Sad B*str*ds

Jumpy

TimAllen is The Citizen. The writing style is the same.

Raam

TimAllen wrote: »

Cyclists should be in single file and should not tailgate one another - especially on a country road

LOL, there goes the rest of the racing season!

TimAllen

el tonto wrote: »

Who is saying they do? I think most people on this forum would agree that cyclists riding two abreast should move to single file and/or pull in if traffic starts piling up behind them and there are no overtaking opportunities.

specsavers all round methinks - not going to reference the posts, just look back over the last page or two and you will find them.
You are putting a lot of caveats up there - just move into single file if you're holding anyone back, then you dont have a problem. The problem with teh TOB types here is that they want to interpret all the exceptions in such a way to suit themselves which ultimately adds up a lack of respect for the fact that, cyclists are slow moving vehicles and must give way to faster vehicles. Some thick headed types just decide " I have equal rights to be here" or "he can just wait until I'm done".
Or maybe you think its all the motorists fault?

Chips Lovell

QUICK, THEY'RE FILMIN' CYCLISTS!

TimAllen

el tonto wrote: »

Indeed, the context being a discussion that the ROTR once gave the impression that cycling two abreast was illegal and now says it is legal in certain circumstances.

you really are a petty pedantic poster arent you. The context was one where other posters were stating that riding two abreast was perfectly legal in the context of having traffic behind them.
Pretty petty and disrespectful reply from you there el tonto

Chips Lovell

TimAllen wrote: »

..just move into single file if you're holding anyone back, then you dont have a problem.

Exactly. Now, having riden with half the people on this forum and various cycling clubs around Dublin, i can say that this is exactly what happens.

TimAllen

Jumpy wrote: »

TimAllen is The Citizen. The writing style is the same.

TimAllen is ... wait for it ....... not The Citizen, though I am a citizen

Chips Lovell

TimAllen wrote: »

you really are a petty pedantic poster arent you. The context was one where other posters were stating that riding two abreast was perfectly legal in the context of having traffic behind them.
Pretty petty and disrespectful reply from you there el tonto

Now now, play nice.

ROK ON

TimAllen wrote: »

I think the bold part sums up your situation - and I dont mean to be condescending.

Cyclists should be in single file and should not tailgate one another - especially on a country road

I didnt ask what people shuld do, I asked what you think an experienced driver would find easier.

So the only permissable form of cycling is solo cycling then?

What happens if, I as a solo cyclist, catch up with a a cyclist. Should I hang back to ensure that I am not tailgaiting or should I try to overtake them and move ahead, as I am moving faster. What happens if someone cycles up behind me and I cant shake them from my tail.

Honestly, if you really drive like the way that it sounds, then I feel sorry for you. You seem to be one of these individuals that is always looking for the bad in life. Another Victor Meldrew. Leave it go, it is a cancer and will eat you up.

Cyclists are generally out for a cycle, drivers generally out for a drive. I honestly believe that 98% of folks out on their vehicles are just trying to go somewhere, but are not out to make peoples lives a misery.

For example as a novice driver, I try not to drive quickly. Many of the roads that I drive on have a speed limit of 100km, but I rarely go ther. Most likely stay between 60 and 70km. The roads are too bad, windy with very little clearence. I make a choice that I would prefer not to drive safely. If someone wants to overtake me, fine. But I am not aiming to ruin someones day. If a driver behind me gets irate, then tough - report me to the gradai. I will take my chances in court. In your world Tim, I would be committing a grevious crime by driving at approximately 70% of the limit.
Also, the only place that I can improve my driving and become experienced is by driving.

petethedrummer

Nietzschean wrote: »

so cyclists should be a car length apart on country roads and always in single file? jebus that would be boring...

What if a truck is attempting to pass a club training group of 20 cyclists? (not a large number for a club).


Lets assume a length of 50ft for a truck and 10% room for the truck to adjust its speed, 55ft.

55ft = 16.76 meters
16.76 m * (20-1) = 318.44 metres....(now this is just an approximation).

So the training group of riders would have to string out to roughly 318 metres.

