Jump to content

DOI plan to foil the fumble


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, The Chief said:

i'd say yes they should have let you through but perhaps there's also an issue with the road design and other traffic if you couldn't get past for 3 miles??

You mean in the way that our local roads have corners and oncoming traffic in the other lane? How inconvenient, I'd never  thought of that.

I shall advise the DOI tomorrow and see if the roads can be modified and oncoming traffic banned just so cyclists can continue to disregard the rule of the road that requests them to ride in single file in order not to hold up traffic.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

We need a way to stop suicidal people driving off Marine Drive. We could improve mental health services? Nah, let's just close the road off. The people who are likely to walk or cycle o

I remember when it was an open thoroughfare. There have always been accidents up there. People in cars and on motorcycles ending up in hospital. Numerous people in cars ending up in church,

Quite, I noticed this when I first left hospital after my accident, there's no consideration given anywhere to less able people. Where can you stop and sit in Strand Street? Tesco, or Shoprite for tha

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

You mean in the way that our local roads have corners and oncoming traffic in the other lane? How inconvenient, I'd never  thought of that.

I shall advise the DOI tomorrow and see if the roads can be modified and oncoming traffic banned just so cyclists can continue to disregard the rule of the road that requests them to ride in single file in order not to hold up traffic.

Please don't do that, they might actually try and do it.

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Peter Layman said:

So when you say 3 abreast, they took over the whole width of the road?

They took up the whole width of the traffic lane concerned. As opposed to riding in single file, particularly when they knew full well that there were motorised vehicles behind them and they were holding up those vehicles. It doesn't do them any favours IMHO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

You mean in the way that our local roads have corners and oncoming traffic in the other lane? How inconvenient, I'd never  thought of that.

I shall advise the DOI tomorrow and see if the roads can be modified and oncoming traffic banned just so cyclists can continue to disregard the rule of the road that requests them to ride in single file in order not to hold up traffic.

If you cannot get past a cyclist because there is traffic coming the other way then you haven't got enough space to overtake anyhow. You should give cyclist the same amount of space as you would give a car when overtaking. 

It's probably much safer riding two-abreast if it discourages impatient motorists from trying to squeeze past when there is traffic coming the other way.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Max Power said:

It seems that walkers have been emboldened by the announcement of the consultation, whilst drivers seem to be staking a claim. Groups of walkers four abreast walking in the roads with no intention of moving out of the way, glaring at car drivers as they pass, are out in force on the Marine Drive today. The lycra louts will soon have them running for cover once they get themselves organised though! 

Years ago I was driving north towards Douglas Head and at the corner just where the little theatre is, there is quite a sharp left hand corner with a high bank on the inland side.  I went round that corner at a very low speed to be confronted by a group of walkers across the full width of the road.  Thank god  I was driving slowly because I would have taken out several people.

It looked like an organised visiting walking group so they should have been advised it was a used road.  They should have been walking on the pavement and that is the simple solution,  mend the pavements. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

They took up the whole width of the traffic lane concerned. As opposed to riding in single file, particularly when they knew full well that there were motorised vehicles behind them and they were holding up those vehicles. It doesn't do them any favours IMHO.

This makes no sense.

you would have had to go on the wrong side of the road anyway regardless of if they were single file or 3 wide.

Single file would be much harder to pass as you would be on the wrong side for much longer.

Unless there were 50 plus of them I can’t imagine how you couldn’t pass for 3 miles unless it was a single track road somewhere?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, trmpton said:

This makes no sense.

you would have had to go on the wrong side of the road anyway regardless of if they were single file or 3 wide.

Single file would be much harder to pass as you would be on the wrong side for much longer.

Unless there were 50 plus of them I can’t imagine how you couldn’t pass for 3 miles unless it was a single track road somewhere?

The road concerned was Sulby to Ramsey, the TT course, specifically Kerroomooar to Lezayre Rd in Ramsey which has the cycle lane, ironically.

There are any number of points in that stretch where there is plenty of room to pass a single (file) cyclist without needing to use the the oncoming carriageway, there's oncoming traffic and various blind bends and brows that preclude using that oncoming carriageway anyway.

@ nine+ cyclists, three rows, three abreast, in the lane make safe overtaking impossible in those conditions. Plus it's contravening the Highway/cycle code which is there for a reason. I'm not going to start slagging cyclists off about lycra or lack of taxes - they just need to start observing their relevant traffic rules and laws. Having a few MHKs onside and being "flavour of the month" does not preclude them from that.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

The road concerned was Sulby to Ramsey, the TT course, specifically Kerroomooar to Lezayre Rd in Ramsey which has the cycle lane, ironically.

There are any number of points in that stretch where there is plenty of room to pass a single (file) cyclist without needing to use the the oncoming carriageway, there's oncoming traffic and various blind bends and brows that preclude using that oncoming carriageway anyway.

