Stay at home

[Sunset tripper]

I'm a pedestrian, a cyclist and a motorist so I see it from different viewpoints. I've been cycling practically all my life. Not a lycra type cyclist, I have mostly used the bike as a mode of transport, getting to work, going to the shop etc. and also for hitting the trails.
I have noticed a big change over the years. When I was a kid the cops would pull you over for cycling on the pavement, now I think its actively encouraged for kids under 16 or maybe its under 14.
Another big change is some pavements are also cycle paths which cause great confusion to pedestrians and motorists. Pedestrians are outraged you are cycling on the pavement and motorists are enraged that you are delaying them by 30 secs by cycling on the road.
Recently during lockdown I have been cycling most days and the Inverness distributor road is one of these roads where pedestrians expect you to cycle on the road and motorists think you should be cycling on the pavement.
Myself being an easygoing chap on my mountain bike try to please everyone by alternating from pavement to road and also cycling this particular road at a time when the pavement/cycle path is quiet.

Amazingly I've had 2 drivers pull up alongside and ask why I am not on the pavement.

I asked them kindly to go home and have a look at the [expletive deleted] highway code, and questioned if they got their driving license in a [expletive deleted] lucky bag.

A big problem, apart from the motorists and pedestrians generally being uneducated or maybe just out of date with the laws, is that the footpath and cycle lane are often not segregated which pushes many cyclists to use the road full time, which is perfectly legal and for fast cyclists on road bikes the safer option anyway.

To be fair some cyclists probably deserve a bad name and make life harder for the rest of us.

[Moriarty]

Good to see that, in a period of uncertainty and change, that there remains one comforting source of constancy - other people are awful.

Roads (and pavements) have become more of a shared space recently, shouldn't come as too much of a surprise that there is a fraction of the population who conflate "shared" with "mine".

[Marty_JG]

I try to be considerate of cyclists but I was annoyed at a pair of cyclists who decided to cycle side-by-side up the A82, trying to "own the road". I noticed in my mirror some fist-waving from them, for some reason.

Occasionally I get told "but cycling two abreast is perfectly legal" and I have to point them to Rule 66 of the Highway Code: it's perfectly legal unless the road is narrow, busy, or around corners; and the A82 is both busy and bendy.

[ChrisButch]

I try to be considerate of cyclists but I was annoyed at a pair of cyclists who decided to cycle side-by-side up the A82, trying to "own the road". I noticed in my mirror some fist-waving from them, for some reason.

Occasionally I get told "but cycling two abreast is perfectly legal" and I have to point them to Rule 66 of the Highway Code: it's perfectly legal unless the road is narrow, busy, or around corners; and the A82 is both busy and bendy.

In circumstances such as those you describe, riding two abreast is often safer because it discourages unsafe close passing when there are motorised vehicles in the opposite carriageway. And when it is safe to pass, then riders in pairs are passed quicker than if spaced out in single file. But without knowing the exact circumstances of the road or the traffic conditions at the time, it's impossible to judge.

[CharlesT]

To be fair some cyclists probably deserve a bad name and make life harder for the rest of us.

AKA Couriers. 😄 I spent all my working life in the City of London, and if you want to see foolish and inconsiderate riding that's the place to be.

As a solo cyclist I tend to agree with the two abreast comments. In my neck of the woods the roads are generally on the narrower side and most of those riding two abreast drop to single file when necessary. This is often impossible when group riding and most motorists seem to accept this. As with many things it is the pig-headed minority on both sides who attract attention.

As for "owning the road ", there are instances when this is necessary to be safe and learning how to do so without being a clown is a matter of experience, as is knowing when to concede the space regardless of your right to it. For my part I always ride a metre out from the verge, avoids a lot of nasty bits of road and gives you somewhere to go if needs be.

For those who don't ride it's worth saying that on a bike you often can't hear a car coming up on you, more so for quieter motorcycles, motorists please note. I drive a hybrid and i have to be particularly careful at low speeds as I can tell people can't hear me coming. This will only increase as more electric vehicles are in use.

[al78]

Good to see that, in a period of uncertainty and change, that there remains one comforting source of constancy - other people are awful.

No, it is thoughtless people or smart phone dumb users that are awful, and there are enough of them around that you sometimes can't avoid them.

Public rights of way are shared facilities and there is a hierachy that the most vulnerable road users should have priority, so pedestrians are at the top, followed by cyclists, and motorists at the bottom (because of the risk they externalise). Unfortunately the more extreme militant out there think having priority means not having to bother with good manners and consideration, a bit like online bullies, they know you can't do anything about it, so they carry on using their vulnerability status as a bullying weapon. You have to consider that people who do behave and think like this are deeply unhappy inside, so it is a reflection on them, not you.

I don't have problems interacting with pedestrians when cycling on shared use facilities, or interacting with motorists when cycling on the road (a bell works well in the former), but it seems some people live in less cyclist tolerant parts of the country. I find being considerate works, and to an extent comes back around when a driver concedes their own priority to me.

[StevieC]

So to summarise, the following people are getting social distancing wrong:

Cyclists
Runners
Dog Walkers
Couples
Motorists

I'll add another category - families. Two adults, couple of kids, maybe a pram and a dog in there too - strolling along the pavement or the canal tow path as if they own the place!!

[Bonzo]

Spot on. The simple rule is that if more people stay at home and exercise from home then there's every chance we'll get over this sooner rather than later.

The government are hoping that the vast majority use their common sense and make additional sacrifices now so that we can get back onto the hills before the next geological epoch.

Anyway, has anyone any advice as to how to inform someone to walk on the correct side of the road (no pavements) without the potential for escalating into a fight? It seems that some people enjoy playing chicken with oncoming pedestrians who are walking on the correct side of the road.

Correct side of road? Is that the side facing oncoming traffic?

That's right.

There's a very popular walk near to us on a road with no pavement. It provides excellent all-round views so attracts large numbers of walkers walking in both directions.

On busy days I've been amazed how many people haven't noticed that they're walking against the grain. You can look down the road and see that 95% of people are walking on the correct side of the road with a small number of buffoons failing to notice that they're 'not like the others'.

I quite like the Taser idea. I'll get onto Amazon now

[al78]

Spot on. The simple rule is that if more people stay at home and exercise from home then there's every chance we'll get over this sooner rather than later.

The government are hoping that the vast majority use their common sense and make additional sacrifices now so that we can get back onto the hills before the next geological epoch.

Anyway, has anyone any advice as to how to inform someone to walk on the correct side of the road (no pavements) without the potential for escalating into a fight? It seems that some people enjoy playing chicken with oncoming pedestrians who are walking on the correct side of the road.

Correct side of road? Is that the side facing oncoming traffic?

That's right.

There's a very popular walk near to us on a road with no pavement. It provides excellent all-round views so attracts large numbers of walkers walking in both directions.

On busy days I've been amazed how many people haven't noticed that they're walking against the grain. You can look down the road and see that 95% of people are walking on the correct side of the road with a small number of buffoons failing to notice that they're 'not like the others'.

I quite like the Taser idea. I'll get onto Amazon now

What once confused me is that I was told that groups of walkers should walk in the direction of the traffic, which is opposite to my understanding that solo walkers are advised to walk facing oncoming traffic (the latter is intuitive, if you can see what is coming you have a greater chance of avoiding being splattered by a careless driver). Why the difference between the two situations?

[Sgurr]

"Did you get your driver's license inn a lucky bag" I wish I'd thought of this one, but am no longer fast enough to catch up cars who cut me up when they have to stop at the lights and am now scared to cycle since a bollard attacked husband and hospitalised him (and then he caught Covid 19...out now thank you.)

[CharlesT]

"Did you get your driver's license inn a lucky bag" I wish I'd thought of this one, but am no longer fast enough to catch up cars who cut me up when they have to stop at the lights and am now scared to cycle since a bollard attacked husband and hospitalised him (and then he caught Covid 19...out now thank you.)

You've got to watch those bollards, some are downright evil.
Glad to hear you're other half is now recovered.

[mynthdd2]

in this day and age who now knows what a lucky bag is?

[madprof]

Why the difference between the two situations?

The person at the back of the group is known as the "canary". The sound of their body impacting with the bonnet of the car will alert other walkers as to the oncoming vehicle and they will move out of the way accordingly.Thus walking in a group with the flow of traffic is perfectly safe.

[dav2930]

Why the difference between the two situations?

The person at the back of the group is known as the "canary". The sound of their body impacting with the bonnet of the car will alert other walkers as to the oncoming vehicle and they will move out of the way accordingly.Thus walking in a group with the flow of traffic is perfectly safe.

Unless you're the "canary".

[magicdin]

Depends on the road. On a straight road yes walk on right towards traffic. But on a winding road better to walk on the outer edge of the bend so that motorists,bikers,cyclists see you earlier.