Riding >two abreast can be legal?

Discussion in 'Australia and New Zealand' started by mkli, Feb 20, 2006.

  1. mkli

    mkli Guest

    Having a read through the pdf on road rules linked to
    (http://tinyurl.com/g7gwp) by cfsmtb in a previous post, I see this on
    page 5:
    =========================================
    151. Riding a motor bike or bicycle
    alongside more than 1 other rider
    (1) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must
    not ride on a road that is not a multi-lane road
    alongside more than 1 other rider, unless
    subrule (3) applies to the rider.
    (2) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must
    not ride in a marked lane alongside more than
    1 other rider in the marked lane, unless subrule
    (3) applies to the rider.
    (3) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle may
    ride alongside more than 1 other rider if the
    rider is-
    (a) overtaking the other riders; or
    (b) permitted to do so under regulation 403 of
    the Road Safety (Road Rules) Regulations
    1999.
    (4) If the rider of a motor bike or bicycle is
    riding on a road that is not a multi-lane road
    alongside another rider, or in a marked lane
    alongside another rider in the marked lane, the
    rider must ride not over 1.5 metres from the
    other rider.
    (5) In this rule-
    road does not include a road related area, but
    includes a bicycle path, shared path and any
    shoulder of the road.
    =========================================

    What is interesting is in 151.(1), where it reads:

    "..on a road that is not a multi-lane road.."

    Does this mean that on a road with more than one lane in each direction
    it is legal to ride 3 or more abreast?

    - mkli
     
    Tags:


  2. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-21, mkli (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > 151. Riding a motor bike or bicycle
    > alongside more than 1 other rider
    > (1) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must
    > not ride on a road that is not a multi-lane road
    > alongside more than 1 other rider, unless
    > subrule (3) applies to the rider.
    > (2) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must
    > not ride in a marked lane alongside more than
    > 1 other rider in the marked lane, unless subrule
    > (3) applies to the rider.
    > (3) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle may
    > ride alongside more than 1 other rider if the
    > rider is-
    > ...
    >=========================================
    >
    > What is interesting is in 151.(1), where it reads:
    >
    > "..on a road that is not a multi-lane road.."
    >
    > Does this mean that on a road with more than one lane in each direction
    > it is legal to ride 3 or more abreast?


    No. 151.(2) then comes into play. Same conditions, "marked lane"
    instead of "road that is not a multi-lane road".

    --
    TimC
    "A distributed system is one in which I cannot get something done
    because a machine I've never heard of is down." -- Leslie Lamport
     
  3. Theo Bekkers

    Theo Bekkers Guest

    TimC wrote:
    > On 2006-02-21, mkli wrote


    >> "..on a road that is not a multi-lane road.."
    >>
    >> Does this mean that on a road with more than one lane in each
    >> direction it is legal to ride 3 or more abreast?

    >
    > No. 151.(2) then comes into play. Same conditions, "marked lane"
    > instead of "road that is not a multi-lane road".


    So you can technically have two people riding abreast in each lane, with
    another rider passing in each lane?

    Theo
     
  4. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-21, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > TimC wrote:
    >> On 2006-02-21, mkli wrote

    >
    >>> "..on a road that is not a multi-lane road.."
    >>>
    >>> Does this mean that on a road with more than one lane in each
    >>> direction it is legal to ride 3 or more abreast?

    >>
    >> No. 151.(2) then comes into play. Same conditions, "marked lane"
    >> instead of "road that is not a multi-lane road".

    >
    > So you can technically have two people riding abreast in each lane, with
    > another rider passing in each lane?


