Waving to invite traffic behind to overtake

[Charlotte]

But does your 'non to swift' paceline have the etiquete to pull over and let a queue of cars past rather than 'stew' behind and frustrated drivers may bad calls about when to pass...?

Although I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "non to swift", I can tell you that when I'm out with my club, if we're on a narrow road and there are enough of us to be in a double paceline, then we're moving at the sort of speed where following vehicles can still make progress without needing to overtake us. 

It's very rare that we single out because although that might give road width to overtake, it would mean that the following vehicle would have a line of bikes double the length to come past.  That would encourage them to partially overtake the group and swing back into the middle of us if an unexpected oncoming vehicle appears.

I've been waving cars through since I joined the C.T.C, riding double, then singling out and waving them through was always part of what we did learned from the older riders.

The older riders may have been doing what they thought best for twenty years ago, but in today's faster, more dangerous (and sadly, more litigious) age, I strongly advise riders in a large group not to single out and not to beckon vehicles to overtake.

At all.  Ever.

[nicknack]

Don't think I've ever beckoned a car to pass me, but I do pull over in an obvious manner if I think it's safe and appropriate.

[Polar Bear]

I'll extend my arm with my palm flat to indicate to a following driver that there is a hazard and they should wait.   I'll even beckon a vehicle through on a long straight with no oncoming when I'm on my own.   I wouldn't beckon one through when in a group.

[Attitudeless Badger]

The older riders may have been doing what they thought best for twenty years ago, but in today's faster, more dangerous (and sadly, more litigious) age, I strongly advise riders in a large group not to single out and not to beckon vehicles to overtake.

At all.  Ever.

That sounds very much like a pro-helmet arguement, which tends to be dissed by a lot of the forum.  What is so different between the two?

[mattc]

I've been waving cars through since I joined the C.T.C, riding double, then singling out and waving them through was always part of what we did learned from the older riders.

In my limited ride-leading experience, the problem with this is that rarely do ALL the group members know the 'etiquette'.

A group that takes 2 minutes to get organised is harder to overtake than a group that just continues doing the same thing, at a predictable pace.

[citoyen]

I stopped before the keep clear to make sure my observer and any other following traffic wouldn't block the keep clear markings or stop that car coming out.   It's that petty observance of the RoadCraft and advanced rules that made me walk out and not go back.

Surely it's not your responsibility but the responsibility of the person following to make sure they don't block keep clear markings?

d.

[Charlotte]

The older riders may have been doing what they thought best for twenty years ago, but in today's faster, more dangerous (and sadly, more litigious) age, I strongly advise riders in a large group not to single out and not to beckon vehicles to overtake.

At all.  Ever.

That sounds very much like a pro-helmet arguement, which tends to be dissed by a lot of the forum.  What is so different between the two?

At best, wearing a helmet might mitigate the injuries sustained by a cyclist during a collision, either with another road user or with the road itself.  There aren't enough peer-reviewed studies to say any more than that.

Not beckoning vehicles to overtake from behind and not singling out from a double paceline to allow them to do so prevents inappropriate overtaking.  Although other collisions could still take place, if there's no overtaking, there won't be any overtaking-related collisions.

[Mr Larrington]

I frequently stick out an arm out to stop drivers overtaking where it isn't safe, such as climbing Dark Hill in Richmond Park. The number of drivers who think it's fine to overtake slow moving cyclists over solid double white lines in the middle of the road approaching a blind crest and corner is quite staggering. This is despite seeing plenty of cars and cyclists coming down the hill at a relatively constant rate.

There was a piece on BBC London News a month or two ago, concerning Crap Cycle Lanes.  They filmed Richard Evans being overtaken by a string of traffic.  The last vehicle in the chain waited until the front bumper of his Golf GTi was approximately one inch from Richard's rear wheel before pulling out and overtaking with half his vehicle in the opposite lane while approaching the summit of a bridge.

Pull over to let following vehicles pass: yes
Indicate to following vehicles that overtaking might lead to a sudden drop in their no-claims bonus: yes
Beckon them to overtake: nyet

[nuttycyclist]

I stopped before the keep clear to make sure my observer and any other following traffic wouldn't block the keep clear markings or stop that car coming out.   It's that petty observance of the RoadCraft and advanced rules that made me walk out and not go back.

Surely it's not your responsibility but the responsibility of the person following to make sure they don't block keep clear markings?

d.

Indeed. And that was his point in the heated discussion we had afterwards.

<back to real world instead of theoretical>

We all know that drivers forget to observe road markings, so there was a possibility that the following traffic would block the keep clear markings.

I was approaching at very low speed, preparing to stop, and had I passed the markings then I'd have only just fitted into the last remaining space at the back of the queue.

Why should I force past the junction with the driver waiting to pull out, just to squeeze into a short space?  Much easier to just stop before the Keep Clear markings and be polite.

[citoyen]

I've done this once or twice, but what I've realised is this: You have to be really confident that it's safe for them to pass, and will continue to be safe for some time to come.

This about sums it up for me. I've done it occasionally, but only if I think the driver is being excessively cautious not to overtake and thereby potentially causing other dangers.

Charlotte's right - it's not your responsibility to "be nice" to other road users and even if the law says that it's up to them to make sure it's safe, I bet you could get in trouble for beckoning when it turns out not to be safe. I never beckon other road users when I'm in the car.

I often hold out a hand, palm backwards, to indicate it isn't safe to try to overtake.

Like Charlotte, I mostly try to discourage inappropriate overtaking by my road position. Doesn't always seem to work, though, so I have been known to use this gesture - there's one particular point on my ride from home to the station where the road narrows on a blind bend. You wouldn't believe the number of idiots who try to overtake there, even if I'm riding practically in the middle of the road, so I often have to use it there. Never get thanked for it, even if I've probably helped prevent an accident.  

d.

[citoyen]

<back to real world instead of theoretical>

We all know that drivers forget to observe road markings...

Yes, and in the real world it's still their responsibility if they do that. I've had twits end up behind me in the box junction on a level crossing by failing to observe road markings. It's still not my fault if they get crushed by a train.

Why should I force past the junction with the driver waiting to pull out, just to squeeze into a short space?  Much easier to just stop before the Keep Clear markings and be polite.

Interestingly emotive terms there. Either your bike fitted in the space or it didn't. I'm afraid I'm with your instructor on this one.

As Bunk says to McNulty in The Wire: "There you go again, giving a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." And look where it got McNulty...

d.

[Jaded]

It seems to me that we are talking about two different types of road. Rural quiet and others?

I'd not recommend to non-drivers to do this, I think you need the experience of driving vehicles to better (best?) judge a wave through.

[Wendy]

I'm usually a waver on through, but I'm finding Charlotte's argument quite persuasive.  I'll give it a try on my next few commutes and report back.

[JohnP]

...

Charlotte's right - it's not your responsibility to "be nice" to other road users and even if the law says that it's up to them to make sure it's safe, I bet you could get in trouble for beckoning when it turns out not to be safe. I never beckon other road users when I'm in the car.

Has the Highway Code suddenly stopped applying to we cyclists?

Yes it is our responsibility to "be nice" to other road users.

Rules 162 - 169 are quite clear where responsible behaviour is expected BY ALL ROAD USERS.

The thought that riding in a double pace line will prevent inappropriate overtaking is risible IMO.  I don't have problems with riding doubled. I don't have problems with groups. I do have problems with large doubled groups who can easily be longer than (say) a modern artic. I believe that this type of group should make some attempt to open up a few gaps. Overtakers can then comply with HC and proceed safely in a controlled series of shorter overtakes.


minor RANT from Sunday morning.   Arrived behind 2 'club' cyclists on 2 lane twisty country road. Took up station about 3 cars lengths behind and towards centre line to discourage any other cars behind me.  Knew the road well and was totally prepared to wait for a mile or more for a wider section.  Really pissed off when the rear rider looked behind and very deliberately moved to double with the rider in front.  A non cycling driver may have taken even more exception than I did.

169 specifically says DO NOT HOLD UP ....

