Cyclone Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Clearly that cyclist hadn't learned the twenty-foot-bunny-hop manoeuvre that's de-rigour for moving into the right hand lane from the left lane on that bit of road. But imagine poor old WeX having to endure the horror of a four second delay in getting to the red light twenty yards away. Have you no sympathy for the poor man! It's very awkward isn't it that bit. I stay to the left until close to the lights and move across when there's a break in the traffic. Sometimes I have to pull up on the left and wait as with traffic flowing it becomes impossible to move over to the right hand, straight ahead lane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 That does not apply when the left hand lane is a filter lane for turning left only, and the right hand lane is marked for straight ahead. Otherwise no-one would be able to go straight ahead. You don't state where on Western Bank but IIRC there is a cycle lane in the middle of the two lanes near the traffic lights by the Octagon Yes that part and yes there is a small section of cycle lane, but I was talking about the whole stretch of the dual carriageway section going away from town. It is not set out as you say though as there is no sign nor road markings to stipulate what each lane is for. Therefore its a dual carriageway and the rule in the highway code still applies. the cycle lane you mentioned covers less than the last 10% of that section of the road and its there for the junction as its restricted in width but the cyclists was using the whole stretch of the road in this manner. If the road was laid out as you said, I would agree, but its not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Clearly that cyclist hadn't learned the twenty-foot-bunny-hop manoeuvre that's de-rigour for moving into the right hand lane from the left lane on that bit of road. But imagine poor old WeX having to endure the horror of a four second delay in getting to the red light twenty yards away. Have you no sympathy for the poor man! Hmmm, 4 seconds up western bank, that would mean said cyclists was traveling at approx 170mph! There isn't much I can say to this, as your understanding is apparent to all. At first it was a denial that cyclists can hold up traffic, now its accepted in a round about kind of way but down played by over 500%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 There isn't much I can say to this, as your understanding is apparent to all. It certainly is since I'm both a motorist and a cyclist that uses that stretch of road virtually daily, whereas you, aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 It certainly is since I'm both a motorist and a cyclist that uses that stretch of road virtually daily, whereas you, aren't. but you think a cyclists only takes 4 seconds to ride up there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 That depends where they are. So was it a whole 30 seconds that transformed your life? WeX, relax, it's OK. You win, I'll see you at the lights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The lane markings start about half way up, but it's pretty much impossible to change lane at that point due to the motorists who are overtaking incorrectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The lane markings start about half way up, but it's pretty much impossible to change lane at that point due to the motorists who are overtaking incorrectly. no they do not. the cycle path is approx 30 metres long while that part of the road 300 metres long. If you dont believe me, look for yourself: http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=53.38096,-1.488673&spn=0.00066,0.001742&t=h&z=20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 That's right, it isn't nearly long enough. Usually by the time motorists make way for a cyclist to move across they'd never do it in that short section. You do know that the cyclists are allowed to use the whole road, both lanes, along it's entire length, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 That's right, it isn't nearly long enough. Usually by the time motorists make way for a cyclist to move across they'd never do it in that short section. You do know that the cyclists are allowed to use the whole road, both lanes, along it's entire length, don't you? 137 On a two-lane dual carriageway you should stay in the left-hand lane. Use the right-hand lane for overtaking or turning right. After overtaking, move back to the left-hand lane when it is safe to do so. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAn...code/DG_070308 You still cant accept the fact your wrong can you, but that's OK, the rules are the rules and I have shown that cyclists do hold up cars which is the point of my earlier post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.