Take your pick
tinyurl.com/6ws49pk - Telegraph
tinyurl.com/6puk3go - Daily Mail
A bus driver who used his vehicle 'like a weapon' to ram a cyclist off the road has been jailed for 17 months.
Reckless driver Gavin Hill, 29, swerved into cyclist Phillip Mead after a road-rage bust-up in Bristol.
Mr Mead was catapulted 10ft across the road and suffered a broken leg and fractured wrist.
|
Watching the Mail's video, it appears that the bike is to the right of the lane (attempting to hold up the bus?), then swerves to his right, as the bus starts to move into lane 2.(about 13 seconds on the Mail link)
(full screen video helps)
As the cyclist says, 'I think he meant to brush against me and give me a fright.'
I would agree.
By the cyclist swerving, then the collision was a certainty.
The bus driver WAS being a total idiot, but IMHO the cyclist was doing his part at winding up as well.
Last edited by: swiss tony on Fri 17 Feb 12 at 06:14
|
>> The bus driver WAS being a total idiot, but IMHO the cyclist was doing his
>> part at winding up as well.
>>
>>
I agree with the driver being charged but why wasn't the cyclist? He was not being a responsible road user. Is there an offence of dangerous cycling (or walking)? if not why not?
A smiley may not be appropriate but hopefully I might provoke a discussion.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 17 Feb 12 at 08:24
|
>> Is there an offence of dangerous cycling (or walking)? if
>> not why not?
When I was at college, a mate got done for "pedalling furiously"(!) an offence that dates back to the 19th Century apparently.
Long, steep downhill stretch back from one of the uni bars. He hit 50 and had very little blood in his alcohol stream at the time. The Peelers 'ad 'im bang to rights guv'nor.
|
>>As the cyclist says, 'I think he meant to brush against me and give me a fright<<
I did a similar thing in the 1970's (as I've said b4) I was charged with dangerous driving but got orf with careless driving,
I intended to put the frighteners on the Muppet, but got a bit too close,
Easily done, if you're mad - MiL had just died from a brain tumour at 45, so someone had to suffer.
|
There's an ancient offence of 'wanton and furious riding' which predates the motor car.
I've seen it applied to horse riders and cyclists.
The wording of careless and dangerous driving is: 'that you drove a mechanically propelled vehicle', so it can't apply to anything without an engine.
|
Cannot see vid atm so difficult to comment properly.
It's clear from narrative however that impact was finale of a running spat. Both parties had their danders up and no doubt cyclist could and should have behaved better.
Whether he moved out to provoke or in an attempt to close off a deliberate 'punishment pass' I cannot tell.
What's certain is that bus driver was a professional in charge of a potentially lethal weapon. All he needed to do was hang back and let it go. He didn't.
|
From that video, IMO the bus driver deliberately knocked the cyclist off, there was no 'brush' it was an intentional punt off...although skilfully done, at an angle, to ensure he didn't run over him.
Prison is wholly appropriate.
However, the cyclist needs his backside kicked as well, because he put himself into this position, deliberately and he's the vulnerable one.
If some cyclists are putting cameras on their helmets to record their inevitable conflict...then they need to ask themselves why?
Why do they have so much conflict? Are they riding aggressively, do they have an evangelical approach to cycling i.e. 'I have a right get out of my way'. No suprises when it ends in tears then. A bit more humility and the conflict would go away.
|
>> IMO the bus driver deliberately knocked the cyclist off, there was no
>> 'brush' it was an intentional punt off...although skilfully done, at an angle, to ensure he
>> didn't run over him.
I agree. That was no gentle swerve to try and brush/frighten. It was a full on whack.
|
>> However, the cyclist needs his backside kicked as well, because he put himself into this
>> position, deliberately and he's the vulnerable one.
How should cyclists ride in order to protect their vulnerability?
|
>> How should cyclists ride in order to protect their vulnerability?
Not picking a fight with a bus would be a good place to start.
|
>> How should cyclists ride in order to protect their vulnerability?
>>
Defensiveley, not aggressively. Not riding as a 'right of way', riding expecting to be carved up or have someone pull out on you. If you know drivers will be 'p'd off at you slowing them down, try to let them pass, not deliberately hold them up. Try to obey some road laws. Don't think 'momentum at all costs', look over your shoulder to see if it's safe to pull out, not presume the following driver will automatically adjust..some don't.
If you've any sense on a motorcycle you ride defensively...and they have the prerogative of acceleratring away.
|
Read the highway code, cyclists are allowed/expected to wobble (may be not in those words).
To my view, the cyclist was riding primary (read umpteen cycle forums for definition) perhaps as a precursor to turning right. The wobble looks like it was caused by the cyclist picking up speed as the bus was starting to threaten.
There may be earlier history of the two road users, but the video does not show that. On the face of the video we can see, the bus driver was definitely using a road vehicle as a weapon.
|
>> as a precursor to turning right. The wobble looks like it was caused by the
>> cyclist picking up speed as the bus was starting to threaten.
A hand sticking out right is a precursor to turning right. Riding primary is NOT swerving out suddenly into the middle of a wide road to block a bus
|
Zero
We don't see enough to judge that bit. In all truth, the few seconds before the video will be quite crucial, but only in determining whether the cyclist "invited" problems. Fact is though, even if the cyclist was riding like a numpty, the bus was still used as a weapon.
Not quite sure what happened to this reply - I meant it to be at the end of the thread.
|
>> Not quite sure what happened to this reply - I meant it to be at
>> the end of the thread.
Threaded view might help explain it:
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=9639&v=t
Last edited by: Focus on Mon 20 Feb 12 at 10:59
|
Vid also available here ~ www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17066798
Good grief - that's unbelievable!!
Last edited by: Dog on Fri 17 Feb 12 at 11:08
|
|
Bus driver deserved to be jailed no excuse.
|
>> Bus driver deserved to be jailed no excuse.
>>
True, but we don't know if the cyclist deserved jail also, we don't have the video of the start of the confrontation.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 17 Feb 12 at 15:13
|
|
No confrontation justifies being knocked down by a bus and no confrontation unless physically violent deserves a jail sentence. The cyclist was seriously injured and could have been killed.
|
>> True, but we don't know if the cyclist deserved jail also, we don't have the
>> video of the start of the confrontation.
What, on the reported facts, might suggest the cyclist committed an imprisonable offence?
|
>> What, on the reported facts, might suggest the cyclist committed an imprisonable offence?
I don't think he did...but neither do I believe the bus driver saw a cyclist and thought "I know i'll punt that one off".
There will have been a build up to it, it will no doubt have been the cyclist holding the bus up or the cyclist getting the hump at how close the bus drove past him (whether or not it was reasonable to do so) and the cyclist would have had some role to play in it.....albeit not enough to have deserved being rammed by a bus.
|
|
It seems that the cycling extremists are always totally innocent in some peoples eyes.
|
>> There will have been a build up to it, it will no doubt have been
>> the cyclist holding the bus up or the cyclist getting the hump at how close
>> the bus drove past him (whether or not it was reasonable to do so)
The reports say there was an earlier confrontation over a close pass on a roundabout.
Cyclist reacted and verbal handbags were engaged. Both then had their danders up and the rest followed.
Cyclist not blame free but he's not in charge of several tons of metal.
If cyclist moved out to right immediately before the impact was that provocative or defensive?
|
>
>> If cyclist moved out to right immediately before the impact was that provocative or defensive?
>>
Just before? Plain stupid to me.
|
>> If cyclist moved out to right immediately before the impact was that provocative or defensive?
Bromptonaut,
If you truly don't know the answer to that one...may I suggest you give up cycling
...quickly.
|
>> >> If cyclist moved out to right immediately before the impact was that provocative or
>> defensive?
>>
>> Bromptonaut,
>>
>> If you truly don't know the answer to that one...may I suggest you give up
>> cycling
>> ...quickly.
OK, hadn't seen the video earlier, only the stills. The queue behind the bus makes pretty clear what was going on.
Cyclist was was being an arxe.
|
>> If cyclist moved out to right immediately before the impact was that provocative or defensive?
>>
Surely the defensive move would be to put distance between the bus and himself, NOT move closer to it! (ie swerve LEFT not RIGHT!!!!!!!)
|
>> Surely the defensive move would be to put distance between the bus and himself, NOT
>> move closer to it! (ie swerve LEFT not RIGHT!!!!!!!)
In this case chummy on bike was being a t!t but there's a more general point:-
A vehicle behind is threatening a close and dangerous overtake - he wants to squeeze through where there isn't space.
Move left into the gutter or door zone & facilitate it for him or keep out/go right and block?
|
My cousin and her husband are both bus drivers they live in the Midlands.
Some of the storys they tell me about putting up with abuse takes some believing.What I am trying to say as a Bus driver you have to keep your cool,this lad has been a driver for ten years I believe and will know the score.
He has lost the plot after a bit of provocation.
|
Who knows what was in the bus driver's head when he did that murderous, deliberate swerve? Anyway he shouldn't be a bus driver. That should have been spotted. But we don't have tests for mental stability.
There are cyclists just as mad or madder, begging to be run into and nasty with it. I blame the traffic fumes, and anabolic steroids.
|
|
True A.C I am surprised that there is no mental stability test for Bus drivers in the UK.Mate of mine wanted to be a bus driver in Rotterdam.Calm caracter he failed the mental stability test,unless they wanted bad tempered drivers.>:)
|
>> Move left into the gutter or door zone & facilitate it for him or keep
>> out/go right and block?
>>
Allow enough space to be able to move left if the overtake occurs.
If necessary slow down/stop to allow the idiot past.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 18 Feb 12 at 00:35
|
>> Move left into the gutter or door zone & facilitate it for him or keep
>> out/go right and block?
That's what I don't understand. If you are in conflict on our roads...and you are the one on the most vulnerable mode of transport...why on earth would you want to place yourself in the position where you'd want to block the other party who is driving something of at least a couple of tons (car) or considerably more (bus/lorry) and is agitated..or worse?. Why wouldn't you want to get out of the way..sharpish?
Particularly as the 'block' would most likely be seen as provocative and wind up the other driver even more.
There is a profound lack of understanding between the two different road users..yet the more vulnerable ones by far, persist in a course of action known to annoy many of the others.
Sounds like an accident waiting to happen, to me.
|
I cycle a few times a week and touch wood I haven't had any bother from any driver.
Some drivers won't stop for me if I have right of way but I always presume they won't stop.
I don't take my right as a cyclist as a given.In a accident with a vehicle I am going to be hurt.
I wear a reflective jackett well maintained bicycle and member of the selfpreservation society.
|
The bus driver certainly deserved his jail term but I was taught to drive lorries by an ex police driving instructor and he taught us progressive driving.
He also told me that there is a very fine line between progressive and aggresive driving and never to cross it.
I think this applies to cyclists too and certainly in this case, his cycling was a demonstration of aggresive cycling.
Pat
|
...That's what I don't understand...
Surely you do - it's the red mist, isn't it?
You will have seen more examples than most of us of the stupid things people do in temper/drink/despair/frustration.
|
Bus driver supposed to be a pro and as such should never use the vehicle as a weapon.
Making constant allowances for other road users, many of whom are imbeciles in/on all methods of transport, is what driving for a living is all about.
|
"Sadly for both parties they each choose a course of action which led to confrontation, aggression and injury and loss and each must acknowlege some share of blame. Having lived in the area where the incident occurred for over 35 years I think they are both willing protagonists in a battle between the new and old Bristol. Since the late 1980's Bristol partly through it's universities and large and ever expanding graduate scene has become incresingly polerised between the haves and have not's and the battles played out between the cyclists and motorists is one aspect of this. The eco conscious graduates seek to belittle the locals or "carrot crunchers," as living anacronisms stuck smoking in their polluting cars while the articulate graduates represent a new and more enlightened future of clean environmentally friendly liberal inteligencia. Over assertive cyclists, local police highjacked by committee loving graduates and locals left marginalised in their own home town = conflict".
Comment today from Iffy's paper .
Last edited by: Dog on Sat 18 Feb 12 at 12:34
|
No offence perro, or even the mole come to that, but for a truly confused, misspelt heap of balderdash that take some beating.
Presumably it's a letter, vox pop. Total and utter garbaggio.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sat 18 Feb 12 at 21:37
|
|
It may well be a confused, misspelt heap Sire, but rather than being senseless nonsense, I'll wager its not a million miles from the truth.
|
>> not a million miles from the truth.
More like a few light-years from it.
What have graduates and local people got to do with a barmy cyclist and even barmier bus driver? No one knows who the cyclist is. Perhaps the bus driver is one of these graduates?
It's a load of cobblers Dog. Never mind misspelt. Anyone who can't spell can do that. It's grossly, grossly confused, just a load of faff out of nowhere, and nothing to do with the incident.
It's embarrassing. My father came from Bristol. I know the place a bit although I don't like it much.
|
I don't mind Bristol one of our sons lived there for more than ten years.Five hr drive from our house every six weeks.>:)
|
>> >> not a million miles from the truth.
>>
>> More like a few light-years from it.
