Why do some cyclists overtake on the left?

On 19/08/2012 18:06, Alan Holmes wrote:
"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/2012 12:43, Cassandra wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 11:41:42 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 18/08/2012 10:46, Cassandra wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 10:36:58 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 18/08/2012 10:31, Cassandra wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:58:25 +0100, "John Benn"
wrote:

"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue
on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on
the
left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by a
driver
by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind spots to
the right
of vehicles because of the position of the driver.

If cyclists overtook on the right the usual trolls would be asking
why they did this and held up traffic.

Although they never seem to ask why bicycles are in a position to
overtake the motor vehicles they consider far superior.

Pushbikeists are only able to over (or rather undertake) stationary
traffic. Once moving the child's toy is left behind.

There appears to be a serious design flaw in cars as a means of
transport if they can be beaten by childrens toys.

As I said above, they can only be beaten when stationary. Which bit of
that didn't you understand?

If I'd bought a vehicle that ceases to function on a regular basis I'd
take it back.

Are you really that stupid or are you just pretending?

One thing is absolutely certain, she is nowhere as stupid as you!

Alan




"She"?



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 05:50:31 -0500, nik.morgan wrote:

Colin Reed wrote:
On 16/08/12 22:47, JNugent wrote:
On 16/08/2012 22:36, Colin Reed wrote:
On 16/08/12 19:23, JNugent wrote:
On 16/08/2012 15:22, Jolly polly wrote:

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are,
you may pass on the left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by
a driver by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind
spots to the right of vehicles because of the position of the
driver.

I do sometimes overtake motor vehicles on there right, in order to
do so you must 'take the lane' this is often not appreciated by all
the motorists, most also do not leave enough room between
themselves and the vehicle in front for an overtake on the right
side.

If you need space left between vehicles in a stationary queue so
that you can overtake (whether on the left or the right), that is
not so much an overtaking move as a queue-jump.

So if you're walking on a lane with no pavement, and traffic is
queued on it, then you should not walk past the traffic as that would
be queue jumping?

...if you were going to stand in front of one of the vehicles involved
and then hamper the occupants by moving forward only at a pedestrian's
speed.

Have you ever actually seen a pedestrian do as you posit?

I have seen pedestrians walk past cars. I have seen pedestrians not
walking past cars.


As many cyclists do not wish to hinder the progress of a motor
vehicle they will usually stay to the left of a lane, even when
overtaking.
I disagree about the blind spots, the obstructions like roof
pillars are closer to the drivers head on the right, so hide a
greater amount of whatever maybe there.

You are wrong to think so.

He's wrong to think that geometry works?

He is wrong if he thinks that proximity to the A post means that
visibility down the RHS of the vehicle is inferior to visibility down
the LHS.

The blind spot caused by the pillars is larger on the driver's side -
geometry basically shows this to be true. There are potential methods
that can reduce these. What do you suggest makes them always more
effective on the driver's side?

the eyes are positioned considerably nearer to the offside A post thus
movement of the head will enable a view around, on the near side
movement of the head will not enable clear vision past the A post.

with commercial vehicles there are blind spots caused principally by the
height of the eyeball relative to the road.
cyclists near my near side front wheel are visible, they are covered by
the horizontal mirror above the side window whereas cyclists ahead of
the scope of this mirror cannot be seen from the driving position,
cyclists towards the rear of the vehicle can be in a blind spot when
they are behind the scope of the horizontal mirror yet not back far
enough to appear in the normal near side rear view mirror.

If I am stopped behind a vehicle (large or otherwise) I try to be in a
position where I can see the driver's face through his/her rear vision
mirror. Then s/he can see me (if s/he looks!)



--
Life is a venereal disease with 100% mortality.

"John Benn" wrote in message
...

"Jolly polly" wrote in message
...

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Jolly polly" wrote in message
...

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue
on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on
the left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by a
driver by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind spots
to the right of vehicles because of the position of the driver.

This topic is being discussed in the censored, err. moderated group at
the moment but posts are being deliberately delayed so much that it's
pretty much unusable unless you are on the whitelist.

whitelist?

Or white list - a list of people who get their posts auto-approved.
Having a chiark email address guarantees being on the white list.

mmm I've posed many times there in the past and very rarely has a post
appeared, so I've given up that group. I didn't know anything about a
whitelist

If you look in the moderation queue, you'll see some people get their
posts auto-approved. They stay on the white list until they start to say
things that the moderators disagree with. If you're not on the whitelist,
it can take a day or more for your post to appear.

But this is not a moderated group!