How does this extend to the Ring of Kerry cycle with over 3500 riders on the roads of Kerry?

16.76 metres * (3500-1) = 58643.24m or approx 59 km of individually spaced riders.

TimAllen wrote: »

Cyclists should be in single file and should not tailgate one another - especially on a country road

We will also need a definition for a country road. I presume it would mean any road outside out of a city or town with a 80 or 100 kmph speed limit.

Or would it also extend to small 1 road country villages with a speed limit of 50kmph?

Motorways obviously are forbidden.


Edit: Can someone check those figures? I didn't get much sleep last night. And Tim can you state if this is the type of scenario you would like to see?

furiousox

Jumpy wrote: »

TimAllen is The Citizen. The writing style is the same.

I was thinking TimAllen might be KONA!:D

TimAllen

petethedrummer wrote: »

What if a truck is attempting to pass a club training group of 20 cyclists? (not a large number for a club).


Lets assume a length of 50ft for a truck and 10% room for the truck to adjust its speed, 55ft.

55ft = 16.76 meters
16.76 m * (20-1) = 318.44 metres....(now this is just an approximation).

So the training group of riders would have to string out to roughly 318 metres.

How does this extend to the Ring of Kerry cycle with over 3500 riders on the roads of Kerry?

16.76 metres * (3500-1) = 58643.24m or approx 59 km of individually spaced riders.



We will also need a definition for a country road. I presume it would mean any road outside out of a city or town with a 80 or 100 kmph speed limit.

Or would it also extend to small 1 road country villages with a speed limit of 50kmph?

Motorways obviously are forbidden.


Edit: Can someone check those figures? I didn't get much sleep last night. And Tim can you state if this is the type of scenario you would like to see?

The assumption you are making is that a group of cyclists can or should be considered one unit. Cyclists are individually accountable and responsible for themselves on the road regardless of whether they are in great numbers or just a solitary cyclist. The behaviour of an individual roaduser is by reference to just themselves. So your maths of how far spread out a group of cyclists should be is not relevant. Individual cyclist should cycle in single file (in heavy traffic or if inconveniencing other road users) and leave enough room between him and the vehicle in front - thats it. The effect that has on the road by reference to the number of road users is irrelevant because, yes, you've guessed it, the cyclist is responsible for only himself not for 100 or 1000 other cyclists that may or may not be on the same road.

turbine?

Sorry, just back from a cycle, on country roads. All went well and the "Motorists" were all well behaved. (Unlike last time when somebody in a blue opel corsa sprayed water at me as they passed on a corner)

Anyway Tim I cant find the page numbers on the for mentioned website: www.rulesoftheroad.ie

Is it in the book you are referring to? I don't have it.

I thought that cyclists did have an equal right to be on the road

Chips Lovell

turbine? wrote: »

Anyway Tim I cant find the page numbers on the for mentioned website: www.rulesoftheroad.ie

Here you go

redmenace1

googlehead wrote: »

Was out cycling last night when this twat, drove up in behind me and then braked hard trying to throw me off my bike, Then he looked over at his mate laughing, I swear If I caught up with him I would have put my foot in the side of his car.:mad:

I've had plenty of similar incidents over the years. My new strategy is total pacifism. Cars hurt!
Anyway going up Greenhills Rd in Walkinstown 3 weeks ago, a car pulled alongside & passenger roared abuse at me, before car sped off. I felt like giving them the V sign and screaming back, but instead I gave them a cheery hello and thumbs up.:P
Got to next lights and I passed them slowly on inside, I smiled and kept going. So as they passed me the next time the abuse became a shout.
Got to next lights (if you know Greenhills you know about junctions) and I went by with a smile. Again I looked just to check they weren't going to do anything stupid and this time the driver gave me the thumbs up! The passenger sat motionless!
Ok these things can go other way but I have a pain in the ar*e trying to win battles that invariably you can't. In your case Googlehead, take the reg number if you can (or at least make /model) & report it to Gardai. some of them do follow it up...........I had three guys arrested on the spot in Rathcoole a few years ago when a really sound Garda followed up my complaint and we saw the skangers parked up at the shops! (they had thrown a bottle at me and hit me going past!):D
I know it happens so fast and it ain't easy but like I said my new policy worked twice - btw I still let out the odd roar:rolleyes:

