Dummy opening post
tnegun wrote: » Narrow country road with 2 of the kids today, my 10 year old was 50m ahead and I had the 7 year old beside me. Lovely pleasant cycle and every car we met we either pulled in or the slowed to a crawl and we passed each other but not this pr1ck in an Audi. I got video but image stabilization on the camera has slowed it right down. I reckon he was doing 70kph but it felt faster any way he barely moved and I had to get out of his way. Judge for yourselves https://streamable.com/v52v3w
Seth Brundle wrote: » Cars cannot cross the solid white lines - these indicate a "mandatory cycle lane" which mean it is mandatory for cars not to enter (stupid naming!). As for dashed markings, these really mean nothing.
buffalo wrote: » I went looking for the SI last night but couldn't find it. Driving in non-mandatory track is definitely allowed. As for parking, the ROTR says: I'm not sure how you reconcile "park in a non-mandatory cycle track" with "do not obstruct a cycle track", but anyway.
magicbastarder wrote: » it depends; some of the dashed cycle lanes actually share space with car lanes, so a car could not physically drive in the car lane without occupying the cycle lane too. but in general, i think they should only cross into the cycle lane when they're actually *crossing* the cycle lane.
Wishbone Ash wrote: » It means that you must not obstruct the cycle track EXCEPT where you have to load/unload and have no other viable option. (AFAIK a vehicle loading/unloading must be taxed commercially - i.e. loading your shopping from a supermarket is not permitted).
Mundo7976 wrote: » On the opposite side, my mrs was about to turn left at the seatown roundabout in to swords today, started her maneuver when a dopey cyclist cut inside her whilst going straight on, car behind almost hit her when she jammed on & blew his horn. Cyclists reaction was an i dont care flip of the hand. Doent help the cause!
07Lapierre wrote: » On behalf of us cyclists I do apologize.
Mundo7976 wrote: » Do i have to apologise for all dickhead car drivers now!
CramCycle wrote: » Doesn't look as bad in the video but the driver merged in on me, phone in hand, child in the back seat who I'd say I scared the sh1t out of. Sorry for the language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYKGIamh3tQ
standardg60 wrote: » Maybe the car behind blew the horn to alert her that she was about to turn into an already alongside cyclist who was doing nothing wrong by being to the left travelling straight on. They are not going to be aware of an indicator (if even on) if they're alongside while the mrs was only looking to the right.
buffalo wrote: » However, if the cycle track is marked with non-mandatory line markings (RRM 023), that restriction doesn't apply to parking while loading/unloading for up to thirty minutes. I can't see a restriction on the type of vehicle.
buffalo wrote: » This was annoying me, so I went digging last night... SI 332/2012: Those signs are respectively, cycle track, shared path/cycle track and contra-flow cycle track. So no parking in those tracks. Article 5 (of 274/1998) makes an exception though: RRM 023 is the line marking for a non-mandatory lane. (RRM 022 is the line marking for a mandatory lane.) So, if a cycle track has a sign, you're not allowed park in it - no distinction between mandatory and non-mandatory, what matters if there's round blue sign (RUS 009, RUS 058) or a contra-flow sign (RUS 059). However, if the cycle track is marked with non-mandatory line markings (RRM 023), that restriction doesn't apply to parking while loading/unloading for up to thirty minutes. I can't see a restriction on the type of vehicle. I am not a lawyer and the Road Traffic Acts are a mess in general and desperately need to be amalgamated into one coherent Act, but that's my reading of it. edit: posted in legislation thread - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=117280124&postcount=273
elchupanebrey wrote: » ....cant figure out their thinking
Mundo7976 wrote: » Wrong. He sped through as she was already making the maneuver, as i said above. We have video of it. Driver behind was in agreement with the horn blow as gestured afterwards.
standardg60 wrote: » Fair. Why not post the video, don't see why a near miss caused by reckless cycling wouldn't be any less relevant here.
CramCycle wrote: » Indeed, although having seen some of the reasons drivers beep, I suspect he was giving out to the other driver for stopping and nearly catching them out, rather than agreeing that the cyclist was a douchebag.
sy_flembeck wrote: » I detest that stretch. Even during the 2km lockdown it was rotten. It was named in a recent report as one of the hotspots for cyclist fatalities and injuries
CramCycle wrote: » Got overtaken/attempted run over by a turning Quashqai at the Boghall road junction, local, on the phone, yellow plates, I was just so fed up with it I stopped before she turned into my rear wheel. I just knew as she looked down at the screen as she was talking (is this a new thing that phones are carried in front of your face but horizontally, like an extension of your chin?) that I either had to hammer it or stop. It's just all gone to sh1t.