Cyclist visibility

[Penguin68]

4 hours ago, malumbu said:

I'm not going to change the world by posting on a community group.   

So why did you?

[Sue]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

 

If you want to discuss why cyclists ride without lights be my guest, and better still how to solve this.

I still maintain it is because they can see their surroundings at night, particularly in areas of street lighting, lit shop windows,  and other traffic with lights, and therefore assume everybody else can see them.

They probably don't even think about it 

[Earl Aelfheah]

2 hours ago, Angelina said:

Social media is a very appropriate means of delivering a message and raising awareness, which does deliver change.

I'm not massively convinced by this. I think posting on social media is often mistaken for a form of activism, but actually changes very little in the real world (except perhaps increasing polarisation due to the echo chamber nature of the algorithms).

2 hours ago, Angelina said:

I know actions that the bus driver has taken, and I know of steps I have taken, and I know that people who have read this message have taken steps as well.

May I ask what actions you're advocating for? It would be helpful to share if you think they've had a positive real world impact.

Edited Wednesday at 14:32 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

I'm not massively convinced by this. I think posting on social media is often mistaken for a form of activism, but actually changes very little in the real world (except perhaps increasing polarisation due to the echo chamber nature of the algorithms).

I suspect Musk and his supporters may disagree.

[Earl Aelfheah]

55 minutes ago, first mate said:

I suspect Musk and his supporters may disagree.

Don't get me wrong. I think social media algorithms have a big (largely malign) impact on the real world. But that's not the same as saying an individual posting / reposting stuff into what's largely an echo chamber, amounts to a form of activism / community action.

I believe the term is 'slacktivism'.

Edited Wednesday at 16:47 by Earl Aelfheah

[malumbu]

1 hour ago, Penguin68 said:

So why did you?

I write to my MP

Join relevant organisations

I am active in my community

I don't resort to social media to moan.  Well not that often.  But to discuss and have a better understanding of the world.

[Earl Aelfheah]

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

4 hours ago, Angelina said:

I know actions that the bus driver has taken, and I know of steps I have taken, and I know that people who have read this message have taken steps as well.

May I ask what actions you're advocating for? It would be helpful to share if you think they've had a positive real world impact.

These steps that have been taken - Any chance you could say more? It's a little cryptic.

[exdulwicher]

10 hours ago, first mate said:

Over the weekend, going towards Crystal Palace from Croydon, a cyclist wearing a Dulwich Paragon Club jersey was ahead of me. He veered repeatedly in and out of the cycle lane, one moment he was in it, then not, it was almost like he was doing a slalom run. There was no signalling as he suddenly pulled out in front of cars in order to move to the other side of the road. At the traffic lights on red, he just sailed through with no change in cycling speed. He had lights but no pedal reflectors.

For a club cyclist, I thought this was a surprising display of poor cycling behaviour.

You mean along here?

Google Streetview

That not-remotely-compliant-with-modern-standards, barely-a line-of-paint, worse-than-useless "cycle lane"?
The one that stops and starts at intermittent points and is barely wide enough for a set of handlebars...?

That was put in years ago as a tickbox exercise way before there were any standards around these things. The weaving in and out will be because it'll be full of glass, grit and other debris that could cause a puncture (plus probably the odd parked car, vehicle trying to turn out, pulled-in bus etc). It's one of those no-win situations. If the cyclist had ridden just to the right of it, you'd have complained he wasn't using the lane. If he rides in it, he's too close to the kerb (cos the lane is stupidly narrow and rubbish) and he's in all the debris.

Plus a couple of other factors:
To overtake, according to the Highway Code (and I know how much everyone on here quotes that when it suits...), you need to give 1.5m of space so basically you need to be pulling into the opposite lane. The existence of the apparent "cycle lane" doesn't change that. Also, the speed limit along there is 30mph, the cyclist (from your description a club cyclist on a decent road bike) was probably doing near enough 20 so there's not a big speed differential. 

Actually to ride along there, the position I'd take is pretty much wheels ON the line of paint, that's as close to the kerb as the Highway Code advises (my bold in the quoted text below).

Rule 72

Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.

1) Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations

on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely

in slower-moving traffic - when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake

at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you

2) When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads.

So what you witnessed along there in terms of riding position was a total failure of cycle infrastructure (and I use that word in it's loosest sense) rather than a failure of cycling.

 

 

[malumbu]

Since the borough (and other boroughs doing similar) wide 20mph, adult cyclists can often keep pace with the motorised traffic, so generally you shouldn't pull over and let cars etc overtake.  If the road is clear behind you there is no rule to say you can't change position, obviously you should check first, but you do not have to signal on a bicycle.  If the driver is paying attention they will see you look which is a form of communication.    Sadly this p's off some.  But they should read the Highway Code as this does not differentiate between the different road users (ie give drivers behind you the priority.   I've had a few drivers shout at me telling me I should be in the cycle lane, which of course I don't have to be.  And one on Hillcourt who tried to get past me when their was no room telling me I shouldn't be in the middle of the lane.  I told him politely without trying to inflame the situation that this was exactly where I should be.

