of a car's/driver's presence, but the driver may not be sure of whether we are aware of his presence and may use the horn accordingly.  This could be interpreted as aggressive; and it could be.  Very often it is in the situation and the execution.

The video example, I suggest, is not aggressive.  It's hard to tell how it was taken:  Ashley reports a wave in the video; on replay, there is a gap between front and rear views, and it looks to me no more than a scratch of the nose - but he could be right.  there was no hostile response to the horn on view.

I just think we need to be more tolerant where the use of the horn is positive or ambiguous.

In contrast, I like the idea of a 'soft horn'.  We've lost the ability to give a throttled bip because most horn buttons seem to have a resistance to a gentle push.  Since there is no advised use of a friendly sound, and there are regulations on the construction of horns, any such device would be retrofitted and probably illegal.  Yet I think there are good reasons for positive communication options in a car, over and above just not putting other road users at risk.

I agree that we are probably tiptoeing around the grey area that always exists regarding edge cases. In addition my perspective definitely has consideration of teh fact that AN is an ADI, and is viewed as an authority. This means that he should be extraordinarily careful of his message. Advocating beeping at riders, whilst also stating (in this thread) that he has little modern experience of riding shows a unilateral view of use of the public highway.

Regarding whether a rider needs to be made aware of the presence of a driver behind, I'd say that pragmatically I don't need to be aware of a driver that is posing me no risk (assuming that I' haven't heard them anyway). If the driver is posing me a threat, I'll ask why, and wouldn't the appropriate course of action be to stop posing a threat, rather than continue and beep teh horn?

If I can drive safely without using the horn around people on bikes, why can't Mr Ashley?

I would argue that most motorists are so used to being an insulated shell with only visual aids (i.e. mirrors) to make them aware of their surroundings, a friendly toot when overtaking another car might actually help make them aware of the maneuvre!

Car Delenda Est wrote:

“go read the Highway Code... The horn in this situation is a simple ‘excuse me’,” he wrote. “

That's the part I would question. 

The HC is clear that the horn should be used to warn other users of your presence ... nowhere does it say anything about an "Excuse me". Maybe I am just weird, but in my experience, people use "Excuse me" when they need you to move a little in order to let them past, e.g. when blocking a doorway, taking up the whole pavement having a conversation, etc. If the doorway is clear, or the conversation has left me plenty of room to get past, I don't feel the need to say "Excuse me". 

The HC says nothing about using your horn to tell cyclists they need to move to facilitate your overtake, which feels like what he is saying here. 

I am also not particularly keen on the idea of every single car tooting their horn to warn me they are going to overtake me, which again is what he seems to be implying here. 

If there is room to overtake me safely, just do it.