"AndyP" <
[email protected]> writes:
> "Simon Brooke" <
[email protected]> wrote
>
> > Get a copy of Cyclecraft from the HMSO and read it. It will make a lot more difference to your
> > safety on a bike than a helmet will, for sure.
>
> I might do but it's also a good thing to think for yourself. Here are some reasons why riding
> towards the outside of the lane might be distinctly less safe.
>
> 1. As I said before vehicles might assume you are turning right and undertake you in what might be
> a narrow space...exactly what you are trying to avoid.
Not ever happened in the past forty years; I suppose it could.
> 2. You are a lot closer to the spray of oncoming lorries...unpleasant and obviously potentially
> dangerous if it hinders your vision.
Never experienced this as a problem.
> 3. You would be far less visible to the second vehicle in a line of approaching traffic who might
> therefore mistakenly assume it is safe to overtake the first car in the line before it realises
> you are there.
If some f*cker tries it, you've somewhere safe to go. They'll try it wherever you sit in the lane,
so the further out you are the more escape space you've left yourself. Also, bang a hard fist on the
passenger side window - make enough row to make him think he's actually hit you. Scare the **** out
of him. He won't try it again.
> 4. If a vehicle approaching fast from behind doesn't see you at all or not until braking is too
> late and swerving around you is the only option you are far more likely to get hit.
I don't see that; if someone is driving that badly you'll get hit anyway.
>
> 5. You will annoy other road users and a road full of frustrated road users isn't good for
> anybody.
You cannot be blamed for annoying other road users if you are just using the road in the legitimate,
officially sanctioned manner. It is a *public* road and cyclists are entitled to use it.
> 6. A minority of the frustrated road users might well think "what on earth does that idiot think
> he's doing out there in my way" and deliberately pass dangerously closely and cut you up.
In which case stop, take their registration number, and phone the police. Remember
* On a bike, you have exactly as much right - legally - to be on the road as anyone else. You have
exactly as much right to your space in the lane as anyone else. Thats the law.
* If there is a collision - any collision - you are going to be seriously injured, whereas the car
driver is unlikely to be hurt. So you need to ride to make collisions less likely.
The three major causes of severe injury collisions involving cyclists are
(i) Motorist overtaking cyclist too close - so do NOT let them try to share your lane space.
(ii) Motorist turning left across the path of a cyclist - so do NOT let yourself be in a position
where a motorist in the left turning lane can pass you on your right.
(iii) Motorist in parked car opens door - so do NOT ride in the 'door zone' alongside parked cars.
Get out towards the outside of your lane and stay there - this is about saving your *life*, not
about worrying about whether some impatient idiot is getting frustrated.
> I can see that riding as close to the kerb as possible often isn't a good thing but I can't see
> how "towards the outside of the lane" is any safer either.
> On narrower roads you don't need to be that far out to prevent cars squeezing through the gap
> between you and oncoming traffic and on wider roads if you are that far out you'll be leaving a
> tempting gap between you and the kerb for undertaking. Is this really what "Cyclecraft" says?
Yes: that's the official government advice, and it is so for a reason; other approaches cost the
National Health Service a lot of money.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke)
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; of 90+ years of protection, but a cure for cancer, only 14? -- user 'Tackhead', in /.
discussion of copyright law, 22/05/02
