Cycling and THAT Late Late Show segment

RGS

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

To be discussed on Liveline this afternoon (Radio One 1.45pm)

another opportunity for the anti cyclist to have a pop.

Wishbone Ash

Nika Bolokov wrote: »

... that regularly cycles 3 abreast on the N14 in Donegal, a narrow bendy road, causing a tailback....

The N14 is a national primary route and part of the Letterkenny/Dublin route. I travel on it very regularly. The way you describe it, it sounds as if it's a boreen with grass along the centre. If cyclists were legally travelling 2 abreast, you'd still have to wait until it's safe tp pass. Why is it that journeys made in a vehicle with an internal combustion engine are deemed to be more important.

(I don't know of any club which would allow members to travel 3 abreast anyway).

07Lapierre

Nika Bolokov wrote: »

Having this turn in to an official complaint will do nothing for motorist cyclist relations.

There's a cycling club , I don't know the name but have been stuck behind it many times, that regularly cycles 3 abreast on the N14 in Donegal, a narrow bendy road, causing a tailback. The driving up there can be bad enough but you have people trying to overtake the large group at high speed as they get frustrated being stuck doing 30km on a 100km road with no alternative.

That's the type of thing in sure she was referring too. Which most would agree is not good practice.

There is a problem with arrogance amongst some cycling groups and I say that as a cyclist but no less stupid motorists.

Pitching this into a battle wont help.

If you are stuck behind a cycling club on a regular basis.... gat a dash cam, record their activity and post the video here and we’ll assist you with the identification. I too would be surprised if they are 3 abreast... I would suggest that they are probably 2 abreast, but rather are cycling in an “untidy” fashion, which gives the impression of being 3 abreast.

Remember, once the cyclist keep to the left of the center line, they are not doing anything wrong and it is up to the motorists who wants to overtake them, to do so only when it’s safe and to do so by crossing over the center line and giving the cyclists as much room as possible.

The cyclists also have an obligation to facilitate the overtake by cycling two abreast and keeping the group as tight as possible.

Weepsie

1bryan wrote: »

Bryan Dobson is a long-time cycle commuter.

He also came to the aid of my OH's friend when she had a cycling accident. A decent citizen all round

ThisRegard

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

To be discussed on Liveline this afternoon (Radio One 1.45pm)

Tombo2001

worth looking at the comments in the Irish Times Facebook page on the cycling column.

https://www.facebook.com/irishtimes/

As mentioned earlier - I really dont think relations between cyclists and motorists could be any worse, that is just pure contempt.

07Lapierre

Tombo2001 wrote: »

worth looking at the comments in the Irish Times Facebook page on the cycling column.

https://www.facebook.com/irishtimes/

As mentioned earlier - I really dont think relations between cyclists and motorists could be any worse, that is just pure contempt.

Have to admit i did laugh at this one: " In other news. Farm animals have lodged a complaint over comparisons to cyclists"

Grassey

I'm perplexed as to how someone can think that only having cyclists contraflow on all roads would be better?

Double file 30k/h into oncoming traffic what could go wrong?

Hugh Jampton

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

The N14 is a national primary route and part of the Letterkenny/Dublin route. I travel on it very regularly. The way you describe it, it sounds as if it's a boreen with grass along the centre. If cyclists were legally travelling 2 abreast, you'd still have to wait until it's safe tp pass. Why is it that journeys made in a vehicle with an internal combustion engine are deemed to be more important.

(I don't know of any club which would allow members to travel 3 abreast anyway).

In fairness, neither is the N14 a wide, straight road with hard shoulders, either. Two abreast is fine, and legal. It has been odd though watching some people pile onto Maura Derrane as if she was a heretic for burning.

07Lapierre

Hugh Jampton wrote: »

In fairness, neither is the N14 a wide, straight road with hard shoulders, either. Two abreast is fine, and legal and safer for both Cyclists and Motorists .

FYP

Duckjob

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

To be discussed on Liveline this afternoon (Radio One 1.45pm)

If anyone can bring balance and mature discussion to a delicate topic like this it's Joe and his army of culture-vulture listeners :pac:

Snickers Man

According to the Irish Times the Dublin Cycling Campaign has lodged a "serious complaint" with RTE about the matter.

This could be an example of what the great Cycle Dub (Treat yourselves-go check out his YouTube channel) would call "The Streisand Effect"

Hugh Jampton

07Lapierre wrote: »

FYP

In fairness, neither is the N14 a wide, straight road with hard shoulders, either. Two abreast is fine, and legal. It has been odd though watching some people pile onto Maura Derrane as if she was a heretic for burning.

FMP

LennoxR

First thing, very occasionally, like once on the Enniskerry road, I did see a group of cyclists riding three or four breast, slowly. And it was very annoying, including for me as a cyclist, as I couldn't pass them. I can see why people would see that as arrogant. That is in fairness the only time I have seen that outside of a closed road event.

So sometimes yes cyclists' road etiquette can be bad. As it can for other road users.

But and it's a big but, I agree that this kind of thing on RTE is dangerous, encouraging antipathy towards cyclists. Last year saw a 50% increase in cycling fatalities and in a number of cases, such as the incident in Kildare in February of last year, the driver is being prosecuted. I think most of us have noticed in the past three years or so that the attitudes of motorists towards cyclists is becoming more aggressive.

While this is probably mainly down to the increase of both cars and bikes on the roads, I believe it is also due to parts of the media stirring up animosity towards cyclists. Quite frankly, this has cost lives.

Mercian Pro

An attempt to redress the balance???

http://irishcycle.com/2018/01/15/prime-time-seeking-footage-showing-conditions-for-cycling-in-ireland/

ericzeking

Macy0161 wrote: »

I would agree. However, passes with plenty of space, but where the motorist hasn't waited until they can see far enough ahead to safely complete the manoeuvre are a significant (and underfocused on) issue imo and experience. Both on group spins and solo/ with the family, overtakes happen on or approaching bends and brows of hills/ inclines where there's no way the motorist can see far enough.

I think I could put a number of about 1 per hours riding on this type of occurrence and I ride on largely quiet country roads... as someone doing 8-10 hours on the bike weekly this can wear away at you.

miketv

Matt Cooper will be discussing this item on his show today on todayfm.

Tombo2001

There is one comment on the Irish Times Facebook piece - the guy says 'All cyclists are c**ts' and I kid you not - you click on the guys facebook home page - and the main picture is a of his young daugther cycling a bike.

Another of the nasty comments is from a guy working on an ambulance crew. You would wonder if someone going online to post nasty comments about cyclists should be allowed drive an ambulance.

ThisRegard

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Another of the nasty comments is from a guy working on an ambulance crew. You would wonder if someone going online to post nasty comments about cyclists should be allowed drive an ambulance.

I think I know of that guy you're talking about. He posted similar ****e some months ago, either on Twitter or Facebook and like you I checked who he was and saw he claimed he worked for Dublin Fire Brigade I'm sure it was. I called him out on it and asked how could he have those opinions considering the results of accidents he has to deal with in his job.

He became a bit contrite on being rebuked and used the usual excuse of just venting at that particular time. Obviously he was talking bollox if he's still at it.

AndrewJRenko

LennoxR wrote: »

First thing, very occasionally, like once on the Enniskerry road, I did see a group of cyclists riding three or four breast, slowly. And it was very annoying, including for me as a cyclist, as I couldn't pass them. I can see why people would see that as arrogant. That is in fairness the only time I have seen that outside of a closed road event.

Is it any harder to pass a group 3-4 abreast than 2 abreast?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is it any harder to pass a group 3-4 abreast than 2 abreast?

I've seen this stated more than once, and I can't see how it wouldn't be. The wider the cyclists are, the larger an arc you would have to take to pass. To me it's simple, but maybe I'm missing something?

