JFKvsNixon Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 The corner doesn't look too blind to me..the overtaking car is only a wheel width over the line...without knowing where the guy started his overtake and what he could see or what the speed is you can't say whether or not he should/shouldn't have done it.. but the fact remains that a solid white line doesn't mean no overtaking ever.. which is what I understood SportsTrophy to have meant... Sorry if I didn't make it clear. My point was that you can only over take a cyclist on a double white line if you can tell the road is clear, I don't think that the driver could going by the photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Sorry if I didn't make it clear. My point was that you can only over take a cyclist on a double white line if you can tell the road is clear, I don't think that the driver could going by the photo. Without being sat in the car's driving seat we can't know what the guy could see when he started his overtake...at least he's given the cyclist plenty of space... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Without being sat in the car's driving seat we can't know what the guy could see when he started his overtake...at least he's given the cyclist plenty of space... Very true, I admit that i am only judging by the photo, which doesn't show the full picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SportsTrophy Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) The corner doesn't look too blind to me..the overtaking car is only a wheel width over the line...without knowing where the guy started his overtake and what he could see or what the speed is you can't say whether or not he should/shouldn't have done it.. but the fact remains that a solid white line doesn't mean no overtaking ever.. which is what I understood SportsTrophy to have meant... At a combined collision speed of over 70mph what difference would an inch or a wheel width make. The car had to overtake the cyclist as it was the back of some bumper riders with the second car narrowly missing the cyclist from 60mph to 35 mph at the corner. How much road in front of the car can you see in order to overtake? The car in the front has a good view of the road but considering the following cars may not see the hazard, should it overtake the cyclist? http://sheffield9.net/images/hathersageroadA625-1.jpg Edited June 29, 2015 by SportsTrophy added image Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 At a combined collision speed of over 70mph what difference would an inch or a wheel width make. The car had to overtake the cyclist as it was the back of 3 bumper riders with the second car narrowly missing the cyclist from 60mph to 35 mph at the corner. How much road in front of the car can you see in order to overtake? I made my comments from the photo you posted... I don't know what the driver could see as I wasn't sat in the driving seat of that car at that time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 You loan your car to someone who starts getting sweary just because other people are on the road? Wow.. Besides, in the video the cyclist has moved over to the side, off the main carriageway. So what's the problem exactly? The tram still can't safely pass him. Personally if I'm holding up the tram (ie going up hill), I stop and move off the road to let it pass. It can't pull out to overtake me after all. ---------- Post added 29-06-2015 at 19:47 ---------- What with this intro and your factually incorrect first line i think ill leave this one here ---------- Post added 28-06-2015 at 13:49 ---------- Well if youre only going to see what you want to see and not whats in the video i think ill leave this one too. The fact remains the cyclist is holding back a long line of traffic. Thats in the video, watch it again or dont bother but if your going to deny whats in front of you then we dont have anything to talk about. Your 'long line' is about 8 cars. And if that's City Road in the rush hour they're soon going to reach the traffic lights queue anyway aren't they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 The tram still can't safely pass him. Personally if I'm holding up the tram (ie going up hill), I stop and move off the road to let it pass. It can't pull out to overtake me after all. ---------- Post added 29-06-2015 at 19:47 ---------- Your 'long line' is about 8 cars. And if that's City Road in the rush hour they're soon going to reach the traffic lights queue anyway aren't they. [bold] I agree However it looks like they cyclist is making an effort to move over but can't because of all the parked cars, but there is a gap between them that the cyclist is approaching His (I assume) positioning suggests that he will indeed move left into the lay-by and carry on at a slow speed whilst the tram passes Conjecture but what else can one do on a couple of seconds of video badly presented as "proof of cyclists (as a whole) taking the pee (to use terminology from the video)" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexAtkin Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Try looking at it from the cyclists point of view. 1) I'm cycling up hill, if I stop I have to accelerate again, up hill. By the time I have done that, I will probably be holding traffic up again anyway. Is it actually LESS of an obstruction to just carry on without stopping, especially as there might be more space to pull over further up? 2) If I pull in between these cars to let the tram overtake, will it be safe to pull out again on this busy road? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Try looking at it from the cyclists point of view. 1) I'm cycling up hill, if I stop I have to accelerate again, up hill. By the time I have done that, I will probably be holding traffic up again anyway. Is it actually LESS of an obstruction to just carry on without stopping, especially as there might be more space to pull over further up? 2) If I pull in between these cars to let the tram overtake, will it be safe to pull out again on this busy road? If he's heading towards a gap (or maybe a red traffic light or queue of traffic) then he should continue. I was only commenting that on Infirmary Rd, going up hill, if the tram catches me up and we aren't about to reach a tram stop, I stop and move out of the way. I generally then catch the tram up in Hillsborough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Try looking at it from the cyclists point of view. 1) I'm cycling up hill, if I stop I have to accelerate again, up hill. By the time I have done that, I will probably be holding traffic up again anyway. Is it actually LESS of an obstruction to just carry on without stopping, especially as there might be more space to pull over further up? 2) If I pull in between these cars to let the tram overtake, will it be safe to pull out again on this busy road? Plus, of course, the cyclist may be totally focused on getting up the hill and surviving the journey and all the perils posed to vulnerable cyclists by the mess on the roads caused entirely by the fact that there are way too many motor vehicles than the system can cope with. And, as as already been noted, it's not the cyclists problem. The problem is caused, again, by the solid line of parked motor vehicles which cuts the useable lane in half. TOO MANY CARS ON THE ROAD is the true cause of this problem- without that line of parked vehicles taking up half the lane, that cyclist could be passed, easily and safely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts