Muppet

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
M

magnatom

Guest
Membrane,

I am not responsible for anyone else's actions but I certainly can suffer as a result of them. I have a duty to ensure my own safety. To ensure that safety I ride with the aim of keeping anything that can cause me harm at a safe distance. Therefore, I need to claim an area of road, not as my own, but as my safety zone. The size of this safety zone depends on a number of factors, road type, my speed, traffic speed, available light, weather etc.

For example in very slow moving traffic, where I am moving slowly and visibility is good and there are no areas where possible conflict can occur then my safety zone can be fairly small. Cars can be close to me without any danger to me or them. However, when approaching a blind hill, where you cannot see the road ahead,and so cannot be sure of what is over the other side of the hill, and where I know that cars can and do attempt dangerous maneuvers at a fair speed, my safety zone increases in size.

In the section of road in this video I need a large safety zone, which I need to defend. To defend my space I make space on the left of me (I suppose this is my escape zone). Taking the primary position provides me with this escape zone. It also (more often than not) provides a safety zone behind me, as following cars can see me easily, see that I am taking up the space of a car and thus should treat me with the same respect as a car, i.e. leave me room and only overtake when it is safe to do so.
If as I pass over the hill, a car decides to overtake (which I reduce the risk of by assuming the primary position) and it enters my safety zone to my right I have the option of moving into my escape zone. This would be vital in the situation where if he overtook and another car came over the hill overtaking. He would swerve toward me and I would have an escape route, that hopefully I could take.


Your notion of me provoking his behavour by my road position is preposterous! Imagine this chap was sitting his driving test. What would he do to pass. He would approach behind, hold back a safe distance, wait for me to pass over the hill. I would pass the other cyclist, pull into the secondary. He would then pass me when the road ahead was clear and who knows I might even give him a cheery wave to say thank you for driving well (I actually do this when it is appropriate). Chap passes his test and everyone is happy.

He would fail instantly if he came up behind me aggressively, hit his horn to get me to move out of his way, then waited until another vehicle was coming towards me and then endanger the lives of me, his passengers and the people in the bus on the other side.

If I cycled in the gutter, the learner, to pass his test would have to take the same road position to pass me safely, over the brow of the hill (gutter cyclists are more likely to swerve unexpectedly for instance). So to pass his test in this case he would do exactly what he did in my first example and hold back until he had passed the hill.

Of course once people have passed their test they often don't take the same safety precautions that they were taught to take. So as a vulnerable road user (although not with the correct precautions) I cannot assume that if I cycled in the gutter that the driver would give me enough if any room. If he did not, I would have no escape zone (see wall to my left) and so if anything went wrong I would be at significant risk.

So you see I had good reason for doing what I did. If he had reacted in the way he was originally trained, no conflict would occur and he would have been held up for a very short amount of time.

If anyone here is a cycling standards officer I would love your input on my cycling in this video, and I would also welcome any driving instructors to confirm or refute my assumptions about the drivers passability.

What do you think membrane?
 

col

Legendary Member
Personally,i wouldnt overtake if there is a car coming up behind me,or there was not enough time to pass safely,and due to your position,from the drivers angle,it may have looked like you were two abreast too,either way,i would wait untill im not going to cause another vehicle to slow down,before passing the cyclist.
 

Membrane

New Member
magnatom said:
What do you think membrane?

I think you completely ignored the points I made, this indicates that you have closed your mind to examining your behaviour. Given that, further discussion serves no purpose.
 
OP
OP
M

magnatom

Guest
Membrane said:
I think you completely ignored the points I made, this indicates that you have closed your mind to examining your behaviour. Given that, further discussion serves no purpose.

Provide me with some succinct points or questions and I will be happy to answer them. Whilst your at it you could always comment on what I said in my previous point.
 

BentMikey

Rider of Seolferwulf
Location
South London
col said:
Personally,i wouldnt overtake if there is a car coming up behind me,or there was not enough time to pass safely,and due to your position,from the drivers angle,it may have looked like you were two abreast too,either way,i would wait untill im not going to cause another vehicle to slow down,before passing the cyclist.

Let's replace all of the vehicles with cars. The third car in line, in this case the muppet driver, would have to wait whilst Magnatom in the second car overtook the first. If you're already out there, the drivers/riders behind need to wait for a safe time to overtake. Anything else is simply impatience and bad overtaking.
 

col

Legendary Member
BentMikey said:
Let's replace all of the vehicles with cars. The third car in line, in this case the muppet driver, would have to wait whilst Magnatom in the second car overtook the first. If you're already out there, the drivers/riders behind need to wait for a safe time to overtake. Anything else is simply impatience and bad overtaking.



But the fact is we are not cars,so your point is?:rolleyes:
 

col

Legendary Member
Jacomus-rides-Gen said:
Hard to do when dead.



Taking primary is not about playing policeman at all, and it is not for others good either! Taking primary is about managing risk and maximising your personal safety.

Is holding a car at a slightly slower speed for 30 seconds in the interest of your own safety really such a big deal?! I gave an example here of just what kind of effect Magnatom would have had on this driver (assuming their journey was a national average of 45mins long). The driver would have spent 1.19% of his journey travelling slightly slower.

Do you not think it pathetic that this driver could not stand to wait for a meagre 30 seconds before overtaking, and would rather endager Magnatom?



Does this mean you only require space on your left! What happens if something caused you to suddenly need to move to the right? Or if you fell to the right? Whatever happened to cars passing cyclists as if they are other cars?


I dont think getting killed was one of the mistakes meant,but i see his point,all this about primary being my right,yes ,but only if its safe and not obstructing others,for no other reason than its my right to be there.
 

gambatte

Middle of the pack...
Location
S Yorks
Membrane said:
The road at that point is plenty wide enough for a car to safely pass a cyclist who cycles to the left whilst maintaining a reasonable distance the curb (<= 70cm). That give us enough room to deal with the occasional driver who overtakes us too closely for it to be actually dangerous (not just annoying).

Less than or equal to 700mm?

Now I'm a recent beginner to cycle commuting, but I'm sure the recent advise from the CTC was that you should never ride closer to the kerb than 750mm?

Infact they tried to get it written into the highway code.

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cach...than+kerb&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=uk&lr=lang_en


look down the left hand side, till you get to 'Rule 58'

so your advice puts his maximum position 50mm inside the CTCs minimum distance
 
This does worry me, SA, Membrane and Col have all stated that primary in this situation is an inconsiderate road position, and was assumed only because a cyclist has as much right to use the road as any other vehicle.

I don't mind admitting that I am utterly failling to see:

a) How secondary is the safer road position to cross that bridge. How can riding in a secondary position, which encourages and facilitates overtaking, be safe on a blind rise with oncoming traffic!!

:rolleyes: Why people are more worried about holding a car up for 30 seconds than the danger of crossing a blind rise, with oncoming traffic in a road position that encourages cars to pass.

c) When is it appropriate to assume a primary position? If it is not to try and manage personal saftey by discouraging cars from overtaking at hazardous points, when is it appropriate?


It seems to me almost that there is a suggestion that Primary and Secondary positions be reversed so that newPrimary (as the position that most time should be spent in) becomes near the gutter, and newSecondary becomes the position used when? To block cars from overtaking... but surely that is just being obstinate and taking up such a position purely because the cyclist is allowed to!?!? So the cyclist should stay in the newPrimary all the time, to avoid this situation???

Ok... now I'm confusing myself, but hopefull I've made some sense.
 

col

Legendary Member
Your over analysing the answer i feel.Primary is a good position in the right and safe circumstances,but useing it when there are no obstructions,and the road is wide enough ,just because its my right,well just seems ignorant to other road users to me.And where Mag stays out after he passed the cyclist,probably provoked the reaction,the driver may have wondered why he was there after passing,instead of moving back to secondary.Like i said,used as and when needed,and not just because i have the right,is the way to go,that way,there would be less confrontation between drivers and ourselves.imo:smile:
 

BentMikey

Rider of Seolferwulf
Location
South London
col said:
I dont think getting killed was one of the mistakes meant,but i see his point,all this about primary being my right,yes ,but only if its safe and not obstructing others,for no other reason than its my right to be there.

IMO this shows that you have a basic misunderstanding about primary. Primary is about "obstructing" others, or rather about owning a safe space on the road when it's required for your own safety. It puts you in the most visible bit of the road where motorist tunnel vision is concentrated, and helps to dissuade stupid overtaking maneuvers such as this one, left hooks, etc.

Of course it's not really obstructing, because safe overtakes are not prevented, and you don't have any automatic right to overtake the car/bicycle in front as they have priority over you.

col said:
And where Mag stays out after he passed the cyclist,probably provoked the reaction


This bit is obvious - see the oncoming traffic vs the car-width of Magnatom's lane? There's no way the driver can overtake safely there with the oncoming traffic. No wonder magnatom stays in lane. There's no point in the car driver overtaking anyway, there's a queue up ahead. Overtaking here is both pointless and stupid. It shows no planning ahead from the driver.

You guys seriously need to look at the way you ride if this is really what you think.
 

BentMikey

Rider of Seolferwulf
Location
South London
gambatte said:
Less than or equal to 700mm?

Now I'm a recent beginner to cycle commuting, but I'm sure the recent advise from the CTC was that you should never ride closer to the kerb than 750mm?

Infact they tried to get it written into the highway code.

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cach...than+kerb&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=uk&lr=lang_en


look down the left hand side, till you get to 'Rule 58'

so your advice puts his maximum position 50mm inside the CTCs minimum distance

Yes, Membrane would seem to be riding far too submissively for good safety. Along the same lines, what's a cycle lane recommended width? 2 metres is the right answer.
 

col

Legendary Member
BentMikey said:
IMO this shows that you have a basic misunderstanding about primary. Primary is about "obstructing" others, or rather about owning a safe space on the road when it's required for your own safety. It puts you in the most visible bit of the road where motorist tunnel vision is concentrated, and helps to dissuade stupid overtaking maneuvers such as this one, left hooks, etc.

Of course it's not really obstructing, because safe overtakes are not prevented, and you don't have any automatic right to overtake the car/bicycle in front as they have priority over you.




This bit is obvious - see the oncoming traffic vs the car-width of Magnatom's lane? There's no way the driver can overtake safely there with the oncoming traffic. No wonder magnatom stays in lane. There's no point in the car driver overtaking anyway, there's a queue up ahead. Overtaking here is both pointless and stupid. It shows no planning ahead from the driver.

You guys seriously need to look at the way you ride if this is really what you think.



I do understand the obstruction for safety bit,but what im saying is, why when there is no need?iv never been honked or shouted at yet,and i dont cycle in the gutter either,It comes down to being aware of whats around you,and acting accordingly.If traffic was coming up behind me,i wouldnt dream of overtaking,and then claiming priority over the rise,whats the point? where does it get me?I agree with primary,i just have a different view on when it should be used it seems.:rolleyes:
 

domtyler

Über Member
Jacomus-rides-Gen said:
This does worry me, SA, Membrane and Col have all stated that primary in this situation is an inconsiderate road position, and was assumed only because a cyclist has as much right to use the road as any other vehicle.

The thing that is worrying me most is why you lot are wasting your time bickering with these three bumbling fuckwits.
 
col
<snip>
I agree with primary,i just have a different view on when it should be used it seems
</snip>

Yep, it seems that you do! :rolleyes:

I don't understand your decision / opting to take secondary for the bridge, but you are free to chose a position (even if I think you're barmy!! :rolleyes::biggrin: )

I have had a thought col, since you are debating very reasonably, what kind of speed do you generally ride at? The reason I ask is that I have noticed a trend that seems to show the slower the cyclist, the closer to the curb they ride.

I know that I ride slightly closer to secondary when on Sir Walter, my knockabout, on which I cruise at around 25-30km/h. On my roadbike I hold a much more dominant primary cruising around 35-40km/h
 
Top Bottom