@ nine+ cyclists, three rows, three abreast, in the lane make safe overtaking impossible in those conditions. Plus it's contravening the Highway/cycle code which is there for a reason. I'm not going to start slagging cyclists off about lycra or lack of taxes - they just need to start observing their relevant traffic rules and laws. Having a few MHKs onside and being "flavour of the month" does not preclude them from that.

There is no where on that road you can safely overtake a cyclist and leave them enough space without at least part of your vehicle going into the oncoming carriageway!  The road would need to be about twice it’s actual width to do that safely.

Three rows of Cyclists three wide is similar to passing a slow van (but with much better visibility for you) there are loads of places it’s safe.

Passing nine in single file is much harder and exposes you and them to danger for longer.

Personally I would much rather see them 3 by 3 than single file.  You obviously disagree 

Edited by trmpton
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

The road concerned was Sulby to Ramsey, the TT course, specifically Kerroomooar to Lezayre Rd in Ramsey which has the cycle lane, ironically.

There are any number of points in that stretch where there is plenty of room to pass a single (file) cyclist without needing to use the the oncoming carriageway, there's oncoming traffic and various blind bends and brows that preclude using that oncoming carriageway anyway.

@ nine+ cyclists, three rows, three abreast, in the lane make safe overtaking impossible in those conditions. Plus it's contravening the Highway/cycle code which is there for a reason. I'm not going to start slagging cyclists off about lycra or lack of taxes - they just need to start observing their relevant traffic rules and laws. Having a few MHKs onside and being "flavour of the month" does not preclude them from that.

The secret is not to give them too much room when passing.  People seem to be overly panicky these days sticking their car out to the other side of the road over compensating the room they give.  No need for it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trmpton said:

Personally I would much rather see them 3 by 3 than single file.  You obviously disagree 

I do, I'm afraid. For instance, a good wagon driver will keep an eye on the mirrors and if he or she sees a build up of traffic behind, they'll pull over where convenient to let the traffic past. It's nothing more than good road craft and courtesy and lots do it. Too many cyclists don't apparently feel the need to display the same.

Motorised vehicle users pay a considerable amount in various taxes, charges and duties to be able to travel at legal, 21st or 20th century speeds to go about their business. If we're going to slow them down to 19th century speeds at the whim of a small group of other road users who don't feel the need to observe that, should we offer those motorists a reduction in charges?

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I do, I'm afraid. For instance, a good wagon driver will keep an eye on the mirrors and if he or she sees a build up of traffic behind, they'll pull over where convenient to let the traffic past. It's nothing more than good road craft and courtesy and lots do it. Too many cyclists don't apparently feel the need to display the same.

Motorised vehicle users pay a considerable amount in various taxes, charges and duties to be able to travel at legal, 21st or 20th century speeds to go about their business. If we're going to slow them down to 19th century speeds at the whim of a small group of other road users who don't feel the need to observe that, should we offer those motorists a reduction in charges?

Motorised vehicle users pay a considerable amount in taxes charges and duties because of the pollution they make not as a free ticket to go as fast.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, The Duck of Atholl said:

Motorised vehicle users pay a considerable amount in taxes charges and duties because of the pollution they make not as a free ticket to go as fast.

that's the excuse for the last few years anyway,  it doesn't matter what the cost the pollution is the same and the money taken in no way reduces that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, The Duck of Atholl said:

Motorised vehicle users pay a considerable amount in taxes charges and duties because of the pollution they make not as a free ticket to go as fast.

They additionally pay those charges to drive within the local speed limit permits and to make reasonable progress (which in itself reduces pollution).

My argument isn't about cyclists paying road tax or their clothing. It's about them observing the laws, Highway Code and the rights of other road users, in the same way as those other road users are expected to observe the rights of cyclists, we now have the minimum distance to allow when overtaking cyclists and that's fair enough.

But the cyclists themselves need to remember that they have responsibilities too and are not one special case simply because they are egged on by a few politicians to believe so.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TerryFuchwit said:

The secret is not to give them too much room when passing.  People seem to be overly panicky these days sticking their car out to the other side of the road over compensating the room they give.  No need for it.

As a cyclist I can confirm this.

On a typical morning cycling East on Peel Road

1. Most drivers do a good job of judging the situation. They pass cautiously but confidently leaving an appropriate gap

2. Some drivers are over cautious and as Fuchwit says they gve you about 5metres of gap. On the surface this would appear to not be an issue, but it can be. That is because drivers behind them get frustrated and then squeeze through a gap that is not there.

3. Sadly a small number take delight in getting as close to you as possible. This is intimidating. In the UK if you get helmetcam of this behaviour the police will prosecute as i see prosecutions on websites. I didn't know it was law here yet, but if it is i'll start gathering evidence

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...