I go horse (or sheep etc), pedestrian, cyclist, motor vehicle. Regardless of the law, horses are essentially unpredictable because they may be spooked by things you are unaware so it’s always worth giving them a wide berth.
...as he should. The basic key to road safety is courtesy - A.K.A. considering how your behaviour impacts others.
I didn’t say I expected him to pull over, an acknowledgement that he knew I was there would have done, I could have got by but not leaving as much space as I’d like or normally leave so I stayed back, how far is it acceptable to sit behind a cyclist? a mile, two? more.
courtesy comes from both parties. The car driver's assumption about what is a good place to pull in for a pass is just that - an assumption. And we all know what assumptions do...
It not really a suitable way of riding in most scenarios.
Here is the new hierarchy
It seems to me that the problems caused by selfish cyclists on 'A' and 'B' roads are not going to be fixed by these "improvements" to the highway code. For as long as I can remember, there have been long tailbacks of traffic, in Devon and other rural counties, caused by selfish cyclists pedalling slowly up hills.
And tractors, caravans, horses, milk floats, heavy loads, mobility scooters..... There are plenty of vehicles that travel below the speed limit, not just bikes and if anything things have gotten better for you over the years because at least milk floats are a thing of the past.
Personally I have never ridden on the road for fun, I find road cycling tedious and boring. But I have for years commuted by bike on roads, not every cyclist you see is out there having fun, plenty are just trying to get from A to B just like you and have just as much right to do so, and if you can tell cyclists not to ride for their leisure then the same has to go for car drivers.
In your opinion. You being stuck behind a cyclist may be frustrating for you. But for a cyclist having to stop, get off their bike and push up a hill (especially if in clipless shoes) would also be frustrating. What gives you the right to call yourself more important? At least you can be slowly frustrated in your comfortable metal box, shielded from the elements and listening to your favourite music.
The root of the problem isnot enough provision for cyclists, especially on rural roads — but the.same applies to pedestrians. Cars have taken over what must originally have been paths and cart tracks and now assume sole ownership. A similar problem occurs when cyclists use paths previously mainly used by pedestrians
.
Up until these rules were introduced, I noticed an increase in younger people staring at their phones whilst walking along and crossing the road. No “stop, look and listen”. Just walking blindly across. This will only exacerbate issues as it pushes the responsibility on to vehicle users rather than all road users.
My commute involves country roads. Infrequently, I will be driving home and suddenly encounter a cyclist. Wearing black. With no lights. At night. It would be no different to me driving without lights on. I think maximising visibility should be a personal responsibility for all road users - be it pedestrians, cyclists or vehicle users.
I agree that the infrastructure is rubbish. It would be better in the long run to invest and improve road infrastructure to enable all road users to navigate safely, instead of imposing rules to make up for the deficiency.The root of the problem isnot enough provision for cyclists, especially on rural roads — but the.same applies to pedestrians. Cars have taken over what must originally have been paths and cart tracks and now assume sole ownership. A similar problem occurs when cyclists use paths previously mainly used by pedestrians
Yep, that was my solution 2 option from earlier, and it would be great if it could be done. But as you say unfortunately there simply isn't the space to incorporate a proper cycle network alongside existing roads in most towns, even less so when you start looking at old villages.The root of the problem isnot enough provision for cyclists, especially on rural roads — but the.same applies to pedestrians. Cars have taken over what must originally have been paths and cart tracks and now assume sole ownership. A similar problem occurs when cyclists use paths previously mainly used by pedestrians
Unless of course it is a significantly wide enough road that you could overtake a single cyclist without crossing the central white lines, in which case then they are simply being bellends.
That is one opinion. Other opinions are also available.
How is it an opinion? If the rider is beside the bike and pushing it, they'll be wider than if the rider is on the bike. Surely that's fact, isn't it?
I am looking at this as someone who commuted by bicycle for many years, wherever it was practical.
I've pushed my bicycle up hills often enough to know that, although I can't help but slow the traffic, drivers can treat me as a stationary hazard and therefor concentrate on passing me. When I've been in the driver's seat, I've found the same to be true.
I don’t understand your need for an acknowledgement from the cyclist. And regarding how far it is acceptable to wait behind a cyclist, the answer is - until it is safe to pass. It cannot be measured in distance or time.
The vast majority vehicles that are blocking the road at any point are cars, vans and lorries. So I find the argument that cyclist should walk quite arrogant and selfish, especially the way that you knowingly and incorrectly frame cycling as a leisure activity and any motorist being a virtuous, essential activity.
Sadly we ‘see’ to large extent what we expect to see so it’s quite possible for the unexpected to be more or less invisible. Not a comment on your particular example of course, he may have been dozing/whatever.
So your righteous indignation (for the purpose of a forum post, if not in real life) is all about someone else getting hurt by someone else who wasn't driving to the same standard as you?
