Positioning on dual carriageways

[jefmcg]

You have obviously completely misunderstood the description of my position on the road.

If I take up a position just a couple of inches to the left of the centre of lane 1 ie. 'own the lane',

The standard width of a traffic lane on a DC in the UK is something like 3.5 or 3.65 metres (thank you google). That's more than 11 feet. I suspect you are really riding a couple of feet, rather than inches from the centre line. The former is often necessary; the latter, I wouldn't do.

 

[jefmcg]

Not the centre line though. The centre of the lane.

No, sometimes I ride closer to the the line of the right tyre position of a sedan. Still well away from the line, but not in the middle of the lane. Only if primary isn't "working". I call it "strong primary"**.

It's strange how roads seem to have personalities. Usually primary works, in that cars move to the next lane. But it seems if one driver doesn't bother moving completely out of my lane and passes too closely, another driver a few minutes later will do the same thing, like the behaviour is somehow coming from the road, not the drivers.

In the 3 lane DC above, I had to move as far right as I ever had in the left lane, despite the motorists having 2 more lanes on an effectively empty road with great visibility so somewhere between 500m and a kilometre to move over one lane.

Edit @User9609 usage is nice "passive primary to a dominant primary"

 

[Ian H]

^^^ This. Though sometimes you have to move to what I call "strong primary" to really take the lane.
I'm not sure why that makes a difference. Is it so you have an escape route? There's usually a lot of crap in there including parts of vehicles, swept off the roads by the cars, so if you need to move into it in an emergency situation it could easily not be a safe move.

To be clear, I'm on the carriageway, right of the fog line.

 

[MichaelW2]

It is always important to use road position to affect the psychology of overtaking drivers, even if you work on a subconscious level.
Yesterday I was approaching on single-lane downhill, towards 2 lines of traffic backed up behind a red light. A big bus was stopped and going nowhere, so I cruised from 20m away to a halt.
The BMW driver behind me was having none of this and accelerated towards the big bus, half-overtaking me, crossing a foot into the opposing lane, then as he drew alongside, he steered back into my lane.
I obviously failed to manage his overtaking fetish with a primary position. maybe a primary plus would have worked better.

 

[sidevalve]

Ok I give in - why are you in the primary position anyway ? Unless making a manoeuvre - turning right / left or approaching a junction at which you wish to do so or a hazard of some kind what's the point - just to p- - s people off ? I'm not saying ride in the gutter [before the 'all cyclists are perfect and have a right to rule the road' crew get involved] but a dual carriageway - as far as a cycle is concerned is just a lane like any other with another one going in the same direction beside it [usually] why in effect do you want to block one lane off and force overtakers over into the other lane when they could overtake quite safely without if you were in the normal position ? Why do you want to 'take control' of the lane ? What is the reason or is it just another 'Ohh look at me I'm a cyclist and I can block the road' thing.

 

[oldstrath]

Ok I give in - why are you in the primary position anyway ? Unless making a manoeuvre - turning right / left or approaching a junction at which you wish to do so or a hazard of some kind what's the point - just to p- - s people off ? I'm not saying ride in the gutter [before the 'all cyclists are perfect and have a right to rule the road' crew get involved] but a dual carriageway - as far as a cycle is concerned is just a lane like any other with another one going in the same direction beside it [usually] why in effect do you want to block one lane off and force overtakers over into the other lane when they could overtake quite safely without if you were in the normal position ? Why do you want to 'take control' of the lane ? What is the reason or is it just another 'Ohh look at me I'm a cyclist and I can block the road' thing.

Generally I would prefer motor vehicles to move into another lane to overtake, just like they would a car. This is easier on a dual carriageway, because they do indeed have another lane all of their own for the purpose.

I don't want this because 'cyclists are perfect and have a right to rule the road', but because neither I, nor the road surface, nor the drivers, is perfect, so the more space the better. What's the big deal, apart from the general dickhead 'I must drive at or above the speed limit at all times and no evil cyclist may impede my divine passage' thing?

 

[theclaud]

I'm not saying ride in the gutter

Yeah - you are.

 

[mjr]

Take primary more often because dual carriageway lanes are often narrower than single ones (S2W ones).

 

[Drago]

Ride firmly in the primary and take control of your lane. It's a 2 lane road (I presume) and needs.to be treated as such. If you don't take your lane then other road users will treat it as a 3 lane road when dealing with you, and that's gonna get you squashed.

I'm never entirely comfortable cycling in fast roads, ie, those with a speed limit above 40MPH. We are of course permitted to do it, and I do often do it myself, but the design of most of such roads and the behaviour of a significant minority of motorists is counter to safe passage by bike.

 

[Dirk]

....... I suspect you are really riding a couple of feet, rather than inches from the centre line........

Then you suspect wrongly.
My position, as previously stated, is a few inches to the left of the centre of the lane I am riding in.

 

[steveindenmark]

Im not being funny but that sounds like you are taking up all of a Lane on a Dual carrigeway.

Draw us a picture.

 

[Sea of vapours]

Im not being funny but that sounds like you are taking up all of a Lane on a Dual carrigeway.

Assuming that is what is meant - and that is certainly a reasonable assumption - what is wrong with that?

I don't ride on dual carriageways, precisely since I think the above is what a cyclist should do; they should take up the whole lane and oblige cars to overtake properly in lane 2, lane 3, etc. Unfortunately, I don't trust all vehicle drivers to recognise that they need to change lanes to overtake so I'd be uncomfortable doing that and I therefore don't ride on them other than very briefly for short distances when essential.

The alternative (to taking the lane) is to cycle such that a vehicle traveling (legally) at up to 70mph can pass within the same lane whilst being overtaken by another vehicle. That is, to say the least, not an appealing situation for the cyclist but is bound to arise unless the cyclist has emphatically 'taken the lane'. If I'm on a bike I want vehicles traveling at that relative velocity to be in their own lane, hence the strong primary position is required, but since most cyclists will hug the edge, most motorists will in turn assume that they can overtake any cyclist within lane 1 and will not be anticipating the possibility of a) moving out in good time into lane 2, b) slowing to the speed of the cyclist if they cannot move into lane 2 due to traffic approaching them from behind which is already in lane 2.

Given the standard of anticipation of at least some drivers (not considering the road far enough ahead), combined with the lack of familiarity with the idea of a cyclist 'taking the whole lane' on a dual carriageway, I don't see a safe solution, which is why I avoid them. That's relatively easy to do around here, but clearly isn't in many places.

This is yet another of those things that needs behavioural change on both sides:
- drivers need to recognise that they should change lanes, not merely shuffle out slightly, to pass cyclists, especially at high relative speeds;
- cyclists need to 'take the lane' to compel this behaviour.
I can't see either of those happening in a hurry though

On the OP's original point: I agree that there definitely does seem to be a psychological reticence in some drivers to crossing the white line at all, and if they are forced to then they are more likely to completely change lane. That's a definite advantage of 'strong primary', but fails to address the issue of those drivers not paying attention to the potential need to do so.

 

[steveindenmark]

This is just my opinion but if I rode a bike down the centre of a lane on a Dual carrigeway. I would expect at some stage to be abused or undertaken by a moped or motorbike. Being just right of primary should make other traffic move out. Some Dual carrigeway lanes are very wide and you can certainly get a car to overtake you safely while staying in your lane.

Drivers do not necessarily have to change lanes to pass cyclists but they need to give them plenty of space. Which they can do on most Dual carriageways.

 

[Sea of vapours]

I agree on the moped/motorcycle issue and - were I on a dual carriageway in primary - would move over if one approached in order to allow them to stay in lane.

On your 'plenty of space' thing though, with respect to cars, lorries and vans:
- The key here is whether the car can stay wholly in lane 1. If they can't then they might just as well move into lane 2 (since no other vehicle can overtake them in lane 2 anyway because they are partially in lane 2 to avoid driving into the cyclist). It 'costs' the vehicle nothing to make that lane change and it's overall safer / nicer.
- Looking at lane widths (UK, which are quite wide internationally), the standard is 3.65 metres. A car is about 2m wide (some a bit less, some a fair bit more, including mirrors) and lorries are even bigger. So, that's 1.65m left for the cyclist and the space around the cyclist. Let's say the cyclist has 42cm bars, so they'll be about 50cm wide overall if totally stable. That leaves 1.65m minus 0.5m for 'space either side of bike, i.e. 1.15m. Just over a metre is not much if a vehicle is passing at 50mph (relative speed to the cyclist), and that also assumes the cyclist is right on the outer edge of the carriageway, on the white line, but not in the gutter part. Even if we assume that the cyclist should ride right at the edge - which I don't - one metre is not enough, given the relative speeds. It's OK-ish when passing speeds are, say, 15-20mph, around towns, but really not enough for my liking at dual carriageway speeds.

Personally, I don't pass cyclists on dual carriageways without changing lanes. I instead imagine the result of them hitting, or swerving to avoid, a pothole or other hazard and ameliorating that event requires a three metre margin, at least, which means I'm in lane 2. This also means that any vehicle behind cannot imagine that it can get past in 'half of lane 2', were I to merely move out a bit to pass the bike and only therefore only slightly encroach on lane 2. And if I've messed up and can't get into lane 2 then I'll slow 'til I can. Many people don't drive like that which is why I try to avoid cycling on dual carriageways.

 

[Dirk]

Im not being funny but that sounds like you are taking up all of a Lane on a Dual carrigeway.

Draw us a picture.

I'm finding it difficult to understand which part of - 'a few inches to the left of the centre of lane 1'- that people are having trouble comprehending.