Undertaking vs not indicating

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Big T
Posts: 2105
Joined: 16 Jul 2007, 1:44pm
Location: Nottingham
Contact:

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby Big T » 16 May 2013, 12:33pm

gripper_stebson wrote:The situation is made a bit more confusing by cycle lanes that are painted onto the road. If I approach a traffic queue, and I am in the cycle lane, I feel perfectly free to zoom along the lane, going past all the traffic queued on your right.

Of course - I try to be careful to watch out for cars that may turn left into my path, as car drives don't seem to be always aware they are crossing a cycle lane where a cyclist could easily be zooming up on the left hand side.

But in this scenario, as I carry on in the lane past all the cars on my right, am I actually undertaking? I suspect that I am, but what are the rules when it comes to using a marked cycle lane?


These are the circumstances where i was knocked off last year. I too was proceeding along the cycle lane with queued traffic to my right. Someone left a gap and someone coming in the opposite direction turned right into that gap and straight across my path. I T-boned him. Neither of us saw each other as the vehilce that left the gap was a van, blocking our view of each other.
My JOGLE blog:
http://www.jogler2009.blogspot.com
twitter: @bikingtrev

snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby snibgo » 16 May 2013, 5:34pm

Rules of thumb:

1. Drivers don't indicate.

2. If a driver is indicating, it's because he forgot to turn it off at the previous junction.

3. Drivers don't expect cyclists to undertake them. Or to overtake them.

4. Mirrors are for applying make-up, or shaving. They have no other function.

5. Drivers have stiff necks, so can't look over their shoulders.

Cynical, moi? There are some exceptions to the above rules, but I don't rely on exceptions.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby TonyR » 16 May 2013, 5:52pm

Time to dust off the good old http://www.bbspot.com/News/2003/11/bmw.html

User avatar
danfoto
Posts: 840
Joined: 2 Jun 2009, 2:59pm
Location: East Sussex

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby danfoto » 16 May 2013, 6:02pm

snibgo wrote:Rules of thumb:

3. Drivers don't expect cyclists to undertake them. Or to overtake them.



Actually, most of them don't expect cyclists to be on the road.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.

hexhome
Posts: 1328
Joined: 1 Oct 2010, 10:33am
Location: Hexham, Northumberland

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby hexhome » 16 May 2013, 10:17pm

TonyR wrote: I have not seen any police recommendation about passing on the right for cyclists. Do you have a link?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPkbNFt5NuY

snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby snibgo » 16 May 2013, 10:20pm

danfoto wrote:Actually, most of them don't expect cyclists to be on the road.

Yes, I thought of adding that, which is certainly true, but it weakened my essential point -- motorists often don't realise that cyclists can be faster than cars, so they don't watch out for it. As a cyclist who wants to stay safe, I need to know this.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby TonyR » 16 May 2013, 10:20pm

hexhome wrote:
TonyR wrote: I have not seen any police recommendation about passing on the right for cyclists. Do you have a link?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPkbNFt5NuY


That's specific to not passing lorries on the left, not against passing on the left in general.

stoobs
Posts: 1307
Joined: 27 Nov 2007, 4:45am

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby stoobs » 17 May 2013, 9:43am

Indeed. That advice is specific, and does not supersede Rule 151 of the Highway Code.

Chrisonabike
Posts: 4
Joined: 15 May 2013, 7:59pm

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby Chrisonabike » 17 May 2013, 1:15pm

TonyR wrote:Time to dust off the good old http://www.bbspot.com/News/2003/11/bmw.html

Marvellous. Thanks very much.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby reohn2 » 17 May 2013, 6:36pm

snibgo wrote:Rules of thumb:

1. Drivers don't indicate.

2. If a driver is indicating, it's because he forgot to turn it off at the previous junction.

3. Drivers don't expect cyclists to undertake them. Or to overtake them.

4. Mirrors are for applying make-up, or shaving. They have no other function.

5. Drivers have stiff necks, so can't look over their shoulders.

Cynical, moi? There are some exceptions to the above rules, but I don't rely on exceptions.

You forgot the first rule of cycling in traffic:- "every other person using the road is a nutter" the second is:- "Alway expect the unexpected"
-----------------------------------------------------------

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18761
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Undertaking vs not indicating

Postby Vorpal » 17 May 2013, 7:17pm

I go up the inside of cars very, very seldomly. I used to do it at one junction where there was a cyle path crossing just before the junction. I filtered up the inside to get to the cycle path, but the traffic was always stopped when I did so, and I went onto the path before the junction.

In general, if I want to overtake, I do it on the outside, or in the oncoming lane.

Legally, undertaking is acceptable, but as it is generally considered to be risky, it will be difficult to blame or claim off a motorist, even if s/he does something blatantly illegal.

There are many other threads on here about undertaking, filtering, and related issues.

Here are a couple:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=55010&hilit=+filtering
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46404&hilit=filter%2A&start=15

The search function will find others.

I suggest that if you haven't done so, read Cyclecraft by John Franklin.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom