Cycle races on dual carriageways !

[Rich_W]

saaby93 said:

xRIEx said:

Just to spin this around, why not ban the poor car drivers (hypothetically, if it were possible)?

As stated before, if a safe driver can negotiate such a hazard.

Obviously they were all safe drivers today as they did manage to negotiate the hazard but why unnecessarily create a hazard to test them?

One mans unnecessary is anothers necessary. Why would people get unnecessarily drunk at weekends? Why do people do parachute jumps?

We still allow free thought and actions in the UK. Just because YOU or I wouldn't doesn't mean others don't want to.

[saaby93]

xRIEx said:

saaby93 said:

Rich_W said:

Though this is a case of semantics. EVERYONE has EQUAL share of the roads. Slow, Fast, big small. EVERYONE should just try and get on and accept the others are allowed to be there and ffs try not to hit each other

no they dont have equal shares - where did you get that from?
You'd get people walking towards you on the outside lane of a dual carriageway saying 'I have equal shares'.
Everyone has to take due care of other road users and help faster traffic on its way pulling over if necessary, holding back to allow an overtake to proceed etc.

Everyone has equal right to use roads, that's why they're called rights of way (the only exception being motorways).

As someone stated before, "right" isn't the same as "invulnerability". Some cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and drivers don't realise this in certain situations; in other situations, they do (such as pedestrians realising they would be daft to walk down the outside lane of a dual carriageway).

I agree with you about duty of care; unfortunately no one has a duty of consideration to others, it would just be nice if they were considerate anyway, even if they don't have to be.

yes there is a right to use the roads and a right of way. Are you sure it's equal?
Is there a right to block someone elses right of way?
By keeping to the left a cyclist/pedestriam etc can exercise their right of way, while other traffic can safely pass exercising it's right of way

It is about due care, courtesy etc

[Clivey]

Regardless of the law, which as we all know is wrong at times, common sense should be used by all parties. I used to cycle frequently and need to get back into it (to keep fit mainly) but I always went out of my way to make sure I wasn't inconveniencing others or making the roads more dangerous. I would personally be ashamed of being a "rolling road block", unlike some others who seem to take great delight in doing so. I am not able to comment on the specific situation the OP refers to as I didn't see it.

As with every kind of road user, there are "good guys" and "bad guys". Generally, I don't have a problem unless someone is being unreasonable.

[xRIEx]

saaby93 said:

xRIEx said:

Just to spin this around, why not ban the poor car drivers (hypothetically, if it were possible)?

As stated before, if a safe driver can negotiate such a hazard.

Obviously they were all safe drivers today as they did manage to negotiate the hazard but why unnecessarily create a hazard to test them?

That's a very good question and I'm not sure I've got a good answer.

I think we do a lot of things that aren't necessary (or maybe they are things from a different level of necessity, if we think about Maslow's hierarchy of needs). It's not necessary to jump off a bridge with an elastic band tied to your ankles, but people do it. It's not necessary to create conflict with our families, friends, partners, colleagues, but (mostly outside of conscious effort) we do.

No one needs to cycle, just the same as no one needs to run marathons, or ride horses, or play rugby, do archery, jump out of a perfectly good plane, or race cars or motorbikes. Sometimes we just want to do these things, and sometimes a bit of danger heightens the thrill.

[anonymous-user]

Jonnas said:

No, I didn't fail to spot anything. I came on at a slip road and arrived at total carnage of people braking hard and having to take avoiding action into lane 2. No signs, no marshals, nothing. Everyone in the car at the time was shocked.

Where I live they have time trials regularly on my local A road. Totally appropriate, well indicated, organised and marshalled. On a dual carriageway, in my opinion it's just too dangerous as I've already said. It's not a lot of good preaching from the moral high ground when you're brown bread. You'll never find me in Lycra in lane 1 of a D/C but I don't particularly want to be part of killing anyone either.....

Sorry I'm not having a dig at you, I'm surprised that there was nothing visible to indicate what was going on, British Cycling are practically falling over themselves to help clubs with warning signs and that sort of thing so its frustrating when these things arent taken up by event organisers. Honestly, as a cyclist its frustrating when this sort of thing happens.

I would argue however that a D/C isnt that bad a place to hold an event where it is, as yellowjack said, essentially one man against a clock albeit with 30 or so on the road at a time, once people realise this, they can stay in the outside lane and in a few miles are passed them all.

[JDMDrifter]

xRIEx said:

Just to spin this around, why not ban the poor car drivers (hypothetically, if it were possible)?

As stated before, if a safe driver can negotiate such a hazard.

If we could ban poor drivers I would be all for it!

[dxg]

Highway Star said:

dxg said:

The hobbyist, lycra-clad cyclists in this part of the world (I'm near you) seem to have a bit of an agenda, shall we say. And now that the sun's back, they're out in force.

Yesterday, for example, I was stuck behind a group of three in a 30 zone. They were riding two-abreast and taking a while to make their way up a hill. I elected to stay behind them, as it was a busy road and, due to the brow of the hill I couldn't see far enough ahead to give them enough space.

I got a pile of abuse for my trouble when I finally was able to move into the oncoming lane to pass them at the top of the hill.

150 yards later and I'm waiting at traffic lights waiting to turn left. The lights turn green and I'd fully seen this group approaching up the inside at speed. I didn't even move off when the lights changed to green as I knew what was coming.

Sure enough, another pile of abuse, with added hand gestures, this time. And my car hadn't even moved.

I guess I should count myself lucky I still have my passenger wing mirror. I suppose I do, because I was actually using it.

And this is not an isolated incident. On their own, they're like the horse riders round here - fine. But put them in a pack and a story changes...

Come on, what did you do when you passed them? Unlikely that they would give you abuse either for no reason whatsoever (unless you came across a club ride of Sociopath CC), especially for a second time when they caught you at the lights.

I come across groups of cyclists all the time, often on the single track lanes near where I live which means I have to spend a goodly amount of time behind them until safe to pass. I have never once received abuse from them for passing them and generally am acknowledged with thanks for patience and consideration.

I would say as much as they may have an 'agenda', you also have one, which your posting this 'story' on this thread would support.

My 'agenda' was simply to give them the space they say they need, not that you'll believe me.

Comments like yours are exactly why we're heading down the path of cameras in cars.

[Rich_W]

saaby93 said:

xRIEx said:

saaby93 said:

Rich_W said:

Though this is a case of semantics. EVERYONE has EQUAL share of the roads. Slow, Fast, big small. EVERYONE should just try and get on and accept the others are allowed to be there and ffs try not to hit each other

no they dont have equal shares - where did you get that from?
You'd get people walking towards you on the outside lane of a dual carriageway saying 'I have equal shares'.
Everyone has to take due care of other road users and help faster traffic on its way pulling over if necessary, holding back to allow an overtake to proceed etc.

Everyone has equal right to use roads, that's why they're called rights of way (the only exception being motorways).

As someone stated before, "right" isn't the same as "invulnerability". Some cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and drivers don't realise this in certain situations; in other situations, they do (such as pedestrians realising they would be daft to walk down the outside lane of a dual carriageway).

I agree with you about duty of care; unfortunately no one has a duty of consideration to others, it would just be nice if they were considerate anyway, even if they don't have to be.

yes there is a right to use the roads and a right of way.
Is there a right to block someone elses right of way.
By keeping to the left a cyclist/pedestriam etc can exercise their right of way, while other traffic can safely pass exercising it's right of way

It is about due care, courtesy etc

As for "block someones ROW" that's overkill. The bikes in the OP are not blocking. They are delaying momentarily. The amount of time lost is miniscule in the great scale of things. No one was lying on their death bed thinking "st, 20 years ago I lost 2 mins waiting to overtake a bike on a Dual carriageway"

But the main thing on this thread is that people seem to think the roads have an order. Cars over bikes and as a result bikes should not go there. And that's just silly. Live and let live. Drive assuming everyone is the worst driver ever and you may have to make adjustments to make progress. That way a line of bikes or a skip falling off a lorry in front of you could hopefully be negotiated without needing a multiple page thread on PH

Anyway. I'm oot. Going to watch MotoGP instead I'm sure this thread will be 20 pages in due course and nothing will have changed

Edited by Rich_W on Sunday 13th April 19:45

[xRIEx]

saaby93 said:

xRIEx said:

saaby93 said:

Rich_W said:

Though this is a case of semantics. EVERYONE has EQUAL share of the roads. Slow, Fast, big small. EVERYONE should just try and get on and accept the others are allowed to be there and ffs try not to hit each other

no they dont have equal shares - where did you get that from?
You'd get people walking towards you on the outside lane of a dual carriageway saying 'I have equal shares'.
Everyone has to take due care of other road users and help faster traffic on its way pulling over if necessary, holding back to allow an overtake to proceed etc.

Everyone has equal right to use roads, that's why they're called rights of way (the only exception being motorways).

As someone stated before, "right" isn't the same as "invulnerability". Some cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and drivers don't realise this in certain situations; in other situations, they do (such as pedestrians realising they would be daft to walk down the outside lane of a dual carriageway).

I agree with you about duty of care; unfortunately no one has a duty of consideration to others, it would just be nice if they were considerate anyway, even if they don't have to be.

yes there is a right to use the roads and a right of way. Are you sure it's equal?
Is there a right to block someone elses right of way?
By keeping to the left a cyclist/pedestriam etc can exercise their right of way, while other traffic can safely pass exercising it's right of way

It is about due care, courtesy etc

I'm fairly sure it's equal.

There is no 'right' to block a right of way, it is an offence to block a right of way. However, moving slowly is not 'blocking' - especially when that road user is travelling as quickly as they can (in the example of a competing cyclist).

Tractors usually travel very slowly, large heavy loads may be as slow as 10-15mph, ambulances occasionally have need to travel very slowly, however none of them are 'blocking', but may be travelling half the speed of a cyclist.

Like I said, I agree completely about duty of care, and agree that more people should show consideration to others. Unfortunately they are not required to do so.

[deltashad]

deltashad said:

Its not it's a push bike approx 1ft wide travelling at 24 mph.
If a car or bus was taking up a full lane of the road at this speed it would be pulled over by the police.

Rich_W said:

No they wouldn't

(I'm guessing this road is a 60 or 70mph limit)

........oh yes they would.

deltashad said:

Riding responsibly would be keeping left to let the faster traffic join the raod in a safe manner.

Rich_W said:

Why faster traffic? There's no hierarchy based on speed to the roads. Or have they changed the law recently?

Come on man, it's courtesy and common sense and safer.

If you see a vehicle coming towards you, or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing place on your left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right.

This is for single track roads but its ignored by cyclists on single track roads and gives a general idea that you shouldn't hold up traffic unnecessarily. If a cyclist wants to ps off another road user then go ahead. Most are ok, but there are selfish cyclists and they don't care about anything else on the road except for themselves.

deltashad said:

Its also legal to jog in the middle of the road but you would need to be even more suicidal, and jogging speeds are much closer to cycling speeds than cycling speeds are to the slowest of moving vehicles

I run at circa 7-9mph. I ride at circa 25ish (highest can be 60 slowest can be 10 depending on the road gradient). What's closer to 30 again? Again. There is NOT more right to be on a road depending on how fast you are going. Something you seem to have imagined

See above

deltashad said:

All it takes is something ahead to happen which can cause a knock on effect, the truck drivers view being limited until the last moment, which can be avoided, by cyclists being more considerate and not taking unnecessary risks.

Rich_W said:

What? A truck drivers view is limited how exactly? High up. Big screen. That doesn't even make sense

A bus pulls out obstructing view, another lorry further up leaves it late to overtake due to cars in the outside lane etc. It happens with slow cars so its gonna happen with slower cycles.
I've driven lorries, you don't always have the view, my co car is higher than most and I can still get caught out.

deltashad said:

Imagine 5-10 miles of groups of C63's doing 24 mph on a dual carriageway.

Rich_W said:

And? It doesn't matter that YOU don't want them there.

Dont really get that. But no, I don't want a line of cars travelling at 24mph. Why would I want that? May aswell reduce the speed limit to 30 instead of 70mph.

[TankRizzo]

We normally have the PH cyclists forming Devastator right about now, I wonder if the nice weather is keeping them outside..

[jayemm89]

TankRizzo said:

We normally have the PH cyclists forming Devastator right about now, I wonder if the nice weather is keeping them outside..

Someone artistic, please, please, for the love of God, draw this.

[standards]

jimbop1 said:

kambites said:

Why would it not be allowed? Cyclists have more right to use non-motorway dual-carriageways than drivers do.

Having said that, I've always been a bit dubious of actual racing on the road, if that's what they were doing.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 13th April 15:55

cyclists have more rights than drivers now do they?!

