2 abreast riding
Re: 2 abreast riding
Each cyclist needs to judge the circumstances they find themselves in for themselves, and make a judgement. If you know how much road you need, take it. If you feel that riding two abreast is going to prevent an unwise pass, do it. If you feel that riding two abreast is not preventing a safe pass when oncoming traffic allows, fair enough. If singling out would not create an opportunity for a safe pass even with oncoming traffic (some road widths make that possible) carry on as you are. But if singling out would allow a safe pass that riding two abreast would not, I would do that. It is for each and every one of us to make these assessments for ourselves each time we go out in company.
First and foremost, stay safe, as much as is in your control. Secondly, be nice to those around you, whatever their transport choice. I'd say the same to a car driver, except that I would put more emphasis on being nice to those around you. I want those who happen to be driving to see other road users as people who deserve care and consideration. I would be a hypocrite if I did not have that same ethos when I cycle.
First and foremost, stay safe, as much as is in your control. Secondly, be nice to those around you, whatever their transport choice. I'd say the same to a car driver, except that I would put more emphasis on being nice to those around you. I want those who happen to be driving to see other road users as people who deserve care and consideration. I would be a hypocrite if I did not have that same ethos when I cycle.
Re: 2 abreast riding
Pete Owens wrote:TrevA wrote:I've no problem with short delays, but one particular pair were 2 abreast on the A6 near Bakewell and it was about 2 miles before we could overtake safely.
From my memory of the A6 through the Peak District - the road is not wide enough to safely overtake a single cyclist in the face of oncoming traffic. This makes it an unpleasant road to ride because a minority of motorists will attempt to do so through a gap that is physically possible but not sufficiently wide. I would also be astounded if the traffic was sooooo busy that there was no opportunity to overtake for 2 miles.
The only stretch I can think of where it would be inconsiderate to ride 2 abreast is here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.1895281,-1.639181,3a,75y,255.57h,86.48t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siMmdlsJPzkAY-WdAC7Xcow!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DiMmdlsJPzkAY-WdAC7Xcow%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D185.31876%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
but that is only a quarter of a mile. 2 miles would be all the way to Bakewell.
Not sure where that is? The 2 mile stretch was just south of Bakewell past Haddon Hall, we managed to get past at the bike path section just north west of Rowsley.
Sherwood CC and Notts CTC.
A cart horse trapped in the body of a man.
http://www.jogler2009.blogspot.com
A cart horse trapped in the body of a man.
http://www.jogler2009.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 2442
- Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am
Re: 2 abreast riding
TrevA wrote:Pete Owens wrote:TrevA wrote:I've no problem with short delays, but one particular pair were 2 abreast on the A6 near Bakewell and it was about 2 miles before we could overtake safely.
From my memory of the A6 through the Peak District - the road is not wide enough to safely overtake a single cyclist in the face of oncoming traffic. This makes it an unpleasant road to ride because a minority of motorists will attempt to do so through a gap that is physically possible but not sufficiently wide. I would also be astounded if the traffic was sooooo busy that there was no opportunity to overtake for 2 miles.
The only stretch I can think of where it would be inconsiderate to ride 2 abreast is here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.1895281,-1.639181,3a,75y,255.57h,86.48t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siMmdlsJPzkAY-WdAC7Xcow!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DiMmdlsJPzkAY-WdAC7Xcow%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D185.31876%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
but that is only a quarter of a mile. 2 miles would be all the way to Bakewell.
Not sure where that is?
About half way between Haddon Hall and Rowsley.
The 2 mile stretch was just south of Bakewell past Haddon Hall, we managed to get past at the bike path section just north west of Rowsley.
Well that is the only stretch in your "2 miles" where it is possible to overtake safely without using the other lane. To remind you how much width you need take a look at HC rule 163:
http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/163
If the cyclists had be riding 2 abreast preventing you from overtaking on the DC stretch then that really would have been obstructive - and you would have remembered it. I suspect that this is the bike path section you referred to in which case you were following the cyclists for less than half a mile from Haddon Hall - along this narrow twisty stretch with double white lines:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.1907514,-1.649912,3a,75y,136.1h,78.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZzdr2zoHZ1cp-eWBclHwTw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Where there really isn't space to overtake a single cyclist in the face on oncoming traffic. Indeed by riding side be side rather than in line they were making it easier to overtake by reducing the distance you would need to be in the opposite lane.
Re: 2 abreast riding
Interestingly, if you follow that last Streetview up the road you see an overtake where the road widens. Safe but the lone cyclist is almost in the gutter.
Re: 2 abreast riding
Just after that overtake the gutter is turned into a cycle lane.
It doesnt look like a pleasant place to cycle. You have a choice, hug the gutter to let cars fly past your elbow at whatever speed they do along there*. Or ride in primary forcing the cars to either wait behind or overtake on the other side of the road (illegally crossing the double whites on some stretches).
I imagine local cyclists have tried both positions and settled on which to do and where to do each position.
*Sooner or later that is going to include cars overtaking you in the face of an oncoming HGV!
Possibly even an HGV overtaking you in the face of.......
It doesnt look like a pleasant place to cycle. You have a choice, hug the gutter to let cars fly past your elbow at whatever speed they do along there*. Or ride in primary forcing the cars to either wait behind or overtake on the other side of the road (illegally crossing the double whites on some stretches).
I imagine local cyclists have tried both positions and settled on which to do and where to do each position.
*Sooner or later that is going to include cars overtaking you in the face of an oncoming HGV!
Possibly even an HGV overtaking you in the face of.......
Yma o Hyd
Re: 2 abreast riding
meic wrote:Just after that overtake the gutter is turned into a cycle lane.
It doesnt look like a pleasant place to cycle. You have a choice, hug the gutter to let cars fly past your elbow at whatever speed they do along there*. Or ride in primary forcing the cars to either wait behind or overtake on the other side of the road (illegally crossing the double whites on some stretches).
I imagine local cyclists have tried both positions and settled on which to do and where to do each position.
*Sooner or later that is going to include cars overtaking you in the face of an oncoming HGV!
Possibly even an HGV overtaking you in the face of.......
I believe it is permitted to cross double white lines if overtaking a slow moving vehicle - or am I mistaken?
I don't know the definition of a slow moving vehicle but perhaps a cyclist could be so defined - particularly going uphill.
Re: 2 abreast riding
ANTONISH wrote:I believe it is permitted to cross double white lines if overtaking a slow moving vehicle - or am I mistaken?
I don't know the definition of a slow moving vehicle but perhaps a cyclist could be so defined - particularly going uphill.
from here.Rule 129
Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26
HTH
"42"
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: 2 abreast riding
The HC cuts both ways:
(Please don't shoot the messenger here.)
The regulation permitting a vehicle to cross a double white line and its variants is in TSRGD 2016 Part 7 (9)(5)(f)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/made
Rule 66
You should ...
never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
(Please don't shoot the messenger here.)
The regulation permitting a vehicle to cross a double white line and its variants is in TSRGD 2016 Part 7 (9)(5)(f)
5) Nothing in sub-paragraph (1)(b) is to be taken to prohibit a vehicle from being driven across, or so as to straddle, the continuous line referred to in that paragraph, if it is safe to do so and if necessary to do so—
...
(f) in order to pass a pedal cycle moving at a speed not exceeding 10 mph;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/made
Re: 2 abreast riding
It's pretty rare than a cyclist is going less than 10mph unless uphill...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: 2 abreast riding
[XAP]Bob wrote:It's pretty rare than a cyclist is going less than 10mph unless uphill...
That may be so but the only means of enforcement - and that's a theoretical possibility in itself - is through the criminal law, which places the burden of proof on the prosecution. So, it's academic but the likelihood of the prosecution being able to prove a rider's speed is quite low.
Unless a rider were to be deliberately trying to prevent a following driver overtaking, they'd sometimes be best served by a driver who took the opportunity.
Re: 2 abreast riding
Crossing continuous white lines is not illegal under all circumstances. I believe it is allowed where you can see the road ahead to be clear for far enough, and the thing you are passing is moving very slowly. But my understanding is that we are talking about hings moving at the speed of road sweepers.
Last edited by pwa on 8 Nov 2017, 12:52pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 2 abreast riding
TrevA wrote:I've been out into Derbyshire today in the car and encountered a number of small groups of cyclists riding 2 abreast on busy main roads. I know that strictly speaking they are entitled to do this, but I can see how it winds motorists up, as it's very difficult to get past. I often cycle with my wife as a pair, and we do ride 2 abreast but only on quiet country lanes. We will single out on busy roads or where a queue of traffic is building up behind us.
On most roads I drive on to pass a cyclist you have to pull out into the next lane (oncoming traffic or next lane on 2+ lanes each direction). If you are going to pull into the next lane that lane needs to be clear (e.g. no oncoming traffic) - so pull out half way into lane or all the way makes no difference (there must be no vehicles using that lane).
When you have a group of cyclists, string them all out in a long line one behind the other and it gets a long line and you (driver) have to have the next lane much clearer to get past them all and any bends make finding a long enough section of road with good visibility can be a lot harder meaning you have to wait behind the line a lot longer. Double those cyclists up to 2 abreast and the length of the line halves and overtaking becomes a lot easier (much shorter obstruction) and you need the next lane clear for a much shorter time.
So, as a driver I would normally prefer cyclists be 2 abreast.
In practice, even with just one cyclist, when I pull across into the oncoming lane to pass them I tend to pull right across (as pulling part way across still needs the oncoming lane to be clear - so why not give the cyclist better clearance).
Ian
- tykeboy2003
- Posts: 1277
- Joined: 19 Jul 2010, 2:51pm
- Location: Swadlincote, South Derbyshire
Re: 2 abreast riding
tykeboy2003 wrote:Kerb to cyclist 1m (minimum)
cyclist to passing vehicle 1.5m (minimum)
width of 2 cars (not considering wider vehicles here) 3.8m
gap between cars 1.5m (minimum)
gap between oncoming vehicle and kerb 1m.
Total 8.8m (28.5 feet). That's an awfully wide road (DOT guidance for new roads says 7.5m for roads carrying bus routes).
Nobody spotted the not-so-deliberate mistake, I forgot to include the width of the cyclist... Assuming flat bars, add another 0.6m giving a total road width of 9.4m (30.5 feet).
Re: 2 abreast riding
Derek - The enlightened petrolhead
Re: 2 abreast riding
thirdcrank wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:It's pretty rare than a cyclist is going less than 10mph unless uphill...
That may be so but the only means of enforcement - and that's a theoretical possibility in itself - is through the criminal law, which places the burden of proof on the prosecution. So, it's academic but the likelihood of the prosecution being able to prove a rider's speed is quite low.
Unless a rider were to be deliberately trying to prevent a following driver overtaking, they'd sometimes be best served by a driver who took the opportunity.
I don’t know - an awful lot of gps logging nowadays
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.