nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Dual carriageway cycling

ccmp

Cycled on normal commute route this morning. South link dual carriageway from airport roundabout to town still quiet. No hard shoulder just yellow line and kerb and concrete wall outside that.
Holding the inside lane about 1/3 out. Buzzed by 2 cars, horns blowing just as they passed me both doing about 100, even though outside lane was free.
One of them still at the next lights with window rolled down to tell me that I shouldn't be on road.
What is the story with cycling on dual carriageway?
Regardless, no excuse for driving that close at speed.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Raam

You can cycle on 'em. Some people are just jerks.

Solair

You shouldn't be able to cycle on that road, it is lethal as it is a converted rail line with high walls and no hard shoulder.

It is one of the narrowest and most dangerous stretches of dual-carriage way ever built in Ireland and is practically the same dimensions as a tunnel, other then the fact that it has no roof.

I saw a woman with a buggy walking along the outer lane once and honestly, I thought she should have been arrested.

It's a poor design and it's a pity that cycleways were not included when it was built in the early 80s, but it's just not safe for cyclists or anything other than cars.

There are signs banning pedestrians, albeit not very clear signage and I do not understand why cyclists are on it in the first place.

There are loads of alternative routes out that way.

It might be technically legal to use it on a bike, but it is not very advisable.

For those unfamiliar with it :

their actions reinforces the need to stay out in the lane. They'd pass you even closer if you were nearer to the curb (scientifically proven). At least, 1/3 out, you've somewhere to go if pushed, and not be smeared on that concrete wall.

Richard

Don't think there's a problem with cycling on dual carriageways. Only motorways.

In the UK, at least, there are some dual carriageways where you can't cycle, but these are clearly marked "No cyclists" or similar.

C3PO

Regardless of the legalities I wouldn't cycle on that particular road, you're just leaving yourself open to abuse or worse!

seamus

ccmp wrote: »

Cycled on normal commute route this morning. South link dual carriageway from airport roundabout to town still quiet. No hard shoulder just yellow line and kerb and concrete wall outside that.

I would always be wary in those scenarios. The problem is not so much being buzzed, but tailgaters, particularly in convoy.
So the first guy sees you, moves around you, second guy tailgating follows his lead, third guy isn't really paying attention and he can't see you because he's tailgating and by the time he's spotted you, you're bouncing off his bonnet.

Holding the inside lane about 1/3 out. Buzzed by 2 cars, horns blowing just as they passed me both doing about 100, even though outside lane was free.

When this happens, it usually means that they weren't paying attention and got a fright. Naturally it's your fault that they nearly hit you, so they beep.

One of them still at the next lights with window rolled down to tell me that I shouldn't be on road.

Best response is always just to ask "why", because then you can laugh at whatever their lame reason is.

Solair

It's because most motorists cannot believe that Cork City Council is so irresponsible that it allows pedestrians and cyclists on a stretch of road that nearly needs tunnel rules applied to it.

Pedestrians and cyclists simply should not be on that stretch of the South Link. There are other stretches of dual-carriage way around Cork which have had hard-shoulders removed to allow for extra exit lanes and some of these also have 120km/h speed limits (Even though they're not motorway).

They're not very cyclist-friendly, but there are alternative routes. Perhaps the City Council should signpost them.

While it may be possible to pull out into the fast lane in light traffic, that road's regularly very busy.

The speed limits along that stretch of the south link are also nuts. There are 100km/h speed limits when you come off the Kinsale Road Roundabout which lead you straight into traffic lights!

That whole stretch ought to be 60km/h max from the Kinsale Road into the City Centre.

Plastik

Technically there's no law against cycling that road and it's the quickest way into town from the Kinsale roundabout, but it's a nasty stretch and I usually try to avoid it unless it's early AM.

ccmp

We all make calls on what roads to cycle. I'm comfortable with that route as I usually come in that road at 6.30. I never use it in the evening as it is too busy (and dangerous as result). This morning I came in at 7.30. At that time you have guys rushing to work. Traffic had loads of time to move into fast lane to overtake. 2 trucks had already passed me safely.
Both cars had plenty opportunity to overtake safely but chose to blow by me hooting late to give me a fright.
There are other routes which I take in evening but that run is great for a fast hard spin uninterrupted by lights etc. (i come in from ballincollig side)
Exchange at lights was quite robust but was taken aback by reference to law regarding cycling on duals.

enas

ccmp wrote: »

Exchange at lights was quite robust but was taken aback by reference to law regarding cycling on duals.

Rule of thumb is whatever they say, it is bull****. If they were such good drivers that they knew every possible rule with the finest level of details, they wouldn't have any trouble changing lane and pass you safely at the first place (amazing how many drivers find this manoeuvre very hard to accomplish).

In fact, there is no situation I can see where a driver's dangerous behaviour can be justified and the cyclist is to be blamed (apart from the obvious illegalities, such as running red lights and cycling on the motorway, but even then it doesn't provide any grounds for taking the law into your hands and apply any sort of punitive action).

Solair, your saying that cycling on this road is crazy is just your own judgement. I wouldn't cycle there either (South Douglas road is more direct for me). But it is perfectly legal as you say, and should cause no distress to any normal driver. I never had any sort of difficulty safely passing cyclists on that stretch of road while driving. In fact, as a driver, I'd rather encounter cyclists on dual carriageways where I can easily pass, even in heavy traffic (unless it's so heavy that anyway I won't go any much faster than the cyclist, which is usually the case at rush hours), than on a busy two-lane road, with heavy oncoming traffic. I'm not getting your point about tunnel rules either. Are there any specific rule concerning tunnels that I'm unaware of? Do you reckon tunnels as such are dangerous for cyclists altogether?

Raam

enas wrote: »

I'm not getting your point about tunnel rules either. Are there any specific rule concerning tunnels that I'm unaware of?

Probably: in tunnels you shouldn't change lanes.

Canis Lupus

Dual carriageways are cool unless signposted otherwise (I've seen some around Waterford for example). However as said above just because you can doesn't mean you should. Some carriageways are just not suitable unless you're some kind of adrenaline junky or enjoy cycling in incredibly uncomfortable situations.

enas

Raam wrote: »

Probably: in tunnels you shouldn't change lanes.

Is there a rule (in Ireland) that you shouldn't change lanes in tunnels, or is it a common practice to put solid lines in tunnels to prevent doing so? And is there a rule for this common practice, or that's just the way it is?

My point is that Solair's argument is the same (I believe) that leads to the logic behind the driver's behaviour. It doesn't look right to me, so there must be a rule against that. And if there's not, let's just pretend there should be some (here with the alleged special tunnel regulations - which might exist, I was genuinely asking for details). Not that I'm claiming at any point that Solair would have had a punitive behaviour, not even that he's defending the driver. I'm just trying to cheerfully challenge his reasoning, because the same reasoning taking place in some drivers head at the moment of the incident is what leads them to behave the way they do. I've stopped counting the number of very respectable persons, and otherwise good drivers, that are genuinely convinced that cycling on the South Ring is illegal, and that cyclists on it deserve to be killed. They generally accept my point that not only it is not illegal, but how dangerous it is lies completely in their hands. (And it is true that it is quite hard to plan an alternative route when the most direct uses the South Ring.)

(Off topic: Having said that, I would hate to cycle on the South Ring, and I believe that not having provided any proper segregated cycle road on it was a major oversight at the time of construction, and will be regarded as a "historical" mistake when, inevitably, utility cycling will have to "go mainstream" and such infrastructures will have to be retrofitted (at a much higher cost of course)).

Raam

I know in the Port Tunnel it instructs you not to change lanes.

It advises here that one should not overtake.

snottybridge

that stretch of road is lethal for cyclists,of course you can use it but as canus lupus says just because you can doesnt mean you should.I cycle that way occasionally but i always take the Turners Cross exit a few hundred yards before that stretch of road,might add a few minutes to youre commute but its much safer.

corblimey

Was planning on taking a spin this weekend that comes in that route on the way home to Carrigtwohill. I see I can jump off just before the lights as you say snotty, but then going via Southern Star and the South Infirmary to get back to the quays looks fairly complicated with a few nasty looking junctions. I suppose still better than being squashed against a wall by a car or lorry.

Malari

corblimey wrote: »

Was planning on taking a spin this weekend that comes in that route on the way home to Carrigtwohill. I see I can jump off just before the lights as you say snotty, but then going via Southern Star and the South Infirmary to get back to the quays looks fairly complicated with a few nasty looking junctions. I suppose still better than being squashed against a wall by a car or lorry.