I have seen that piece before. You only need to change "cyclist" "motorist" and "Bristol" and you can trot it out for any scenario anywhere anytime. Its used at journo school as it has some lovely long words, is nicely constructed, and is completely meaningless.
|
As an ex-cyclist commuter the cyclist was riding defensively - as I always used to.
If he had kept left the bus-driver would have pushed past and left the cyclist squeezed between the bus and the kerb - not a good place to be. The ONLY way to avoid this happening is to make some space between you and the kerb - which the cyclist did. If that means there is not sufficient space in the lane for the bus then tough, he has to wait - better than getting knocked off. Anyone heard of cyclists getting killed by long vehicles turning left across them?
Similar things happen when turing right, if the cyclist goes right over to the white line some drivers will pass so close you risk getting pushed into the oncoming traffic.
Having scannerd the comments here I guess very few of you have actually ridden a cycle in traffic and understand how few drivers take account of your presence. Not_ I didn't sday how few see you sinc emany see you but ignore you expecting you to clear the path for their imperious progress in their motor vehicle. Try cycling some time, it works wonders for your awareness and you will be frightened.
I stopped commuting on a cycle because soomer or later the odds were going to catch up with me.
|
>> As an ex-cyclist commuter the cyclist was riding defensively - as I always used to.
He wasnt - he was deliberately being obstructive. Escalation of an existing altercation
>> Having scannerd the comments here I guess very few of you have actually ridden a
>> cycle in traffic and understand how few drivers take account of your presence.
I have and do. In London.
While no-one can condone the bus driver, the cyclist takes his share of the blame here, as in many cases, because they insist on having "rights" that actually they dont have.
|
The bus driver did a good job of wiping out the cyclist.
Not worth going to prison for, but I bet it was very satisfying at the time.
|
|
You cant defend the morals of it, but as a great piece of driving it was peerless.
|
'expecting you to clear the path for their imperious progress in their motor vehicle.'
Doesn't really tally with
'If that means there is not sufficient space in the lane for the bus then tough, he has to wait '
Seems like you are more alike with some motorists than you believe.
|
I used to cycle daily in central London many years ago, and had a few brushes with vehicles.
The received wisdom then in biking circles was that you had to fight to occupy some personal space, because if you didn't you would get squeezed out.
So we always rode down the middle of lanes, to stop a vehicle getting ahead and then edging us into a non-existant space. That wasn't regarded as aggressive riding, just self-defence. Once a car or bus has got more than a quarter of its length ahead, the bike is ignored.
But it's a risky procedure, because of the chance that the driver will be unpredictable, aggressive, or suffer sudden road rage. Those who wanted to live knew when to pull back and not force a confrontation.
The harmless way to wind up a driver was to hammer on the side of his vehicle and then peel off down a side turning.
|
I doubt cyclists would be quite so keen to ride as they do if they were subject to the same compulsory registration and insurance as motorists.
I'm not suggesting they should be, the freedom to jump on a bike and ride off should be preserved.
But it seems to me some cyclists are doing the wrong thing - riding like idiots - for the wrong reason - they know they can't be held to account for their actions.
|
>> I doubt cyclists would be quite so keen to ride as they do if they
>> were subject to the same compulsory registration and insurance as motorists.
Compulsory registration and insurance is absolutely neccessary for vehicles easily capable of lethal impact. Still plenty of silliness goes on though.
|
>> I doubt cyclists would be quite so keen to ride as they do if they
>> were subject to the same compulsory registration and insurance as motorists.
>>
>> I'm not suggesting they should be,
I think its a damn fine idea.
the freedom to jump on a bike and ride
>> off
... has been sufficiently abused now that the privilege should be revoked.
Cyclists demand right and facilities? they should pay for them and abide by the rules that provide those rights and facilities.
|
When I'm cycling I don't demand anything just not to be run over by some nut in a motorised vehicle.
|
>> I doubt cyclists would be quite so keen to ride as they do if they
>> were subject to the same compulsory registration and insurance as motorists.
Not compulsary but household insurance cover provides it - mine does.
>>
>> I'm not suggesting they should be, the freedom to jump on a bike and ride
>> off should be preserved.
>>
>> But it seems to me some cyclists are doing the wrong thing - riding like
>> idiots - for the wrong reason - they know they can't be held to account
>> for their actions.
>>
They can be held to account and frequently are.
|
>> I stopped commuting on a cycle because soomer or later the odds were going to
>> catch up with me.
>>
Yes...because you would on occasions ride right down the middle of a carriageway, deliberately preventing motorised traffic from coming past you...then wondered why there was confrontation?
If a cyclist is worried about being squeezed by something that has (inevitably) overtaken them....why not do the cycling equivalent of throttling off and create their own space...or is the importance of maintaining momentum more important than that?
|
>> If a cyclist is worried about being squeezed by something that has (inevitably) overtaken them....why
>> not do the cycling equivalent of throttling off and create their own space...or is the
>> importance of maintaining momentum more important than that?
You need to do more than 'throttle off' WP. Too often its a case of brake furiously and pray as he forces you into the kerb or worse turns left across your bows. The guy's bloomin forgotten you once you're behind his A pillar. Or possibly not realised that actually you're moving at 15-20mph - almost as fast he is.
In general it's not meant to be confrontational to take a lane in traffic. Today, on Gordon St, as on most days, I used a good primary through a pinchpoint and past some parked cars. The thinking iro the vehicle behind was 'nahhmate not just yet' rather than Foxtrot Oscar. Just part of the give and take of riding as and in traffic.
As soon as there was space I pulled in so the fellow (a taxi off Euston) could pass. Then had to slow down to stay behind him while he crawled over a traffic hump the bike could happily take at 20!! - but of course he had to be in front of the cyclist. Even without the hump I'd have caught him 50m further on at Byng Place.
Do you really expect us to hug the kerb and just keep out of the way of the cars?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 20 Feb 12 at 12:50
|
Well said, Bromptonaut. That's exactly as I remember London.
Motorists exercising their God-given right to overtake everything they can, and then ignoring cyclists who mostly can go faster.
Bus drivers behave in the same way. They expect to be able to pull out without warning and the traffic give way, but will risk a collision rather than let a car out in the same situation.
The film clip just illustrated both at their worst. Both were raring for a fight, and got one.
|
>> Bus drivers behave in the same way. They expect to be able to pull out
>> without warning and the traffic give way, but will risk a collision rather than let
>> a car out in the same situation.
Bus drivers are an interesting case - action can bring about change.
In 1999 when I resumed regular commuting they were exactly as you remember. Overtaking and then immediately pulling into a stop was the real nasty. Colleagues describe me as the calmest man they know but just once I shouldered the bike and boarded a bus to give driver doing that a piece of my mind.
Form the mid noughties on, possibly as a result of Mayor/TfL action they've got much better. Dealing with cyclists is, I would surmise, part of their training and even on busy thoroughfares like Oxford St or Goodge st they're (relative) paragons of consideration
|
Of course the imbalance in this sort of situation is that if a cyclist feels he has been treated badly by a car/lory/bus driver he can take the vehicle number and report it to the Police.
At the very least in the case of a sign written vehicle it will get reported to the firm and the driver 'spoken to'.
In the reverse situation that can't happen.
Imagine the scenario.....
I want to report a cyclist for dangerous riding.
OK Sir, what was he riding?
Errrr, a bike
What was he wearing?
Err Lycra
Another good reason for making them identifiable and so, responsible for their actions
Pat
|
>> I want to report a cyclist for dangerous riding.
>> OK Sir, what was he riding?
>> Errrr, a bike
>> What was he wearing?
>> Err Lycra
>>
>> Another good reason for making them identifiable and so, responsible for their actions
>>
>> Pat
But to implement such a system would cost millions.
Apart from fact the cyclists might be getting away with stuff and 'it's not fair' how can one begin to justify the cash and/or opportunity cost?
And that's before getting started on practicality.
By the way, I'd like to report a pedestrian for dangerous jogging.......
|
>>how can one begin to justify the cash and/or opportunity cost? <<
What price do you put on saving lives?
If the mindset of the cyclist was such that he knew he could be reported I'd like to bet there would be far safer cyclist about.
No more red light jumping and far fewer banging on the sides of vehicles in anger too.
But the problem with that as a solution is it's something that affects the cyclist and NOT any other road user.
The more I listen to all sides of this, the more I become convinced that cyclists really do want everyone else to make changes to save their lives without lifting a finger either in body or mind, themselves.
Pat
|
I don't think you can generalize about cyclists, or car drivers, or BMW drivers or even Volvo drivers some of whom don't mimse. However there is a large minority of not-very-competent cyclists, and a smaller one of tense, uptight, self-righteous aggressive cyclists begging to be run over.
