Michael MacClancy tried to scribble ...
> In message <
[email protected]>, Tony Raven <
[email protected]> writes
>> In
news:[email protected], Michael MacClancy
>> <
[email protected]> typed:
>>>
>>> He didn't run into the back, he went into the rear near_side_.
>>
>> Back or nearside - makes no difference if he ran into either from behind. The only situation
>> where he would not be at fault in that situation is the classic overtake and turn immediately
>> left manoever where the drivers actions result in insufficient space. Otherwise Section 105 of
>> the Highway Code applies:
>>
>> "Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear.
>> You should leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely
>> if it suddenly slows down or stops. The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall
>> stopping distance"
>>
>>
>> Tony
>>
>
> So what this means is the following. You're riding along a road and a car passes you and then
> takes up a position just in front of you. You're to the side and one inch behind the bumper. The
> car maintains this position because of slow moving traffic. (Not crawling, but doing 16 mph or
> similar, a speed you can keep up with.) What you have to do then is fall back to provide adequate
> stopping distance. Another car does the same and another and an...
>
> You never get yourself out of the danger zone and you never get anywhere.
>
> I know there are people who say you shouldn't be to the side, you should be in the lane. But
> cyclists are constantly doing this, indeed for slower cyclists they might have to do it.
>
> The vehicle in front is not always blameless when shunted from behind despite what some people
> might think.
But that's the same argument that is cried out when cyclists moan at tailgaters on motorways .. Now
which is it to be ? Follow the highway code, or your idea of good practice ?
--
Digweed