Don't always blame the motorist.

[GrumpyGregry]

By the way, you are Gabriel García Márquez and ICMFP.

Whilst that is quite the nicest thing anyone has said to me since I caught my flight to cph on Tuesday morning my qualifications to be the greatest Columbian who ever lived are scant.

 

[hatler]

The End.

If only.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

The End.

And with that, I'm out.

 

[slowmotion]

Whilst that is quite the nicest thing anyone has said to me since I caught my flight to cph on Tuesday morning my qualifications to be the greatest Columbian who ever lived are scant.

You are too modest.

 

[doog]

That I don't agree with your definition and application of "common sense", whatever the heck that actually is?
Or that my view on the balance of probabilities based on the OP's observations is different to yours?

Or do you just have a chip on your shoulder when people don't agree with you?

So you accept I mentioned common sense after all......thank feck for that..

The rest of your posts are hyperbole

Goodnight

 

[CaadX]

Not specifically but do throw in some of your wisdom.

I'll just watch ta !

 

[theclaud]

I admit the evenings on my todd in cph are a bit tedious

Brew By Numbers ‏@BrewByNumbers 16h16 hours ago

We're in Copenhagen this weekend but our taproom will be open as normal Friday + Saturday, launching our new Tripel!

3 retweets 7 likes

 

[growingvegetables]

Sorry but I don't get that.

And I'm sorry - I got distracted.

But for a few posts, you had @doog communicating civilly and pleasantly. Just a couple, I grant you ... but it was a pleasure.



A bit like the semi-feral cat that visits our back garden - I happen to know just which bit of his chin he likes to be fussed over. And he just lies on his back and soaks it up.

But the slightest disturbance - and he's back to being fierce and feral! Yup, @doog - that's you.

 

[screenman]

I tend to single out on twisty roads, gives any speeding motorists or motorcyclist a tad more space to avoid us if they come around the blind bend behind us at too high a speed.

 

[Pale Rider]

I tend to single out on twisty roads, gives any speeding motorists or motorcyclist a tad more space to avoid us if they come around the blind bend behind us at too high a speed.

Which recognises the practicalities of the situation.

I agree a motorist who wants you to single out is saying 'give me enough room to squeeze past unsafely', and I have on occasion prevented that by remaining two abreast.

But the safest place for that type of driver is in front of me, so that is the situation I will usually try to engineer.

Riding solo on a narrow road I will pull over to let a motorist pass.

Yes, I was there first, 'right' is on my side, the driver should wait, etc etc.

But all that is trumped by my wish to avoid a collision.

 

[martint235]

And I'm sorry - I got distracted.

But for a few posts, you had @doog communicating civilly and pleasantly. Just a couple, I grant you ... but it was a pleasure.



A bit like the semi-feral cat that visits our back garden - I happen to know just which bit of his chin he likes to be fussed over. And he just lies on his back and soaks it up.

But the slightest disturbance - and he's back to being fierce and feral! Yup, @doog - that's you.

Ah ok now I understand.

It was fluke as I usually have two internet states: infinitely calm or frothing at the mouth. That must have been one of my calm phases. It rubs off sometimes.

 

[Brandane]

I defy anyone to out-logic this argument.

OK then; I love a challenge.....

If you take a VW Golf as an average representative of a car, it's width including mirrors is 2.027 metres. Two of them, then, are 4.054 metres wide. If we take @gavroche 's quote literally, adding some clearance for two cars to "just pass each other" (are they coming towards each other and squeezing past slowly; or are we talking about a safe overtake which is completely different? I'm assuming the former here), then the road is about 4.5 metres wide.
I just measured the bars on my MTB which are 60cm wide (about 50cm on the road bike), but the average cyclist probably has wider shoulders than that. Allowing for space between cyclists, and assuming the nearside rider is riding in secondary, then one cyclist will take up about 110 cm (just measured it!). Two cyclists will occupy roughly double that, maybe a little more for clearance from each other - but at least 2.2 metres. That means a single cyclist + 1 car = 2.137 metres, leaving about 2.38 metres clearance for a perfectly safe pass. Car + 2 cyclists abreast = 4.227 metres. So about 20cm to spare; no chance of a safe pass!

The end?

 

[benb]

Not really, as when riding 2 abreast the left cyclists will typically ride much closer to the edge than a standard secondary, plus the second rider would be closer to their buddy than you are calculating

 

[Brandane]

Not really, as when riding 2 abreast the left cyclists will typically ride much closer to the edge than a standard secondary, plus the second rider would be closer to their buddy than you are calculating

My point is that the safety of the pass depends very much on the width of the road. As others have pointed out, sometimes it is perfectly safe to pass a single cyclist, but not if they are two abreast. Sometimes it makes no difference, and sometimes it isn't safe to pass a single cyclist. @gavroche was there, we weren't; it was his call and he is getting flack for a situation in which his annoyance looks reasonably justified.

 

[jefmcg]

Extraordinarily entrenched views here. I think it's too late for any realistic prospect that anyone is going to be hauled out of their own trench to a different place, but I like a challenge. And I know I'm treading in some well-worn footsteps here.


This one line should be sufficient for anyone with any sense to draw all the necessary and relevant conclusions about the appropriate behaviour of the cyclists and driver concerned.

There's not enough room for a car to overtake one bike if there's a car coming the other way.
Therefore any car behind a single bike should wait until there are no vehicles coming the other way.

There's enough room for cars to pass each other in opposite directions, and two bikes abreast are generally less wide than a car.
Therefore, there's enough room for a car to overtake two bikes abreast, presuming there's no vehicle coming the other way.

Given that a car coming the other way means it would be impossible to overtake one bike safely, the existence of a second bike (abreast of the first) doesn't alter the level of impossibility.

Net result, whether the bikes were singled out or two abreast makes not one jot of difference to how or when a following driver should overtake them.

It sounds like the cyclists did EXACTLY the right thing, and stayed two abreast, otherwise they might have invited an unsafe pass from an impatient, inconsiderate motorist. I detect no 'attitude' here, other than a desire to stay safe, with, just possibly, a little thought to the prevention of a motorist making an utter tit of himself. Thankfully their tactics appear to have been completely successful, on both counts.




I'm struggling to see how anything these two did could in any way be interpreted as 'dangerous'. Quite the opposite.

This isn't rocket engineering, the principles really are quite straightforward.

I defy anyone to out-logic this argument.

That's a TMN to me, then. I said basically the same on page one

Sorry to be dense, but if it is only just wide enough for two cars to pass then surely it's not wide enough for 2 cars and a bicycle, but plenty wide enough for 2 bikes and a car. I real have no idea what they did wrong.

that got this non-answer

I also said that the road was twisting a lot and may be should have added very few long straights to overtake safely.