Overtaking on both sides

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16710
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby mjr » 22 Oct 2015, 11:47pm

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:I always say stay in lane no matter what. […]
I feel it is safer to stay in lane behind a vehicle until you no longer can keep the speed.

How is it safer to leave yourself at risk of being squashed in an all-too-common concertina crash?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 12508
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 23 Oct 2015, 12:23am

Hi,
mjr wrote:
NATURAL ANKLING wrote:I always say stay in lane no matter what. […]
I feel it is safer to stay in lane behind a vehicle until you no longer can keep the speed.

How is it safer to leave yourself at risk of being squashed in an all-too-common concertina crash?


You really think that you will be squashed :?
So where are you riding :?:
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.

Pete Owens
Posts: 1932
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby Pete Owens » 23 Oct 2015, 1:09am

AlaninWales wrote:Filtering is legal for *cyclists. As a car driver, I expect *cyclists to pass on either side when I'm in slow moving or stationary traffic. Manoeuvring (for whatever reason) without considering that and checking mirrors, is careless.
Had there been a collision, it would have been the van driver's fault. I wouldn't expect most British juries (or police) to accept that simple fact though (given British public attitudes).


Oh dear - another case of "two wheels good - four wheels bad"

Or do you always consider it the overtakees responsibility to avoid collisions rather than the overtaker?

Pete Owens
Posts: 1932
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby Pete Owens » 23 Oct 2015, 1:34am

jan19 wrote:I'm sure this must happen, but I've never seen it before and I wondered how common it is.

I needed the car for work today, and on my way in overtook two cyclists, one behind the other and both going at a good speed. A little later on, I was in a slow moving queue and the cyclists caught up. Ahead of me was a transit van. The lead cyclist went to undertake the van - he had space, and at the speed the traffic was going (ie dead slow) it wasn't a risky manoeuvre. The second cyclist went in front of me, to overtake the van on its outside. The van driver obviously saw the first cyclist and moved over to the right, giving the cyclist more room. By doing so, he moved into the path of the second cyclist, who swerved to avoid the van. It was close enough to set me thinking - if there had been a collision, whose fault would it have been?

Jan


Presumably, when you overtook the cyclists you did so on the right, and you made sure to leave them plenty of room to allow for them to adjust their road position - say to ride round a pothole - rather than assumed they were travelling in a dead straight line so you could squeeze past with your wing mirror a few cm from their right elbows.

When I overtake motor vehicles on my bike I excersise the same care that I expect from drivers when they overtake me.

IF the traffic was moving so slowly that the 1st cyclist could safely filter on the left then the van's move to the right must have been slow. If the 2nd cyclist needed to swerve it suggests that they were riding too fast and not leaving enough space.

Elizabethsdad
Posts: 1158
Joined: 15 Jan 2011, 7:09pm

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby Elizabethsdad » 23 Oct 2015, 6:21am

Had it happen to me recently when I was on my bike - a car was overtaking me a bit close and I nearly swerved into the bicycle that came flying past on my inside. I keep a certain distance away from the kerb, but I wasn't that far out that I would have said there was room to be safely undertaken like that. That same bicycle was lucky again a few seconds late when the car that overtook me nearly left hooked it.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16710
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby mjr » 23 Oct 2015, 8:23am

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:
mjr wrote:How is it safer to leave yourself at risk of being squashed in an all-too-common concertina crash?


You really think that you will be squashed :?
So where are you riding :?:

I'm riding past them to the advanced stop line, or completely past them on a cycle track!
If there's no bike box at the front, I stop next to the gap between the first two cars and as the first one accelerates away, move left into the gap.
And if I can't overtake (narrow road or whatever), I stop at least 2m behind the back bumper of the car in front, to reduce the squish risk.

It's unlikely that I'd be squashed, but concertina crashes are very common, at least daily along A10/A149/A148 route into town, based on how often I see them.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

AlaninWales
Posts: 1609
Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 1:47pm

Re: Overtaking on both sides

Postby AlaninWales » 23 Oct 2015, 11:04am

Pete Owens wrote:
AlaninWales wrote:Filtering is legal for *cyclists. As a car driver, I expect *cyclists to pass on either side when I'm in slow moving or stationary traffic. Manoeuvring (for whatever reason) without considering that and checking mirrors, is careless.
Had there been a collision, it would have been the van driver's fault. I wouldn't expect most British juries (or police) to accept that simple fact though (given British public attitudes).


Oh dear - another case of "two wheels good - four wheels bad"

Or do you always consider it the overtakees responsibility to avoid collisions rather than the overtaker?

Not at all. Simply a case of "two wheels light and narrow - four wheels heavy and wide". On four wheels in heavy traffic there is no use to hurry. On two wheels in heavy traffic the narrow nature of the vehical allows filtering and this is accepted in the HC , by the police (who teach their riders to do this as part of normal, non-pursuit riding) and by the courts. When (most) cyclists are able to overtake heavier, wider vehicles such as vans, the heavy traffic is moving (usually well-)below the speed limit. In such circumstances, when driving, I expect *cycles to filter (and the HC warns me to). I therefore, as a careful and competent driver, make sure I don't endanger them by sudden swerves to the side.

I have no idea why you would see the expectation of such as "two wheels good - four wheels bad", except that a great many of your posts seem to oppose the idea ofcycling as an activity for all, trained or otherwise. Do you really want to keep it as a niche activity for fit young highly trained athletes with all their spidey-senses aquiver? Shouldn't we accept responsibility when driving heavy, wide, motor-powered vehicles, to avoid making life dangerous for any other road user?