CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

The War on Britain's Roads premieres Wednesday 5th December, 9pm BBC one

(147 posts)

12345

  1. Dave
    Member

    I don't think the HC mentions "undertaking" though. It says you shouldn't "overtake on the left" unless traffic is slow moving (163: "If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left").

    "undetake" is just a colloquialism.

    Note that 'moving more slowly than you' obviously includes traffic which is itself moving, not stationary. At most, 'filtering' can be defined as the passage of small vehicles through a slower-moving stream of large ones.

    Taken in its entirety, I think it's almost impossible to take from rule 211 and that part of 163 a credible position that one shouldn't ride through queueing traffic.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  2. Focus
    Member

    Reading the "sorry excuse for an article" cb linked to on page 1, I had to laugh at the ignorance of the writer who says, "Heads down, teeth clenched, buttocks unappetisingly upended and cased in white neoprene..."

    Neoprene? If she's worried we're all a lot of sweaty freaks, she'd be less happy if we were covered from head to toe in neoprene!

    Posted 12 years ago #

  3. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Tell you what, to save the impasse, I'm going to send emails to the L&B polis and DfT about undertaking/overtaking on the left and find out if it's legal.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  4. mgj
    Member

    @Dave, that is a significant cut out of 163 that completely changes what it says;

    it actually reads

    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

    Clearly that gives permission to overtake on the left in only those two circumstances (right turning traffic, slow moving queues in another lane), particularly since it says earlier that after overtaking you should pull back in to the left.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  5. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Would you agree that even within the HC that:

    "stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues"

    and

    "If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left"

    Seem slightly contradictory?

    Anyway, you lot can debate it all you want. I've emailed the polis and DfT as planned (the polis were really good with a query I had once before on speeding offences - which I knew the answer to, but made for a good short article destroying the myth that you can get points on a driving licence for cycling offences).

    Posted 12 years ago #

  6. ianfieldhouse
    Member

    Did anybody else notice that drivers were more curtious on their commute this morning? I didn't watch the documentary but was aware of drivers stopping at/before junctions rather than 3 feet into the flow of traffic and not nipping out in front of me where there wasn't really a gap. I could have just been imagining it as anything would have been an improvement over Wednesday when I was forced off the road and into a hedge by an inconsiderate 4x4 driver.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  7. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    That's a little beyond inconsiderate.... :-/

    No noticeable difference for me. I did grab 15 minutes to skip through the show on iPlayer at lunchtime though. Seemed, from the bits I watched, better than I'd expected. Certainly wasn't placing all of the blame on cyclists, and the last word from the taxi driver was unexpected.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  8. Morningsider
    Member

    Filtering isn't an offence. It might not always be advisable but it isn't illegal.

    The Highway Code is an odd mix of law, guidance and advice. If you wish to be pedantic then some parts are slightly contradictory, which is what happens when you try and provide advice for very different road situations.

    I think my previous definition of filtering as only applying to stationary traffic should have read "stationary and slow moving traffic" - in line with para 88 of the Highway Code for motorcyclists.

    My last word on this - a pint/PY coffee of your choice to the first person to prove me wrong.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  9. ianfieldhouse
    Member

    > That's a little beyond inconsiderate....

    Well apparently crossing onto my side of the road to pass a parked car, thus forcing me off the non icy part of the road onto the sheet ice in the gutter, was my fault because I "shouldn't be cycling today as it's too dangerous". My response that the only thing endangering me was inconsiderate assholes like him didn't meet with his approval.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  10. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Oh I LOVE that argument.

    Someone has just done something dangerous, then tells you you shouldn't be cycling because it's dangerous. Marvellous. You can't actually fault the logic.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  11. earthowned
    Member

    I had a few incidents like that yesterday on the coast road to gullane. Oncoming cars overtaking slower traffic forcing evasive action. Apparently they haven't heard of driving to the conditions.

    Oh and I nearly spat hot tea into my keyboard when I noticed the tags to this thread (It's like being back in 'Nam)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  12. crowriver
    Member

    @earthowned, that was me in the OP.....just a wee joke.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  13. earthowned
    Member

    @crowriver - all taken in the spirit it was intended :)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  14. Dave
    Member

    @mgj, I didn't mean to suggest I was quoting 163 fully. Interested readers can see all rules at

    https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/overtaking-162-to-169 ... and similar pages.

