ArMoRothair wrote:If you use your indicator in a vehicle it means "I would like to turn", it is then up to you to make sure your way is clear; and if you have to wait a long time that's the way the cookie crumbles.
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
where traffic is queuing at junctions
when a road user is indicating right, even if you believe the signal should have been cancelled
drossall wrote:Cyclists arriving after the lights go green would be unwise to dash up the side of left-turning vehicles, even though those vehicles should cede priority before crossing the cyclists' lane, just as someone approaching a junction in the left lane of a dual carriageway at 70mph would be especially unwise to charge through if a vehicle in the right lane were showing brake lights and a left indicator. Being in the right and avoiding crashes are not always the same thing!
drossall wrote:It's pretty much the same, in terms of road markings, as turning left when starting in the right-hand lane of a dual carriageway. Say you suddenly decided to change route and turn left, because the road ahead was jammed - before entering the left lane, you'd make jolly sure that it was clear and that nothing was coming up behind.
drossall wrote:Normally, cyclists occupy the same traffic lane as motor vehicles, and so should not move left of a left-turning vehicle. Again, this is no different from cars, though they normally are too wide to try - but imagine that you were slow in turning left at a junction and a driver tried to nip past on your left to get ahead - it must have happened somewhere! In that case, the driver to your left would be in the wrong. Generally speaking, then, there's no real difference between cars and bikes - both are vehicles, and the rules of conduct for each, and towards each, are the same.
Flinders wrote:I just wish they had engaged brains before wording the original one.
mjr wrote:Flinders wrote:I just wish they had engaged brains before wording the original one.
They did and agreed wording with London Cycling Campaign for the original two back in 2006, then ignored it for later ones. Vehicle owners must keep brains engaged and not switch off and start killing cyclists again after a while.
Certainly cyclists should not follow anything so close that they can't be seen in one's mirrors - and for any kind of vehicle without an interior mirror that's particularly important. A general rule - if you can't see the driver's face in their mirror, they can't see you.BeeKeeper wrote:The problems come if I meet another vehicle and need to reverse, especially when the passing place is just behind me. The problem is the cyclist a few yards behind me. It hasn't happened often but enough times, as a cyclist myself, to be be hypersensitive to seeing cyclists following me and knowing that they don't magically vanish, they just get so close I can't see them.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests