Police attitudes to riding side by side

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13076
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
NATURAL ANKLING wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 9:46am Hi,
Of course they changed the rules in cycling in triathlons so that you can now draft, Where previously you have to maintain 5 m? IIRC.
I wasn't 100% sure but I went looking and it's Olympics triathlon were drafting is allowed?
The British rules seem to say no?
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
Stevek76
Posts: 1141
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by Stevek76 »

DaveReading wrote: 17 Sep 2021, 5:15pm
Stevek76 wrote: 6 Sep 2021, 7:24pmThe never ride more than two abreast is being removed in the update. Unfortunately the recommendation to ride single file in some cases isn't.
Why would you want or expect the latter recommendation to be removed? There will always be cases where riding two abreast is plain inconsiderate.
Because it simply provides ammunition to entitled motorists, much as the victim blaming rubbish about what to wear as a pedestrian or cyclist also does. Sadly that's also staying despite pressure from the experts the dft consulted with for much of the recent improvements in dft policy for non motorised transport.

At any rate I can't think of many situations where two abreast would be inconsiderate. In most cases the logic contained in Surrey road cops diagram applies, drivers should be using the other lane if they're to not close pass the cyclist (or horse for that matter) so it doesn't really matter what the cyclists are doing in their lane.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
DaveReading
Posts: 317
Joined: 24 Feb 2019, 5:37pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by DaveReading »

Stevek76 wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 12:14pmAt any rate I can't think of many situations where two abreast would be inconsiderate. In most cases the logic contained in Surrey road cops diagram applies, drivers should be using the other lane if they're to not close pass the cyclist (or horse for that matter) so it doesn't really matter what the cyclists are doing in their lane.
Well YMMV, but as I said in a subsequent post
DaveReading wrote: 17 Sep 2021, 9:20pmRoughly two-thirds of my ride today was on roads where both the current Rule 66 and Cycling UK's proposed changes would have recommended that I ride in single file, had I been riding with a companion.
Many of the country roads around here are barely wide enough for a car to pass one coming in the opposite direction without one or both putting their nearside wheels on the grass verge.

Overtaking a car travelling in the same direction is nigh on impossible; there is no white line or "other lane" to use.

Substitute two-abreast cyclists for the car in front and the same applies. Singling out creates room for a careful but safe overtake (obviously with no oncoming traffic); staying two-abreast traps the vehicle behind you entirely unnecessarily.

I very much doubt that the lanes of Berkshire/Hampshire are unique - there will be thousand of miles of similar road up and down the UK.
Syd
Posts: 1230
Joined: 23 Sep 2018, 2:27pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by Syd »

I’ve been cycling, and driving, in some remote parts of Scotland this year and last. Many of the roads are single track with passing places.

Mrs Syd and I rode two abreast throughout but slowed and pulled into a passing place as needs required. Heck, I even pulled into a passing place (in my car) on a particularly windy part of a road to let a DHL van pass who seemed to be lot more familiar with the road that I was.
Manc33
Posts: 1835
Joined: 25 Apr 2015, 9:37pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by Manc33 »

Go past me! Stop following me!
When two cyclists get married, they should throw anodized cable crimps instead of confetti.
DaveReading
Posts: 317
Joined: 24 Feb 2019, 5:37pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by DaveReading »

Syd wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 5:42pm I’ve been cycling, and driving, in some remote parts of Scotland this year and last. Many of the roads are single track with passing places.

Mrs Syd and I rode two abreast throughout but slowed and pulled into a passing place as needs required. Heck, I even pulled into a passing place (in my car) on a particularly windy part of a road to let a DHL van pass who seemed to be lot more familiar with the road that I was.
Absolutely correct behaviour.

If the road is so narrow that even a single cyclist is impossible to overtake, then you might as well cycle two-abreast.
Stevek76
Posts: 1141
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by Stevek76 »

DaveReading wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 3:35pm Overtaking a car travelling in the same direction is nigh on impossible; there is no white line or "other lane" to use.

Substitute two-abreast cyclists for the car in front and the same applies. Singling out creates room for a careful but safe overtake (obviously with no oncoming traffic); staying two-abreast traps the vehicle behind you entirely unnecessarily.

I very much doubt that the lanes of Berkshire/Hampshire are unique - there will be thousand of miles of similar road up and down the UK.
Sure but that's a case of pull into single file if a vehicle wishes to pass & if the cyclists deem to be safe, there's no need to default to single file in such situations.

If the driver of a motor vehicle wants to have made unimpeded progress then they should've routed via a main road, not rat runned down a lane. If they're using it for access, a few moments to negotiate past or simply wait behind a few cyclists isn't much of an issue.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
DaveReading
Posts: 317
Joined: 24 Feb 2019, 5:37pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by DaveReading »

Stevek76 wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 11:15pmSure but that's a case of pull into single file if a vehicle wishes to pass & if the cyclists deem to be safe
Good, I'm glad we're in agreement.
Stevek76 wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 11:15pmthere's no need to default to single file in such situations.
I wasn't suggesting that there was, apologies if I didn't make that clear.
DaveReading wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 3:35pmSingling out creates room for a careful but safe overtake
The situation that I was describing was leaving room for an overtake when somebody behind you wishes to do so. Hence my reference to remaining two-abreast trapping the vehicle that's behind you.
bjlabuk
Posts: 50
Joined: 9 Jul 2021, 1:44pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by bjlabuk »

It seems a bit pointless adding to the comments about the existing Rule 66, so I thought instead I would comment on the proposed changes.

According to the Summary of the Consultation:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... orcyclists

"update Rule 66 to ensure cyclists are considerate towards horse riders, along with the following text:

Start quote:
[cyclists’ should] ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so. When riding in larger groups on narrow lanes, it is sometimes safer to ride two abreast
End quote"

Personally I can’t see how the update is much of an improvement.

1.Why is it up to cyclists to decide when "it is safe to let them (ie driver) do so (ie overtake) " ? Surely the onus is (and always has been) on the driver wanting to overtake to make sure it is safe to do so, not on the person in front ! It makes no sense, and is totally inconsistent with Rule 162 and 163.
2.What narrow lanes are being referred to - narrow lanes on a multi-lane road, or narrow (country) roads?

If the proposed changes are meant to clarify Rule 66 then I don't think this wording helps.
DaveReading
Posts: 317
Joined: 24 Feb 2019, 5:37pm

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by DaveReading »

bjlabuk wrote: 19 Sep 2021, 3:18pm1.Why is it up to cyclists to decide when "it is safe to let them (ie driver) do so (ie overtake) " ? Surely the onus is (and always has been) on the driver wanting to overtake to make sure it is safe to do so, not on the person in front !
Because cyclists have more to lose from a driver's error of judgement ?
bjlabuk wrote: 19 Sep 2021, 3:18pm2.What narrow lanes are being referred to - narrow lanes on a multi-lane road, or narrow (country) roads?
"on narrow lanes" rather than "in narrow lanes" would suggest the latter interpretation, though I agree it needs to be clearer.
User avatar
tykeboy2003
Posts: 1169
Joined: 19 Jul 2010, 2:51pm
Location: Swadlincote, South Derbyshire

Re: Police attitudes to riding side by side

Post by tykeboy2003 »

Stevek76 wrote: 18 Sep 2021, 12:14pm At any rate I can't think of many situations where two abreast would be inconsiderate. In most cases the logic contained in Surrey road cops diagram applies, drivers should be using the other lane if they're to not close pass the cyclist (or horse for that matter) so it doesn't really matter what the cyclists are doing in their lane.
Absolutely agree.
Post Reply