- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
OPINION
Cycling on fast dual carriageways – Yes or No? A road.cc reader gives his view
Wed, Oct 21, 2020 14:47
112
Dual carriageway at Alvie on the A9 (licensed CC BY-2.0 on Flickr by Glen Wallace)A video featured in our Near Miss of the Day series earlier this week showing a cyclist being subjected to a very close pass at a car travelling at around 60mph on the A34 ignited a debate in the comments, as footage shot on such roads often does – should you, or should you not, ride on fast dual carriageways?
> Near Miss of the Day 483: Audi driver makes close pass while beeping horn
Highways England decided two years ago against implementing a blanket ban on cycling on the A63 near Hull after Cycling UK gathered more than 10,000 signatures in a petition against the plan, warning that it might set a dangerous precedent, and whether or not to ride on one remains a personal choice.
> Highways England decides against banning cyclists from UK’s fastest time trial course
Having said that, there are some places where it is impossible to avoid riding for at least a short time on one, perhaps to negotiate a roundabout – and often, there will be no usable footpath alongside for those who don’t want to ride on the main carriageway.
After we published that Near Miss of the Day on Monday, road.cc reader Phil Reynolds got in touch to give his views on the subject.
“I’m very rarely moved to write in about anything, but I feel this needs comment,” he said, adding, “Perhaps you'll publish this email as a discussion starting point?”
We agree with Phil – we know that our readers hold a broad range of views on the issue, and it’s one we feel is worth debating. Here’s Philip’s post in full – let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
I'm an avid cyclist, hater of close passes, and defender of cyclists’ rights – I’ll state that for the record before beginning.
I'll also agree that, in the video I've copied into the subject box, the cyclist has a legal right to ride on that road and would be in the right if her/she were to be hit.
However, one thing is totally clear: he/she should not be on a 60mph dual carriageway. That is completely stupid. Sure, it’s allowed, but it's also allowed to jump off a cliff on a bike, and the resultant death is not the cliff’s fault.
We can’t expect drivers to think pushbike when they’re on a dual carriageway any more than we can expect them to think pedestrian, injured bird or crashed alien spaceship. It’s too dangerous. The two are incompatible.
The only option is to ban cycling on these car-only roads. It’ll probably actually ameliorate the car-cyclist antipathy, to my mind, if we give this sensible concession.
In case you yourselves don't agree, let me ask you: would you cycle on a dual carriageway? Would you walk on one? On that road in the video?
Close passes are always the driver’s fault – let’s not deny that – but in some cases, as with the above, the cyclist has made a really stupid decision to ride that road in the first place, and simply being in the right doesn't cut it for me.
Perhaps you'll publish this email as a discussion starting point? I don't have all the answers but I certainly think the debate is more complex than ‘close pass equals condemnation’.
Do you agree with Phil? Should cyclists avoid such roads at all costs? Do you feel confident riding on them?
Or should more be done in terms of giving cyclists safe infrastructure to ride alongside the dual carriageway, as well as carrying out more and tougher enforcement against drivers who do put cyclists’ lives in danger?
Over to you …
More Opinion
Latest Comments
- mark1a 0 sec ago
I wonder if F-At attempted to register the domain gravel.cc but then realised it cost 30% more for no obvious reason.
- andystow 15 min 2 sec ago
But they said that the bodycam footage was only for their safety. They wouldn't lie about that, would they?
- andystow 29 min 31 sec ago
Aerostich is primarily in the motorcycling market, but their messenger bags are handmade in the USA and look really nice. They come in four sizes....
- Patrick9-32 39 min 36 sec ago
The thing with improving road safety is that its easy and cheap to do. It would just be political suicide as it would involve drivers being told no...
- cyclisto 40 min 20 sec ago
It is an example. If you feel Jesus so easily cancelable you could replace him with one of others hard to cancel guys, like Nelson Mandela or Keanu...
- dubwise 48 min 54 sec ago
But if it was a furriner, they deserved all they got.
- Hirsute 55 min 32 sec ago
And here are the culprits
- bikegirl-2 1 hour 52 min ago
What about walking, catching a bus, train, tram or ferry or for gods sake taking a cycle on one of these modes of transport?
- mattw 1 hour 51 min ago
Lucas is the Lib Dem candidate for Cities of London and Westminster, so he's doing local populism. Labour are predicted to win, so he's trying to...
Add new comment
112 comments
Basically, this.
Banning cyclists from dual carriageways would only be at all feasible if suitable alternative routes (with drainage, tarmac, etc) was provided.
Like the "run off road by slow moving hill climbing vehicle" earlier in the week - one of the commenters has said, "They shouldn't have been on that road!". OK, fair enough, but is that the only - or the only decent - road going from that rider's Point A to Point B?
I wouldn't have to expect to buy a fat bike just so that I could avoid a nasty road - I'd expect the council or the authorities to do something about that nasty road.
Motorists already have roads built just for them - they're called motorways. I'm afraid the rest were not built for them and they'll have to learn to live with it.
Agree with this. But I watched the vid yesterday and my immediate gut reaction was that I just wouldnt ride on that road. You can be right and be dead/injured. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Agreed with the principle but it isn't a position i would put myself in. Each to their own, that's just how I feel.
I think there are many of us who would agree... unless there is no option for our particular journey.
However the fact that many riders would not ride a particular type of road if they can avoid it does not absolve drivers of their duty of care
Like everybody here, I avoid these roads almost entirely, and try to keep away from all busy/fast/ commuter roads generally when I’m riding my bike. I think it’s a good idea for the cycling community to discourage riding on dangerous roads like these, but I’m not in favour of it being actually outlawed.
Who would benefit from such a law? Most bicycle riders keep away from such roads from an instinct for self-preservation; but those do who end up riding on a dual-carriageway - either by choice or ignorance - could do without having the law against them.
On the main dual near me, the A30 in Cornwall, most people (myself included) drive at high motorway speeds, yet 20mph tractors are a common occurrence during harvest, and the steep hills force plenty of slow vehicles down to similar speeds year-round. Drivers must expect to approach vehicles in their lane at 50mph+ speed differential, and plan for last minute lane changes or heavy braking on busy roads. This is considered an ordinary part of roadcraft for driving on such roads, and I’ve heard no calls to ban tractors or old camper vans from dual-carriageways. I think it important to keep the burden of responsibility clearly with the driver, rather than potentially criminalising the bicycle rider.
The tractor thing happened on the A1 round Newcastle...
https://goo.gl/maps/pZv2esCgfupjtCbg9
Indeed however that is case by case
It is perfectly possible for prohibition to happen on the local level, here is a snap from the bypass near me
Blimey, I hope in that case there's a reasonable alternative. With it being a bypass, the old road probably offers a more direct (and nicer) route.
I've noticed that near me, there's a dualled bypass that I've never seen a cyclist on, not because it's banned, but because there's a better option. This was confirmed by having a gander at the Strava heatmaps. The old road gets a lot more love.
I guess this is part of the problem, cyclists will self-select alternative routes to busy dual-carriageways. So the presence of bikes on them becomes rare and people don't see what they're not looking for.
So for the dual-carriageways where the existing road has been widened and there isn't a better alternative, you then become an anomoly for cycling there. I guess we need to thank the TT guys for getting out there on the main roads and asserting the bicycles' 'right to roam'!
As for the A1, did I ever ride it round Ncl at rush hour? Hell no! But I did further north near Morpeth, where the bypassed old road merged back into the widened dual-carriageway for a couple of miles. It was mid-morning and felt ok and the other options were a significant detour.
So in my view, it's nothing to do with the number of lanes or speed limit of the road, but the risk-assessment I make at the time. No route is risk free. That Stafford A34 one, whilst the NCN5 looks fairly reasonable with lots of cycle warning signs, it's a single track road in places and you could easily envisage a nasty close pass occuring there too.
You can go through the town and pick up the DC at teh next junction, but it's not as direct. In any case none of that DC (whether permitted) or not is a road I'd want to ride
Absolutely right in your last paragraph. There is another single carriageway road that I used to ride regularly. Very fast, but wide and drivers were pretty good at passing wide, partly cos it was easy for them to do so.
Yes, yes and yes basically.
ironically, the dual carriageway pictured is the A9, during the dualling of dalraddy - kincraig. it has a reasonably decent and seperate cyclepath running alongside it - true for most of its length.
The A9 also has at least one cycle route (i.e. the official type with minute signs, kerbs to hop, muddy fords etc) that crosses over it at right angles. 70 mph stretch in Perthshire, with zero assistance for the rider. Not even a will-writing service.
I tend to avoid dual carriageways, but I have ridden short stretches of them out of necessity.
My view is: we have motorways (where cycling is banned) and there are certain dual carriageways where cycling is banned (despite not being motorways). On any other road, cycling is a perfectly legitimate activity and cyclists (and indeed pedestrians) should be able to use them without fear for their life.
I see no reason why drivers should be excused from driving with due care and attention on those roads. Cyclists are not invisible, and indeed dual carriageways normally have very good visibility.
Whilst some events (e.g. wildlife leaping out of the undergrowth) might lead to unavoidable collisions, I cannot see how road users using the road in accordance with the law could possibly be one of them.
Not for me, live in west Sussex and close by is the A27 which I avoid whenever possible even the 40mph stretches are a nightmare.
We are a long way off achieving education for all types of drivers and significant cycleways seem to very much an afterthought for planners. Only choose to use an A road at off peak times for a limited distance.
Not far from the Buckingham - Oxford stretch of the A34 myself.
Would I cycle it?
No f'in way!
Happy to concede that right to the motorist and would like to think that the concession helped understanding between the two but very much doubt it!
I've done it a few times, once at rush hour (not by choice). When I chose to ride it it was either relatively quiet, or closed!
No, the real doozy was taking a wrong turn at Milton Common at 3am, and ending up on the wrong road numbered "40" (the gate was left open, so "authorized vehicles only" was completely invisible). Incidentally, that felt safer than the A34...
No motorist is aware of your concession not to ride on the road that you helped pay for. By all means choose your road to use, but there won't be any impact on the car & lorry driver vs all the other road users relationship.
I came onto one unwittingly, after crossing the old Runcorn bridge. Really bad mistake, couldn't get off it quick enough. Hopefully you live and you learn.
I live in the West Midlands and it's basically impossible to move around without using dual carriageways. There are urban roads around here which are national speed limit and even when I'm driving feel unsafe over 50mph. The other options for my new commute are canals (long muddy detour) town centres (very hilly) or villages (no direct route out of Birmingham) so the best I can hope for is traffic to be at a standstill so I can filter through.
If all A roads were required to have a high quality cycle path alongside them I might be more inclined to agree. At the least, no new road, or significant work should be done to an existing road, without due consideration of supporting cycling. When we've got good, full infrastructure then I'm fine with it.
But there are many places where it's either impossible or near impossible not to use them so to me there is no way any rights should be removed for the foreseeable.
I personally wouldnt touch a dual carriageway (particularly the A34 near me which is basically a 2 lane motorway) with a barge pole whilst on my bike, but I'll defend my cycling brethen rights to do so to the hilt - doing otherwise would set a dangerous precedent.
Pretty much this. I do get that there are some riders who don't have much of a choice - that's fair enough.
All of the comments here make sense. Would I want to ride a long distance on a dual carriage way - absolutely not, but there are a fair few bits of busy road in West London/Buckinghamshire/Surrey where you don't really have a choice but to use them for short distances. I've not had any issues to date fortunately.
Pages