New cycle proficiency test

marmitedog

Yorkie1 wrote: »

One difficulty with cycle lanes is that they are not wide enough generally to facilitate you cycling 1m away from the kerb ...

Correct, DfT guidelines indicate that 1.5m is the minimum, but as

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/

shows, this is rarely the case. Perhaps motorists should be reminded of the recommended distance when overtaking cyclists. As a cyclist and motorist I know this is often not practical on todays crowded roads, but the "1m from the kerb" thing is designed to stop all but the most determined idiots from overtaking too closely.

Anyway, heres the ideal world from the highway code.....

Harry_Flashman

What's the 'official' line on cyclists riding two abreast?

Coming back from camp this weekend, I was driving along a 'reasonably' narrow road (twin track though) through a smallish village. It wasn't what you'd call busy, but there were a few cars moving both ways along the road.

There was a group of 5 cyclists, one a fair distance in front of the others and the other 4 riding two abreast. This meant that there was no way to overtake them safely while there was other traffic coming the other way.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Riding two abreast is perfectly legal and on narrow roads is often the safest option for cyclists. If you can't safely overtake the cyclists in the example you quote, you can't also safely overtake cyclists riding single-file.

casper_g

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Riding two abreast is perfectly legal and on narrow roads is often the safest option for cyclists. If you can't safely overtake the cyclists in the example you quote, you can't also safely overtake cyclists riding single-file.

Road widths vary. Surely there must be some borderline cases where it would be safe to overtake a single cyclist but unsafe to overtake a pair of cyclists riding together?

Print_Screen

Technically you are supposed to leave as much room as if you were overtaking a car.
So 2 cyclists riding abreast would take up about as much room as a car unless riding were far apart.
Therefore if you couldn't overtake a car in that space you shouldn't overtake the cyclist

chorlton

If they were riding single file you would have a longer line of cyclists to overtake.
That would mean you had to be in the danger zone (ie the wrong side of the road) for longer to pass them. So actually, it is safer for them to be 2 abreast.

Harry_Flashman

But, to pass single file cyclists, there's no need to be over the central line (ie in the 'danger' zone).

I got past 'em anyway, just had to get very close is all.

Harry_Flashman

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

There was a group of 5 cyclists, one a fair distance in front of the others and the other 4 riding two abreast. This meant that there was no way to overtake them safely while there was other traffic coming the other way.

I should have pointed out here 'safely for them', I was never in any danger.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

But, to pass single file cyclists, there's no need to be over the central line (ie in the 'danger' zone).

I got past 'em anyway, just had to get very close is all.

You're a !!!!ing idiot if you don't at least partially cross the white line on an average road, while overtaking a cyclist.

Harry_Flashman

How do you work that one out? That will just slow myself and traffic behind me if there's oncoming cars?