I am always careful with cyclists. For example, I don't just get my nose past them before turning left but make sure I have passed them completely and got a little ahead before turning left. If that's going to be difficult, I stay behind them. I am also polite to wandering, none-too-bright pedestrians. Both categories are liable to think the car driver is always at fault when something bad happens, but they are quite wrong of course.
'Taking a lane' is sometimes appropriate in town, and one has to accept that. But it isn't always. Despite the idiot fiddling of local authorities which usually results in narrower, worse roads, there are many places where there's plenty of room and the cyclist should stay out of the way. It's a matter of brains, and observation. Both alas in shortish supply. It's very annoying when a cyclist takes up a whole lane unnecessarily and then pedals in a leisurely manner. They have a duty to stay out of the way if possible, as we have a duty to see them and not run over or frighten them.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Mon 20 Feb 12 at 16:20
|
How does registering cyclists save lives? Bikes don't, with very rare exceptions, kill other road users.
Registrations don't stop cars, trucks and buses running reds at pretty much every cycle of every set of lights I go through in London. And shooting amber or the first second of red at 25/30 is a damn site more dangerous to the offender and others than a push bike slipping round the left kerb, or even one dodging peds during their phase.
Motor bikers with registrations seem just as prone as cyclists to banging vehicles that endanger them. Indeed the most egregious bit of road rage I've ever seen was a leather clad biker jumping up and down on the taxi that had allegedly cut him up.
|
>> Apart from fact the cyclists might be getting away with stuff and 'it's not fair'
>> how can one begin to justify the cash and/or opportunity cost?
>>
>> And that's before getting started on practicality.
Ok the next cyclist on a mountain bike doing 30 mph along the Thames tow-path forcing me out of the way and swearing at me, I shall throw in the river,
Thats practical.
A considerable number of cyclist are aggressive pests and their number is increasing. It might well cost millions - the cyclists can pay it for it with a license.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 20 Feb 12 at 16:42
|
I recall reading a story in a local newspaper:
Police are seeking a cyclist who threw his bicycle through the back window of a taxi, smashing the glass.
I'd love to know the full story!
|
...who threw his bicycle through the back window of a taxi, smashing the glass...
Would have been an even better story if the bike had gone through the window without smashing the glass.
|
>> Ok the next cyclist on a mountain bike doing 30 mph along the Thames tow-path
>> forcing me out of the way and swearing at me, I shall throw in the
>> river,
I'm tempted to say be my guest. He can have the owner of the yapping pooch on the invisible and ever extending lead for company.
|
|
Lets hope they both get tangled up and fall in then
|
>> Do you really expect us to hug the kerb and just keep out of the
>> way of the cars?
>>
To some extent 'yes'. I'm not suggesting so close to the kerb it's dangerous or so no progress can be made...but cycling in the complete middle of a lane, holding everyone up isn't reasonable either.
Same principle as a slow moving vehicle anywhere else...keep left and facilitate other traffic if they wish to overtake.
|
>> Same principle as a slow moving vehicle anywhere else...keep left and facilitate other traffic if they wish to overtake.
Right as so often Westpig. An example near here, not two hours ago. Followed a citizen in a Panda down a straight, unrestricted downhill stretch of single carriageway today at a mimsing 45 indicated. I didn't overtake because I knew I was going to have to turn left soon, and I am less press-on than I used to be partly for economy reasons. Then when it was too late the mimsing citizen indicated left too. Damn!
The turn was onto a minor road, but with two good lanes and straight. Hooray! Booted it past immediately, sod that for a lark, damn mimser. After I had passed I noticed that the citizen had turned his headlights on and off. I was quite strongly tempted to stop in the middle of the road and ask him courteously if there was anything he wanted. But contented myself with vanishing rapidly into the distance never to be seen again.
The roads can be very annoying. Very.
|
>> To some extent 'yes'. I'm not suggesting so close to the kerb it's dangerous or
>> so no progress can be made...but cycling in the complete middle of a lane, holding
>> everyone up isn't reasonable either.
>>
>> Same principle as a slow moving vehicle anywhere else...keep left and facilitate other traffic if
>> they wish to overtake.
But much to the left of the nearside wheel track of a car (secondary in cycling parlance) and you're in the danger zone from, as well as close passing cars, pedestrians, uneven road edges, rubbish in the gutter and slippery thermoplastic paint - road edge or yellow lines.
