The chairman of Darlington Cycling Club has complained of “two complete planks” who he says ‘held up traffic’ by riding two abreast on the way into Yarm yesterday. The comments come as the government consults on a proposed revision to the Highway Code which would tell cyclists they should “ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake.”
Writing on the Darlington Cycling Club Facebook forum, Mike Drake said: “We came across these two complete planks riding into Yarm today. They were two abreast, well before Tesco’s roundabout and all the way to the traffic lights.
“I pointed out to them at the traffic lights that they weren’t doing the cause of cyclists any good, to be told the Highway Code tells them to ride like that.
“Read again mate, it applies in certain situations and riding the busy road into Yarm isn’t one of them.”
The current wording of Rule 66 of the Highway Code says that while cycling, “You should … never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.”
While some club members expressed support for Drake’s comments, the majority were critical. Several people said they tended to ride two abreast on that stretch to deter drivers from passing as they felt the road was too narrow for safe overtaking.
“Perhaps the video doesn’t show the full picture, as I didn’t start recording it as soon as we came across them,” said Drake.
“We came across them riding two abreast between the Urlay Nook and Tesco roundabout and I just assumed they would go into single file after the roundabout, but they maintained their position all the way to the lights.
“You can see the volume of traffic going the other way and it was similar going into Yarm, albeit backed up behind these two.
“I’m a big fan of riding two abreast, where it is practical and safe, but don’t feel I have the right to hold up traffic because I think the [Highway Code] says so – which it doesn’t.”
He added: “The point I was making is that the image of cycling will not be enhanced by taking this approach. The [Highway Code] does also say you should not hold up a long queue of traffic.”
The Government this week launched a consultation on revisions to the Highway Code with Cycling UK asking cyclists to support 10 changes it feels will improve safety.
One potential update is to the wording of Rule 66.
The proposed new wording – which could potentially spell the death of the chain gang – would say, “You should … ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so. When riding in larger groups on narrow lanes, it is sometimes safer to ride two abreast.”
45 thoughts on “Cycling club chairman complains of being held up by cyclists riding two abreast”
In other news:
In other news:
my journey to Tesco’s was “delayed by about 15 seconds” said one shopper
members hail new Chairman for Darlington Cycling Club
If the chairman of a cycle
If the chairman of a cycle club doesn’t understand the need to use the other side of the carriageway to overtake a single cyclist (or side by side cyclists), and cannot do so because of the oncoming traffic, so feel that they must (just have to…) close pass the single cyclist, or is unable to do this because of primary position or riders side by side then there is truely no hope.
I agree. I sometimes think
I agree. I sometimes think when I see stuff like this that the best advice for such people as said club chairman is “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all”. Why on earth get on social media to complain about such a minor thing? Also, the whole “these kinds of cyclists give us a bad reputation” is surely a complete canard. It seems to me that for an unfortunately large segment of the motoring population, it doesn’t really matter how we behave – blameless or not, they hate us all equally.
ktache wrote:
There, fixed it for you
The club chairman is the
The club chairman is the plank.
Suppose the cyclists were in single file, and he overtook, allowing 1.5m clearance. That is going to place his nearside wing mirror somewhere level with the current position of the outside rider, and his offside wing mirror somewhere level with the face of the oncoming motorist.
So the thing that is holding him up is the motorist in the other lane, the lane which he would need to use to safely overtake the two cyclists, a manoeuvre which is facilitated by them being bunched up two abreast instead of strung out single file.
Well said.
Well said.