Gavin

Yo Tim, chuck your video up on youtube will you ? I'd like to see what I shouldn't be doing.

petethedrummer

TimAllen wrote: »

The assumption you are making is that a group of cyclists can or should be considered one unit. Cyclists are individually accountable and responsible for themselves on the road regardless of whether they are in great numbers or just a solitary cyclist. The behaviour of an individual roaduser is by reference to just themselves. So your maths of how far spread out a group of cyclists should be is not relevant. Individual cyclist should cycle in single file (in heavy traffic or if inconveniencing other road users) and leave enough room between him and the vehicle in front - thats it. The effect that has on the road by reference to the number of road users is irrelevant because, yes, you've guessed it, the cyclist is responsible for only himself not for 100 or 1000 other cyclists that may or may not be on the same road.

Ok we can assume all 20 riders in the training group are individually accountable, which I had originally assumed anyway and also that they are very obedient.
They have chosen to ride together but will act individually in response to traffic.

Truck approaches from behind. Each indiviual rider choses to ride single file in accordance with the single file rule. We now have 20 riders riding single file, all of their own chosing.
You now suggest they must not tail gate. each of them is aware of this new rule and individually choses to spread out with a truck length between them.

You are then left with 20 riders spaced out waiting for the truck to overtake. All of their own chosing.


Edit: I also I forgot to factor in the length of the bike in the original example

turbine?

ok so:

"Do cycle in single file if cycling beside another person would endanger, inconvenience or block other traffic or pedestrians."

but:

Tim, you say "Cyclists have no right to determine when it is safe for a motorist to overtake, and have no right to cycle two abreast and hold back traffic"

How long is reasonable to have a car behind you, if your two abrest, before it becomes an inconvenience or that your holding up traffic? Maybe the motorist is just waiting for a safe overtaking oppurtunity and would prefer you remain two abrest?

lukester

I know it's Friday and all, but this thread is causing me to lose the will to live.










There, that's better.

turbine?

LOL
I am leaving ye to it now.
Be nice everyone!

Chips Lovell

Cipollini's losing his touch. There's only one woman in that photo.

TimAllen

petethedrummer wrote: »

Ok we can assume all 20 riders in the training group are individually accountable, which I had originally assumed anyway and also that they are very obedient.
They have chosen to ride together but will act individually in response to traffic.

Truck approaches from behind. Each indiviual rider choses to ride single file in accordance with the single file rule. We now have 20 riders riding single file, all of their own chosing.
You now suggest they must not tail gate. each of them is aware of this new rule and individually choses to spread out with a truck length between them.

You are then left with 20 riders spaced out waiting for the truck to overtake. All of their own chosing.


Edit: I also I forgot to factor in the length of the bike in the original example

what new rule? I haven mentioned anything thats new, its all been ther for years. Funnily enough, the hypothetical situations being brought up seem to all involve trucks yet the real life issues raised by posters earlier all involve cars.
I am guessing but, somehow I think cyclists get the hell in out of the way of a truck but get brave and brazen when its just a car and decide they know best for this motorist!!!

petethedrummer

TimAllen wrote: »

what new rule? I haven mentioned anything thats new, its all been ther for years.

This new rule...

TimAllen wrote: »

Cyclists ....should not tailgate one another - especially on a country road

I would have assumed tailgating would make it a shorter line to pass, but maybe you have other ideas.

TimAllen wrote: »

Funnily enough, the hypothetical situations being brought up seem to all involve trucks yet the real life issues raised by posters earlier all involve cars.

We can substitute cars for trucks if you like. Its the same as both my examples above but with shorter gaps. I was just covering the worst case scenario. I can recalculate the figures if you like. I will also add in the length of the bike.


Edit: I suppose we must also thrash out what constitutes tailgating on a bike. This could go on forever but I am willing to keep going if everyone* else is.


* And I mean everyone on both sides. We need an even debate.

lukester

el tonto wrote: »

Cipollini's losing his touch. There's only one woman in that photo.

I think that was on a Monday.

Later that week

TimAllen

petethedrummer wrote: »

This new rule...

I would have assumed tailgating would make it a shorter line to pass, but maybe you have other ideas.


We can substitute cars for trucks if you like. Its the same as both my examples above but with shorter gaps. I was just covering the worst case scenario. I can recalculate the figures if you like. I will also add in the length of the bike.


Edit: I suppose we must also thrash out what constitutes tailgating on a bike. This could go on forever but I am willing to keep going if everyone* else is.


* And I mean everyone on both sides. We need an even debate.

Tailgating is not a new rule - cyclists want equality, there you go

obviously you have not read my post on the issue of your maths being irrelevant - its still irrelevant regardless of whether your talking trucks or cars

niceonetom

TimAllen wrote: »

I, and an increasing number of motorists keep video recording on every journey now - it comes in handy in a dispute, not usually for cyclists in my experience, more likely in a collision with another motorist.) I have had two occasions to complain to cycling clubs regarding their members behaviour on the road including causing huge traffic tailbacks and another where cyclists were holding onto a support car preventing motorists from overtaking.
On the latter this was denied until I mentioned to the club chairman that I had video evidence and that if he believed I was lying then I would take it up with the gardai - he met me and viewed the footage and agreed that such behaviour was wrong and thanked me for being willing to sort it out without involving the gardai. I got a full apology from the offenders and a promise that such behaviour would not be repeated (I am taking them at their word as "gentlemen")

I'm calling BULLSHIT on that whole story. Tim, you're full of it. Prove me wrong.

TimAllen wrote: »

The assumption you are making is that a group of cyclists can or should be considered one unit. Cyclists are individually accountable and responsible for themselves on the road regardless of whether they are in great numbers or just a solitary cyclist. The behaviour of an individual roaduser is by reference to just themselves. So your maths of how far spread out a group of cyclists should be is not relevant. Individual cyclist should cycle in single file (in heavy traffic or if inconveniencing other road users) and leave enough room between him and the vehicle in front - thats it. The effect that has on the road by reference to the number of road users is irrelevant because, yes, you've guessed it, the cyclist is responsible for only himself not for 100 or 1000 other cyclists that may or may not be on the same road.

If group cycling is illegal, which you seem to think, you should probaly ask the guards why they generously marshal various sportives and charity rides. Do you think the guards are out there facilitating lawlessness?


This thread is living up to its title .

Chips Lovell

niceonetom wrote: »

If group cycling is illegal, which you seem to think, you should probaly ask the guards why they generously marshal various sportives and charity rides. Do you think the guards are out there facilitating lawlessness?

Which is why it's pointless to even engage in these "tailgaiting" assertions.

petethedrummer

TimAllen wrote: »

Tailgating is not a new rule - cyclists want equality, there you go

I certainly don't want equal rules to cars. There are many areas in which the laws are absurd for both modes of transport. I only want to understand what you mean when you say cyclists shouldn't tailgate on a country road. Thats all. If you have changed your mind thats fine. I won't take anyone up over a change of opinion. Mine has changed on a number of cycling (helemts red lights etc.) and car issues.

TimAllen wrote: »

obviously you have not read my post on the issue of your maths being irrelevant - its still irrelevant regardless of whether your talking trucks or cars

Ok we can forget the actual numbers, now that the tailgating issue has become redundant, has it? So you want cyclists in all cases to string out single file if they are impeding traffic, irrespective of the group size. Or should a large group split into smaller single file groups?

The only reason I keep going back to the group scenario, is because group riding is the only time I have felt following traffic might have cause to think I was part of a cycling activity that was unduly holding up traffic.

I would like to know from your point of view what the group should do as indivuals. I have done alot of driving (without major incident!) and I know how I would like a group to act, but I'm not sure my views represent the driving majority.

The tax man

unionman wrote: »

*groan*

Just in the door from Wesley....yeah?:D

Raam

lukester wrote: »

I know it's Friday and all, but this thread is causing me to lose the will to live.










There, that's better.

Who's the hottie underneath the bird?:pac: