ADUK Archive

Astraist wrote:

IVORTHE DRIVER wrote:I think most D/Cs should have enough room for 2 cars and a bike as long as care is taken anyway but by clearing the scene quickly you are creating more room if needed.

Indeed, a dual carriageway should be wide enough (on each of the carriageways) to fit about four cars alongside one another, even without considering the additional space offered by the shoulders on at least one side.

I'd doubt 4 cars but there is room for 3 on most. The emergency services will drive down the middle to get to incidents in very heavy traffic or if it's stationary due to the incident in front blocking the road.

There should be enough room for four cars parked directly alongside each other, which means that during actual driving there should be sufficient space for three automobiles with some clearance to each side, again without even taking the shoulders into account.

chriskay wrote:

Astraist wrote:

chriskay wrote:MY safety comes first.

When one of the parties involved is so voulnrable (as a cyclist or pedestrian would be) their safety comes first!

Nonsense; each is primarily responsible for his/her own safety. The safety of others can only be considered when my own safety has been assured.

So would you rather plough into a group of children crossing the road or plough into another car (or a tree)? I'm afraid find statements like those above wrong and a bit selfish! If a vulnerable road user is about, it is life that is important: vehicles can be repaired or replaced (and even limbs)...

Back to the OP - if there is a queue of cars in both lanes, I would slow down. Speeding up does solve your problem, but leaves everyone else in a more dangerous situation. If both lanes are moving slowly, it means that both lanes have much more time to react to the danger. Mind you, as a cyclist, I would not try to cycle on a NSL dual carriageway anyway!

Standard Dave wrote:
While I shouldn't advocate anyone breaking the posted limit I feel I would use the performance of my car to clear the hazard if there was room and allow everyone else to just sort themselves out.

I see it as described as two options either clear or slow and allow space in the offside lane for vehicles to pass a slower vehicle in this case a bicycle. It coud be a moped or other slowere vehicle although many would be bigger such as farm machinary etc.

I agree with Dave - Get out of the situation. Move as far right as safe, to allow the lead car in L1 some space, and hence the cyclist, and try to move into the clear space in front of you in your lane, ie. accelarate firmly

If you brake enough as slow to allow the lead car in L1 to pull out, you may find the vehicles behind you become a problem if they haven't been leaving enough space
Also the others in L1 will be effectively trapped as they have nowhere to go.
As the car in L1 enters the space in front of you, where has your safety zone gone?
Will you need to slow further to create space about you?

The only space you can control is the space to the side of you and the bigger space in front.

A two-lane dual carriageway and there isn't room to brake to the speed of the lane you are overtaking? Why not? What was your escape plan if a vehicle in that lane had an attack of impatience?

IMO if you could not stop your overtaking manoevre safely at the time you saw the slow-moving vehicle at the front of the overtaken queue, then your speed differential was too large.

Renny wrote:I agree with Dave - Get out of the situation. Move as far right as safe, to allow the lead car in L1 some space, and hence the cyclist, and try to move into the clear space in front of you in your lane, ie. accelarate firmly

If you brake enough as slow to allow the lead car in L1 to pull out, you may find the vehicles behind you become a problem if they haven't been leaving enough space
Also the others in L1 will be effectively trapped as they have nowhere to go.
As the car in L1 enters the space in front of you, where has your safety zone gone?
Will you need to slow further to create space about you?

The only space you can control is the space to the side of you and the bigger space in front.

If you brake to let the car in L1 in front of you, the whole of L2 will need to slow down. This means that the speed differential between L1 & L2 will be small, and merging the lanes will be easier. So you ease that part of the problem instead of just sorting yourself out.

The issue is whether those behind in L2 are awake enough to react to the change in pace: on a busy road, the "ripple" of braking cars can go on for ages and may cause different problems. There is no "right" answer, I'm afraid. The best answer depends on the circumstances

Some good posts and plenty to think about. There are a few different view points here and I think there's perhaps no right answer but a few each with their own pros/cons.

I like the idea of treating each car as its own overtake and considering at what point you become committed, then looking for any hazards that would affect each overtake in turn. I don't think it will always be that simple on some of the more congested roads but it seems a good idea.

Ancient wrote:A two-lane dual carriageway and there isn't room to brake to the speed of the lane you are overtaking? Why not? What was your escape plan if a vehicle in that lane had an attack of impatience?

IMO if you could not stop your overtaking manoevre safely at the time you saw the slow-moving vehicle at the front of the overtaken queue, then your speed differential was too large.

I was capable of stopping when I saw the cyclist if the leading vehicle had moved out - that's why I initially started to brake in case this happened. When I saw their brake lights then I took that to mean they had seen me (otherwise they would have pulled out) and that they were slowing for the cyclist. There is no point in us both braking together which is why I went back on the power, and that's why I originally raised the question.

This thread reminds me of one of the driving mistakes which I made this year. I was on a single carriageway twisty.
I was about to overtake, on the offside already starting to accelerate, when I saw a bicycle in front of the car I was about to overtake. I braked firmly to stay behind. Afterwards, I could not quite work out whether the bicycle should have been visible to me earlier, or whether I should have known that I had not had a good enough view beyond my overtake target to make the 'go' decision. It may be relevant that we were climbing a mountain, and from where I was the bicycle was behind my overtake target,then behind the bicycle was hillside. Anyway, I will try to remember to think bicycle before committing to an overtake.