Those junctions are fine, I cycle them all the time. Just make sure you signal and are seen by the traffic. You have to take up a prominent position on the road and be assertive.

I find the same on that stretch of the dual carriageway. You won't be squashed if you travel far enough into the lane that you have plenty of room to move in if necessary.

[Deleted User]

You are technically right, and those motorists are indeed selfish idiots. The problem however is that you are likely to meet more. Who needs that kind of stress in the morning? I would recommend finding an alternative route. If you're coming from ballincollig it might actually be quicker to come in the straight road and go across town.

I almost never cycle that stretch of road, it's just not pleasant and there are plenty of alternatives.

Keep_Her_Lit

rp wrote: »

their actions reinforces the need to stay out in the lane. They'd pass you even closer if you were nearer to the curb (scientifically proven). At least, 1/3 out, you've somewhere to go if pushed, and not be smeared on that concrete wall.

Looking at that road, there is no way I would position myself such that following traffic was forced either to change lanes or reduce its speed to match mine. Quite simply, putting yourself in harm's way is not the best way to ensure your own safety.

Saying that you've somewhere to go if pushed doesn't make sense in this situation. It's not as if you're going to have the luxury of deciding for each approaching vehicle whether or not you'll move over on this particular occasion. The traffic may be closing on you at a relative speed of 60-70km/h. If things go wrong, it will happen too quickly for you to do anything about it.

And it's very easy to see how it could all go horribly wrong. Regardless of the legal speed limit there, it's certainly believable that traffic will move at ~100km/h given the opportunity. As suggested above, it's only a matter of time before someone approaches from behind at speed, is being tailgated by some dozey/aggressive muppet and is also unable to move to the outside lane because it is in use. That leaves them with no option but to reduce their speed by >50% before they reach you. They might manage it but the muppet hanging off their rear bumper probably won't. You're now in big trouble. If it's wet and/or dark, the risk is further heightened.

I might be prepared to use that road (hard to tell just from the picture) but if I did, I would stay well in - not in the gutter, riding in all the grit and crap, but far enough in to let most traffic past without having to alter position. I would also move as briskly as possible - the lower the speed differential, the lower the risk.

doozerie

As has already been said, there is no excuse for that behaviour by the drivers concerned. They themselves would be justifiably horrified if a large truck behaved the very same way towards them in their relatively puny car, the fact that they don't apply the same kind of logic to the effect of their own driving behaviour towards others is the real issue here and not the fact that someone is cycling on the road. People that are willing to be so aggressive towards others simply shouldn't be allowed to drive, in my view, but as long as others are willing to make excuses for their behaviour they'll never feel the need to change - I realise that people are not condoning their behaviour on here, but taking the view that the cyclist shouldn't be there in the first place effectively supports the view of those idiots in the cars and it is that view that they use to justify their illegal and dangerous actions.

Incidentally, I cycled on that road a lot when I was a teenager, including that narrow stretch at times, and I don't recall meeting such hostility while on it (did meet other forms of muppet though). It probably carries more traffic now but I'm not sure that the speed limit has changed since my time. It makes no sense to me that a road that was safe to cycle in my day should be deemed completely unsuitable for cyclists now - if is no longer safe now then it is due to the behaviour of the road users on it, not the road itself, and rather than arguing that cyclists should be removed from it for their own safety we should be arguing that action be taken against those whose behaviour makes it unsafe. Removing cyclists from it entirely is a stereotypical irish "solution", where you tackle a symptom of the problem rather than the real problem itself because the symptom is a lot easier to deal with.

Malari

Deleted User wrote: »

You are technically right, and those motorists are indeed selfish idiots. The problem however is that you are likely to meet more. Who needs that kind of stress in the morning? I would recommend finding an alternative route. If you're coming from ballincollig it might actually be quicker to come in the straight road and go across town.

I almost never cycle that stretch of road, it's just not pleasant and there are plenty of alternatives.

Definitely if you are coming from Ballincollig, I'd go the Model Farm Road or Lee Road even. Since they narrowed the straight road, drivers are almost as aggressive there! It's definitely 4 or 5km shorter than going the South Ring, and I wouldn't like to go near a road where the speed limit is 120kph.

crashoveroid

ccmp wrote: »

Cycled on normal commute route this morning. South link dual carriageway from airport roundabout to town still quiet. No hard shoulder just yellow line and kerb and concrete wall outside that.
Holding the inside lane about 1/3 out. Buzzed by 2 cars, horns blowing just as they passed me both doing about 100, even though outside lane was free.
One of them still at the next lights with window rolled down to tell me that I shouldn't be on road.
What is the story with cycling on dual carriageway?
Regardless, no excuse for driving that close at speed.