Not that I should be moaning about poor driving skills....

[first mate]

In this case the road was not clear, there was a queue of cars, all I might add patiently and politely moving behind the cyclist who, as I said, slalomed in and out of the cycle lane, effectively keeping the whole queue of other traffic behind him for some distance. 

The cycle lane looked wide enough without loads of sharp detritus, that I could see, and also well surfaced- perhaps this was just the section closest to Crystal Palace, where I saw the cyclist. It could be the cycle lane is not as good at the Croydon end.

Anyhow, this guy was not a great advert for 'good' cycling and sailing through a red light was, I guess, to be expected. It just came over as very entitled and somewhat inconsiderate display by someone wearing a Dulwich Paragon jersey.

 

[exdulwicher]

1 hour ago, first mate said:

slalomed in and out of the cycle lane, effectively keeping the whole queue of other traffic behind him for some distance. 

And as I said, regardless of the existence (or otherwise) of the appalling pretend cycle lane along there, no traffic can overtake him anyway without pulling clear into the opposite lane in order to give the required 1.5m space.

Rule 213

On narrow sections of road, on quiet roads or streets, at road junctions and in slower-moving traffic, cyclists may sometimes ride in the centre of the lane, rather than towards the side of the road. It can be safer for groups of cyclists to ride two abreast in these situations. Allow them to do so for their own safety, to ensure they can see and be seen. Cyclists are also advised to ride at least a door’s width or 1 metre from parked cars for their own safety.

On narrow sections of road, horse riders may ride in the centre of the lane. Allow them to do so for their own safety to ensure they can see and be seen.

Motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.

Just because you can't see any debris, potholes, drainage grids etc from your vantage point behind the wheel of a car doesn't mean it's not there.

[malumbu]

I'll come back to one of my least favourite routes, Brenchley Gardens, where there is not 1.5m to pass cyclists with traffic coming both ways, but some still try to do it.  On most occasions you will catch up with the traffic (and often overatke it) at the next junction, which includes the inevitable cluster as drivers slow from 25mph plus at the speed cameras.  

[first mate]

14 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

And as I said, regardless of the existence (or otherwise) of the appalling pretend cycle lane along there, no traffic can overtake him anyway without pulling clear into the opposite lane in order to give the required 1.5m space.

Next time I go that route I will take a very careful look at the cycle lane, along the stretch where the Dulwich Paragon club jersey wearing cyclist ran the red lights- I assume you will not find an excuse for that behaviour also?

The cycle lane looked to me in good condition and wide enough at that point and that in part is why I found this cyclist's behaviour so odd. I will take a closer look next time I am there. Had he stopped at the red lights, as he should have, I'd be more inclined to think you have a point.

[exdulwicher]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

Next time I go that route I will take a very careful look at the cycle lane, along the stretch where the Dulwich Paragon club jersey wearing cyclist ran the red lights- I assume you will not find an excuse for that behaviour also?

The RLJ is a separate issue so I didn't mention it because as far as I can tell it's not related to the use (or otherwise) of the faded lines of paint masquerading as a cycle lane. In the past on other threads I've explained why some cyclists might jump lights some of the time but I've never condoned it.

[Rockets]

On 20/11/2025 at 18:44, exdulwicher said:

Rule 213

On narrow sections of road, on quiet roads or streets, at road junctions and in slower-moving traffic, cyclists may sometimes ride in the centre of the lane, rather than towards the side of the road. It can be safer for groups of cyclists to ride two abreast in these situations. Allow them to do so for their own safety, to ensure they can see and be seen. Cyclists are also advised to ride at least a door’s width or 1 metre from parked cars for their own safety.

Is that stipulation on the circumstances where is it ok to ride in the centre of the road removed anywhere else? It's interesting that many cyclists interpret that as it is ok to cycle in the middle of the lane in any circumstance. I didn't realise it came with some caveats.

The not using the cycle lane and riding two abreast (along the A205) has come up on these threads before and as a cyclist I always take the approach that I am always considerate to other road users. I do remember two gents cycling really slowly along the A205 two abreast along the section between the Grove Tavern and Dulwich College and folks coming on here saying - well they can so they should. They had created a long line of traffic behind them as they had a good old natter and were, quite rightly, getting volleys of harsh words from drivers - the lack of consideration for other road users was quite something.

[malumbu]

Riding in London you will generally be in the centre of your lane.  As per Highway Code.  Don't judge all cyclists based on the behaviour of two.  

Primary position (center of lane): Use on quiet roads, in slow-moving traffic, or when approaching junctions and narrow roads [as most urban roads in central London are - my additional wording] to make yourself more visible and to deter dangerous overtaking.

[exdulwicher]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

They had created a long line of traffic behind them as they had a good old natter and were, quite rightly, getting volleys of harsh words from drivers - the lack of consideration for other road users was quite something.

What do you think those same drivers would have done if it was a horse rider - perhaps someone coming from riding their horse around the park? Or even a police horse & rider? Takes up about the same amount of space as a cyclist or two.

Willing to bet that the levels of consideration from said drivers to the obstruction in question would have been considerably higher... 

Just saying.

It's genuinely fascinating how drivers will at towards different "obstructions" (for "obstruction" read: legitimate road user not doing the speed that the driver behind wants).

Horse rider: driver passes slowly and carefully, literally climbing the kerb on the opposite side of the road.
Mobility scooter: might grumble a bit but basically does the same, passing wide and carefully.
Tractor: definitely going to grumble but they've got no choice.
Cyclist: BEEEEEEPPPPP!!! GET OUT OF THE WAY YOU NON TAX PAYING LYCRA LOUT!!!!

Edit: what's also fascinating is how this thread started as a complaint about cyclists dressed in all black, being invisible, coming out of nowhere etc. Seems that everyone on here is more than capable of identifying a cyclist at half a mile - not only identifying them but able to tell what jersey they're wearing, what type of bike they're on, what speed they're going (it's never "just about the right speed", it's always either far too fast and a danger to everyone or far too slow and holding everyone up - sometimes both speeds at the same time), what clothing they had on (especially whether or not they were wearing a helmet) and how they were riding. I'd suggest from all that, there's no issue at all with cyclist visibility! 

Edited 20 hours ago by exdulwicher

[first mate]

The issue of visibility raised in the thread was only to do with cyclists at night. 

As a fellow cyclist, I certainly did not beep or yell at the Dulwich-Paragon-jersey-wearing cyclist. Nor did anyone else for that matter. On that occasion there was only one individual behaving badly and it wasn't the queue of car drivers.

[Rockets]

12 hours ago, malumbu said:

Riding in London you will generally be in the centre of your lane.  As per Highway Code.  Don't judge all cyclists based on the behaviour of two.  

Primary position (center of lane): Use on quiet roads, in slow-moving traffic, or when approaching junctions and narrow roads [as most urban roads in central London are - my additional wording] to make yourself more visible and to deter dangerous overtaking.

@malumbu I think your addition speaks volumes and highlights the issue. Most urban roads are not narrow and are not the type of roads to which the Highway Code refers. It is very interesting that cycling in the centre of the lane does come with those caveats as many cyclists seem to interpret it as applying to all roads but it clearly doesnt. 

And therein lies the issue and takes us back to the original post and the ludicrousness of some of the things said about wearing dark clothes whilst cycling at night. 

Why wouldn't you try to make yourself more seen or why would you cycle down the centre of a road or two abreast on the A205 holding up lines of traffic?

 

[malumbu]

@RocketsMost urban roads around here have parked cars, so effectively are narrow.  That's why cyclists should normally be in the primary position. 

As for the cyclists riding two abreast, which they are entitled to do, why on earth do you use this occasional situation to justify your views?   I use the South Circular regularly and most road users are fine.  I could list the times I've seen, mainly drivers, do dodgy things but what is the point of that??  Speed is usually restricted by the number of vehicles on the road, and on most occasions whether I use the carriageway or that poxy shared cycle lane by the park I will be quicker that drivers.

As you are a cyclist it is particularly disappointing that you do not understand the position that you should adopt.

Here's a good video of why cyclists adopt the primary position - by a driving instructor.  All credit to him.

https://road.cc/content/news/134661-video-tells-driving-instructors-why-cyclists-ride-primary-position

[Rockets]

28 minutes ago, malumbu said:

RocketsMost urban roads around here have parked cars, so effectively are narrow.  That's why cyclists should normally be in the primary position. 

If that was the case then the Highway Code would not make the stipulation they do? As I said before that rule seems to be taken by some cyclists to justify inconsiderate and selfish cycling

29 minutes ago, malumbu said:

As for the cyclists riding two abreast, which they are entitled to do, why on earth do you use this occasional situation to justify your views? 

I think you hit the nail on the head when you say "entitled to do" with entitlement being the key. The road is not narrow, it was broad daylight so no-one would have a problem seeing them yet they did it and created challenges for other road users by doing so. If they had been thoughtful to other road users then they would not have done it but they seemed only to care about themselves and actually seemed to be revelling in it.

31 minutes ago, malumbu said:

As you are a cyclist it is particularly disappointing that you do not understand the position that you should adopt

Why? Again why the use of should adopt....you can cycle perfectly safely and also be considerate to other road users - I could adopt that position I don't have to. It's your use of should rather then could that probably flags the issue here. I could adopt that position should the situation dictate it - it's a subtle, but important, nuance of language and probably mindset.

[exdulwicher]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

I think you hit the nail on the head when you say "entitled to do" with entitlement being the key.

My God, wait until you hear about all those 2-abreast drivers! Even when they go out alone, they take an armchair and a sofa with them! How entitled of them!

😉