Safer cycling, we can make a difference /MPDL thread

Arcade_Tryer

It's an excellent proposal.

Even if people don't entirely comply with the new law, and enforcement is lax, people will be in general more educated concerning the distance required and many will at least attempt to make some kind of an effort, ensuring the law still has a positive effect. It may change drivers' behaviour which is key.

Tenzor07

The Taxi drivers vehemently oppose the minimum passing distance proposal! (well i'm so surprised!!)


So they won't be able to cut past cyclists with a wing mirrors length at high speed in the bus lane whilst beeping the horn at the same time now eh?

taxi-fares-set-to-increase-if-new-law-making-it-an-offence-for-drivers-to-pass-close-to-a-cyclist-are-brought-in/

Leroy42

Did speeding fines result in higher prices for customers? What about drink driving laws?

What nonsense. First off the taxi driver has no ability to increase prices, the regulator does. Second, why would a customer have the pay the fine for a driver?

I have heard many people comment on why they don't think this law is useful, but that really pushes the limits

magicbastarder

what does 'But there is nothing to stop the cyclist from keeping his distance' mean?
did he mean the opposite?

Tenzor07

Leroy42 wrote: »

Did speeding fines result in higher prices for customers?

Any Taxi's i've seen only speed when there's no passengers, and go slow when you're a paying passenger....

Annie get your Run

magicbastarder wrote: »

what does 'But there is nothing to stop the cyclist from keeping his distance' mean?
did he mean the opposite?

Yeah I'd imagine he means that a cyclist can cycle close to a taxi :rolleyes: I just tweeted the article to the NPHTA saying I hope he was misquoted. We can't let them away with that given they are the biggest offenders (or certainly in my experience).

Pinch Flat

Leroy42 wrote: »

Did speeding fines result in higher prices for customers? What about drink driving laws?

What nonsense. First off the taxi driver has no ability to increase prices, the regulator does. Second, why would a customer have the pay the fine for a driver?

I have heard many people comment on why they don't think this law is useful, but that really pushes the limits

Must be true, it's in The Sun - the paper of record for taxi men

Chiparus

Have to say, drivers are giving me more space while passing since this hit the media.

ThisRegard

Take a look at the Tell us about... thread to see the recent interactions of others with them.

Moflojo

Chiparus wrote: »

Have to say, drivers are giving me more space while passing since this hit the media.

I've been getting the same feeling this past week or so. I've had quite a few drivers cross lanes to overtake me, something that might have been an annual occurrence in the past.

MediaMan

I've been thinking that perhaps the focus on the 1.5 metre aspect of this proposal is a bad idea. This is because it puts the topic on the table in a way that seems unworkable to most people. If instead the initial focus was on safe overtaking of cyclists, then people might be able to find some common ground in principle before arguing the detail.

CramCycle

MediaMan wrote: »

I've been thinking that perhaps the focus on the 1.5 metre aspect of this proposal is a bad idea. This is because it puts the topic on the table in a way that seems unworkable to most people. If instead the initial focus was on safe overtaking of cyclists, then people might be able to find some common ground in principle before arguing the detail.

I respectfully disagree, I have people overtake me with inches to spare and when I talked to them, in a civil manner, they really did not comprehend that they were too close, some of them actually touched me or me them, and yet they still did not see.
Some people need a guide, they are not bad people, they are not malicious but like many of the people I have taught over the years, they are smart enough to function in society but not smart enough to function without society telling them how too.

magicbastarder

i think the 1.5m figure places a false burden of accuracy on the issue. a 'height of the cyclist' passing distance, as an example, might help place the ball back in the motorist's court in terms of it being a reasonable judgment to ask a motorist to make in a limited amount of time.
if there's a supposed '10% +3' allowance on speed limits (and i know that is disputed), when a motorist has a legally mandated measure of speed in the car, enforcing a specific distance with no means of measuring it - from a motorist's point of view, or from an enforcement point of view - seems futile.

plus, as discussed in the other thread, older motorists may not actually know what 1.5m is.

dreamerb

magicbastarder wrote: »

[...] 'height of the cyclist' passing distance [...]

That's exactly what I remember my dad doing, over 30 years ago. I asked "why are you moving out so far?" - His (somewhat ambiguous sounding) reply: "Every cyclist deserves a fall." Me, mildly confused, wondering whether to be horrified: "What??" Him:You overtake so if the cyclist falls, you don't hit them.

Mind you, as a non-cyclist, he was very keen on criticising the gear I cycled home in, not much later. It's been a while, so I don't know if he had a good point.

BTW, my dad never passed a driving test. He was licenced in one of those amnesty periods in the early 70s.

Macy0161

Sorry, I don't want someone passing my children at only their height.

I doubt we're going to see a load of prosecutions for passing at 1.3 or 1.4 meters rather than 1.5.

Some are getting hung up circumstances where common sense will prevail, such as narrow roads, assuming a responsible approach by both parties is taken. Narrow roads aren't the issue in my experience - it's 2 lane roads, with impatient drivers, close passing at speed.

My anecdotal evidence, mainly as a driver witnessing the behaviour of other drivers, is that since this hit the news drivers are giving more time and space. Therefore, even getting it on the agenda, the law is already working.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think the 1.5m figure places a false burden of accuracy on the issue. .

