magnatom said:
It's perfect, because we were discussing the safety of the maneuver, not the legality. I think it has already been discussed that overtaking is legal if the traffic is stationary. The real concern is safety when overtaking from vehicles you are overtaking and vehicles coming in the opposite direction. The video covers that.
There isn't much difference between temporary lights and permanent lights. They both function the same.
Thing is, the safety and legality aren't entirely seperable. I'm reminded of the number of times I see cyclists going the wrong way down one way streets literally run off the road by oncoming motorists here in Cambridge (literally happens all the time). What the cyclist is doing isn't dangerous in itself, but because it is perceived to be illegal theres a sub-set of motorists who will just go right at them, safe in the knowledge that the bike will find somehow to get the hell out of the way.
This scenario strikes me as rather similar; yes, you can legally overtake there (although whether it would be considered 'overtaking' as such when the traffic isn't moving at all is an interesting question), but the oncoming motorist doesn't necessarily agree with that interpretation, and while most will be cool with that theres the odd one who will go right at you and run you off the road. I am
in no way a mild mannered, submissive cyclist, but I'd still refrain from going around the outside where there are temporary traffic lights and where theres a solid white line. While yes, you can keep a sharp eye for oncoming motorists to get back inside if you really need to, that also seems to be asking for conflict with other road users (namely the motorists in the queue of traffic who then have to keep a sharp eye out for your manoevres).
Just doesn't seem worth it to me.
