Undertaking on cycle paths

[mjr]

But in the incident I had it wasn't stubbornness it was just the difficult thing when you are heading directly for someone and don't know whether to divert or to keep on.

That seems like a false dilemma: hand signals or calls are better, but whichever you pick, if the other person continues to match you, stop (or attempt to), which has the benefit of minimising the damage to you.

 

[Starchivore]

That seems like a false dilemma: hand signals or calls are better, but whichever you pick, if the other person continues to match you, stop (or attempt to), which has the benefit of minimising the damage to you.

Yeah, it was just one of those ones where you try to guess what someone is going to do and get it wrong. My mistake was presuming he understood that you are supposed to keep to the left, which was a bit naiive.

 

[mjr]

My mistake was presuming he understood that you are supposed to keep to the left, which was a bit naiive.

I still feel you were stubborn in refusing to stop when on a collision course. He made more mistakes, but two wrongs and all that... but yes, naïve. After all, not even lorry drivers understand to keep left when there's signs:

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a4dQG5fIHzM

Trust no-one, but at least usually no-one dies when cyclists get it wrong.

 

[smutchin]

don't know whether to divert or to keep on.

You're right, it isn't easy to make a snap decision in those situations, but think about what you'd do in a car in that situation - I assume you'd always slow down or stop rather than risk a head-on collision.

 

[EnPassant]

Hm, it's another reason I don't like cycle paths, or perhaps a re-iteration of the one I sort of disagree with @mjr about in a thread that's now locked. Is it not the case that when two people are on a collision course what often happens is they both move to avoid each other ending up back on a collision course? And then do it again and even again? This is the 'shall we dance?' moment pedestrians sometimes have?

Thus if you stick rigidly to course you have a decent chance they move first or at least it's no worse than both moving, of course if neither moves, there's a short period where both work out the other isn't going to and then do so, trouble is, that's again often the same time frame, so you are back to square one. I've always assumed avoiding this situation is at least partly why there are pass this side rules in the first place.

This situation is so dangerous for aircraft that they have T-CAS (up to I think revision IV now) in airliners specifically to avoid it.
If I remember correctly this system negotiates with the other aircraft automatically and after a few microseconds of negotiation between computers advises one to 'pull up' and the other 'down' (there may also be some sideways component, I'm no authority on it).

 

[smutchin]

Thus if you stick rigidly to course you have a decent chance they move first

If you stop, you have an even better chance that they'll move first.

 

[Starchivore]

If you stop, you have an even better chance that they'll move first.

yeah, I definitely could have done that. But at the time it doesn't seem necessary, and it wasn't a high speed thing. Looking back I think he genuinely had no notion that he was supposed to keep to the left, and probably was confused and alarmed that I seemed to be veering more to "his" side.

 

[EnPassant]

If you stop, you have an even better chance that they'll move first.

Sure, but without wishing to derail the original topic here by banging on endlessly about the general uselessness of cycle/shared paths with regard to making reasonable progress , it's why I'd sooner use the road in the first place ordinarily.

 

[mjr]

Sure, but without wishing to derail the original topic here by banging on endlessly about the general uselessness of cycle/shared paths with regard to making reasonable progress , it's why I'd sooner use the road in the first place ordinarily.

Because no cyclist ever gets forced to a stop by an oncoming motorist asserting a priority that they don't have and it's completely harmless if you collide with one?

 

[EnPassant]

Oh come on mjr, I didn't say that. .

 

[mjr]

Oh come on mjr, I didn't say that. .

I know you didn't and I'm just trying to highlight how avoiding all cycle tracks is an absurd overreaction to a minority of users not following the highway cod. Most of the same problems occur on carriageways but few posters on CC advocate avoiding all of them.

 

[EnPassant]

We've been over this elsewhere. Clearly where you are and possibly the way you use them is different to my experience here in Gloucester.

I have also previously mentioned elsewhere that there are a few around Oxford that I will use, and named them. For the most part here they are either too narrow, too obstructed by side roads and all the other issues that were mentioned to be used by anyone wishing to travel much faster than walking pace.

In any event, it's probably off-topic for this thread which is about passing on the left if you are using one.

 

[smutchin]

Assuming that other users will keep left is part of the problem.

 

[mjr]

We've been over this elsewhere. Clearly where you are and possibly the way you use them is different to my experience here in Gloucester.

Yeah, but fortunately, Gloucestershire doesn't build all of them across the whole country. You stop overgeneralising and I'll stop picking you up on it, OK?

This situation is so dangerous for aircraft that they have T-CAS (up to I think revision IV now) in airliners specifically to avoid it.
If I remember correctly this system negotiates with the other aircraft automatically and after a few microseconds of negotiation between computers advises one to 'pull up' and the other 'down' (there may also be some sideways component, I'm no authority on it).

If only cyclists had some way they could negotiate with oncoming cyclists about which side they're going to pass each other.

 

[EnPassant]

I am not overgeneralising, so there is nothing to 'pick up' on. your experience is different to mine, I could say you are overgeneralising and dismissing people who say your method is impractical at their location . I have done what most people do, shared my experience of them, so far as I can tell, so have you.

Your experience, where you are, riding the way you do is that it is entirely possible to pass people on them at a reasonable pace by means of the occasional use of a bell. Mine is not, that's all.

Edit to add: Oncoming, isn't normally the problem (for me ), It's those heading in the same direction who you are behind and can't see you.