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 17/08/2012 23:32, Colin Reed wrote:
On 16/08/12 22:47, JNugent wrote:
On 16/08/2012 22:36, Colin Reed wrote:
On 16/08/12 19:23, JNugent wrote:
On 16/08/2012 15:22, Jolly polly wrote:

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue
on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on
the left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by a
driver
by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind spots to
the
right
of vehicles because of the position of the driver.

I do sometimes overtake motor vehicles on there right, in order to do
so you
must 'take the lane' this is often not appreciated by all the
motorists, most
also do not leave enough room between themselves and the vehicle in
front for
an overtake on the right side.

If you need space left between vehicles in a stationary queue so that
you can overtake (whether on the left or the right), that is not so
much
an overtaking move as a queue-jump.

So if you're walking on a lane with no pavement, and traffic is queued
on it, then you should not walk past the traffic as that would be queue
jumping?

...if you were going to stand in front of one of the vehicles involved
and then hamper the occupants by moving forward only at a pedestrian's
speed.

Have you ever actually seen a pedestrian do as you posit?

I have seen pedestrians walk past cars. I have seen pedestrians not
walking past cars.

What *on* *the* *carriageway*, and plonk themselves in a queue of motor
vehicles, such that the motor vehicles behind them could move only at the
pedestrians' speed?

What happened after you woke up?

As many cyclists do not wish to hinder the progress of a motor
vehicle
they will usually stay to the left of a lane, even when overtaking.
I disagree about the blind spots, the obstructions like roof pillars
are closer to the drivers head on the right, so hide a greater amount
of whatever maybe there.

You are wrong to think so.

He's wrong to think that geometry works?

He is wrong if he thinks that proximity to the A post means that
visibility down the RHS of the vehicle is inferior to visibility down
the LHS.

The blind spot caused by the pillars is larger on the driver's side -
geometry basically shows this to be true. There are potential methods
that can reduce these. What do you suggest makes them always more
effective on the driver's side?

You reckon that the offside A post blocks rearward vision down the offside
flank of the vehicle?

I see.

And doubly wrong if he thinks that it justifies the stupidity
of overtaking on the nearside:

Apart from it being your opinion, what makes you so sure about this?
What made you form this opinion?

Did you read the recent report of the cyclist killed when he tried to
undertake a left-turning bus (as retold by another cyclist who witnessed
the incident but was far too canny and cautious to try the same trick)?

But was the bus driver signalling early enough for the cyclist to see before
he tried to pass?

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 19/08/2012 18:06, Alan Holmes wrote:
"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/2012 12:43, Cassandra wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 11:41:42 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 18/08/2012 10:46, Cassandra wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 10:36:58 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 18/08/2012 10:31, Cassandra wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:58:25 +0100, "John Benn"
wrote:

"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue
on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass
on
the
left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by
a
driver
by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind spots to
the right
of vehicles because of the position of the driver.

If cyclists overtook on the right the usual trolls would be asking
why they did this and held up traffic.

Although they never seem to ask why bicycles are in a position to
overtake the motor vehicles they consider far superior.

Pushbikeists are only able to over (or rather undertake) stationary
traffic. Once moving the child's toy is left behind.

There appears to be a serious design flaw in cars as a means of
transport if they can be beaten by childrens toys.

As I said above, they can only be beaten when stationary. Which bit
of
that didn't you understand?

If I'd bought a vehicle that ceases to function on a regular basis I'd
take it back.

Are you really that stupid or are you just pretending?

One thing is absolutely certain, she is nowhere as stupid as you!

Alan




"She"?

There are not to many males called Cassandra!

On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 22:06:14 +0100, "Alan Holmes"
wrote:


"John Benn" wrote in message
...

"Jolly polly" wrote in message
...

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Jolly polly" wrote in message
...

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue
on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on
the left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by a
driver by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind spots
to the right of vehicles because of the position of the driver.

This topic is being discussed in the censored, err. moderated group at
the moment but posts are being deliberately delayed so much that it's
pretty much unusable unless you are on the whitelist.

whitelist?

Or white list - a list of people who get their posts auto-approved.
Having a chiark email address guarantees being on the white list.

mmm I've posed many times there in the past and very rarely has a post
appeared, so I've given up that group. I didn't know anything about a
whitelist

If you look in the moderation queue, you'll see some people get their
posts auto-approved. They stay on the white list until they start to say
things that the moderators disagree with. If you're not on the whitelist,
it can take a day or more for your post to appear.

But this is not a moderated group!


ffs - are you really as daft as you make out?

Here is a clue: the moderated group is under discussion here.

Follow that?

"John Benn" wrote in message
...

"thirty-six" wrote in message
...
On Aug 16, 2:14 pm, "John Benn" wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

++ Only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to
turn
right, and there is room to do so

Does it really? Does that tome specify what constitutes
"signalling". AIUI, advised by local traffic cop, position on the
road is sufficient to indicate intentions, at least for him.
IIRC it is aknowledged by govt documents that even the position
within a lane may give sufficient indication of intention. My
recognition of this has saved me many a collision with taxis. It's
generally easy to spot on a motorway, drivers move to the edge of the
lane to get a good look in their mirrors before moving out.
Unfortunately they sometimes forget to see that the lane is clear for
an appropriate distance, they just do not see and move out without
using trafficator or hand signal, because there was, in their mind, no-
one there.
Oh, by the way, that traffic cop had been following me without lights
at night, so I didn't see him. There was no need for me to make a
specific signal and he knew it because he was acting illegally. He
did not appreciate me crossing the hazard line, but seeing as there
was no other observable road users his opinion was nonsense, no legal
user of the road suffered any inconvenience.

++ Stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue
on
your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left

First rule of the road, keep left when in the vicinity of other road
users unless conditions or intention dictate otherwise.

If a road user is not keeping left, he should be turning right, is
intending to overtake or some other nonsense.



If you can legally pass on the right, why not do that instead of
overtaking
on the left of vehicles? Am I missing something?

I think you probably are. You keep asking these questions time and
time again and I don't know why,

I keep forgetting what the answer is!

Join the queue!

On 21/08/2012 22:11, Alan Holmes wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 17/08/2012 23:32, Colin Reed wrote:
On 16/08/12 22:47, JNugent wrote:
On 16/08/2012 22:36, Colin Reed wrote:
On 16/08/12 19:23, JNugent wrote:
On 16/08/2012 15:22, Jolly polly wrote:

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
"Bill" wrote in message
news:502cf39b$0$3602$7120d902@karibu...
On 16/08/2012 14:14, John Benn wrote:
The Highway Code 163 says:

If the queue
on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on
the left


You have published the answer. Please learn to read.

Why not overtake on the right? You are more likely to be seen by a
driver
by passing on the right. There are generally fewer blind spots to
the
right
of vehicles because of the position of the driver.

I do sometimes overtake motor vehicles on there right, in order to do
so you
must 'take the lane' this is often not appreciated by all the
motorists, most
also do not leave enough room between themselves and the vehicle in
front for
an overtake on the right side.

If you need space left between vehicles in a stationary queue so that
you can overtake (whether on the left or the right), that is not so
much
an overtaking move as a queue-jump.

So if you're walking on a lane with no pavement, and traffic is queued
on it, then you should not walk past the traffic as that would be queue
jumping?

...if you were going to stand in front of one of the vehicles involved
and then hamper the occupants by moving forward only at a pedestrian's
speed.

Have you ever actually seen a pedestrian do as you posit?

I have seen pedestrians walk past cars. I have seen pedestrians not
walking past cars.

What *on* *the* *carriageway*, and plonk themselves in a queue of motor
vehicles, such that the motor vehicles behind them could move only at the
pedestrians' speed?

What happened after you woke up?

As many cyclists do not wish to hinder the progress of a motor
vehicle
they will usually stay to the left of a lane, even when overtaking.
I disagree about the blind spots, the obstructions like roof pillars
are closer to the drivers head on the right, so hide a greater amount
of whatever maybe there.

You are wrong to think so.

He's wrong to think that geometry works?

He is wrong if he thinks that proximity to the A post means that
visibility down the RHS of the vehicle is inferior to visibility down
the LHS.

The blind spot caused by the pillars is larger on the driver's side -
geometry basically shows this to be true. There are potential methods
that can reduce these. What do you suggest makes them always more
effective on the driver's side?

You reckon that the offside A post blocks rearward vision down the offside
flank of the vehicle?

I see.

And doubly wrong if he thinks that it justifies the stupidity
of overtaking on the nearside:

Apart from it being your opinion, what makes you so sure about this?
What made you form this opinion?

Did you read the recent report of the cyclist killed when he tried to
undertake a left-turning bus (as retold by another cyclist who witnessed
the incident but was far too canny and cautious to try the same trick)?

But was the bus driver signalling early enough for the cyclist to see before
he tried to pass?

Pass (I wasn't there).

But another cyclist who was there reported that he not only saw the incident
but had (effectively) known it was going to happen before the (now deceased)
cyclist attempted to pass the bus. That is likely to mean that the bus's
driver was signalling.

*Not* that signalling is a legal requirement (and even if it were,
hand-signals, visible down the RH flank of the bus, would be sufficient to
comply with the law).

On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 22:16:37 +0100, Judith wrote:

ffs - are you really as daft as you make out?

people who insult are insecure and what they say to be mean is the
deepest fear they have about themselves
its a control drama



--
Life is a venereal disease with 100% mortality.