Not asking you to wait while I climb the Bealach na Ba in a Granny gear, just the time it takes clear 50 metres of urban canyon.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 20 Feb 12 at 20:34
|
>> >> To some extent 'yes'. I'm not suggesting so close to the kerb it's dangerous
>> But much to the left of the nearside wheel track of a car (secondary in
>> cycling parlance) and you're in the danger zone from, as well as close passing cars,
>> pedestrians, uneven road edges, rubbish in the gutter and slippery thermoplastic paint - road edge
>> or yellow lines.
And, I was reminded this morning, too close to the kerb and your 'SMIDSY' risk goes off scale.
Even drivers who creep/peep and try to look effectively can miss a bike behind street furniture or amongst parked cars.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 21 Feb 12 at 11:18
|
It's a matter of being reasonable.
It is not reasonable for motorised traffic to get so close to cyclists that they feel vulnerable...
...and neither is it reasonable for cyclists to have the complete centre of a lane, when they could easily be further to the left.
We've all seen both, haven't we.
|
>> If a cyclist is worried about being squeezed by something that has (inevitably) overtaken them....why
>> not do the cycling equivalent of throttling off and create their own space...or is the
>> importance of maintaining momentum more important than that?
>>
>>
When you have had a HGV brush your shoulder at 40mph when you are 6" from the kerb you start taking more space, so if it happens again you can move away a little. The effect of that is sometimes there is insufficient room for people to pass - tough.
I believe the French have a rule which means you have to allow at least a metre when overtaking a cyclist.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 21 Feb 12 at 12:47
|
What's the deal with single file riding these days? Back when I was cycling as a child it was drummed into me that if there were two or more of you then you went single file. These days, cyclists are reluctant, shall we say, to do so.
There's a stretch of road near me where I often encounter cyclists in twos and threes. If they would single file there would be stacks of room to overtake, but when they stay two or three abreast there just is no way, so I have ended up on occasion travelling for a mile and a quarter at cycle speed. They shift over when a car comes the other way but shift back again as soon as it's past.
Wash, lather, repeat. Maybe my perception of the road width is askew, but I wonder whether in fact there is some edict about it and the advice to cyclists has changed? Highway Code seems to still say single file though, or I need a new copy.
Last edited by: Crankcase on Tue 21 Feb 12 at 12:44
|
>> changed? Highway Code seems to still say single file though, or I need a new
>> copy.
www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069837
You should
- never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
|
In a group as the inner part of two abreast I'd be prepared to rider closer to kerb than when alone/single file. The outer rider is providing the visibility etc that would otherwise have me in 'primary'. On a decent road a car shouldn't have too much prob passing a small peloton 2 abreast.
Riding country roads in groups protocol is to have a 'lanterne rouge' briefed to stay at the back. As well as keeping an eye on stragglers he/she will warn the approach of motor vehicles with a shout of 'oil up'. Riders should take that as a cue to single up and be ready to be overtaken. Bear in mind though that singling up may take a few seconds particularly in a group of mixed ages/abilities – touched wheels are a violent off so formation changes need care & practice.
The other one I’m aware of is long straggles. Ride out a few times a year with the Folding Society. A group of thirty plus mixed Bromptons, Moultons and Airnimals needs to be broken up on main roads and dispatched at 30 second intervals so cars can ‘loopstitch’ rather than get very cross held up by a convoy.
If I'm organising a ride I'll survey the route beforehand from a bike or car to identify hazards and points where I might need to nominate fellow riders as marshalls.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 21 Feb 12 at 13:17
|
>> The effect of that is sometimes there is insufficient room for
>> people to pass - tough.
Is that an " I'm alright Jack" mentality?
|
>> Is that an " I'm alright Jack" mentality?
No more so than 'don't hold up the cars'.
And if only one Jack can be 'alright' it surely should be the one who stays alive rather than the one who'd held up for 10 seconds.
|
>> No more so than 'don't hold up the cars'.
>>
>> And if only one Jack can be 'alright' it surely should be the one who
>> stays alive rather than the one who'd held up for 10 seconds.
>>
I thought the whole basis of civilised road usage was the consideration of others. It's in the Highway Code and the Road Traffic Act.
I am not and never have been advocating cyclists putting themselves in danger. I am however saying they should facilitate the progress of others if they can and adopt that mentality..not be ignorant about their road usage.
Same principle as a tractor or caravan...you know the principle that most people in England choose to ignore.... the one that causes conflict.
|
>>whole basis of civilised road usage <<
But it's quite clear from this thread that cyclists only consider themselves to road users when it suits them
When it comes to obeying the highway code, or any other normal traffic law such as red lights, they assume the rank of pedestrian.