    I've lost track of what we're arguing about, tbh. I thought it was that overtaking on the left wasn't acceptable, whereas "you should... 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" seems tailor-made to apply to cyclists (if the traffic is not moving more slowly than you, you won't be able to overtake it on either side!).

    Posted 12 years ago #

  15. Focus
    Member

    ianfieldhouse:

    was my fault because I "shouldn't be cycling today as it's too dangerous".

    A slightly more logical argument than I encountered the other week:

    On a main road, approaching a (totally unobstructed) side road where a car is waiting to come out. Driver looks at me and pulls straight out into my path causing me to hit his front wheel arch. Had I not been alert and braked it would certainly have been worse as I would either have been in front of his grill or over the bonnet. My immediate reaction?: "Have you got eyes?"

    His?

    ...

    "Have YOU?" :-o

    So it was clearly my fault that, having right of way, I deemed it my right to continue forward without being run over by someone coming out of a side road! Had I not needed to get home to head to the airport I would have called the Police. As it was, no damage was done, but it could have been very different.

    <edit: do the quote tags not work or have I done something wrong?>

    Posted 12 years ago #

  16. Dave
    Member

    'do the quote tags not work or have I done something wrong?'

    doesn't look like they do. Mostly people just stick quotes around and/or italic :)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  17. Kenny
    Member

    I also thought gareth was completely okay

    I'm surprised anyone thought he was ok, tbh. His own footage showed him to be an inconsiderate cyclist. When he whacked the taxi, he was clearly and deliberately riding in a position on the road to antagonise the taxi driver, rather than simply trying to share road space. Watch it again, and note where he is in the lane. I can't be bothered with cyclists who cycle like that; we are all trying to use the same road, why cycle in a manner that is deliberately trying to annoy drivers?

    In another clip, his tactic of taking primary on a road that he believed no-one should be overtaking him on was another one that I was shaking my head at. Yes, if the letter of the law was being strictly adhered to, then no-one should overtake him, but the way he was doing it was deliberately trying to cause trouble.

    Added to these two incidents, they also showed various clips that he himself must have provided that showed him getting overly irate at drivers when they hadn't done enough, IMHO, to get irate at them for. A wee shake of the head maybe, but he was taking it too far.

    It would have been good to get him and the taxi driver face to face for a conversation, though, as has been suggested. It's a shame it didn't happen.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  18. wingpig
    Member

    " In another clip, his tactic of taking primary on a road that he believed no-one should be overtaking him on was another one that I was shaking my head at."

    I hope you don't mean the road which had the double white line down the middle of it...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  19. Kenny
    Member

    I hope you don't mean the road which had the double white line down the middle of it...

    That's exactly what I meant. I hope you don't think his road position was perfectly acceptable...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  20. wingpig
    Member

    When there are double white lines to the right and railings to the left?

    [+] Embed the video | Video DownloadGet the Flash Video

    When Princes Street used to have railings along the north side buses used to try and grate you against them.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  21. DaveC
    Member

    If I were to cycle that road I would cycle a couple of feet off the kerb and allow the cars following to overtake, instead of cycle right up the middle blocking everyone behind me.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  22. Min
    Member

    That's exactly what I meant. I hope you don't think his road position was perfectly acceptable...

    I hope you don't think it would have been perfectly acceptable for a motorist to have squeezed past a cyclist on that very narrow lane? Primary is the only safe position to have taken.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  23. Kenny
    Member

    When there are double white lines to the right and railings to the left?

    Yep. It was one of many examples during the show of his overly aggressive road positioning which I can fully understand annoys car drivers. There was no need for him to be so far over to the right, as he was at one point. It's fine to make sure you are clear of the left side of the road, but not to the extent he was doing it.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  24. Kenny
    Member

    @DaveC - yep, that's in line with what I'm thinking.

