Department for Transport

[Origamist]

Interesting that the DfT leaflet says

"Give cyclists space - at least half a car’s width - and never force past them."

While the Highway Code says

"Give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car."

Well the DFT advice is more in keeping with a number of US States that have a 3ft passing law (which is approx half the width of a car).

The problem with the HC guidance is that a lot of motorists are happy to overtake a car by a foot or two (or less) and apply the same standard to overtaking a cyclist.

 

[PBancroft]

Well the DFT advice is more in keeping with a number of US States that have a 3ft passing law (which is approx half the width of a car).

The problem with the HC guidance is that a lot of motorists are happy to overtake a car by a foot or two (or less) and apply the same standard to overtaking a cyclist.

Why is this?

Is this because of some perceived spacial awareness? Or because its safe?

Or because people are used to it? I was stuck in a traffic jam on the M11 a few months back. We were stuck long enough (about four hours) that people got out of their cars to have a chat with each other. We were really close to each other - less than three foot or half a cars width at least. And had we been moving it would have been at 70 miles an hour.

Are people just used to traveling close to others at high speed and being "safe"?

 

[Origamist]

This piece of overtaking satire encapsulates the problem:

The Theoretical Physicist: Treat the bicycle as a widthless two-dimensional object of effectively zero velocity and zero mass. Therefore make no change to your trajectory when passing. If you wish to turn left immediately after passing this is not a problem, given the assigned parameters. Any subsequent swearing and crunching noises are an artifact of the cyclist's failure to understand your frame of reference.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A412930

 

[alp1950]

This piece of overtaking satire encapsulates the problem:

The Theoretical Physicist: Treat the bicycle as a widthless two-dimensional object of effectively zero velocity and zero mass. Therefore make no change to your trajectory when passing. If you wish to turn left immediately after passing this is not a problem, given the assigned parameters. Any subsequent swearing and crunching noises are an artifact of the cyclist's failure to understand your frame of reference.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A412930

Brilliant. The rest of the page is worth a look too.

 

[Bollo]

This piece of overtaking satire encapsulates the problem:

The Theoretical Physicist: Treat the bicycle as a widthless two-dimensional object of effectively zero velocity and zero mass. Therefore make no change to your trajectory when passing. If you wish to turn left immediately after passing this is not a problem, given the assigned parameters. Any subsequent swearing and crunching noises are an artifact of the cyclist's failure to understand your frame of reference.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A412930

If the cyclist has zero mass, then they must be travelling at the speed of light. If they're travelling at the speed of light, then the vehicle (with mass) cannot overtake them. What are we teaching the children!!!

 

[Origamist]

If the cyclist has zero mass, then they must be travelling at the speed of light. If they're travelling at the speed of light, then the vehicle (with mass) cannot overtake them. What are we teaching the children!!!

Sci-Fi geek - you'll be trying to convince us that you have a scientific background next.

Tell us Bollo, how are you coping with the news that David Tennant is quitting Dr Who?

 

[Bollo]

Sci-Fi geek - you'll be trying to convince us that you have a scientific background next.

Tell us Bollo, how are you coping with the news that David Tennant is quitting Dr Who?

Worst post.....ever!

 

[Origamist]

"Worst post ever" and Jeff Albertson - it doesn't get any better than that. I'm leaving CC on a high...!