FML some people are petty, I
FML some people are petty, I wonder if he took a video of that couple in Tescos who cant decide what coffee to buy, that held him up for 30 seconds as well.
i dont care. i want to know
i dont care. i want to know why there is oncoming traffic at all. this confuses me so much. What time was this at? why was everyone driving in the other lane coming on it again and again and again and again, at the exact time someone following the cyclists? why were the drivers of the other cars not at work? you can’t all be on a day off or just happen to be on that section of road at the exact same moment, it makes no sense. you’d expect one or two cars to come towards you, then nothing as everyone is at work. Nobody should be behind you apart from a van or lorry either. Unless we are now deducing that the reason there is constant traffic on a busy road, is because nobody works more than 16 hours any more and instead spends my money on driving around for no reason. it really perplexes me, traffic levels. Anyway, if the cyclists were holding people up, then why is it ok for people in cars to sit in bournemouth hospital for two hours, holding the car behind them up? cars hold me up and van rivers, buses, lorry drivers, police, ambulances, ALL THE TIME. Cyclists don’t. We only slow it down a little, we dont come to a complete stop and block the road like cars do. Yes i am serious about the jobs thing. I’ve just done 50 hours and at no point between 9am and 6pm was i on the road this week. Yet i hear stories about traffic queues all the way into and out of bournemouth in the middle of the day, whilst i was working….. how can all those people possibly not be at work and be able to drive at the same time? theyve all got the day off have they? so thousands of people all have the day off at once and all chose to drive to bournemouth on the exact same time and route? i dont get it!
Me neither. I nipped out of
Me neither. I nipped out of work yesterday to go to the local builders merchants. Ten minutes there, no problem. I was in the shop for ten minutes. On my way back, utter gridlock. It turned out there had been an accident on the motorway. My point is, many of these people had not left the motorway to avoid the delays, they were local traffic held up by a number who were leaving the motorway. Which shows just how many people are simply driving about each and every day. We are a mere ten minutes from gridlock. Do all these people really need to be out during the working day?
biker phil wrote:
Yup. Motor traffic levels are frequently at or exceeding capacity, and all it takes is one collision in one part of the system and it all grinds to a halt. Clearly what we need is more roads to increase the capacity, a policy which has consistently worked over the past fifty years.*
*May contain huge dollops of BS.
eburtthebike wrote:
Often demonstrated in the Bristol area, as I think you’d know, Burt: if there’s a collision on the M32 or the M4 or the M5 then the whole city grinds to a halt (more than usual) as everyone tries to avoid it.
but your reason for being out
but your reason for being out is fine, you wanted to get an item so briefly went out on the road to get it. But normally, you wouldnt be there, you’d be working. How come there were so many other people driving in the same area at the same time though? i would say ok, retired people, maybe part time workers, or care workers. But it still doesnt explain the consistent flow of traffic in both directions in every road in the country. And even if the people on the road at the same time and area as you were carers, or part time workers, how come they all just happened to be there at the same time? why is there never a gap? margaret the old lady is going for a hospital appt for two pm. Thats why she is there. Ella is a care worker, on the road at two pm, going the other way, going to look after a disabled lady. They should pass eachother, and then that should be it for several minutes. It shouldn’t be car car car car car car car, truck, car car car car. I want to know the answer to this!!
david rides wrote:
Yeah, it’s everyone else briefly getting in the car for a good reason who’s the problem.
Bit embarrassing uploading a
Bit embarrassing uploading a section of video which clearly shows the benefit of riding side by side in a situation where riding single file may have encouraged an ill judged overtake into oncoming traffic with danger to the cyclists from the resultant close pass.
exactly why I think the
exactly why I think the proposed Highway Code changes, with the talk of 1.5/2.0m overtaking clearance and the onus to go single file if drivers wish to overtake, is so wrong. [B]They need the other lane[/b].
But the proposed changes do nothing to disuade them from believing they can somehow squeeze by despite oncoming traffic, [i]if only the bloody cyclists would move out of the way.
Maybe if he and his wife were
Maybe if he and his wife were not travelling two abreast the problem would not have arisen.
“The proposed new wording –
“The proposed new wording – which could potentially spell the death of the chain gang – would say, “You should … ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so”
It looks like they were already doing their new civic duty and preventing the car from overtaking in an unsafe location.
How was the driver communicating to them that he wished to overtake?
I know we all change our
I know we all change our behaviour when we get behind the wheel of a car, but this example is a bit extreme, and shows how far we still have to go to persuade drivers to share the roads. I’m pretty sure that rather than not doing the cause of cyclists any good, agreeing with self-entitled drivers and not knowing the HC isn’t going to do you or your club’s reputations any good.
Maybe it’s because two cyclists made you look bad in front of your other half, but I really don’t think that there’s any excuse for making yourself look such a plank Mike. Maybe next time take the tandem, eh?
Sometime I will share the
Sometime I will share the footage from my tandem ride with 6y.o. on the back, as a delightful woman yells abuse from the passenger window at us as they pass, merely for our temerity to be on the road.
Sadly, for some people it is simply the existence of cyclists that is the problem, regardless of what they do or don’t do.
I wish that when they did the
I wish that when they did the driving test they hammered home that roads are a public right of way, and that they were originally built for any road user. Car drivers seem to think they were built for them because they need the signage and road furniture. I don’t think it helps to dissuade this notion that there are pavements and cycle lanes because it reinforces the idea that the road is for them only. Roads are for all.
I don’t have an issue with
I don’t have an issue with them riding 2 abreast. I do have an issue with the huge gap between them.
Why?
Why?
I’m sorry to read you had a
I’m sorry to read you had a tiff with your lover. I hope you sort it out soon.
Hmm, social distancing
Hmm, social distancing slighly plus also giving room for the one gutter cycling to move in or out easily.TBH, it only looks bad because the one in secondary is probably too close to the curb.
At no point in that video
At no point in that video could I see it would have been safe for him to overtake – single file or two abreast.
Anyone notice the two
Anyone notice the two cyclists riding in the opposite direction single file who were being close passed by everyone who passed them. About 10 seconds in you notice them just as the partner says something. A white Kia slighly moves over but barely goes over the white line but the two cars beforehand don’t alter their line at all.
Yes, proves the sense of
Yes, proves the sense of riding two abreast in the circumstances.
All this shows is that cars are like a magic trick. You can take a cyclist and put them into a steel box and turn them into an asshole…
Furthest roundabout at Urlay
Furthest roundabout at Urlay Nook to traffic lights at yarm 0.8 miles
Total time at 18mph 2:43 (is slight downhill and they look reasonably proficient – could be quicker but going for lower estimate)
At 30 mph limit – 1:36 assuming perfect speedo accuracy, no speeding, no cars slow to turn off the main road and there is no oncoming traffic at the roundabouts.
the injustice!
Absolute dross. I cycle
Absolute dross. I cycle central on all roads, because its much safer (for me) to slow down traffic and make them individually overtake instead of squeezing by without slowing down.
Would he have posted a video if there was a single horse/rider?
Unbelievable!
Unbelievable!
Highway code also says that
Highway code also says that you shouldn’t overtake on the approach to a bend which is exactly what is shown in the picture.
Don’t know why we can’t just
Don’t know why we can’t just be considerate to all. As a bike user, I will pull over to let cars past, when able to. I don’t like being held up by cars being held up by bike riders when I am cycling. This is all a bit tribal, if you are holding up the traffic on your bike, just get out the way.
Mike Drake should be supported in this, well at least I think so. I accept others may not agree, those who insist on riding 2 abreast.
Dhill wrote:
But the point that seems to elude you is that it would not be safe to overtake even if the cyclists were single file. Do you not see the constant stream of traffic in the oncoming lane? Are you suggesting that the chairman crosses the centreline into their path, or that he somehow squeezes by in the lane he’s in? Remember, his car is at least 1.8m wide (plus wing mirrors, but they don’t hurt too bad), plus 1.5m clearance to a single cyclist, plus the width of the cyclist, plus about 60cm from the kerb. Add it up, a lane just is not that wide!
So at this point your advice is for the cyclists to get off the road to allow the chairman by. Very gracious.
As it is they are doing the best they can; by bunching up two abreast they increase his opportunity to find a break in the oncoming traffic long enough to overtake safely on the other side.
Cyclists please do some maths
Cyclists please do some maths,
Motorhome width 2.8m
Road width 3m one lane, 6m for total width
Unless you ride in single file I CANNOT PASS YOU SAFELY giving you 1.5m clearance
Yes you can ride two abreast as you did, but is that being considerate for other road users as you were only doing aboout 12mph. As a result a huge queue built up on the road because you wouldn’t pull in for a few seconds
Oh and giving me the figure multiple times is Section 5 Public Order offence and can land you a fine.
I am a cyclist too but I always help other road users by pulling in so they can get pass on STRAIGHT ROAD stretches
So these cyclists just
So these cyclists just randomly started giving you the finger (assuming that’s what you meant) completely unprovoked? Or were you perhaps sounding your horn at them first, which, of course, would have been an offence in itself?
Oh the irony. The huge queue
Oh the irony. The huge queue of impatient drivers builds up behind you regardless of whether there are cyclists on the road or not.
Caravans and the like should move at night during the holiday season to avoid traffic jams. Better still, pay for a hotel.
Caravans should pay road tax.
Caravans should pay road tax.
Mungecrundle wrote:
Owners of caravans probably do pay VED, in all fairness…
Yes, let’s do the maths.
Yes, let’s do the maths.
Even with a single cyclist 60cm wide riding in the gutter, 0.6 + 1.5 + 2.8 = 4.9, so you’d be 1.9m over the lane marker anyway. That leaves 1.1m for the 1.8m wide cars coming the other way. Math’s a bitch.
So motorhome at 2.8m = you need the whole other lane to overtake. Move over.
So that leaves the whole lane clear for the cyclists regardless of whether they be single file or two abreast. Once you are in the other lane it is up to the cyclists how they make use of their lane – just as if you were coming the other way.
How else are you going to overtake?
I think the idea is the
I think the idea is the cyclists pull over and doff their caps to the gas guzzling, environmentally damaging motor homes.
Well, not quite. If the 2.8m
Well, not quite. If the 2.8m motorhome is in the centre of the 3m far lane, that means they’re 0.1m from the centre marking. For that to be a 1.5m pass, the cyclists can’t be closer than 1.4m from the centre marking. That leaves 1.6m of lane for them to be in. Take off the 0.6m clearance from the kerb, and to ride two abreast while being passed they’d need to squeeze into 1m of road, which would be a little tight.
If there’s a wide load like that behind you, I’d say it is considerate to single out, or even pull over, to let it pass, at a point of your choosing.
I’m still not convinced
I’m still not convinced singling out helps often (if ever). I’m yet to (knowingly) experience a vehicle refrain from overtaking when the opposing lane is completely clear just because the gap left might be slightly less than 1.5m. If the overtaking vehicle is entirely over in the opposing lane, and the speed differential isn’t too high (which it rarely is for a wide vehicle) then generally I don’t find such overtakes particularly dangerous – certainly no worse than a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction travelling at a much greater relative speed.
As in so many situations, I find it is in fact far safer to be two abreast as this halves the length required to overtake and the overtaking manoeuver can therefore be completed more quickly. I would much rather be two abreast and have the caravan (or whatever) slightly less than 1.5m away, than single out and have the caravan abort mid-overtake because an oncoming vehicle came around the next corner.
Yes, there are occassionally situations when the only safe and considerate option is to pull over, but those are relatively rare.
All fair. Personally, if
All fair. Personally, if something like that came up behind me, I’d be looking to ride fairly central initially, to discourage an overtake until I found a spot where I was happy to let it pass, and then pull over completely, because just moving left I wouldn’t trust it to move over enough to pass safely, or not to swing in too early (plus if there’s a queue behind it there’s a greater chance of a poor overtake from another frustrated driver). If it then attempted to pass before that, it’s at least going to be forced to go wider, and I’ve got room to move left if it starts coming too close.
2.8m wide is not road legal,
2.8m wide is not road legal, maximum vehicle width is 2.55m. Most motor homes are 2.3m wide. You must have imagined the problem seeing this is an imaginary vehicle.
My neighbours have an old GMC
My neighbours have an old GMC motorhome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMC_motorhome
It’s abso-f-ing-enormous, but wikipedia still says it’s only 2.4 metres wide.