What is 'pedestrian priority'

[sjs]

A pedestrian is often (but not always) slower but more manoeuvrable, and surely it's the manoeuvrability that's the key thing rather than the speed? A sea kayak should get out of the way of a freighter not the other way round. On a shared path, as often all the pedestrian has to do is step to one side it might not be unreasonable for them to do this.

I feel more manoeverable on a bike. I can swoop from one side of the path to another with the slightest movement of the handlebars, and can accellerate quickly.

So, on the road, cyclists should always give priority to motor vehicles?

[Annoying Twit]

So, on the road, cyclists should always give priority to motor vehicles?

No, speed is more important than manoevreability. Please see my original post before we went off on tangents.

[AlaninWales]

I do think that faster and more manoeverable traffic should always give priority to slower and less manoeverable traffic.

A pedestrian is often (but not always) slower but more manoeuvrable, and surely it's the manoeuvrability that's the key thing rather than the speed? A sea kayak should get out of the way of a freighter not the other way round. On a shared path, as often all the pedestrian has to do is step to one side it might not be unreasonable for them to do this.

The real problem is that councils and Sustrans love putting up signs - it would be better if they just left it to those concerned to work it how to pass each other. Okay some people may be inconsiderate (on foot, bicycle, or horse) but I doubt a sign is going to change their behaviour.

Only if the freighter is constrained in its ability to manoevre (by its draft usually, or not under command).

[Annoying Twit]

Only if the freighter is constrained in its ability to manoevre (by its draft usually, or not under command).

I was talking about normal road/path traffic such as pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, and cars.

I'm worried that in a few more posts people will be comparing the Death Star to the Starship Heart of Gold or something.

[AlaninWales]

Only if the freighter is constrained in its ability to manoevre (by its draft usually, or not under command).

I was talking about normal road/path traffic such as pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, and cars.

I'm worried that in a few more posts people will be comparing the Death Star to the Starship Heart of Gold or something.

I was replying to hufty, who took the wrong emphasis from IRPCS by claiming that a sea kayak gives way to a frieghter (because in fact power gives way to sail/muscle unless the power vessel physically cannot).

[[XAP]Bob]

Yes - sea rules are quite clear.

Some vessels just cannot change direction - you stay out of their way. There is nothing like that on the roads (trams maybe) but the railways are...

Everything else it's power cedes to non powered.
Then there are rules amongst similar classes of vessel.

[hufty]

IIRC Annoying Twit posted that faster and more manoeuvrable traffic should do this and slower and less manoeuvrable traffic should do that. My point was that is immediately a false dichotomy as of course there could be fast less-manoeuvrable traffic bearing down on slow but highly manoeuvrable traffic. Obviously there shouldn't be sea kayaks or freighters on shared paths, but I had hoped it would illustrate that fast does not necessarily mean manoeuvrable and slow doesn't necessarily mean less manoeuvrable. Don't get hung up on the means of propulsion. Once that concept had been established, it can be applied to the situation under consideration, and I suggest there are situations where a pedestrian is more manoeuvrable than a bicycle, maybe due to constraint eg a slippery patch of fallen leaves.

[XAP]Bob, surely you agree with me and not with AiW if you write that some vessels just cannot change direction so you stay out of their way? Other than that I thought head on collision both boats bear right, if crossing paths boat on the left gives way.
AlaninWales, make sure I'm never in a kayak with you, refusing to yield as a super tanker comes straight towards us.

[Annoying Twit]

IIRC Annoying Twit posted that faster and more manoeuvrable traffic should do this and slower and less manoeuvrable traffic should do that. My point was that is immediately a false dichotomy as of course there could be fast less-manoeuvrable traffic bearing down on slow but highly manoeuvrable traffic. Obviously there shouldn't be sea kayaks or freighters on shared paths, but I had hoped it would illustrate that fast does not necessarily mean manoeuvrable and slow doesn't necessarily mean less manoeuvrable. Don't get hung up on the means of propulsion. Once that concept had been established, it can be applied to the situation under consideration, and I suggest there are situations where a pedestrian is more manoeuvrable than a bicycle, maybe due to constraint eg a slippery patch of fallen leaves.

I feel that I am faster and more maneuverable than pedestrians and that cars are faster and more maneuverable than me. This isn't in general, e.g. if you put me (on a bicycle) and a car on a twisty obstacle course, I'll win easy. However, in the context of the situations I'm talking about, on shared use paths and roads, and in the context of how people pass each other in those environments, I feel that my reasoning is reasonable. Yes, it doesn't apply in every single case like wet leaves, or if The Queen drives buy in a taxi whereby I will pull to the side and doff my cap. But, it's a good rule of thumb.

I'm really not interested in arguing about whether a cheetah should give way to an elephant, or whether the Soyuz capsule should give way to a Space Shuttle, or whether the World's Strongest Man champion should give way to Charlie Brooker.

EDIT: OK, perhaps your post isn't as off-topic as that. But as an example, when I said that in general faster and more traffic can give way to slower and less maneuverable traffic. That was never meant to be an unchanging physical law of the universe. E.g. I live near a hospital and ambulences with sirens blaring are common. Of course I give way. I hope that others will give way if it's me in the ambulence some day.

[AlaninWales]

IIRC Annoying Twit posted that faster and more manoeuvrable traffic should do this and slower and less manoeuvrable traffic should do that. My point was that is immediately a false dichotomy as of course there could be fast less-manoeuvrable traffic bearing down on slow but highly manoeuvrable traffic. Obviously there shouldn't be sea kayaks or freighters on shared paths, but I had hoped it would illustrate that fast does not necessarily mean manoeuvrable and slow doesn't necessarily mean less manoeuvrable. Don't get hung up on the means of propulsion. Once that concept had been established, it can be applied to the situation under consideration, and I suggest there are situations where a pedestrian is more manoeuvrable than a bicycle, maybe due to constraint eg a slippery patch of fallen leaves.

[XAP]Bob, surely you agree with me and not with AiW if you write that some vessels just cannot change direction so you stay out of their way? Other than that I thought head on collision both boats bear right, if crossing paths boat on the left gives way.
AlaninWales, make sure I'm never in a kayak with you, refusing to yield as a super tanker comes straight towards us.

Hufty, if you ever are in charge of a even motor barge (to which IRPCS rules apply if they are on navigable waters which connect with the sea - i.e. pretty much all canals), I hope you will bother to learn the rules, otherwise you will be running down rowing boats who are NOT obliged to get out of your way. Unpowered vessels must give way to powered vessels if and only if the powered vessel is constrained in its room to manoevre.
The reason this does not transfer onto the law of the roads (which includes anywhere there is a public right of way for pedestrians and cycles) is because the operator of a land vehicle (such as a bicycle) is meant to procede at a speed where the vehicle can be safely stopped in the distance seen to be clear (which water-borne vessels cannot always do, because the water itself moves): Whilst not stated in law, this is a clearly established safety principle . If you find yourself unable to manoevre near a pedestrian due to e.g. slippery leaves, then you are in fact cycling too fast for the conditions. Slow down, manoevre around them as that is your responsibility. That is what is meant by 'pedestrian priority'. It is confirmed in Highway Code rule 62.
In the same manner if I come across you on a country lane, me driving and you walking: I will not drive by expect you to leap out of the way 'because pedestrians are more manoeverable than cars', but will slow down or stop if necessary, to allow us to pass each other safely; again allowing pedestrians priority. This (rather than the pedestrian climbing the bank) is what is supposed to happen (Highway Code rule 206).