Watch out pedestrians

[VectraMan]

FWIW, I'm fairly certain that on shared use pavements, pedestrians still have priority (unfortunately I can't provide a citation for that).

It's not a case of priority; it's that pedestrians don't look and randomly change direction. If a driver on the road did what pedestrians do, they'd be unquestionably at fault regardless of right of way or priority.

When I cycle (when it's warm again) I start through a park on a cycle path with a big thick white line down the middle and signs both on posts and painted on the path. Yet you still need to be über careful passing anyone as they simply don't pay attention to where they're walking. Children I can understand and do slow right down, but I like to whizz past the stupid adults within an inch and wait for the "Oh my God! Sorry!". Don't be sorry, stay on your side of the path. Grrr.

But I wouldn't use a path unless it was specifically marked as such.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

It's not a case of priority; it's that pedestrians don't look and randomly change direction. If a driver on the road did what pedestrians do, they'd be unquestionably at fault regardless of right of way or priority.

Yes, pedestrians can do that - they may not be expecting a cyclist to be approaching and so I consider it the cyclists responsibility to take greater care. Likewise, cyclists can wobble on the road and I would expect drivers to take extra care when driving around them (and me!).

[vetran]

It's not a case of priority; it's that pedestrians don't look and randomly change direction. If a driver on the road did what pedestrians do, they'd be unquestionably at fault regardless of right of way or priority.

When I cycle (when it's warm again) I start through a park on a cycle path with a big thick white line down the middle and signs both on posts and painted on the path. Yet you still need to be über careful passing anyone as they simply don't pay attention to where they're walking. Children I can understand and do slow right down, but I like to whizz past the stupid adults within an inch and wait for the "Oh my God! Sorry!". Don't be sorry, stay on your side of the path. Grrr.

But I wouldn't use a path unless it was specifically marked as such.

Get a big Horn!

Yep my experience exactly.

[LondonManc]

It's not a case of priority; it's that pedestrians don't look and randomly change direction. If a driver on the road did what pedestrians do, they'd be unquestionably at fault regardless of right of way or priority.

When I cycle (when it's warm again) I start through a park on a cycle path with a big thick white line down the middle and signs both on posts and painted on the path. Yet you still need to be über careful passing anyone as they simply don't pay attention to where they're walking. Children I can understand and do slow right down, but I like to whizz past the stupid adults within an inch and wait for the "Oh my God! Sorry!". Don't be sorry, stay on your side of the path. Grrr.

But I wouldn't use a path unless it was specifically marked as such.

Not exactly got the body armour to whizz past someone acting all Mohammed I'm Hard Bruce Lee have you? Rage all you want but when all you've got is a bit of lycra protecting you, you're just an angry bleeder with a death wish.

[SueEllen]

Not exactly got the body armour to whizz past someone acting all Mohammed I'm Hard Bruce Lee have you? Rage all you want but when all you've got is a bit of lycra protecting you, you're just an angry bleeder with a death wish.

I don't cycle in lycra.

They don't in Holland so why should I in the UK?

Oh and I did a search earlier. The only thing I could find was a cycle group quoting from a Department of Transport letter that cyclists must not "disrespect pedestrians" on shared paths. I interpret that as you mustn't run them down.

There is also no speed limit which explains why the cyclists going up a steep hill near me can go on to the short shared path at a junction at what speed they like.

[WTFH]

...But generally I prefer to use the road and will do so on normal roads even if there is a "path". I believe advice is to only use paths if you're going slower than 12mph - I can manage that and I'm not even that fit, a fit cyclist on a road bike can easily manage 20-30mph.

And therein lies the problem. A cycle path has been provided but you prefer to use the road, because you think you're too fast for the path.
And what does that do for road traffic and other road users?

[greenlake]

But I wouldn't use a path unless it was specifically marked as such.

[SueEllen]

And therein lies the problem. A cycle path has been provided but you prefer to use the road, because you think you're too fast for the path.
And what does that do for road traffic and other road users?

There is no legal requirement in the UK to use a cycle path or shared use path rather than the road. The onus is on the cyclist to use the safest for them.

If you are not keeping up with the speed of motorised vehicles it depends on the road and cycle path what you should use it.

For example if the cycle path is shared use, the road is a minor one and you see pedestrians on it then you may as well stay on the road. If the road is a main one but the cycle path puts you in the door zone you are safer on the road.

Anyway one good thing I learnt with trying to find speed limits is that I don't have to get off my bike between two cycle paths unless the cyclist dismount sign is in a red circle. The rectangular signs are advisory.

[TheCyclingProgrammer]

And therein lies the problem. A cycle path has been provided but you prefer to use the road, because you think you're too fast for the path.
And what does that do for road traffic and other road users?

No, the problem is that local authorities waste money providing crap infrastructure that is not fit for purpose.

I don't think I'm too fast for the path, I KNOW I'm too fast for the path. The Highway Code advises using the ride above a certain speed and I don't think pedestrians should have to dive out of the way of a maniac doing 20mph on a bike.

When I'm on the road, I am traffic, but I'm not the cause of it. The cause of most road traffic tends to be, unsurprisingly, other cars. When I ride in central London, the cars and buses hold me up.

When I'm in my car, I have no problem overtaking a cyclist safely and at an appropriate place and I'm not going to get worked up over being held up for a few minutes when I know I'm going to be held up far longer by the inevitable queue at the next set of lights.

[xoggoth]

As long as they don't get in the way of my little van. Cyclists will be at front of the queue for the concentration camp when I become world dictator.