Nuxx:SM gl.5350$aJ3.3356@newsfe23.ams2

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!69.16.177.242.MISMATCH!cyclone02.ams2.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!npeersf01.ams.highwinds-media.com!newsfe23.ams2.POSTED!7564ea0f!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: _  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Dangerous driving complaint and response. Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:13:26 +0000 References: <3a30696f-4bca-46fb-87d4-a4c5dac7867a@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com> <6uis19Ff35gnU1@mid.individual.net> <34a4c060-bad6-478e-9a7f-c719f323eb33@z27g2000prd.googlegroups.com>  <6uj19lFfnvl5U1@mid.individual.net> <088cd0f2-72ef-4679-8955-4d8cee962cb8@z27g2000prd.googlegroups.com>  <3416dc25-8a50-4077-b233-f110b6f20de9@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>  <96afac66-fff0-4f4f-9207-d2a6193e0626@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com>     Lines: 29 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.21.204.127 X-Complaints-To: http://netreport.virginmedia.com X-Trace: newsfe23.ams2 1233418418 82.21.204.127 (Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:13:38 UTC) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:13:38 UTC Organization: virginmedia.com Bytes: 3249 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:684417

AndyC wrote: > "francis"  wrote in message > news:dada1fe8-08cb-4af8-acd9-5e32e7031546@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com... > > If it is not safe to overtake a cyclist close enough for the cyclist > to touch the car, why is it safe for a cyclist to overtake a car close > enough for the car driver to touch the cyclist? > > -- > > It's down to size, speed and speed differential. > > A larger vehicle needs to give more space than a small vehicle does, because > they need a larger margin for error. Faster moving vehicles need to give > more space than slow moving vehicles to allow for a greater margin for > error. The greater the speed differential, the greater the risk of > collision. > Couldn't agree more! Thats why I suggested that a FULL lanes width is advisable passing cyclists when doing 60 on an NSL dual carraigeway. But back to this example, lets say the cab was doing, say, 25ish. After all, he's only just come off a r'bout, passing a bike, etc. And he stops very quickly. I think that speeds about fair. So, passing 'close' at 25 is a wrong'un, according to the cyclist in question and also spindrift.

Now, cue the queue, if you'll excuse the pun. Car stationary or nearly so, cyclist moving along the outside. That'd be 25mph ish, wouldn't it? And thats close enough to hit the cyclist if you opened the door? So, how come the difference then?