Serge Auckland wrote:

I live not far from the A14 in Suffolk, and there's a fair
bit of this time-trialling going on there. Although they
do put out signs, and they do space the riders a fair bit
apart, it still strikes me as a thoroughly dangerous thing
to do on a fast public road. The worse part is when a
cyclist passes a junction, which, for a car, takes a
second or two to pass, but for the biker, takes a fair bit
longer. Cars turning off have to cut in before or after
cyclists and there have been a few accidents. The idea of
mixing slow vulnerable cyclists with fast invulnerable
cars seems crazy. Cyclists and horses aren't allowed on
motorways, and there's precious little difference between
a motorway and a fast dual carriageway like the A1 or A14.

I never see any cyclists on the A14 except for the
time-triallers around Bank Holidays as it's far too
dangerous at any other time.

I was just about to rip into the murderous victim-blamers on
the thread when you took the wind out of my sails with your
thoroughly sober deliberation.

The essential difference between a motorway and a
similarly-furnished dual carriageway is that, on the one,
drivers and motorcycle riders don't need to be wary of
cyclists, pedestrians, horses, right-turning traffic, etc.,
whereas on the other, they do.

The cyclists have a perfect right to do what they do without
having to defend themselves against reckless drivers.

OTOH, it was the case (is it still so?) that pedestrians
have right of way at an intersection if it cuts across a
path. As my mum said, you don't have much use for rights
when you're dead.

Shame, though. And it's a shame about that particular
cyclist, too.

In flat places where bicycles are common, drivers are
frequently reminded of the need for caution. Drivers from
hilly places are presumably much more dangerous. Cyclists
can take me by surprise because I'm always looking out for
sheep.

Ian