I cycle the South link every week mainly at weekends and maybe twice during the week never had an issue or drivers giving out. Its not against the law i have as much right to be there as any car. Its the driver that's at fault for road rage and lack of respect for other road users.

bigjohnny80

Its legal for me to walk along the edge of a cliff. Doesn't mean I'd do it though.

I'd have no problem with a cyclist on a dual carraigeway but only on the hard shoulder. There is no hard shoulder in that pic.

doozerie

Malari wrote:

It's definitely 4 or 5km shorter than going the South Ring, and I wouldn't like to go near a road where the speed limit is 120kph.

I am open to correction on this but I believe that the highest speed limit on any stretch of the South Ring road is 100kph.

Solair

doozerie wrote: »

I am open to correction on this but I believe that the highest speed limit on any stretch of the South Ring road is 100kph.

The southlink is 100km/h

The Ballincollig Bypass is 120km/h for most of it, despite not being a M-road and parts of the N25 past Little Island / Carrigtwohill is also 120km/h. It's this one which has hard-shoulders removed to allow for long queuing exit lanes to cope with rush-hour traffic. It's very dangerous for cyclists as it's both very fast and has no hard shoulders at points.

I am not sure if these are the only roads in Ireland that are not motorway officially but have 120km/h speed limits?

The South-Link pictured above is a spur from the South Ring road (4 and sometimes 6-lane dual carriageway) that skirts the Southside of Cork City. It was built in the early 80s and links the city centre to the ring and to the airport. It's extremely narrow as it comes into the city as it uses the old railway cutting with steep sides. So there are no hard-shoulders and really dangerous slip ways which aren't long enough / turn directly into the slow lane.

enas

doozerie wrote: »

taking the view that the cyclist shouldn't be there in the first place effectively supports the view of those idiots in the cars and it is that view that they use to justify their illegal and dangerous actions.
[...]
It makes no sense to me that a road that was safe to cycle in my day should be deemed completely unsuitable for cyclists now - if is no longer safe now then it is due to the behaviour of the road users on it, not the road itself

Very sensibly said, thanks!

doozerie wrote: »

I am open to correction on this but I believe that the highest speed limit on any stretch of the South Ring road is 100kph.

If I remember correctly, it increases to 120 km/h after the Bandon road roundabout. Definitely the last stretch to Ballincollig anyway.

bigjohnny80 wrote: »

I'd have no problem with a cyclist on a dual carraigeway but only on the hard shoulder.

What happens then with those cyclists you have a problem with?

Malari wrote: »

Since they narrowed the straight road

Sorry for being off-topic, but do you know why they did that?

enas

Solair wrote: »

I am not sure if these are the only roads in Ireland that are not motorway officially but have 120km/h speed limits?

It's a fairly recent development, but not unique to Cork. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Special_speed_limits and also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Quality_Dual_Carriageway#High_Quality_Dual_Carriageways_with_Motorway_Speed_Limits_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

redzone

Raam wrote: »

You can cycle on 'em. Some people are just jerks.

I agree, some people are just jerks. We all encounter them at some time or another when out on the bike.
However when cycling you have to weigh up risk against gain. When you can account for your own actions and accept the results thats fine, but you cannot forecast the actions of others. All it takes is someone tailgating as mentioned or distracted on the phone or by the kids fighting in the back or changing the cd etc. All things motorists shouldn'd do but happen all the time.
If your hit at that speed at best you will survive and probably have severe injuries with a long recovery.
What I'm saying is use your cop on and see the danger, you are responsable for your own safety first.
No good being in the right when your dead.

bigjohnny80

Re: Enas

What happens then with those cyclists you have a problem with?

Since you are being pedantic.

The natural flow of what I said, meant that I would have a problem with a cyclist on a dual carraigeway which had no hard shoulder.

Does that clear it up for you, or can you find a way of playing with those words too?

bigjohnny80 wrote: »

The natural flow of what I said, meant that I would have a problem with a cyclist on a dual carraigeway which had no hard shoulder.

I think the question was about what action you take toward those you do have a problem with.