Sadly, it seems that TFL seems to support this one way thinking while trying to make the roads safer for them.
Pat
|
|
That's a big brush you're tarring all cyclists with Pat.
|
It is Tubby Tommy, and you only have to read through this thread to see the percentage of cyclist who have that sort of mindset.
I don't think it's anything new though.
I did my HGV training for my Class one licence in 1981 and was trained by an Ex Police instructor.
He told me on the day of my test in Leicester 'Always remember that a cyclist can dictate a pass or fail for you'
We've tried to get involved with TFL to put another angle on their proposals from the view in the cab, but have met a brick wall.
Yet they come to us for a view from lorry drivers....
When that view isn't the one they want, they lose interest.
I constantly ask myself why all road users can't manage to get rid of that 'them and us' thinking and consider themselves simply as sharing a space together.
Pat
|
Pat,
I genuinely don't know what you want. Your London Cycling thread asked us about rider's experiences. This one had gone over the same ground.
On both I've tried to give my perspective a a generally law abiding andd I hope skilled and sensible rider.
Commuting in London and less regularly as a leisure rider near home my biggest problem is that motor traffic fails to give riders the space they need. It may be counter intuitive but trying to keep out of the way, close to the kerb, makes the cyclists problem worse. The most frightening rides I've ever had are those where I've been nursing a sick bike home and lack the performance to mix with traffic. Not saying it's deliberate, indeed I'm sure it's not, but a cyclist near the kerb is ignored; clutter in the gutter. Cars, trucks & buses whizz past inches from your elbow, turn left over your bows etc etc.
The solution is the same as on a motorcycle - make yourself visible so they see you and think about you. That means riding in a primary or secondary road position. Don't want to hold other traffic up but there's not room on the average London street to avoid doing so. Sometimes if drivers still want to push through you need the courage to block them. Not for miles, just for a few yards until there's space again. That's not just my view its the technique that's taught at cycle training and set out in 'Cyclecraft' - near enough an official guide that it's published by HMSO.
We're vulnerable whichever way you slice the cake; we just have to manage it as best we can. Sliding into the gutter so as not to briefly impede Westpig's progress is unfortunately not going to help. Fursty, Nortones, Cliff Pope IJWS and others who ride in traffic have posted in similar terms to above.
I don't condone shooting reds (though I've pointed out the biggest danger here is amber gamblers and downright red runners with motors and doing thirty). Quite pleased to see the Met or City plods booking them.
I'm no more going to welcome your prescription of tests, number plates (fitted where?) or insurance - though most of us have it - then you'd welcome one of LGV speed restrictions and minute by minute monitoring of your position, speed etc by VOSA.
On the HGV deaths point some are clearly down to cyclists edging where they shouldn't. Others though I'm sure result from trucks overtaking or pulling alongside at lights.
I don't know anything about why your approach to TFL didn't go as you wanted and don't appreciate it being used as a brush to tar me.
OTOH if I can help in any way I will.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 21 Feb 12 at 20:19
|
>> Sliding into the gutter so as not to briefly impede Westpig's progress
>> is unfortunately not going to help.
Ah, the old insult and only concentrating on one extreme element of someone's arguement or embellishing someone's view point to the negative. That old response.
That normally means a 'lose'.
How about answering my post times at 1710.
For the record, I have posted above, in plain English, my view...and it isn't as you've stated it here.
|
Wasn't meant as an insult WP; delivered with a wry grin over the edge of my pint. Proof again that the internet cannot do irony/humour.
Perhaps the difference between us is one of degree. Obviously we need to share the road, but sometimes the it's too narrow.
See my Gordon St example from yesterday g.co/maps/zu8z8.
I first need to avoid being 'left hooked' by cars turning into Endsleigh Gardens, then navigate that pinch point and finally pass the row of parked cars. In rush there's loads of traffic both ways. Nobody's near the 20 limit. A bold primary is only way to manage left turns and the door zone round the parking bays. After the parking bays, by the trees in Bedford Square, I can pull over to left, ease and stuff can pass - though I usually see them again at the end of the street.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 21 Feb 12 at 21:34
|
>>
>> I believe the French have a rule which means you have to allow at least
>> a metre when overtaking a cyclist.
>>
Specifically 1 metre in urban areas; 1.5 metres everywhere else.
Would that the UK get itself in line with this rule.
|
Bus driver jailed for deliberately hitting cyclist - swiss tony