We could just give all cyclists a folding meter stick, to be kept on the crossbar and whipped out in case of any dodgy overtakes. If you can poke the overtaking car with the meter stick, they are too close.

Macy0161

I have to come back on this passing at height "option" - you're essentially making it ok to close pass children! It's a bizarre "option".

Drivers who can't do metric - how do they manage with km/h, distances on road signs in km?

Anyone who already gives appropriate space isn't going to have an issue. The arguing over this really shows how many motorists and commentators think it is acceptable to close pass, and confirms the view of cyclists that many do close pass either deliberately or through ignorance.

Tenzor07

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

We could just give all cyclists a folding meter stick, to be kept on the crossbar and whipped out in case of any dodgy overtakes. If you can poke the overtaking car with the meter stick, they are too close.

TheChizler

Macy0161 wrote: »

I have to come back on this passing at height "option" - you're essentially making it ok to close pass children! It's a bizarre "option".

Obviously it's a rule of thumb for the average adult cyclist, not children. It's easy to imagine the height of an adult cyclist. You'd apply that when overtaking a child, people are stupid but not that stupid.

magicbastarder

also, the last time i had to overtake a six year old cycling on the open road was a good while ago.

Leroy42

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, the last time i had to overtake a six year old cycling on the open road was a good while ago.

Nothing to fret about. We all slow down as we get older.:-)

Moflojo

I still feel like the message about a safe passing distance is starting to get across to drivers. I cycle along Anglesea Road (between Ballsbridge & Donnybrook) a couple of evenings a week and it's usually quite hostile for cyclists, i.e. no bike lanes, winding road, few safe overtaking areas, cars parked on one or both sides of the road. In the past I would've been close-passed on a frequent basis, despite taking the lane for large sections of the road. These past couple of weeks drivers have been holding back until it's safe to pass and have been giving me huge amounts of space when overtaking. Close passes have been the exception rather than the rule. Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.

P.s. I saw THREE separate foxes while cycling home on that route the other night. Three. All healthy and happy-looking, not a bother on them. Life is good. Have a great weekend folks, unless you're Welsh.

RobertFoster

I remember someone posted this video from Scotland a few years ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azvwjYKMbSw

No mention of exact passing distance, but focusing on the cyclist's height as a general rule of thumb. Not ideal for shorter children (as Macy0161 points out), but would a driver not think of their own span instead of eyeballing every cyclist they decide to pass?

Personally I give children a wider berth than adults as from experience they're more prone to wobbling.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, the last time i had to overtake a six year old cycling on the open road was a good while ago.

Which highlights a broader degree of failure on our cycling infrastructure and culture in itself.

CramCycle

There is a kid who goes down the N11 with his Dad, who cannot be much more than 6, and I'll be damned but he is hard to keep up with.

Macy0161

TheChizler wrote: »

Obviously it's a rule of thumb for the average adult cyclist, not children. It's easy to imagine the height of an adult cyclist. You'd apply that when overtaking a child, people are stupid but not that stupid.

Stupid enough they can't get their head around 1.5m apparently...

Corca Baiscinn

missing information

MediaMan wrote: »

I've been thinking that perhaps the focus on the 1.5 metre aspect of this proposal is a bad idea. This is because it puts the topic on the table in a way that seems unworkable to most people. If instead the initial focus was on safe overtaking of cyclists, then people might be able to find some common ground in principle before arguing the detail.

http://www.newstalk.com/listen_back/9/34410/06th_March_2017_-_High_Noon_Part_1/

But Media Man you're the OP! The ROTR page 53 I think does focus on the safe overtaking of cyclists and the RSA has had an extensive advertising campaign about it but still the close and punishment pass stories abound. Listen to the Newstalk interview above by George Hooke of all people with an Australian Researcher in Road Safety about the Queensland experience with MPDL. She says if I recall correctly that enforcement isn't an issue, that the mere fact of there being a specific offence is enough to ensure compliance. She didn't disagree when Hookie asked if the effect was more due to psychology than law. she said that the Queensland trial of 1.5 was made permanent, that other States have either introdued a MPDL or are trialling it

Obviously proof becomes an issue in the event of a collision but once there is a specific offence it will be up to the driver to show that he was allowing a safe overtaking distance, eg by claiming that half his car width was over the broken line

Corca Baiscinn

I haven't figured out how to post images yet but there are lots online of MPD signage from other countries where a MPDL is in place so if it's a normal part of road safety in other countries there is no reason except our sense of exceptionalism why it shouldn't work here.

Pinch Flat

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I haven't figured out how to post images yet but there are lots online of MPD signage from other countries where a MPDL is in place so if it's a normal part of road safety in other countries there is no reason except our sense of exceptionalism why it shouldn't work here.

In fairness, cycling in countries where this signage is in existence is a different experience to Ireland. The "must get past as all costs" gene is not as prevelant. These countries are also more socially mature with a more developed of respect and personal responsibility. In my own experience anyway.

Deep Thought

Pinch Flat wrote: »

In fairness, cycling in countries where this signage is in existence is a different experience to Ireland. The "must get past as all costs" gene is not as prevelant. These countries are also more socially mature with a more developed of respect and personal responsibility. In my own experience anyway.

Fully agree with ya, was driving to work today..narrow road, overtaking cyclist would have meant crossing the white line into oncoming traffic, decided to take my time...car behind beeping the crap outta me...Me..I slammed on the brakes, she backed off and never came near again