To the OP I'm afraid this is just cyclists for you. They don't care about other road users or the dangers they cause. In fact it probably makes them quite happy that they have annoyed you, and probably many other motorists that where on the same road.

As both a cyclist and I hope a courteous driver it might be fairer to say that drivers have more (legal) responsibilities than cyclists. Whether that conveys more rights...

[Highway Star]

dxg said:

My 'agenda' was simply to give them the space they say they need, not that you'll believe me.

Comments like yours are exactly why we're heading down the path of cameras in cars.

Why should or shouldn't I believe you? Rather a defensive riposte there, old chap? Touched a nerve?

Your comments lead to exactly the same conclusion, if you use the same logic.

I may be wrong, but I fail to believe that the cyclists' reaction was not triggered by some action. It may or may not have been yours, it may or may not have been premeditated, but human beings (which cyclists are, though some on this thread seem to forget that) do not usually react in a hostile nature unless provoked.


Comments given by you show you are anti-cyclist. Perhaps a dash cam would be a good idea for you.

[matthias73]

Hmmm.

It's quite legal for a chap to stand next to a big angry bloke who is minding his own business and tell him that he thinks the big chap's wife is fat and unpleasant, and possibly a we at the weekends.

It's also quite illegal for the big chap to turn round and hit him.

However most people can agree that they would not only have seen it coming, but that it's also the smaller guy's fault.



Being legal doesn't make something safe, or even normal. I wouldn't consider racing push bikes on a 70mph road with lorries to be good planning, personally.

[dxg]

Highway Star said:

dxg said:

My 'agenda' was simply to give them the space they say they need, not that you'll believe me.

Comments like yours are exactly why we're heading down the path of cameras in cars.

Why should or shouldn't I believe you? Rather a defensive riposte there, old chap? Touched a nerve?

Your comments lead to exactly the same conclusion, if you use the same logic.

I may be wrong, but I fail to believe that the cyclists' reaction was not triggered by some action. It may or may not have been yours, it may or may not have been premeditated, but human beings (which cyclists are, though some on this thread seem to forget that) do not usually react in a hostile nature unless provoked.


Comments given by you show you are anti-cyclist. Perhaps a dash cam would be a good idea for you.

Thank you for your concern. I shall rush out and fit one toot sweet.

[Mr Gear]

wolves_wanderer said:

Martin4x4 said:

They do the same thing on the A63 and refused to stop even one of them was killed as a result of his dangerous riding and the Police are powerless.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Police-powerless-st...

Someone died in a car crash near me recently. I have also refused to stop driving.

Touche!

[Pkh72]

JDMDrifter said:

Caused abit of a stir here

I appreciate it's their sport and they have the right, but IMO it seems very dangerous. Bare in mind this stretch of road has a very busy lane 2 90% of the time and pulling across to overtake isn't that easy, this combined with poor drivers can only end in tears. I believe it should be banned on this particular stretch of road due to the volume of traffic and the disruption it causes.

Edited by JDMDrifter on Sunday 13th April 19:16

No st Sherlock.

Edited by Pkh72 on Sunday 13th April 20:57

[surveyor]

Threads like these remind me of a tutorial group in university many years ago.

For a particular module the surveying course (investment focused - very Conservative), joined with an environmental course (hippy's). These seemed pointless at the time, but now in hindsight was valuable.

One particular heated debate revolved around cycle lanes. The environmentalists wanted to run one of these down the middle of the pedestrianised city centre. They could not see the danger in cyclists mixing with pedestrians in that context. The higher moral ground was claimed by the Surveyors, for a change.

Not much I've seen since then makes me think that some cyclists are any more level headed or balanced these days.

George Ferguson is a classic example (Bristol Mayor).

[MH]

Pkh72 said:

JDMDrifter said:

Caused abit of a stir here

I appreciate it's their sport and they have the right, but IMO it seems very dangerous. Bare in mind this stretch of road has a very busy lane 2 90% of the time and pulling across to overtake isn't that easy, this combined with poor drivers can only end in tears. I believe it should be banned on this particular stretch of road due to the volume of traffic and the disruption it causes.

Edited by JDMDrifter on Sunday 13th April 19:16

No st Sherlock.

Edited by Pkh72 on Sunday 13th April 20:57

Anyone cycling on the A50 round there is just nuts when there's an airfield just up the road that's used for cycle racing (time trial is still racing).