AIBU expecting cyclists to use the cycle tracks?

I know there's no way you will ever see it from another's point of view

Right back atcha.

Semantics? Rubbish!

Get over it.

Firstly, the majority of cyclists you meet are solo.

Secondly, you'll rarely see cyclists in 'packs' (note the emotive language...) except on club runs which are almost invariably on a Sunday.

But don't let me interrupt your 'drivers are king of the road' and 'everybody else should get out of our way' mental thought processes as I know there's no way you will ever see it from another's point of view.

Semantics. They need to pull over, especially when travelling in packs. It's plain rude.

169
Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.

Generally held to apply to large vehicles like tractors. Bicycles are not driven, they are ridden.

Doesn't the highway code say that slow moving vehicles should pull over so as not to hold up traffic flow?

I got the link to the book but would have to buy it ..I thought there may be an on-line article. I will look in the library tomorrow.

CrunI am not pro or anti any road user but I am wary of 'statistics' of any sort!

I have given up cycling because I no longer feel safe due to the volume of motorised traffic but I am not blind to the foolishness of more than a few cyclists: jumping lights, weaving in and out of lanes, no lights, not using a mirror, poor signals etc. which are the same faults many drivers are guilty of.

What is it you couldn't find pen, the link to Cyclecraft seems to work.

www.amazon.co.uk/Cyclecraft-complete-enjoyable-cycling-children/dp/0117082430/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1441379389&sr=8-1&keywords=franklin+cyclecraft&tag=gransnet

It requires diagrams to explain cycle paths in more detail, which is why I keep suggesting that people read Cyclecraft.

What makes you think that motorists are the only ones who are vigilant, and cyclists the only ones who take risks? This is just the sort of prejudice that Walker was referring to. Here's a vigilant cyclist, and a stupid motorist.

Walker's research wasn't showing much sign of motorists being charitable or vigilant, was it? In the scenario with the polite request, motorists were deliberately passing too close out of spite. The only scenario which improved their behaviour was the one with a credible risk of prosecution.

crun I cannot find anywhere to read the item you referred to so unaware of what makes them additionally hazardous?

TRL statistics are presumably based on actual accidents. Some car drivers might argue that their vigilance re cyclists has avoided higher numbers of potential collisions where cyclists have taken inappropriate risks. I have seen , both as a pedestrian, passenger and driver, some stupid actions by cyclists which put them and other road users at risk of harm. The only collision I have been in was when I was knocked over by a cyclist on a footpath

I accept that there are aggressive and stupid car/truck drivers but really everyone needs to take greater care.

Sorry, thatbags, I don't understand that. If everyone has right of way how is the traffic to progress? Think I'm being thick here...

car not care

Worth mentioning here that all traffic on the main road, which includes pedestrians and cyclists on pavements, have right of way at give way or stop junctions. A lot of care drivers don't seem to know that and pedestrians tend not to chance being knocked down by a car whose driver thinks s/he has right of way.

Feeling safer and being safer are not necessarily the same thing, Pen

Aly people trade anecdotes on threads like these forevermore, the bottom line is that there are good road users and bad road users, and there are some of each among both cyclists and drivers. As I mentioned above, the TRL statistics show motorists at fault more often than cyclists though.

There was £280 worth of damage when I went over the bonnet of the car that pulled out in front of me 10 years ago.

Not all the morons are on wheels. The narrowest shave DS has had, cycling in London was when a pedestrian, without looking, stepped off the pavement into his path. DS swerved, fell off and very narrowly avoided the wheels of a truck.

Yesterday DD was taking DGS to a party in the car. She slowed ready to stop at the busy junction at the end of her road. Completely out of the blue a cyclist came from the main road's pavement on her left and straight into the road and into the side of her car, bouncing across the bonnet and into the main road. Teenager, no helmet, iPhone ear things in. Police and ambulance called. Fortunately teenager not hurt nor bike damaged. Car with over £300 worth of damage. DD left terribly shaken and DGS extremely upset. Not all the morons are in a car.

I felt safer when I used it!

"there is a raised kerb separating the cycle lane from the road so it is clear, safer and fast and I get annoyed when that lane is ignored "

No, these are the paths that are more dangerous, here's a short paper by John Franklin explaining why. For a fuller explanation, read Cyclecraft.

I am very aware, as a former regular cyclist, that Cycle Lanes have a habit of running out/ being parked on etc. so it sometimes feels safer to avoid using them. However in one area I know well there is a raised kerb separating the cycle lane from the road so it is clear, safer and fast and I get annoyed when that lane is ignored and the already narrowed road made even narrower by cyclists not using a good lane!
Cyclists are as mixed a bunch as drivers in terms of their road awareness and some can be just as stupid and thoughtless as some drivers. (& pedestrians!)

Roses [like]

The Institute of Advanced Motorists are also endorsing Franklin's advice too, I see:

www.iam.org.uk/cyclists/insight-cyclists

I haven't read it, but it reportedly contains the same warnings as Cyclrecraft about the hazards of using cycle paths.

Cyclists have every right to be on the road as anyone else, but that means they can do the same dangerous things as well at times. I treat them with way more caution than cars though, not least because they can be more easily injured, and prefer the slow cyclists, who I can pass when it's safe, to the lycra clad ones hunched over and going like the clappers who seem to put on an extrea turn of speed when they are being overtaken.

It was only an example, I wasn't suggesting that there are three killed in every car crash, I was just trying to demonstrate the effect of increased deaths offsetting fewer accidents.

I think I would have to go into the statistics with a fine tooth comb. And I probably cant be bothered.

On face value though, I would have thought that when there is a car accident that results in death, that it is unusual for there to be the driver, the passenger and a bystander killed.

I sort of see your point.

Not sure how many people get run over by a cyclist.

Not sure how interesting my whittereings on this have become either!

Hartog et al are comparing life expectancy, a grazed knee isn't really life threatening. Being unfit reduces your life expectancy seven times more than the risk of being run over whilst cycling.

Imagine 300 cycling accidents in which only the rider dies, compared with 100 car accidents in which the driver, the passenger and one other bystander die. At face value there are three times as many fatal bike crashes, but the total number of deaths are the same in each case. This is why Hartog et al are arguing that the death rate for motoring and cycling are similar.

Arguing that you are more likely to die if you cycle to work than drive to work may be true, but it ignores other casualties. That brings us back to the inegalitarian nature of motoring that I referred to above.

Thanks crun but I shall keep to my whip. It is very flexible and also has a ribbon fastened to it which extends the length of the whip as the wind waves it about. Any vehicle hitting it must be VERY close and would knock me off anyway. The flag in your link does not look flexible and would be snapped (with bits flying off) if it was hit.

Yes it does thanks. I am beginning to get it now.