    Two riders abreast, being passed by two riders abreast, in each lane.
    Nifty, eh? Completely legal CM :)

    --
    TimC
    Anyone seeking the "Relativistic Quantum Mechanics" soft option
    course, may wish to leave now. -- Intro lecture to RQM
     
  5. flyingdutch

    flyingdutch New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    5,700
    Likes Received:
    0
    legalizing 'Chocolate Mango'. Another MBTC food-obsessed initiative :)))
     
  6. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-21, flyingdutch (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >
    > TimC Wrote:
    >>
    >> Two riders abreast, being passed by two riders abreast, in each lane.
    >> Nifty, eh? Completely legal CM :)

    >
    > legalizing 'Chocolate Mango'. Another MBTC food-obsessed initiative
    >:)))


    Our centre has been holding a BBQ every second week for the past 4
    weeks. I have taken over the production of the one coming up.
    Initiatives include eating parts of our Coat of Arms. It seems a
    large proportion of the centre, having not been in Australia that
    long, have never had kangaroo (and those that have, haven't, either).
    Most are keen for it, but some are still offput by eating "boing
    boing". Maybe they would fare better with "Australus"?

    Phear the TimC food factor!

    --
    TimC
    "And Rob convinced me to learn perl. But now that I'm
    sober, I'm having second thoughts." -- Alan J Rosenthal
     
  7. dewatf

    dewatf Guest

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:56:43 +1100, mkli wrote:

    > Does this mean that on a road with more than one lane in each direction
    > it is legal to ride 3 or more abreast?


    No.

    The rules list multilane and non-multilane separately but you can only have
    two riders side by side (unless overtaking).

    The reason for spliting it up is because on a non-mulitlane road you can
    only ride 1.5m apart to make it easier to overtake you, where as that
    doesn't apply on a mulit-lane road where there are other lanes to overtake
    you in.

    dewatf.
     
  8. EuanB

    EuanB New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    877
    Likes Received:
    0
    I suggest you read rule four again.

    4) If the rider of a motor bike or bicycle is
    riding on a road that is not a multi-lane road
    alongside another rider, or in a marked lane
    alongside another rider in the marked lane, the
    rider must ride not over 1.5 metres from the
    other rider.

    The 1.5 metre rule applies in both cases.
     
  9. adam85

    adam85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    486
    Likes Received:
    0
    What's this?
    0 0
    -|- (.)-|-
    /\ /\

    Two men walking abreast. (Hope that crappy ascii art works!)

    Adam
     
  10. adam85

    adam85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    486
    Likes Received:
    0

    bollocks :(
     
  11. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-21, adam85 (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > adam85 Wrote:
    >> What's this?
    >> 0 0
    >> -|- (.)-|-
    >> /\ /\
    >>
    >> Two men walking abreast. (Hope that crappy ascii art works!)

    >
    > bollocks :(


    Almost worked in monospace fonts (which usenet was meant to be,
    dammit!), except that the forums seem to strip off the leading spaces.
    Bet they're using fortran for the text processing part :)

    --
    TimC
    If you tried to understand this, you'd be very confused, in the standard
    way we talk about confusion. -- Some astronomer at a talk.
     
  12. Aeek

    Aeek Guest

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 02:32:12 GMT, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Two riders abreast, being passed by two riders abreast, in each lane.
    >Nifty, eh? Completely legal CM :)


    not sure it stops there.
    2 overtaking 2 overtaking 2 overtaking ... 2 overtaking 2, in the one lane.
    Doesn't that satisfy the wording?


    Andre
     
  13. In article
    <[email protected]>,
    TimC <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Two riders abreast, being passed by two riders abreast, in each lane.


    I think you'll find it's interpreted as *one* rider overtaking two
    riders abreast. If it were two abreast, by definition they wouldn't be
    "overtaking the other riders", but overtaking some of the other riders.

    --
    Shane Stanley
     
  14. Aeek

    Aeek Guest

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:15:07 +1100, Shane Stanley <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I think you'll find it's interpreted as *one* rider overtaking two
    >riders abreast. If it were two abreast, by definition they wouldn't be
    >"overtaking the other riders", but overtaking some of the other riders.


    still 2, there's only one rider that the exception doesn't apply to.

    Andre
     
  15. Euan

    Euan Guest

    TimC <[email protected]> writes:

    > On 2006-02-21, adam85 (aka Bruce)
    > was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    >> adam85 Wrote:
    >>> What's this?
    >>> 0 0
    >>> -|- (.)-|-
    >>> /\ /\
    >>>
    >>> Two men walking abreast. (Hope that crappy ascii art works!)

    >>
    >> bollocks :(

    >
    > Almost worked in monospace fonts (which usenet was meant to be,
    > dammit!), except that the forums seem to strip off the leading spaces.
    > Bet they're using fortran for the text processing part :)


    I think groups.google preseres spaces.

    Works find in Gnus.
    --
    Cheers | ~~ [email protected]
    Euan | ~~ _-\<,
    Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)
     
  16. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-02-21, Aeek (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 02:32:12 GMT, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>Two riders abreast, being passed by two riders abreast, in each lane.
    >>Nifty, eh? Completely legal CM :)

    >
    > not sure it stops there.
    > 2 overtaking 2 overtaking 2 overtaking ... 2 overtaking 2, in the one lane.
    > Doesn't that satisfy the wording?


    One problem: they would have to very thin bikes to fit all within a
    single lane :)



    Left my wallet at work Friday night, left my keys at work tonight. It
    turns out you *can* go to watch Wired to Win at IMAX, realise you
    don't have your keys, ring up RACV bike assist, tell them a very
    convoluted story, and get them to come out and smash your lock with a
    mallet.

    Incidentally, I had mentally written up a report about Wired to Win by
    halfway through, and then forgot it all by the end.

    Suffice is to say, I had a very big grin and tears to my eyes quite
    often. The scenery on a screen that takes up 120 degrees of your
    vision is almost as good as real life, and the Alps are *beautiful*.
    Descending at 95km/h with the riders is *awsome*. And the brain
    documentary was not half bad either. What people get NSF grants for,
    eh?

    --
    TimC
    Stapp's (of Murphy's law fame) Law: the universal aptitude for
    ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle.
     
  17. dewatf

    dewatf Guest

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:34:28 +1100, EuanB wrote:


    > I suggest you read rule four again.

    ....
    > The 1.5 metre rule applies in both cases.


    So it does.


    In which case the rule could have been written simply and logically in
    English as:

    151. Riding a motor bike or bicycle
    alongside more than 1 other rider

    (1) The rider of a motor bike or bicycle must not ride alongside more than
    1 other rider on a road that is not a multi-lane road, or in a marked lane
    alongside more than 1 other rider in the marked lane. This rule does not
    apply if
    (a) the rider is overtaking the other riders; or
    (b) permitted to do so under regulation 403 of
    the Road Safety (Road Rules) Regulations
    1999.

    (2) If the rider of a motor bike or bicycle is riding alongside another
    rider on a road that is not a multi-lane road, or in a marked lane
    alongside another rider in the marked lane, the rider must ride not over
    1.5 metres from the other rider.

    (3) In this rule "road" does not include a road related area, but
    includes a bicycle path, shared path and any shoulder of the road.

    But that would make it easier for people to follow the rule, rather than
    for the lawyers.

    dewatf.
     
  18. Shane Stanley wrote:

    >
    > I think you'll find it's interpreted as *one* rider overtaking two
    > riders abreast. If it were two abreast, by definition they wouldn't be
    > "overtaking the other riders", but overtaking some of the other riders.


    This is how it was spelt out by an educated constable plod one time at
    NCM. One overtaking the pair. Four bicycle side by side in one lane is a
    bit too crowded for my liking anyway.
     
  19. dewatf

    dewatf Guest

    On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:14:14 +1100, Terry Collins wrote:

    > This is how it was spelt out by an educated constable plod one time at
    > NCM. One overtaking the pair.


    > Four bicycle side by side in one lane is a
    > bit too crowded for my liking anyway.


    It's called a peleton

    dewatf.
     
  20. EuanB

    EuanB New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    877
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which has no place on the road. That's something for racing and racing only.

    Golly gosh, are we in agreement here for once dewatf? :)
     
Loading...
Loading...