    @Min - no, I don't. I am making the point that he was grossly over-exaggerating his primary position. He did not need to be so far to the right, and in doing so, was merely making things worse for himself.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  25. Claggy Cog
    Member

    I missed the programme due to doing other things...but a colleague at work, who does not cycle at all asked me if I had seen it and then proceeded to tell me about some of the terrible antics of the cyclists, mostly about filtering and seemed to think that this was not allowable and downright dangerous. She thought the ghost bikes were amazing and a great idea to mark someone's death and thought that it would probably affect motorist and make them think. She then went onto say how badly behaved the cyclists were, but did concede that some of the motorists portrayed were awful too, but I got the impression overall that some things that had not really entered her psyche were now highlighted, particularly filtering. There was no seismic shift in her thinking and overall she thought that cyclists were largely to blame if they are in accidents due to poor cycling and law breaking. Sensationalist reporting highlighting bad behaviour but no answers on how these issues should/could be addressed. I would say that it was a fail from her account.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  26. Kenny
    Member

    Someone might have already mentioned this and I didn't notice, but if you want to see it and missed it last night, or want to re-live particular incidents, it's on the iPlayer:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01p7q2l/War_on_Britains_Roads/

    Posted 12 years ago #

  27. Kenny
    Member

    The double white line clip is around 28:20, btw. Personally, I try to avoid situations like that. (Don't watch it if you're offended by colourful language)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  28. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "why cycle in a manner that is deliberately trying to annoy drivers?|"

    "but the way he was doing it was deliberately trying to cause trouble"

    Interesting. I don't think he came over terribly well, but I'm not sure he was deliberately trying to annoy. He was certainly acting deliberately, but in a manner which he thought was to make the road safer for him. Which is a big difference - doing something deliberate that you realise could annoy is different from actively doing something in order to annoy.

    On the double white line clip... Hmmmm.... Tough one. My question would be, if he was riding further left would a driver have tried to overtake? And supplemental, if a driver had tried to overtake was there the space to do so safely? If the answers are yes, then no, it means taking the more central position is, surely, the correct decision? (no/no, or no/yes, answers mean he was in the wrong).

    The very fact someone overtook him when he was more central means that the answer to the first question must be yes; so this really becomes a discussion on whether we think there was space there for a car to overtake safely. Personally I don't think there was; clearly Gareth doesn't think there was; clearly mkns you think that there was space there for a car to overtake without going over the double white lines. Given his different take on the safety of the situation, does that automatically mean he was deliberately trying to annoy the drivers behind, or just that he was (in your opinion) misinterpreting the situation?

    As an aside, Dave Brennan has mentioned (in PoP mailings) that Gareth was poorly edited and that's what made him come across poorly in the talking heads bit - though I agree, in his videos his reactions are a bit OTT. I just don't think we can say he was deliberately trying to annoy. In my opinion. Nor do I think that his road positioning in the double white line clip was that poor. In my opinion. Because I think further left and someone would definitely try to overtake, and that there wasn't space for that to be done. In my opinion.

    And personal opinions will always be varied - it doesn't mean that someone's opinion is 'wrong' and that people here should start snapping at each other. Chill guys. Ride your own way.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  29. stiltskin
    Member

    Road positioning is always a fraught subject. Ultimately it comes down to personal judgement, although I think that people's understanding of what primary is can be highly variable. I also think it is really difficult to judge these things from a headcam. They can be hugely distorting in the view they present.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  30. Dave
    Member

    In the clip above there isn't room for a car and bike in the same lane, so I would ride to force an overtaking driver to use the oncoming lane (i.e. only overtake when it's clear).

    Which is sort of what he does. I didn't listen with sound, so I can't tell what's going on when he starts looking over his shoulder (horn action?) but at that point I would stop, myself, right in the road and let them overtake if they want. When people get territorial behind the wheel they aren't rational, sometimes it's fun to play, but you can always just let them get on with it.

    It's not really about being held up, because when I ride around with my trailer nobody at all can get past in the same lane, and nobody in the last 12 months has ever tooted at me that I recall. It happens often enough in the same places at the same speeds without the trailer though...

    Pass them at the next lights anyway, hereabouts :P

    Posted 12 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12345

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin