Cycling UK Forum

One possible advantage of the one in the OP link is the lack of text.

A message along the lines of

Pasiwch feicwyr yn ddiogel

with English subtitles would have to be large and to the extent that anybody actually read it would be distracting.

mjr wrote:

Bmblbzzz wrote:I've no idea what legal status it has but the more important thing is that it's "official" in that it has been put up by the relevant authority and looks the part. And in time it may be assigned its own DfT reference number (maybe diagram 1.5M ).

Oh sure, but if cyclists can tell their local highways departments to put up some of standard sign diagram whatever then it's easier than having yet another debate about sign wording and design where some muppet motorist says something like the council can't "go all the way for cycling" yet and waters it down to an unhelpful 1m design.

And I think you're hoping for far too much sanity in DfT numbering there

Agreed, but if one doesn't exist yet, that shouldn't be a reason not to design one. As Gwynedd have demonstrated. And if DfT aren't going to get around to it (which presumably they won't unless some official passing distance is adopted), Gwynedd have provided a template for other think-ahead HAs to use.

(And it does look so much more convincing in metal than correx!)

Several roads in the Silverdale and Arnside AONB area had large passing distance signs 2 or 3 years ago. I thought they were metal signs on metal posts but I don't really notice them now like they've been taken down

Whether plastic or metal the fact they're up is positive but I believe a thread on here I mentioned them and I believe another poster from other area said they had them too. Not new but still positive they're up and positive the BBC are mentioning it too. I saw that article come up on Google news so people are reading it.

mjr wrote:

Navara wrote:

Cyril Haearn wrote:@Navara
Please report the hate crimes you described
Thanks very much

Hate crimes?
These statements/memes are all over social media and probably forums too.They're classed as "amusing". [...]

Groping unwilling people used to be classed as "amusing" and now it's sexual assault, so these things are not set in stone.

[...] a 25st White,English Trucker.

I wonder if autocorrect got the last word there

No Trucker was definitely what I meant........

I see what you mean re your groping reference but as things are these memes etc are just accepted.No one is safe.Prince Andrew is currently being hammered with all sorts of accusations via meme on FB etc.They are basically the modern equivalent of old school Pub banter.Some have very sinister undertones but still seem to fall within the law.There are some very close to the knuckle ones on just about any subject matter.
I've seen this one......

....on a few vehicles,usually HGVs and the Company owners can obviously see them so what hope is there?I've also seen Pick-ups with similar stickers along the front wing(like USAF planes had in WW2).It seems to amuse the owners.

mjr wrote:

Pete Owens wrote:They aren't the first - I saw this one two years ago in Cumbria:
https://www.cyclestreets.net/location/101626/

Metal signs are a step up from Correx posters flyposted with cable-ties, aren't they?

Indeed so - but they were there before the Welsh ones - And rather better than what Yorkshire was putting up at the time:
https://road.cc/content/news/221940-single-file-safest-style-sign-appears-yorkshire-road
Several of which turned out to be temporary shortly after I passed them.

Navara wrote:

Cyril Haearn wrote:@Navara
Please report the hate crimes you described
Thanks very much

Hate crimes?
These statements/memes are all over social media and probably forums too.They're classed as "amusing".I doubt any Police would get involved as they aren't really targeting any one person.People just change the wording to fit into whatever group they want to aim the "fun" at!
The 2nd one is actually a sticker you can buy to stick to your vehicle!

Bmblbzzz wrote:

Navara wrote:*It may or may not be relevant but he also posts anti-EU,anti-immigration,anti-BLM,anti-LGBGT in fact anti-anything that he thinks goes against his "Englishness" or gets in his way out on his roads.

So he's racist, nationalist and homophobic.

I think,like many,he falls into the "Gammon" category as he seems to hate anyone who isn't a 25st White,English Trucker.He's very far removed form the bloke we used to drink with 30-odd years ago.

Might one describe him as a 'terrorist'?

Cyril Haearn wrote:Might one describe him as a 'terrorist'?

Labeling anyone a terrorist is a bit extreme is it not?
Gammon,idiot,prat,d-head.I haven't spoken to him in years and he used to be a decent bloke.Obviously as he's aged his views changed.Maybe they were always there but he never let on.Maybe we were all like him and we've changed.Maybe it's all a front and he just posts the rubbish on social media for a laugh.I don't know.
I wouldn't describe him as a terrorist.

Just a thought, but...

Why is 2M the minimum for pedestrians but cyclists only warrant 1.5M?

jimlews wrote:Just a thought, but...

Why is 2M the minimum for pedestrians but cyclists only warrant 1.5M?

2M is just the recommended distance during Covid-19?
1.5M is the general recognised distance for motorised traffic to pass cyclists all over Europe?

Navara wrote:

jimlews wrote:Just a thought, but...

Why is 2M the minimum for pedestrians but cyclists only warrant 1.5M?

2M is just the recommended distance during Covid-19?
1.5M is the general recognised distance for motorised traffic to pass cyclists all over Europe?

Yes, I know that.

But cyclists/motorists may also be breathing out C-19 and the former may be hyperventilating, so perhaps 3M would be more appropriate.

As a cyclist, I can tell if passing motors contain cigarette smokers, even when the occupants are not smoking and all the windows are wound up tight.

In German law the minimum separation distance required by law since 20.4.20 is 150 cm in town and 200 cm elsewhere

150/200 cm seems more than 1.5, 2 m I think

Well, it's more precise.

jimlews wrote:Yes, I know that.
But cyclists/motorists may also be breathing out C-19 and the former may be hyperventilating, so perhaps 3M would be more appropriate.
As a cyclist, I can tell if passing motors contain cigarette smokers, even when the occupants are not smoking and all the windows are wound up tight.

1.5m is(I think)the minimum and is advisory only in the UK.The highway code shows a photo of a car over the white lines and advises "Give vulnerable road users as much room as you would a car"Ambiguous....not.

It seems to be difficult to get cars to pass at 1.5m(min) let alone 2 or 3m!!

Cyril Haearn wrote:In German law the minimum separation distance required by law since 20.4.20 is 150 cm in town and 200 cm elsewhere
150/200 cm seems more than 1.5, 2 m I think

There's a space-filling article in today's Sunday Telegraph where somebody has complained about the use of metric measures in the two metres social distancing signs on the basis that only imperial measures may be used on traffic signs. It quotes the TSRGD and I lack the enthusiasm or energy to check, but perhaps it's something to be aware of. Those of us who can cope with either system know that 1.5m is as near as dammit 59" so the nearest imperial rounded measure is 5 feet (60") My impression is that at a superficial level, five feet sounds a lot more than 1.5 metres. Perhaps it's something to press for.

Plenty of road signs featuring imperial and metric, have a look at the next low bridge or width restriction you see. TSRGD was changed updated last year, I think, maybe it was two yeas ago, so that metric and imperial can by placed on one sign rather than requiring two separate signs.

But never mind that. Why is the letter writer treating social distancing signs as road signs?