Cycle Lane Use

Rotor

A ring of the bell is not "GET OUT OF MY WAY SCUM" but "Can I come past please" and the reasonable response, especially when it is of little incovenience, is "yes of course"

Cycrow

Sounds like the same attitude a lot of car drivers have.

if a cyclist is going down a road and a car comes up behind, the driver expects the cyclist to move over to allow them through, otherwise the cyclist is being inconsiderate.

when in reality, it should be the driver behind that waits for a safe time to overtake then pulls over leaving plenty of space

Rotor

Not the same at all. For a car driver to overtake safely even single file cyclists would require the driver to partly move into the other lane. If they are partly moving into the next lane it is no more trouble or danger to move entirely into the lane. Thus moving over is of no benefit to a good car driver.
This is not true of the faster cyclist who CAN safely pass and still remain in the same lane.
in the first case you are not being inconsiderate if you don't move, in the second case you are.

armyknife

Rotor wrote: »

Not the same at all. For a car driver to overtake safely even single file cyclists would require the driver to partly move into the other lane. If they are partly moving into the next lane it is no more trouble or danger to move entirely into the lane. Thus moving over is of no benefit to a good car driver.
This is not true of the faster cyclist who CAN safely pass and still remain in the same lane.
in the first case you are not being inconsiderate if you don't move, in the second case you are.

Exactly how CLOSE do you envisage getting to this other cyclist at you pass them ?

Why not give them a safe distance approaching that which you'd expect a passing car to give you?

Rotor

Probably more space than you give someone when you talk to them on a bike. You're not saying a road is not wide enough for two cyclists are you? You can give plenty of space when passing , after all a bike is a tiny proportion of the width of a car.

WiggyDiggyPoo

Rotor wrote: »

Probably more space than you give someone when you talk to them on a bike. You're not saying a road is not wide enough for two cyclists are you? You can give plenty of space when passing , after all a bike is a tiny proportion of the width of a car.

I think your making two points, both wrong.

Firstly regardless of whoever wishes to pass a cyclist, be it motorised traffic or other cyclists there is no expectation that the person to be passed should be expected to move over for the person wanting to get by. This isn't ignorance on the part of the person being passed but a willingness to share space with slower traffic on the part of the person doing the passing*

Secondly bike may appear to have a 'tiny proportion of the width of a car' but in reality this is not the case. From curb I'd typically be positioned 0.5 - 0.75m out depending on how much debris is in the gutter and the state of the road, and then I'd expect whoever to give me 1.5m of room when passing. This allows plenty of wiggle room should I need to avoid potholes for example or worst case fall off I hopefully won't end up underneath whoever is passing.

* There are some minor exceptions I will mention for sake of argument, single lane country roads for example I do tend to pull over where convenient for me so that other traffic can get by as they have no choice but to wait otherwise.

Lastly, this study into cycle lane use shows they can actually have a negative effect unless implemented properly.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/reports.htm - PDF copy of report
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/good-practice.htm - scroll down for examples of good lanes

custardy

houseimprover wrote: »

I was driving home tonight and noticed in the cycle lane instead of riding one behind another that two cyclists were riding aside of each other.

Are there any rules to riding on a cycle lane or were what they were doing acceptable? (the one on the right did ride close to the line and did slip over it at least once)

This is just intrigue cheers.

Didnt you read the highway code?

Rotor

You mix up different things. It is entirely possible to stick to the laws ,rules and regulations and still be rude and inconsiderate.
After all, pedestrians have right of way on footpaths and cycle ways but people walking 4 abreast across path and cycleway are still being rude and inconsiderate.

It just requires some common courtesy.

liz545

Cycrow wrote: »

if a cyclist is going down a road and a car comes up behind, the driver expects the cyclist to move over to allow them through, otherwise the cyclist is being inconsiderate, when in reality, it should be the driver behind that waits for a safe time to overtake then pulls over leaving plenty of space

This - when I'm riding in town I frequently have to pass slower cyclists. I wait until there's a safe opportunity to pass them, shoulder check and then pass them as wide as possible. If necessary I slow down and stay behind until it's safe to pass. I don't ring my bell or expect them to get out of my way - it's my responsibility to pick the right moment to pass, not their responsibility to make it easy for me to overtake.

If I'm out for a ride on a quiet country lane I'll often ride two abreast so I can chat to my companion. Most of the time we're the only ones on the road, so there's no harm in that, but if there's traffic coming, we drop into single file. Don't usually do it in town, but that's mostly because the bike lanes are narrow.

houseimprover

custardy wrote: »

Didnt you read the highway code?

Yes thanks....though unfortunately unlike you obviously, I don't have a 100% retention rate.