Of course, you could have 2 abreast riding with a 2 metre gap between them....

magicbastarder

Basil3 wrote: »

I've seen this stated more than once, and I can't see how it wouldn't be. The wider the cyclists are, the larger an arc you would have to take to pass. To me it's simple, but maybe I'm missing something?

if you want to overtake two cyclists, you have to wait until the oncoming lane is visibly clear for a sufficient distance to be able to enter the lane for the overtake.
if you are able to enter the oncoming lane, it no longer matters if you're overtaking one, two or three cyclists, as long as they are all in lane.

what you appear to be referring to is a manouevre where you don't completely leave your own lane, or are unable to do so because of conditions (such as visibility or oncoming traffic). i would question performing any overtake where you think you can complete it without leaving your lane, but would not be comfortable doing it while leaving your lane fully.
in short, an overtake is an overtake.

MojoMaker

Except when it's a 'slip by and hope the pr1cks don't bitch too much' manoevre :pac:

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

if you want to overtake two cyclists, you have to wait until the oncoming lane is visibly clear for a sufficient distance to be able to enter the lane for the overtake.
if you are able to enter the oncoming lane, it no longer matters if you're overtaking one, two or three cyclists, as long as they are all in lane.

what you appear to be referring to is a manouevre where you don't completely leave your own lane, or are unable to do so because of conditions (such as visibility or oncoming traffic). i would question performing any overtake where you think you can complete it without leaving your lane, but would not be comfortable doing it while leaving your lane fully.
in short, an overtake is an overtake.

I guess if you're going to reduce it down to 'you're performing one overtaking manoeuvre in which the road in front of you is completely clear and you need to go completely into the opposing lane to complete the move', then yes....it makes no difference.

Annie get your Run

Basil3 wrote: »

I guess if you're going to reduce it down to 'you're performing one overtaking manoeuvre in which the road in front of you is completely clear and you need to go completely into the opposing lane to complete the move', then yes....it makes no difference.

When over taking one cyclist you should be doing this. Anyone who isn't is driving dangerously and putting the cyclists life in danger. There is no 'reducing it down to'. This is the way it should be every single time. This is why we need the Minimum Distance Passing Law to be law as opposed to just a rule of the road.

magicbastarder

Basil3 wrote: »

I guess if you're going to reduce it down to 'you're performing one overtaking manoeuvre in which the road in front of you is completely clear and you need to go completely into the opposing lane to complete the move', then yes....it makes no difference.

yes, we call that 'an overtaking manouevre'.
you do realise that for a cyclist, being overtaken into oncoming traffic is not good for the blood pressure? whether the motorist realises it or not, it's an utter dick move.

triggermortis

Annie get your Run wrote: »

When over taking one cyclist you should be doing this. Anyone who isn't is driving dangerously and putting the cyclists life in danger. There is no 'reducing it down to'. This is the way it should be every single time. This is why we need the Minimum Distance Passing Law to be law as opposed to just a rule of the road.

beat me to it!

mr spuckler

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is it any harder to pass a group 3-4 abreast than 2 abreast?

tbf i'd expect it may well be harder if you're also trying to allow 1.5 metres between the car and the outermost cyclist (thinking country road example here).

Macy0161

Basil3 wrote: »

I guess if you're going to reduce it down to 'you're performing one overtaking manoeuvre in which the road in front of you is completely clear and you need to go completely into the opposing lane to complete the move', then yes....it makes no difference.

Is there another way? Can't see how a safe pass can be performed on the majority of regional roads otherwise, even for a single cyclist.

Assuming a 12 foot width (big assumption that they're that wide) - cyclist 2ft/ 60cm from kerb, another 2ft/ 60cm for the cyclist, and 5ft/1.5m for a safe pass - what car would you be driving to not have to go into the opposite direction lane?

magicbastarder

i'm still a little agog at that post.