Motorway cycle paths speed limits

[KeithW]

If that was the very early attempt I'm thinking of boards had been laid between the tracks. It was a somewhat questionable attempt - the passage of the train wobbled the boards about, and the cyclist had to be pulled on to the back of the train when the boards ran out...

Just so.

[Nwallace]

Pity - I was hoping you were going to have an answer saying cyclists aren't subject to a 70mph limit (although by implication they've said that too). Must get training...

If a cyclist is charged with exceeding 70 mph, they have a very good defence in court "My Lord, I do not believe it is possible to cycle at 70 mph. If counsel for the prosecution disagrees, let him demonstrate".

Just need the right sort of hill
https://mpora.com/road-cycling/tour-de- ... e-le-tour/

[solocle]

I thought it was well established that cyclists were not subject to speed limits as they are not required to have speedometers but I suppose they are still able to be prosecuted for wanton and furious cycling an offence since 1861 as I recall.

The 40 mph and 30 mph speed limits on the A87 Extension (Skye Bridge) do apply.

The regulations are worded to cover all vehicles.

Unlike Part VI (particularly section 84), which is explicitly limited to motor vehicles, traffic regulation on special roads can apply to any authorised traffic, even pedestrians!

[KeithW]

It all depends on the definition of what driving is, it usually refers to operating a motor vehicle , it it was not so restricted then cyclists would be required to wear seat belts, pay excise duty, be subject to drink driving laws, speed limits in general etc. !

I had a look at the Special Roads Act Scotland and see nothing in there or the act itself to invoke such a rule.

Here is what the act says

A special road shall not be used except by traffic of a class authorised to do so—
(a)in England and Wales, by a scheme made, or having effect as if made, under section 16 of the Highways Act 1980 or by virtue of paragraph 3 of Schedule 23 to that Act, or
(b)in Scotland, by a scheme made, or having effect as if made, under section 7 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984.]

The act may be found here.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/1984/made

Even if it did the lack of any requirement to fit accurate speedometers would in itself make such a requirement unenforceable, at best they could bring an action under the old crime of "Wanton and Furious cycling"

Nowhere does the act even mention cyclists , as is normal it refers to vehicles.

Speed Limit
3.—(1) No person shall drive or cause to be driven any vehicle at a speed exceeding 40mph on that length of the special road described in paragraph (2) below or exceeding 30 mph on that length of the special road described in paragraph (3) below.

(2) The length of the special road referred to in paragraph (1) above to which the 40mph limit applies is from a point 245 metres or thereby west of its junction with Main Street, Kyle of Lochalsh to its junction with the A850 Kyleakin to Broadford Road, Isle of Skye.

(3) The length of the special road referred to in paragraph (1) above to which the 30mph limit applies is from its junction with Main Street, Kyle of Lochalsh to a point 245 metres or thereby west of that junction.

Prohibition of stopping
4.—(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3) below, no person shall cause or permit any vehicle to stop on the lengths of the special road described in regulations 3(2) and (3) above.

(2) Nothing in paragraph (1) above shall apply to anything done with the permission or upon the direction of a police constable in uniform.

(3) Nothing in paragraph (1) above shall apply—

(a)so as to prevent a vehicle stopping for so long as may be necessary to enable the vehicle to be used in connection with any building operation or demolition being carried out adjacent to the said lengths of the special road, the removal of any obstruction or potential obstruction to traffic, the maintenance, improvement or reconstruction of, or the laying, erection, placing, maintenance, testing, alteration, repair or removal of any structure, works or apparatus, in, on, under, over or adjacent to, the said lengths of the special road;
(b)to a vehicle being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes;
(c)to a vehicle stopping in any case where the person in control of the vehicle—
(i)is required by law to stop; or
(ii)is obliged to stop in order to avoid an accident; or
(iii)is prevented from proceeding by circumstances outwith his control and it is not reasonably practicable for him to drive or move the vehicle off the said lengths of the special road; or
(d)to a vehicle stopping at a place at which tolls are payable for the purpose of paying a toll.

[solocle]

It all depends on the definition of what driving is, it usually refers to operating a motor vehicle , it it was not so restricted then cyclists would be required to wear seat belts, pay excise duty, be subject to drink driving laws, speed limits in general etc. !

I had a look at the Special Roads Act Scotland and see nothing in there or the act itself to invoke such a rule.

Here is what the act says

A special road shall not be used except by traffic of a class authorised to do so—
(a)in England and Wales, by a scheme made, or having effect as if made, under section 16 of the Highways Act 1980 or by virtue of paragraph 3 of Schedule 23 to that Act, or
(b)in Scotland, by a scheme made, or having effect as if made, under section 7 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984.]

The act may be found here.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/1984/made

Even if it did the lack of any requirement to fit accurate speedometers would in itself make such a requirement unenforceable, at best they could bring an action under the old crime of "Wanton and Furious cycling"

Nowhere does the act even mention cyclists , as is normal it refers to vehicles.

The key thing is that a bicycle is a vehicle, but not a motor vehicle. Part VI (speed limits) refers to motor vehicles specifically - and that does include veteran cars without speedometers. As will those other requirements.

But rules applying to vehicles generally? Traffic lights, for instance, apply to "vehicular traffic".

And per definition in TSRGD 2016, a pedal cycle has a driver.

[KeithW]

The key thing is that a bicycle is a vehicle, but not a motor vehicle. Part VI (speed limits) refers to motor vehicles specifically - and that does include veteran cars without speedometers. As will those other requirements.

But rules applying to vehicles generally? Traffic lights, for instance, apply to "vehicular traffic".

And per definition in TSRGD 2016, a pedal cycle has a driver.

Feel free to quote ANY example of a cyclist being prosecuted for just exceeding the posted speed limit. In fact following an instance in London which led to a fatality new legislation was brought forward to modernise the act of 1861 in the form of the offence of "Causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving"

Of course TRSGD refers to
"“The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016" not to any offence.

No mention of a speed limit you may notice which was deliberate as "wanton and furious driving" also covers the situation where the harm was caused by a cyclist riding on the pavement who collided with a pedestrian causing injuries, or behind horse drawn vehicle. We had number of minor cases in Cambridge where pedestrians were hit by cyclists but of course without registration plates proving who owns or rode a bicycle is extremely difficult. Here is what the police had to say of a more serious case.

"This case clearly highlights the dangers of riding a cycle on a pavement. Adults should be riding on the road and if they are forced to go on to a pavement they should take extreme care and always give priority to pedestrians."

The case in London succeeded as the cyclist there had no brakes he relied on back peddling his bike which had a fixed wheel and hit a pedestrian causing fatal injuries. But hey feel free to campaign for making registration plates and speedometers on bicycles mandatory, lets throw in an annual MOT roadworthiness test too if you feel that strongly about it.

[AndyB]

And per definition in TSRGD 2016, a pedal cycle has a driver.

The definition in TSRGD is restricted to TSRGD to act as a shorthand. There’s no definition in RTRA or the Roads (Scotland) Act other than that in RTRA it includes any separate steersman, so it’s the everyday meaning of driver.

Feel free to quote ANY example of a cyclist being prosecuted for just exceeding the posted speed limit.

I think solocle was trying to explain why you would not find any example of a cyclist being prosecuted for exceeding the posted speed limit, but other rules applying to vehicles in general rather than specifically to motor vehicles do apply to cyclists. Unless of course there’s a case in the Royal Parks which actually went to court.

[solocle]

And per definition in TSRGD 2016, a pedal cycle has a driver.

The definition in TSRGD is restricted to TSRGD to act as a shorthand. There’s no definition in RTRA or the Roads (Scotland) Act other than that in RTRA it includes any separate steersman, so it’s the everyday meaning of driver.

I think it's clear from the existence of wanton and furious driving and its application that it applies to cyclists, carriage drivers, etc... despite common parlance being a bit different these days.

Feel free to quote ANY example of a cyclist being prosecuted for just exceeding the posted speed limit.

I think solocle was trying to explain why you would not find any example of a cyclist being prosecuted for exceeding the posted speed limit, but other rules applying to vehicles in general rather than specifically to motor vehicles do apply to cyclists. Unless of course there’s a case in the Royal Parks which actually went to court.

Yes - the special road case is a case where speed limits could legally apply, but apart from the Skye Bridge, where speeding is possible but rather difficult... Maybe the short 30 section in Kyle of Lochalsh is the best bet.

I'm not currently aware of another example of special road that both allows cyclists and has a speed limit applying to cyclists.

[rileyrob]

Yes - the special road case is a case where speed limits could legally apply, but apart from the Skye Bridge, where speeding is possible but rather difficult... Maybe the short 30 section in Kyle of Lochalsh is the best bet.

The app says I reached 35mph on my bike on the Skye Bridge. Didn't want to go any faster with the traffic flashing past (probably doing 50), and I wanted to stop at the bottom and take photos!!

[solocle]

Yes - the special road case is a case where speed limits could legally apply, but apart from the Skye Bridge, where speeding is possible but rather difficult... Maybe the short 30 section in Kyle of Lochalsh is the best bet.

The app says I reached 35mph on my bike on the Skye Bridge. Didn't want to go any faster with the traffic flashing past (probably doing 50), and I wanted to stop at the bottom and take photos!!

I've seen 44 on the Strava leaderboard. Didn't get down the island to take a crack for myself when I was up there last year, though. I did clock 41 on the A855 and A87.

[SteelCamel]

I think solocle was trying to explain why you would not find any example of a cyclist being prosecuted for exceeding the posted speed limit, but other rules applying to vehicles in general rather than specifically to motor vehicles do apply to cyclists. Unless of course there’s a case in the Royal Parks which actually went to court.

Another obstacle to prosecuting a cyclist for exceeding a speed limit is producing the evidence. Someone would need to measure their speed with a suitably approved speed gun or speed camera. And a cyclist is a pretty small target for a radar designed for cars and motorbikes. If the manufacturer doesn't state that it's suitable for measuring the speed of pedal cycles, then the case could be thrown out on the basis that the evidence is unreliable. And given that there are a tiny number of roads where speed limits for cycles exist, is the manufacturer likely to bother testing and certifying for cycles?