Gratis Rijbewijs Online Forum

when a cycle lane is marked with dashed lines on both sides, what is the difference if the cycle lane is painted red or unpainted? to me they are the same - a continuous cycle lane.

the aaershot/koninckx theory book is not clear. it shows a painted cycle lane on page 129 that is higher priority than a car from the right, but question 8486 shows an unpainted lane in the same situation where the car on the right has priority. it doesn't make sense.

can someone clarify which is correct?

thanks,
tim

Question 8486
I don't understand the problem. The brown car comes from the right.
There is even no cyclist on the picture.
If there also is a cyclist, then the answer is:
1. Cyclist.
2. Brown car.
3. Blue car.

oh - so the point here is the presence of a cyclist in the continuous cycle lane coming from the left or not, not the colour of the cycle lane? then, am i right that at an intersection i have priority over an empty cycle lane and a car to the left, but if there is a car to the left and also a cyclist in the cycle lane to the left then i give priority to the cyclist, but not the car?

that is not obvious from the text. the grammer in the english text version is quite bad throughout the book. this makes the meaning very difficult to accurately understand many times. *sigh* i don't know how non-native english speakers can understand it at all...!

thanks,
tim

silverjaw schreef: ↑19 jan 2019, 16:20 when a cycle lane is marked with dashed lines on both sides, what is the difference if the cycle lane is painted red or unpainted?

None ... as long as the dashed lines are there.

silverjaw schreef: ↑20 jan 2019, 07:48the grammer in the english text version is quite bad throughout the book

As bad as here the "grammer" instead of the "grammar"?