Road Positioning

[Cab]

^ This, exactly.

Its exactly right but it isn't the whole story. Distance from the kerb is also a consideration; you don't want to be hitting streat furniture, you need space in case of pedestrians leaning or stepping out, an you need to consider how small an escape route you need. Position in lane doesn't only depend on traffic and lane width, a wise cyclist will also give consideration to whats going on pavement side.

 

[Cab]

This can be the normal riding position, if you're on a deserted road at 04:30 when the sun is just rising on a summer's morning. Otherwise, it's in the nearside tyre tracks.

Can you cite any current training manual, cycling body or government institution involved in cycling that in any way supports your stance on being passive to the point of increasing your own risk?

 

[jimboalee]

Does anyone want to try and ride with their left elbow 125mm from a vertical line up from the curb?

It's going to be 350mm at least to be in secondary.

What is the Cycling England paper suggesting?

The centre line of the bike should be ( 0.75/2 )+0.125 = 0.5 m from the curb MINIMUM.

This is less than the 60 cm suggested on the OP's thumbnail.

Is this where Cycling England accept a cyclist will ride to avoid being hit and not obstruct the free flow of traffic?

 

[Origamist]

OK Origamist,

Where in this post did I make reference to YOUR link?

I didn't.


Why did you automatically assume I was asking about YOUR link?

...

I asked you if you were referring to my link - you did not have the courtesy to reply in order to clarify the situation.

 

[Dan B]

Its exactly right but it isn't the whole story. Distance from the kerb is also a consideration; you don't want to be hitting streat furniture, you need space in case of pedestrians leaning or stepping out, an you need to consider how small an escape route you need. Position in lane doesn't only depend on traffic and lane width, a wise cyclist will also give consideration to whats going on pavement side.

Very true. And often a good argument for adopting primary instead of secondary on some roads is that it puts you further away from the pavement so gives you more time to react if pedestrians step out.

 

[Origamist]

Its exactly right but it isn't the whole story. Distance from the kerb is also a consideration; you don't want to be hitting streat furniture, you need space in case of pedestrians leaning or stepping out, an you need to consider how small an escape route you need. Position in lane doesn't only depend on traffic and lane width, a wise cyclist will also give consideration to whats going on pavement side.

Indeed, different roads, different challenges. On rural roads pedestrians and kerbs are less of a consideration; on most urban roads pedestrians need to be high on your list of priorities. That said, the greatest threat of serious injury comes from larger, heavier vehicles and not pedestrians.

 

[Cab]

Indeed, different roads, different challenges. On rural roads pedestrians and kerbs are less of a consideration; on most urban roads pedestrians need to be high on your list of priorities. That said, the greatest threat of serious injury comes from larger, heavier vehicles and not pedestrians.

True. Its a trade off between reducing risk to yourself, to others, and of course actually getting where you want to go.

And with the best will in the world, sometimes a pedestrian will just be determined to get hit. I recall one occasion on a narrow (single lane) one way street in Cambridge, as I was going along right in the middle, three pedestrians came out from the right, two from the left, all looking the wrong way. It wasn't a question of whether I'd hit one, it was more a question of which one and how hard (fattest one on the left and not all that hard, thankfully).

Road positioning and the speed you choose to go are both about minimising the likelyhood of accident and hopefully reducing how bad such an accident would be.

 

[Cab]

@Jimboalee

Can you cite any current training manual, cycling body or government institution involved in cycling that in any way supports your stance on being passive to the point of increasing your own risk?

Still no answer, Jimbo?

 

[Alien8]

Doomed... we're all doomed!

 

[jimboalee]

@Jimboalee



Still no answer, Jimbo?

I'm still trying to understand why you think 'the nearside tyre tracks' is a 'passive' position.

 

[Cab]

I'm still trying to understand why you think 'the nearside tyre tracks' is a 'passive' position.

P1, in that image, that you've supported here and argued in favour of across the Commuting section, is passive to the point of increasing risk.

And you still haven't answered me.

I put it to you that this is because no cycling body, government body or current cyclist training manual in the UK advocates that. Not one.

 

[jimboalee]

P1, in that image, that you've supported here and argued in favour of across the Commuting section, is passive to the point of increasing risk.

And you still haven't answered me.

I put it to you that this is because no cycling body, government body or current cyclist training manual in the UK advocates that. Not one.

WTF.

"The defendent is GUILTY m'lud".

 

[jimboalee]

My client is NOT guilty m'lud.

What he did was compare Cycling England's Key Measurements with P1 on the OP's thumbnail and ask a couple of questions for the jury to answer the best way they could.

Did my client agree with P1? I don't think so.

Have another look at Drawing 2 and see where the truck's nearside tyres are.
Now tell my client that is a 'submissive' position.

"I'd refer to it more as 'escape position' or 'emergency position'. "
This is what you said earlier in the thread in response to Sheffield_Tiger's comment about it being a 'third' position.

My client's view of an 'escape position' to avoid being hit and also lessen the wrath of motorists is remarkabley similar to yours.

 

[goo_mason]

Its quite rare that 60cm would be appropriate.

Totally agree. The ONLY time I move within 60cm of a kerb is on the way home at the mo where it's the only way to avoid some throw-you-off-the-bike potholes that are one after the other. The yellow line at the side of the road is the only way around them!

 

[gaz]

Totally agree. The ONLY time I move within 60cm of a kerb is on the way home at the mo where it's the only way to avoid some throw-you-off-the-bike potholes that are one after the other. The yellow line at the side of the road is the only way around them!

I have some small dimbles in the road that are in the perfect area for cycling, but because they last for so long and so many are there, it could easily damage my wheels, either i cycle on the painted red line or i cycling primary. most of the time i take primary