People shouting 'left' 'right' etc on a cylce path whilst approaching from behind

[Audax67]

You went through between them? I hate that, feels really dangerous

Isn't it the law (at least in the UK) that, when something travelling faster approaches a group of pedestrians on a narrow road, at least one of the group must move out of the way to the opposite side of the road as the others?

Especially when a dog goes with one group and the owner with the other but the two remain connected by an extensible lead.

[The utility cyclist]

My view is you shouldn't be calling out at all,

It's a misnomer to believe that calling out is merely to inform other cyclists on the road/trail that you are coming, it is in fact to tell the other cyclist to 'hold their line' so as not to veer into you.

You make my point and clearly don't get it do you!

I won't hold my line because someone has shouted something, I have no guarantee what is going to happen in the next second or however long it takes for you to get past, so I'll do whatever I need to do to be safe, if that means I have to move in any direction then I will. You can say/shout whatever you like, if I have to deviate then that's on you as the overtaker to account for that, I have priority not you, so it's fully on you to overtake when it's safe to do so.

You wouldn't shout out to a pedestrian or motorist when overtaking (or maybe you would ) so why would you do it to another cyclist which impinges their safety (and indeed yours) because you then think they should stay in precisely their same line and then ride too close, your timing of overtake and road positioning and doing basic hazard perception is the ONLY effective way to overtake safely.

So no, I won't hold my line for your convenience and reducing my safety thanks very much.

[The utility cyclist]

My view is you shouldn't be calling out at all, in exactly the same way when using a bell for passing pedestrians .........

I like to give and receive advanced warning that something different may happen.

If it's very quite and I'm cycling along minding my own business and not checking my mirrors when suddenly something 3'-4' taller than me suddenly appears in the corner of my vision from behind with no warning then I tend to jump because of the sudden shock.
If I had a bit of warning they were there then I'd stay in my very relaxed state.

As for giving a warning, I do it again because a recumbent trike is so different from a bike.
On any road/path due to where the wheels are, I ride about 18" wider than a bike.
So even with the safest overtake, I've got that much less wobble room.
So I think giving a warning that something different is coming passed makes it that much safer.

It is ALWAYS incumbent on the overtaker to make sure it is safe to overtake, if you as the overtaker are passing in a safe manner with enough space taking into account potential hazards and situations that might crop up - like junctions, parked cars, road defects etc, then there is zero need to warn anyone.
35 years I've been cycling this way, never warned anyone that I was passing, never needed to because I accounted for 99.9999% of all eventualities (a frozen block of urine falling from a jet or a golden eagle dive bombing from above are obvious scenarios I won't be thinking of), when I'm being passed then I don't need you to warn me, would you do that when rotating in a chain gang, no you wouldn't, mainly because you have an element of trust and understanding.
So someone you do not know, don't know their experience level, their thinking towards hazards, what they are going to do next -a right turn for instance or change line for that road defect you've not seen) how they might react to you shouting out that they might not even hear anyway (wind noise or deafness or even earbuds) then you MUST always take account and either hold back/change speed and ride wide.

Sorry but I couldn't disagree with this nonsense of calling out to people and wanting people to call out to you even if one can be heard or you hear them, it's simply not needed, it's totally unnecessary if you are riding safe with respect to others and the prevailing conditions/environment.

[Bmblbzzz]

Have you ever driven in France? It is, or used to be, the convention for a following motorist to flash their headlights as an indication they wanted to overtake. The motorist in front would then hoot to indicate they agreed/were aware/reckoned it safe.

[Mike Sales]

Have you ever driven in France? It is, or used to be, the convention for a following motorist to flash their headlights as an indication they wanted to overtake. The motorist in front would then hoot to indicate they agreed/were aware/reckoned it safe.

When I first cycled in France I was disconcerted by the toots from drivers.
Then I realised they were saying, "Here I am" in a courteous way. I was used to the British hoot, which means "Get out of my way."

[Cyril Haearn]

Have you ever driven in France? It is, or used to be, the convention for a following motorist to flash their headlights as an indication they wanted to overtake. The motorist in front would then hoot to indicate they agreed/were aware/reckoned it safe.

