Overtaking on wide Single Carriageways

[James]

1


It actually looks quite good. Long gap after the Golf and nothing in front of the 4X4. Despite the fact that there is a car on the opposing lane, it is committed and at the speeds I guess they will be travelling, long gone in a split second. If anything perhaps the Passat went a fraction early?

2


Hard to judge as it is facing us.

3


I don't like the look of this. I can see his stop over gap 4 cars in front with a safety gap in front of the red one. But the size and acceleration of the van will go against him. It seems evident he can make the gap in front of the red one, but I should imagine he just continues all the way down the middle of the road.

4


Hard to judge as it is facing is. A clear gap one car in front of the Transit and no other road users compromised.

5


Hard to judge as it is facing us. Although, assuming there are no cars immediatley behind the Astra, I think the 4X4 has executed a very feasable overtake. He should still be able to complete it before the hazard lines finish, and it won't matter if the hatches are surrounded by a broken white line anyway.

6


This is th worst of the bunch. Hs only stop-over gap is 5 cars ahead, one of them being an HGV. He has committed himself, his acceleration will not be sufficiently powerful, yet in the distance we can see what looks like a car from the opposing carriageway overtaking and also using the middle of the road. The green van is taking a chance if he is relying on that overtaker completing their overtake and moving in. Also the overtaker is likely to be followed by other overtakers (sheep) and so there may be a continuous flow of traffic doen the middle of the road towards him. It also looks like a slight hill brow coming up so vision is lessening. Body language of the Punto? Is he thinking about it aswell?

7
[/quote]

Seems fine. Looks like the road straightens out and I have this image of a long, open, car-less road on both sides behind the picture!

[tonyh]

Of all the pictures, no 6 deserves some mention as the overtake IMHO could be a tad dodgy.
The first three cars could be overtaken with safety, the gap between car3 and 4 looks quite tight and car 4 looks to be contemplating an overtake himself.
A lot depends on how the van is overtaking and what is the difference in speed.
Is the green van just overtaking in a high gear or is he really going for it.
There are few places to escape to if things go pearshaped .
It is only a picture and I know I would if the circumstances were right would carry out an overtake in two stages or one if the situation allowed.
Tonyh.

[Nigel]

Its nice to see the slightly differing opinions, but note we are all looking towards the safety side.

Just think how many decisions we make like this, without the benefit of being able to sit down and study the situation.

[MiniClubmanEstate]

Just anoher point about the road markings is that as that edge is not marked as a cycle lane, it's the edge of the caridgeway. Would it technicaly be ileagal to cycle in the edge area beyond the edge of the caridgeway?
I totaly agree that there should be cycle lane signs for everybody's safety, mainly the cyclists. It's the same down the A1 at some points where we're at 70mph and there are cyclists doing about 25 - 35 meaning you gain on them fast, if somebody decides to accelerate to 90 behind you when you're getting ready for the overtake you've got a lot of braking to do and it's totaly un-necesary as there is space at the edge of the caridgeway for a cycle lane.

[TripleS]

Its nice to see the slightly differing opinions, but note we are all looking towards the safety side.

Just think how many decisions we make like this, without the benefit of being able to sit down and study the situation.

Aye, all of 'em. All things considered we do pretty well do we not? Actually I mean drivers in general, but of course we do even better!

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[notaboyracer]

I think they are pretty badly designed roads to give the temptation- I could see a lot of cars committing when they can't see a place to pull back in and if people from both directions did this it could get very tight.

I wouldn't see any problem overtaking on roads like these with oncoming cars if you could overtake without crossing the centre line. (Or if you had blue lights and sirens so everyone could see you better)

Just out of interest- many of the cars being overtaken seem to be quite far over to the nearside, if any of you were in that situation and thought it unsafe to overtake when there were oncoming cars, would you consider a bold road position to try and persuade others not to overtake you?

[Nigel]

The bold road position isn't that good an idea in my opinion, as in my experience it insites other drivers.

On a slightly different but similar note, there is an extended 30 mph speed limit near where I live that is total nonesense, no side roads, no houses etc, normal anti car stuff, and by sticking pretty close to the limit I've caused a couple of near misses by people overtaking me with oncoming traffic.

In general I think it is better not to try and influence other peoples manouvres.

[notaboyracer]

thats a good answer, would you consider the nearside position to be just as dangerous, inviting people to overtake? (Like the 4x4 in pic 1 and the lorry in 7)

I'm just interested what everyone thinks as until recently I probably would have gone to the nearside position as soon as someone got quite close behind me, wheras now I would stay bang in the middle, until someone was committed to overtaking me, then I would be watching them through ready to move over to help them through and give them more space if they need it.

[Nigel]

on the spot now lol.

I'd consider moving to the left, if safe, a good thing to do if the following vehicle has move up into contact position (or just plain tailgating for most of them !)

My reasoning for this is you are allowing the vehicle going past you to stay to the left of the white line, thus removing danger.

Be careful of the road surface though, you don't want to start hitting large potholes, or debris at the side of the road.

[SammyTheSnake]

Just out of interest- many of the cars being overtaken seem to be quite far over to the nearside, if any of you were in that situation and thought it unsafe to overtake when there were oncoming cars, would you consider a bold road position to try and persuade others not to overtake you?

I consider "marking my teritory" (*ahem*) to be a major survival tactic on the motorbike. The "normal" position is pretty much in the centre of the lane, though obviously that changes according to hazards or bends or whatever. I will often see somebody behind who looks like they'd like to overtake and decide that I'd rather make it clear by my body language that I don't want him to i.e. move toward the centreline. Once I feel it's safe for the vehicle behind to overtake, I'll move toward the left and slow a little to make it clear that my objection is rescinded and make it a little easier for the vehicle behind to get past swiftly and safely.

If the driver behind decides to initiate an overtake while I'm still in my "taking up space" position, I'll move over to give him space and try not to be within shrapnel range, should it all go wrong.

Sometimes, the driver behind decides not to overtake, even when I take up a nearside position, in which case it's usually that he just likes tailgating, in which case I press the red button on the handlebars that drops a variety of caltraps, oil, and backwinder rockets.

Cheers & God bless
Sam "SammyTheSnake" Penny

[Gromit37]

Just anoher point about the road markings is that as that edge is not marked as a cycle lane, it's the edge of the caridgeway. Would it technicaly be ileagal to cycle in the edge area beyond the edge of the caridgeway?
I totaly agree that there should be cycle lane signs for everybody's safety, mainly the cyclists. It's the same down the A1 at some points where we're at 70mph and there are cyclists doing about 25 - 35 meaning you gain on them fast, if somebody decides to accelerate to 90 behind you when you're getting ready for the overtake you've got a lot of braking to do and it's totaly un-necesary as there is space at the edge of the caridgeway for a cycle lane.

Please don't take this the wrong way (and the same for all the other cycle lane commentators), but do you do much cycling? The cycle lane arguments put up by many people often stem from an ignorant (and sometimes arrogant) point of view. That cycle lanes are inherently safer is a fallacy, and legally, we have as much right to use roads (excluding M/ways of course), such as BOATS, and I believe bridleways. Like it or not, cyclists and horseriders are legitimate traffic and it is a motorists responsibility to treat them with the same resepct (or lack thereof) as any other traffic. The Road Traffic Act gave us this right a long, long time ago. With the increase in car numbers, motorists just see anything slower than them as a pain in the bum, and find excuses to get them off the roads.

I'm not condoning the behaviour of some cyclists, as I see a lot of pretty awful riding and plain stupidity (and I'm quite vociferous about it too! ), but this cycle lane argument is as contentious as the speed limit arguments.

And in case you're wandering, I ride a recumbent trike these days... just like this one!

http://www.bentrideronline.com/reviews/Q/ICEQ.html
[/img]

[MiniClubmanEstate]

Yes I do cycle often, which is why I would like to see more cycle lanes, especialy on faster roads as I'm all to aware of how most motorists behave towards cyclists, and who is it who gets killed?
My point of view is that on roads like the section of the A1 I mentioned it would be much safer if the cyclists had a lane of their own without cars flying up behind and relying on ABS due to poor planing then swerving out, as opposed to just passing safely on their part of the road without coming close to killing you.
Do you agree with the above?

PS I like the Recumbent, I thought about building one in the past, until the Mini's moved in, I might get round to it one day.

[7db]

I'm not condoning the behaviour of some cyclists, as I see a lot of pretty awful riding and plain stupidity (and I'm quite vociferous about it too! ), but this cycle lane argument is as contentious as the speed limit arguments.

Add to that a lot of mouthing off. It doesn't help anyone - either coming from drivers or cyclists. Suffice to say, there's a few cyclists out there that I wouldn't be shedding a tear over if Darwin accelerated their passing.

[Gromit37]

Well, I've been riding on roads for twenty five years and I'm not dead yet!

(I know this is off topic, but the rest of you can ignore me and carry on regardless. No change there then! )

I use an 'off-carriageway' cycle path for about a mile down the A52 dual (NSL) carriageway, not because I won't ride on it, but because I can relax more on the way to work. I have ridden down it many times, and it's not too bad as long as you ride defensively... as with all roads IMHO. But it is harder work. I have had very few problems on the roads because I try and position myself where drivers expect to find a car, and not in the gutter. I move over when it is safe for me and the drivers. 'Cyclecraft' by John Franklin (RoSPA approved) is a useful book. Mine's a very old version, but the theory is the same today.

I don't think we should be forced off the road when a cycle path is available, and for good reason. If we are *obliged* to use cycle paths, motorists will be less used to cyclists on the road. They will resent us even further. This in turn means less consideration when a cyclist has to use the road because there is no cycle lane.

Cycle lanes usage should be voluntary, and judging by the planning of and the suitability 'modern' cycle paths... we're better off on the road! I despair with most of the ones I come across

[Gromit37]

I'm not condoning the behaviour of some cyclists, as I see a lot of pretty awful riding and plain stupidity (and I'm quite vociferous about it too! ), but this cycle lane argument is as contentious as the speed limit arguments.

Add to that a lot of mouthing off. It doesn't help anyone - either coming from drivers or cyclists. Suffice to say, there's a few cyclists out there that I wouldn't be shedding a tear over if Darwin accelerated their passing.

Mouthing off? In what sense do you refer to this? Sorry if I'm being dense here.

As for natrual selection, surely you could say the same for drivers, pedestrians, criminals, politicians (is there a difference?) and the like? If I kept a record, I would have a very long list of people that should be banned from passing on their genes Including myself I suspect!

Generally, I get a good reception from motorists when I'm on my trike. More so than when on a standard upright bike. And I always try to help them as much as I can, but there are always those who's attitude leaves much to be desired. Car drivers... who needs 'em?