[citoyen]

It's that petty observance of the RoadCraft and advanced rules that made me walk out and not go back.

You know, this is a rather presumptuous comment too - are you sure it was "petty observance"?

I thought Roadcraft was all about the very good reasons why you should observe the rules, and that the instructors/organisers have given long, hard thought to matters such as this.

d.

[Wendy]

It's that petty observance of the RoadCraft and advanced rules that made me walk out and not go back.

You know, this is a rather presumptuous comment too - are you sure it was "petty observance"?

I thought Roadcraft was all about the very good reasons why you should observe the rules, and that the instructors/organisers have given long, hard thought to matters such as this.

d.

LOL, I know.  I remember Nutty's complaint about being told to be in the offside line on a DC for a left bend, and complaining that perhaps there might be traffic coming up from behind.  Observation, and possibly negotiation or changing lanes, old chap.

[citoyen]

Yes it is our responsibility to "be nice" to other road users.

No it isn't. That's not what it says in the HC.

Rules 162 - 169 are quite clear where responsible behaviour is expected BY ALL ROAD USERS.
...
169 specifically says DO NOT HOLD UP ....

Oh well, in that case, let's clear the road of all cyclists because we can't have motorists being compelled to slow down and drive sensibly for a few seconds, can we?  

Try reading the sections of the HC about safe overtaking before making any more ignorant comments.

d.

[JohnP]

I've read them and I fully understand them.  I do not make ignorant observations. I do have to deal with ignorant people like you.

I'm out of this thread.
....................................................................................

[clarion]

It's arguable that doubled cyclists are easier to overtake than single file.  If it's safe to overtake at all, you should eb giving well enough space, and it's a much shorter object.

[citoyen]

I do not make ignorant observations.

You've failed to observe the point of this thread, which is not about riding two abreast, or in big groups, but about whether or not it's appropriate to beckon cars to overtake. My impression from the OP is that the question was asked in respect of cycling alone.

And you've failed to observe that my point was not that we should deliberately hold up other road users but that we should be wary of trying to be helpful when it might not be safe to do so.

And you've failed to observe that riding responsibly does not mean getting off the road the moment a car comes up behind you. Causing a motorist to slow down for a moment because it's not safe for them to overtake is NOT the same as holding them up.

I'm out of this thread.

Good riddance if your last comment is the best you can contribute. I do try not to get angry when getting involved in internet forum discussions but you've managed to pluck my strings good and proper.

d.

[Chris S]

What's difficult to overtake is a 200m long line of cyclists riding wheel to wheel - but trying to encourage a gap to open (calling "Oil up" or "Car up") usually results in this: No change.

[nuttycyclist]

Why should I force past the junction with the driver waiting to pull out, just to squeeze into a short space?  Much easier to just stop before the Keep Clear markings and be polite.

Interestingly emotive terms there. Either your bike fitted in the space or it didn't. I'm afraid I'm with your instructor on this one.

Yes the bike fitted... if I put the overhanging numberplate just past the white line and left less space than I like to between me and the vehicle in front.  Had it been on an uphill road I wouldn't have stopped there in case the driver rolled back with a bad hill start.

In order to stop that soon after the white line I'd have had to approach slowly, spending lots of time across the nose of the vehicle waiting to pull out.  The whole time I was doing that I could see that there was no oncoming traffic and so I was preventing the driver from proceeding.

Stopping where I did, (not beckoning the driver out btw) allowed him to proceed unhindered with his journey.  Sticking to "da roolz" would have been petty and rude.

We should be sharing the roads, not being selfish and looking solely at numero uno.

It's that petty observance of the RoadCraft and advanced rules that made me walk out and not go back.

You know, this is a rather presumptuous comment too - are you sure it was "petty observance"?

I thought Roadcraft was all about the very good reasons why you should observe the rules, and that the instructors/organisers have given long, hard thought to matters such as this.

d.

LOL, I know.  I remember Nutty's complaint about being told to be in the offside line on a DC for a left bend, and complaining that perhaps there might be traffic coming up from behind.  Observation, and possibly negotiation or changing lanes, old chap.

Yes, they are petty observance of the rules.

Taking Bent Mikey's memory, yes it was a gentle left hand bend on a dual carriageway.  At 70mph, whilst correctly positioned in the inside lane, you could easily see that the lane ahead was obstruction free for at least twice the required stopping distance.   Absolutely no need to switch to the outside lane.

However, out they all went.   Had I joined them then that would have been four motorcyclists sitting at 70mph in the outside lane.

The Highway Code says to use the left hand lane unless overtaking.

So, in one hand I have the rules of the road as taught to all road users.  In the other hand I have a select few who are riding to a separate agenda.  What example are they setting to the person who's just passed their test and not seen a copy of RoadCraft?   The road users who have only read the Highway Code will be looking at that group of Advanced Drivers/Motorcyclists and raising their eyebrows at "typical outside lane hoggers".

My issue is slightly different to Mikey's recollection.  It wasn't the lane change or lack of observation that concerned me.  It was the pettiness of sitting out in the outside lane when the inside lane was just as good.  The comment at the time re other traffic was for what occurs if a sillybilly comes flying up from behind at 90 or so (as happens on those roads).  Whilst sitting out in the lane you need an eagle eye on the mirror to watch out for that, whilst also looking ahead at where you're going; then need to make a judgement call as to when to pull back in to allow sillybilly to pass.  

Isn't it just easier to sit in the inside lane, as per the Highway Code, while keeping an ye out front and an eye on the mirror?  No need to change lanes when sillybilly roars up.

[Charlotte]

I do have problems with large doubled groups who can easily be longer than (say) a modern artic. I believe that this type of group should make some attempt to open up a few gaps. Overtakers can then comply with HC and proceed safely in a controlled series of shorter overtakes.

I disagree.  I suggest that unless they themselves are overtaking parked cars or other road users, a large bunch of fast cyclists are safer remaining in a double pace line in pretty much all circumstances and road conditions.

If such a pack singles out, they double the effective length of the group.  This makes an overtake no safer.

Similarly, if such a pack singles out and then splits in one or more places, inviting an overtaking vehicle to pass by stages, I would suggest that this too, is less safe than forcing following vehicles to wait until an appropriate moment.  

Cyclists would do best to remain as disciplined as they possibly can and to present a square, uniform block for other road users to overtake.  From a driver's perspective, this means that they treat the pack as one vehicle and that makes judging overtaking space much easier and consequently, much safer.

It's still fairly rare to meet a group of more than (say) six fast cyclists riding together.  Probably about as rare as meeting a milk float, traction engine or one or more equestrians.  All of which you would expect to wait behind until an overtake becomes absolutely safe to initiate.

What is it about groups of cyclists that makes drivers want to take unnecessary and unreasonable risks to overtake?  

Even if those drivers are also skilled, regular cyclists?

[mattc]

I do have problems with large doubled groups who can easily be longer than (say) a modern artic. I believe that this type of group should make some attempt to open up a few gaps. Overtakers can then comply with HC and proceed safely in a controlled series of shorter overtakes.

I disagree.  I suggest that unless they themselves are overtaking parked cars or other road users, a large bunch of fast cyclists are safer remaining in a double pace line in pretty much all circumstances and road conditions.

If such a pack singles out, they double the effective length of the group.  This makes an overtake no safer.

I agree that doubled can be better than single.

But there MUST be a group size that starts to become inconsiderate. Quite a few clubs (Reading CC?) recommend splitting into groups of 12 or less on busier roads. (In fact, this is really nothing to do with double vs single!)

If your regular club ride became REALLY large you'd probably be beraking some law-or-other to ride en masse without any special planning, escort etc ...

[Charlotte]

Twickenham CC regularly gets two dozen riders turn out for the Sunday club run in the off-season.  We'd never go out all in one pack - mainly because we want to split into different groups based on speed and ability, but also because that number of riders in one go is much more likely to encounter aggro.

Having said that, I've been on CTC rides where there have been huge numbers of riders safely pootling along in a double pace line, so YMMV.