CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 16years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
Prompted by t'other thread on complaints about cyclists.
HC says 'as much space as you would a car'. I'd like to see that changed to '3 feet'. Steveo has the understandable view that at 50mph 3 feet isn't enough and has posited a foot per 10mph.
What could work? What would be easiest to understand? Surely we need something that relies on more than just 'common sense' (as referred to by steveo as well) since that leaves far too much up to chance!
It would need backing up by an awareness campaign.
There are some drivers who don't seem to have a good idea where the left side of their car is. These are the ones that drive in the gutter.
Four feet of air, not counting the width of wing mirrors or handlebars. That still leaves a foot if you have to swerve to avoid a three-foot-wide trench or pothole or are jerked sideways by a sudden gust.
Since my position has been highlighted in the opening I have little to add. The only downside I can see to my argument is that filtering might be slightly contradictory, though I think its rare I filter at more than 5mph and 6 inches is about enough to get through...
And this is another reason not to filter; if drivers see us thinking that it is safe to pass them with little space, why would they give us space?
I'd go for 3 feet plus another foot for every 10mph, from wingmirror to handlebar/elbow. The punishment for infringing this would be an immediate right to swap over and carry it out again...
I think most drivers think the side of their car is further left than it actually is, and simlararly for the right hand side.
That's why you get so many 'you could get a bus through that gap' situations.
But I think there is a tendancy to steer away from solid things on the drivers side.
Watch drivers in the outside lane of the Queensferry road as they pass a traffic island. 90% of drivers swerve needlessly to the left.
So when overtaking cyclists on narrowish roads drivers are weighing up the risk of hitting the cyclist on the left and the other side of the road on the right. The righthand side is nearer the driver so they tend further to the left than they should.
And this is another reason not to filter; if drivers see us thinking that it is safe to pass them with little space, why would they give us space?
Because simple physics would point out that a 100kg bike doing 5mph is almost stopped compared to a 1000kg car doing 30mph. Thus my 1 foot per 10mph. If I wanted to sit in traffic I'd do so in my nice warm car...
The 'does filtering give motorists an idea of how much space we need' thing is something I've thought about in the past.
I think there's an easy distinction to be made, that begins with the point made by steveo above, that the relative speeds we're talking about are very different. 6 inches at 30mph feels way more hairy than 6 inches at 5mph.
The other difference is that generally when filtering one of the parties (the car) is stationary. This negates the need to allow 'pothole avoidance' room and the like. Although you do have to pay attention to traffic starting off again, or a driver suddenly swinging out. If I'm riding at 20, and a driver passes at 30, 40 or 50, there's a potential for rather catastrophically more harm as we're both having to concentrate on moving and dealing with road conditions, weather etc. If I'm filtering through queues then I'm having to think about road conditions etc., but the driver is only really having to think about how much they hate breakfast radio with its overly-cheery presenters.
I quite the law they have in France which is 1m gap in towns and 1.5m gap outside of towns as it has the advantage of being relatively easy for your average motorist to understand. I fear a law based on the driver's speed would be too difficult to enforce as the police would need to measure the passing distance and speed simultaneously.
Well, I go for the fully into the other carriageway approach when I'm overtaking cyclists, horses, pedestrians, cars... It ain't hard to do and if you feel it's safe to go into the other lane (ie, no oncoming traffic) then chances are the overtake is safe for all concerned. It would be easy to judge from an enforcement point of view too.
The broken white line is advisory, so use that other side of the road to make your driving safe for all road users.
@ PS +1
On a two way road I think drivers should overtake you on going into the oncoming lane. Far too many overtake cyclists staying on their side, and therefore your side, of the road, attempting to stay inside the white line. Far too many, and far too close, especially considering this is when there is nothing coming the other way and they are going very fast along a road that is covered by the national speed limit, i.e. 60 mph. They feel like punishment passes frankly, lets see how close we can get to those freaks on bikes!
Yes far too many (of us) motorists forget that we're allowed to cross the centre broken line to pass when it's safe. And too many don't know they shouldn't cross a broken line into a cycle lane unless that lane is clear of pedal cycles. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267554/Britains-barmiest-bike-lane-wide-rest-road.html
Does the "give me cycle space" campaign go far enough? Or do some motorists think as long as they're out of arms reach that's enough space? http://www.cyclingscotland.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/CS-23240-School-Banner-AB-AW-GK.jpg
The general rule in most drivers' heads seems to be 'if there's nothing coming the other way give the cyclist/pedestrian/horse loads of room and go onto the other side of the road but if there's a car coming then obviously you can't do that so squeeze past as closely as you can fit'
'Wait behind the cyclist until there's room to pass safely' just doesn't compute.
I was on about that Give Me Cycle Space campaign on another forum a while ago. It's amazing the fantasy world our politicians and the people responsible for that advert live in. I have NEVER seen ANY child cycling on the roads in this country - never mind a *smiling* child without a high-visibility jacket! If I ever do see such a thing I'll probably think it's all a dream or that I've moved to NL/DK.
That Cycling Scotland ad simply annoyed me at the time because I reckoned the suggestion you took from it is that you only had to give as much as space as a child could reach out. Even if the message was to give space equal to a child's arm span it's still a paltry distance.
"Even if the message was to give space equal to a child's arm span it's still a paltry distance."
I also think the idea was that the space should be that taken by both arms - but most people wouldn't get that (I might be wrong anyway!)
They probably got the idea that it only applied when passing children...
I sometimes think about passing distances as I filter up, and note that I'm happy to pass by with 2 inches to spare but that I'm most upset when someone passes me with 2 feet to spare.
But there's 2 key differences as I see it.
In filtering, you are the party that is moving faster and is in control of your route and progress. You make a decision to progress based on the condition of road, space, speeds, if there is space ahead etc. When it comes to passing, someone else makes the decision for you, there's very little you can do to get out the way if they make the wrong decision. I'm happy to go up the side of a lorry (wait for it) if the thing is stationary, if I can see a clear cycle lane route up the side and a clear exit infront that will take me beyond the vehicle and if I know the junction well enough that I know I have time to make my maneouver and get clear. I know the lorry can't suddenly lurch a foot to the left when its static. I'm also more than happy not to make that decision and to stay put if I can't satisfy the above criteria. However if the lorry is moving and making a close pass, I've no way of knowing it isn't going to make a sudden lurch towards me and I've no way of getting away from it if it does.
Secondly, as mentioned above, it's simple physics. When you filter, you're probably doing no more than 10mph past a queue of stationary and slowly moving vehicles. The biggest danger to watch out for is the driver that suddenly decides to switch lanes without indicating or checking mirrors. When you're passed by traffic, you're probably still doing at least 10mph (plus) but the other vehciles quite probably twice if not thrice your speed. Even the most careful driver has nothing like the control over their vehicle as a cyclist does and situational awareness inside the glass and steel box, with all its distractions, restricted visibility and restricted hearing conditions means that the situational awareness is never going to be as acute as a cyclists. Contrast and compare what 30mph feels like on a bike (massive endorphin rush akin to almost breaking the sound barrier) to 30mph in a car (dull, boring, monotonous, rumbly feeling).
Steveo's solution is very neat - a faster vehicle needs to give more room so that firstly it reduces the impact it has as it passes you (close passes by buses and lorries can feel like getting blown off the bike by the wind) but also it allows for the fact that at higher speeds, reaction distances are greater and the results of any contact are exponentially worse.
@CalumCookable - I have NEVER seen ANY child cycling on the roads in this country - never mind a *smiling* child without a high-visibility jacket!
You're welcome to borrow some of mine (regulars will recognise that they're available for photo ops, modeling, etc):
Child - check
Cycling on the road - check (but under supervision)
Smiling - check (mostly, at least as much as in the car)
Without Hi-Viz - Oops...
Sorry, almost managed it - unfortunately UK road culture and environment is such that I still need that comfort blanket.
Robert
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts