An Radfahren vorbeifahren?
Hallo,
hätte eine Frage wie ihr an Radfahrern vorbeifahrt . Hatte vorhin die Situation, dass 4 Autos vor mir waren und an dem Radfahrer mit knappen Abstand vorbeigefahren sind.Die Hauptstraße war frei und selbst wenn nicht, beim knappen vorbeifahren hätte es den Gegenverkehr auch nicht behindert, weil die Straße breit genug war. 300m weiter vorne war eine leichte Rechtskurve. Aufgrund der nicht möglichen Behinderung vom Gegenverkehr habe ich mal ganz frech mitgemacht.
Bin Fahranfänger habe meinen Führerschein seit knapp 1 Jahr. Meine Frage wäre ob des legitim ist, in der Prüfung wäre das ja ein Durchfallgrund wegen den 1,5 Metern Abstand. Ich glaube ist besser als den kompletten Verkehr auszugrenzen. Wie denkt ihr darüber, würde mich über die Meinung von jemanden mit mehr Erfahrung freuen.
Auch dieMeinung von jemanden der viel Rad fährt würde mich interessieren, wie die Gegenseite darüber denkt. Findet ihr das okay oder stört es euch sehr?
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Sebi
(1 votes)
Loading...
It depends. Basically, a risk is naturally much worse than when you arrive at the target a bit later. I think, as a cyclist, that a distance of one metre should not be underestimated. In the case of children, adolescents and older persons, as well as in the field of rails and in the case of bad weather, the statutory minimum distance of 1.5 meters should be maintained, otherwise the overtaking must be seen.
If you can’t overtake at a distance of 1.5 m, you can’t overtake. And if you’re gonna hang out for 10 minutes, you’ll just hang out for 10 minutes.
Wär’s ne 2 m wide horse carriage, the case would not be different. Except that you wouldn’t get the idea that you can overtake without using the counterway.
If you couldn’t hinder intercourse, why didn’t you just keep the 1.5 m?
Just like this: there are also cyclists who do not have the right balance. The ones in the uncertainty may also strip along the edge stone and then, in the case of counter-steering, sillyly flip over. If this happens at the moment you overtake, you have either kept enough distance from the beginning or override the cyclist.
So you just believe that “complete traffic” is more important than the life of a cyclist.
And yes, this also applies to cyclists who have not previously seen snake lines.
I don’t get a tape and see if it’s 1.5 m.
But if you get overhauled, even though there’s an intercourse, you know very well: if it’s getting tight, the overtaking will rather constrict you with defenceless little cyclists from the road than coming too close to the intercourse.
Accordingly, it is extremely unpleasant to be overtaken if you already see that there is not too much space between yourself and the intercourse.
I personally drive in the traffic situations where I see it as a life-threatening when someone wants to overtake me, so far to the left that even the last full deal realizes that he does not fit between me and the intercourse. To commit this disorder is much better for me than to play with my life.
Thank you for having your “I’m not doing anything wrong if I’m going against the StVO?” Ask so nicely that this procedure is necessary.
It becomes particularly funny when you drive through the 30’s zone at 33-35 km/h and after the motto “riders must always be overtaken” – and when a flasher comes, the overtaking must get so sharp into the iron that you hit him almost in the back. I don’t remember anything.
___
Edit: What unfortunately also disregards some cyclists is the duty for slow vehicles to drive to the side at suitable places and to let the following traffic pass. As a cyclist there are many opportunities for it.
Or there’s a wind bee. Or a cyclist turns out to be a hit hole. Or even in the city: car door from nem right standing car goes on + cyclists softens.
All things that are not very remote/probable.
Hey,
thanks for your feedback.
as I said, the driver is the question. Look it only daily and all I know do that the same.
I only observe very ruthless behavior of cyclists every day, which, of course, does not mean that you should go together.
Just gives too little understanding. Road traffic.
What I do not understand is the mentality of cycling. Scheiss doesn’t matter if I’m on the road or I’m on the road and I’m on the bag for every road participant. And woe me overtakes someone without 1.5 m then there’s ne ad. Had it already been that cyclists in front of me on a well-thinkable road partially skipped to the left with intent, while I want to overtake due to the good traffic situation. And no I didn’t run up tight I even had a generous distance.
Of course, it’s not for everyone, but a lot of it is.
and no I just don’t justify driving cyclists together because a few cannot behave.
but eye around eye tooth around tooth…
even my old instructor complained about the majority of cyclists.
And if I think it would be a license plate for cyclists. They usually do a lot.
and if you notice on the bike that you need a break WARUM always or the track can no longer keep straight you should run right and take a break.
I don’t leave my life to my fellow human beings.
At the end of the song I’m the stronger in road traffic and that’s why I have to let everything down. I’m God.
how often I had the situation the cyclist had pulled out so ruthlessly without looking. Result = I must make a full brake so that I do not disturb the God.
But this discussion can be conducted to the eternal because both parties are not angels.
Simply from both sides more understanding. If I insist on 1.5 m as a cyclist, I should let the traffic pass behind me. But that would, of course, be too understanding for the rearward traffic. I wouldn’t want to show you that. I’m the weaker the others have to look after me. Shouldn’t anyone let me do anything. I’m just showing those welcome to Germany.
end of the song = cyclist is a God equal creature.
Das ist absolut richtig. Nur, rechtfertigt das Fehlverhalten anderer, dass du dich auch falsch verhältst?
Ah, ja. Genau. Wenn dir etwas nicht in den Kram passt, muss der Grund natürlich eine persönliche Boshaftigkeit dir gegenüber sein. Was anderes kann nicht sein.
Schonmal darüber nachgedacht, dass Radfahrer nicht bewusst entscheiden, Autofahrern “auf den Sack” zu gehen? Sondern dass schlichtweg die Straßen für alle Fahrzeuge gebaut sind und Radfahrer dort mit dem gleichen Recht fahren wie Autos, außer es gibt einen benutzungspflichtigen Radweg?
Ich habe noch nie jemanden angezeigt. Aber du wirst mir jetzt wohl kaum erzählen wollen, dass ein Autofahrer mich auf eine sichere Weise überholt, wenn ich ihm dabei mit dem Fuß eine Beule in die Beifahrertür treten kann.
Wenn du mit korrektem Abstand überholst, kanns dir ja egal sein ob der Radfahrer ein Bisschen nach links ausschert.
Du merkst aber schon, dass du dir hier selbst widersprichst?
Zumal das wenig mit “Auge um Auge” zu tun hat… mir wäre neu, dass ein Radfahrer genug Bums hätte, um ein Auto von der Straße zu kegeln.
Es gibt auch schon Kennzeichen an Autos. Trotzdem fährt ein guter Teil der Autofahrer (offenbar einschließlich dir) so, als wäre die StVO eine freundliche Empfehlung für Touristen. Die wenigsten Verkehrssünder denken über die Möglichkeit eines Bußgeldes oder Fahrverbots nach, wenn sie aufs Gas treten, besoffen ins Auto steigen oder in der Rettungsgasse gegen die Fahrtrichtung fahren.
Was bringt dich zu der Hoffnung, dass das bei Radfahrern anders ist?
Sprach der Autofahrer, der sich anscheinend im Recht fühlt, mit voller Absicht das Leben von Radfahrern zu gefährden (d.h. über Leben und Tod zu entscheiden), wenn die nicht so fahren wie er es haben will.
Nein, willst du nicht. Du hackst die ganze Zeit auf dem Fehlverhalten von Radfahrern herum, aber sobald es mal um dein eigenes Fehlverhalten geht, ist das ja vollkommen gerechtfertigt und die anderen haben halt Pech gehabt.
Du willst nur Verständnis für dich.
Du bist in erster Linie mal der gefährlichere im Straßenverkehr.
Wenn der Radfahrer dir die Vorfahrt nimmt, ist er selbst derjenige, der die schlechten Karten hat. Keine Chance, den Autofahrer irgendwie gesundheitlich zu gefährden.
Wenn du dem Radfahrer die Vorfahrt nimmst, hast du höchstens ein paar Schrammen im Auto, aber er ist ggf. tot.
Ich weiß, dass du nicht darüber nachdenken möchtest. Solltest du aber.
You can see with the help of the car driver how little license plates lead to keeping to the rules everywhere. All the dashcam channels such as DDG, RLP, NEDK, JX are the vast majority of the entries of motorists.
In return, bureaucracy is once again available for over 90 million bicycles in Germany.
If the cycle path is not subject to use, the STVO shall have the right to drive on the road.
This has established itself among cyclists who master the “art of self-defense”. As you have now found to yourself, many motorists are overtaking illegally and are more likely to endanger cyclists than being slower. For this reason, cyclists are advised to make the road “tight” wherever dangerous overtaking is not possible so that drivers are not triggered.
1.5m stay 1.5m, no matter if there’s traffic coming, the road is wide enough or you think you can control the situation.
This regulation does not exist because you might suddenly make a fool with your car or be a weak road user, but the cyclist.
Normal roads have a width of 3m, in the best case 3.5m.
In case of reverse traffic, you can overtake a cyclist while maintaining the minimum lateral distance, so you must always evade to the counterway.
As I said, while passing is still enough space for intercourse. I do not know why traffic should be unnecessarily impeded over 1km to the next best possible overhaul and allow 1.5m. In my driving career, I noticed that the backmen are getting impatient again and again and that dangerous overtaking maneuvers are starting. If the cyclist does not show any striking behavior, why not? If he is fighting for his life just before flipping over or snake lines due to whatever does not drive.
If no one comes, will you go to Red?
That’s not a big difference.
Exceptions are even 2m.
Nene was just a note as you said your point was good. You won was meant seriously.
Would you like a nice evening?
.
Your problem shouldn’t be another one that you feel compelled,
to break the StVO. Just to satisfy others their desire for 30sek time win, you might risk a cyclist?
Just because cyclists often travel without rules, you shouldn’t forget yours. How is this spiral going? Who’s gonna pay the price?
That’s what I meant with:
You probably still know the overwood cheek when you drive at local exits to the local end sign with 50. There is also “everyone” overtakes you, despite the fact that the law is clearly 50.
It’s really serious.
I’ve been extremely often haunted by that you don’t think. Problem is it doesn’t stay with the horn and the ones behind me just catch up with traffic. It’d have been so many times. That’s why I asked the question. I am still inexperienced but have seen enough…. That’s why I can’t say that the cyclist himself doesn’t look at a road. More often, it was necessary to make a juicy braking order for the cyclist who just thinks to pull out not to start with 100 things. Come from a more rural area. Not all of them again, but that is of course. But up to my current state of knowledge, there are 3/4 who play with their lives.
If this is meant seriously: Definitely.
Anyone who thinks that people are needed by horns, who simply want to avoid dangers, has simply had bad luck. If you cannot overtake cyclists, you must not overtake cyclists.
Good point. You won 👍🏻. Thanks for your feedback I will be able to master and accept the hup concert.
Correct. In the one, a cyclist is definitely at risk. In the other, there is a real chance that no one will be threatened if no one comes.
Now I wonder why you’d rather not commit the weakness of the two, but the stronger.
Well,
the passing by a cyclist with a red light is not proportionate. On a red light it is necessary to keep, while carefully passing a cyclist, you can ensure a more liquid traffic flow. No one says that you should shoot by at a distance of 0.5 meter + 50kmh.
Just like the STVO commands. If space is, I use it (and indeed completely) if there is no place, I do not overtake it. I know how bad this is as a cyclist to be too tightly overtaken.
As a driver, of course, you don’t realize how dangerous it can be. You yourself are isolated from wind and weather and, at worst, only a bump in the car. The cyclist is potentially a hospital case with that. Or dead.
I love such statements. Because it actually means nothing other than: I prefer to use the health of the cyclist as a minute of time loss.
Unfortunately, this mentality is extremely common among motorists. For many it is obviously not acceptable to drive a few 100 meters slowly behind a cyclist. A cyclist is more likely to be at risk as well as to only accept some time delay.
And this is very simple. 1.5m are required by law. 1.5m distance between his car and anything else is now nothing that would be mentally demanding. If you can’t estimate 1.5m exactly, hold a reserve on top. No one says you have to hold exactly 1.5m, but keep at least 1.5m.
Those who do not manage to comply with such simple things as 1.5m minimum page distance are not able to find such simple things or unnett: drive too stupid to the car.
(And whoever could do it, but is not willing to do that which makes it intentional what is even a corner worse.)
Also, if there is enough space then I try to keep the 1.5 meter distance, if not enough space, then I will drive past the cyclists with care.
Cyclists shouldn’t get upset about it, and they’re not much better, sometimes even worse.
Really?
Because others don’t stick to rules, don’t you have to?
Oh, that’s a good argument – so here’s a driver who doesn’t adhere to rules, so I don’t have to stick to it as a cyclist anymore.
..you know what?
I’ve never paid attention to this, I have no idea what 1.5 meters are