Barmy
I have driven in France
Read a suggestion once, probably from the bad, british association of drivers, if driving a rhd vehicle in France one might ask the front-seat passenger to decide whether one might overtake
That worthy could call 'no', or 'okay to go', was the ludicrous suggestion
Both phrases sound quite alike

[Bonefishblues]

Have you ever driven in France? It is, or used to be, the convention for a following motorist to flash their headlights as an indication they wanted to overtake. The motorist in front would then hoot to indicate they agreed/were aware/reckoned it safe.

Barmy
I have driven in France
Read a suggestion once, probably from the bad, british association of drivers, if driving a rhd vehicle in France one might ask the front-seat passenger to decide whether one might overtake
That worthy could call 'no', or 'okay to go', was the ludicrous suggestion
Both phrases sound quite alike

They do?

[ambodach]

I am with Tigerbiten on this. I could be looking at something off to one side and not checking my mirrors. I cycle for pleasure not to race from point to point so I have no problem with people passing but a bit of warning is always welcome. Don’t bother suggesting I am careless not constantly checking my mirrors. I mostly look ahead and on a trike small adjustment in steering avoid bumps,holes and horse turds which are common where I often cycle.

[The utility cyclist]

One thing I find a bit annoying on the European cycleways is that all the locals cycle two abreast and take up the whole path, and go quite slowly.

Precisely why cycleways/cycling infra even on the continent is no substitute for a 3.5m wide carriageway that is given over to people on bikes only, those cycle lanes really aren't useful for mass cycling with people of hugely varying speeds, it should be designed to allow a parent and child to cycle side by side, or a couple of people chatting to each other or any other scenario that takes up a bit more space than a single rider.

The segregated cycle infra solution is a good idea, but actually it's nowhere near the ideal solution not just for keeping people on bikes safe but also enabling them in large numbers to transit from A-B in the most convenient manner, which is precisely what the powers that be do for motorists, and that is why many people won't swap over to cycling to get about when it's easier to get about by car.

This is still apparent in NL and why cycling numbers have stagnated for well over a decade, the slower cyclists are catered for, but the younger men who are generally getting about by car who could arguably be travelling faster on bike as per the majority of British cycle commuters aren't choosing to cycle. A recent study in NL showed that almost a quarter of all Dutch people who travel for work/utility would NEVER consider cycling as an option.

[The utility cyclist]

Have you ever driven in France? It is, or used to be, the convention for a following motorist to flash their headlights as an indication they wanted to overtake. The motorist in front would then hoot to indicate they agreed/were aware/reckoned it safe.

And that in part is why French driving standards are even worse than in the UK. The government reduced the speed limit on all 90km/h roads to 80 for 2018 and this is said to be one of the main factors for reduced deaths which was their their lowest ever 3,259 in 2018, down from 3,448 in 2017, but has gone up significantly this year already month on month).
Ambiguity/misunderstanding/poor judgement/ignoring hazards is the major reasons why people have crashes, stick to one system and keep it the same for everyone ALL the time, flashing lights in the manner described is simply somebody being impatient and usually driving at excessive speed/ignorant of hazards, someone ceding to these types only make matters worse by legitimising this nonsense.

If you cannot judge yourself to overtake in that situation then it's not safe to overtake IMO, slow down and wait for a clear overtaking opportunity.

[Bonefishblues]

If you cannot judge yourself to overtake in that situation then it's not safe to overtake IMO, slow down and wait for a clear overtaking opportunity.

This, in all circumstances and all modes of transport, including cycles on the Camel Trail this Easter (not!)

[Bmblbzzz]

Have you ever driven in France? It is, or used to be, the convention for a following motorist to flash their headlights as an indication they wanted to overtake. The motorist in front would then hoot to indicate they agreed/were aware/reckoned it safe.

And that in part is why French driving standards are even worse than in the UK. The government reduced the speed limit on all 90km/h roads to 80 for 2018 and this is said to be one of the main factors for reduced deaths which was their their lowest ever 3,259 in 2018, down from 3,448 in 2017, but has gone up significantly this year already month on month).
Ambiguity/misunderstanding/poor judgement/ignoring hazards is the major reasons why people have crashes, stick to one system and keep it the same for everyone ALL the time, flashing lights in the manner described is simply somebody being impatient and usually driving at excessive speed/ignorant of hazards, someone ceding to these types only make matters worse by legitimising this nonsense.

If you cannot judge yourself to overtake in that situation then it's not safe to overtake IMO, slow down and wait for a clear overtaking opportunity.

French driving standards are a distraction from the point, which is that you said:

...
You wouldn't shout out to a pedestrian or motorist when overtaking (or maybe you would ) so why would you do it to another cyclist ...

Charlie Polecat is, I think, in the USA. I don't know what customs, conventions or rules they have there (I would imagine it varies from region to region) but yes, it can be perfectly normal to hoot at pedestrians and motorists when overtaking them. Not just accepted, but in some cases to not do so would be deemed discourteous and unsafe, simply because they'd be expecting a hoot.

Signals are a matter of convention or habit. This is one of the reasons for and benefits of the "Two tings please" signs put up by the Canal and Rivers Trust in some places -- it establishes a convention (telling cyclists to ting twice in order to alert other path users of their approach and telling walkers, runners, etc to interpret the tings as an informative, courteous alert of approach rather than a rude path-clearing.

[cycle tramp]

My view is you shouldn't be calling out at all,

It's a misnomer to believe that calling out is merely to inform other cyclists on the road/trail that you are coming, it is in fact to tell the other cyclist to 'hold their line' so as not to veer into you.

You make my point and clearly don't get it do you!

I won't hold my line because someone has shouted something, I have no guarantee what is going to happen in the next second or however long it takes for you to get past, so I'll do whatever I need to do to be safe, if that means I have to move in any direction then I will. You can say/shout whatever you like, if I have to deviate then that's on you as the overtaker to account for that, I have priority not you, so it's fully on you to overtake when it's safe to do so.

You wouldn't shout out to a pedestrian or motorist when overtaking (or maybe you would ) so why would you do it to another cyclist which impinges their safety (and indeed yours) because you then think they should stay in precisely their same line and then ride too close, your timing of overtake and road positioning and doing basic hazard perception is the ONLY effective way to overtake safely.

So no, I won't hold my line for your convenience and reducing my safety thanks very much.

+1 if we desire motor traffic to overtake us at 1.5 metres, then we should we not expect the same from other cyclists for the same reason?

[Tigerbiten]

Signals are a matter of convention or habit. This is one of the reasons for and benefits of the "Two tings please" signs put up by the Canal and Rivers Trust in some places -- it establishes a convention (telling cyclists to ting twice in order to alert other path users of their approach and telling walkers, runners, etc to interpret the tings as an informative, courteous alert of approach rather than a rude path-clearing.

That's my thinking.

If a path is wide enough that I can overtake safely no matter what then I see no real reason to use my bell. But if the path is very quiet then I still might just as a heads up that something is passing from behind.

If the path is so narrow or twisty so I cannot overtake safely then I'm happy to slow right down and wait until it's safe. One advantage of a trike is that you can go at a slow walking speed without wobbling. Once it's safe then I'm likely to use my voice to inform the person ahead that I'm coming passed.

It's the in between width that is a bit more iffy. I can still overtake but I may be a little closer than I like especially if their in the middle of the path. Then I start to slow and give one bing-bong on the bell from a distance back. I hope they'll move over a bit or even better check behind while moving over. If they do then I'll give a cheerful "thank you" and I go passed. If they don't then it's a case of slowing down and waiting for/working out the safest way passed.

Remember I'm on a recumbent trike and it tends to ride ~50 cm wider than a bike. I also don't like dropping a wheel off a tarmac track due to the risk of a swerve if the verge is soft due to the different drag on the wheels. So what may be perfectly wide enough for two bikes, may be a bit iffy for a bike and trike.
The other thing is I tend to have the trailer on behind the trike. So with a total length of just over 3 meters it take longer to get passed.

[mattsccm]

I can't help but to disagree with the Utility cyclist in one respect. Not to speak is plain rude. It gives no warning to those you are passing that you are there and being surprised isn't nice. Courtesy to the other person if nothing else.It's for their benefit as much as yours.
I don't disagree that the overtaker has responsibility for their actions but the world is full of idiots and they turn around when surprised. Often into you. Creeping up on them is not being clever, its missing a trick.
As to what to say, "left" gives nothing. "On your left" says everything.
Bells are bloody useless. So often am I told by some dozy so and so, (usually elderly ) that as I should ring my bell after I have. I quick example and an "I did" just gets a grunt. A nice polite " morning" is all it needs unless you are ignored. Then it's "excuse me please". Never needed anything else in 4 decades.