1. Based upon the RoSPA guidance I'd suggest that Terry is riding too close to the centre of the road leaving almost no room for anyone coming around the corner to manoeuvre therefore placing themselves and other road users at risk.Originally Posted by Captain Morgan
2. I wasn't referring to the DoT but to the quotation from Chris Peck from the lobby group.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by adg31; 28th October 2018 at 18:59.
I see. So it is fine for you as a child to ride a horse weighing 400-800 kg completely unsupervised on a road, a horse that you admit can be ‘skittish’, which I interpret as ‘not always in control’, without identification or insurance.
Yet “hairy ar%%d Davie”, who at the age of 34 most likely has a full driving licence, requires a number plate and insurance to ride an 8 kg bicycle.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You included a photo? Really? I suggest you pop back to post #281 and look again.
yeah you've nailed it at last.
You have evaded my question.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It's a static image of a dynamic situation. What if it showed you in your car, side by side with another car as you were in the process of overtaking it. Should you really be driving on the wrong side of the road? Does that follow RoSPA guidelines?
This is getting silly so in that spirit - I asked first!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I wouldn't be stupid enough to overtake on a blind bend - or where there are double white lines.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
There's plenty that are. My point is that Terry is very likely in the process of dropping back to tag on the end of the line. From his body language he has sat up whereas the others are riding hard
Terry could be
Moving back
Holding prime position to help prevent unsafe overtaking
Sounds like Terry thinks its unsafe for cars to overtake and has made the call to ride prime to me, what do you think?
How is Terry at significantly greater risk given that, safe and considerate drivers will not be overtaking coming from the either direction on a blind bend and travelling at speed they can safely stop from?
Super as you didn't take issue with the ToD report, does that mean you accept that?
Which would suggest that the majority of education needed lays with those motorists who do not cycle?
1. It looks like a Terry has made a decision to ride close to the centre of the road alongside the rest of the pack which doesn't seem to be in the RoSPA guidelines for cyclists.
I appreciate from other comments that they may be moving to the back of the pack but that could possibly be more safely achieved on a straight stretch of road rather than on a corner - unless the road was closed to other traffic which again we don't know from the image.
2. By riding close to the centre of the road alongside the rest of the pack Terry has reduced the room for manoeuvre for other road users following around the corner which could result in an accident if another road user is not driving perfectly on the day - something which it is safest to assume!
As a fairly high mileage driver I was lucky to be taught defensive driving - unfortunately not everyone has had that benefit so it is always better to reduce the risk rather than argue over who was in the right after the accident.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by adg31; 28th October 2018 at 20:04.
So Terry is riding in prime position then as he is
A:B:Could you show me where
A: Rospa advise that when riding prime position you should have no one cycling on your inside?
B: Rospa advise that riding more than one abreast is forbidden?
Could you help me understand what kind of accident you are envisioning?
I can see no accident occurring from behind or oncoming traffic that is not caused by dangerous driving, mechanical failure or driver ill health all of which likely to involve the cyclists wherever they are positioned.
Good for you, to be quite honest I really don't care anymore and have rather better things to do with my life than continue this pointless dialogue.
Feel free to troll away and drive or ride as you please.
Cheerio :)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by adg31; 28th October 2018 at 23:08.
Thought not...
Out of curiosity, I wonder how many people drive motor vehicles with windows rolled up and music on in their vehicles. Or, is that different in some way? Having seen this in the thread, the question has been subconsciously rattling around for some time, and finally came to the fore.
Mind, not that I object to situational awareness. I have bone conductive headphones, which I like a lot. I wear them in the house when I need not to be tuned out.
Best wishes,
Bob
PS After having this thought, I did a little investigation. I wasn't the first to think it. One bicycle magazine did some measurements and found that cyclists listening to music could hear more of what was going on around them than car drivers not listening to music. Given that it was a bicycle magazine, it could be special pleading, of course, but I suspect not.
https://www.bikebiz.com/business/cyc...ing-to-nothing
RLF
Last edited by rfrazier; 29th October 2018 at 14:20.
Lost of classic victim blaming in this thread.
while on the subject of victims, what about the 75 people killed on the roads since i last posted about road deaths?
yeah but cyclists though...
This case beggars belief - I don't know how the jury came to their conclusion of "Not guilty of careless driving"
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...court-15342538
She thought the old boy looked like 'rubbish' and drove over him, failed to stop yet turned around and drove back past the scene... Not even a ban...
Had a few cyclists over the last few mornings riding without lights at around 6:45-7:10, hard to see the buggers in the morning half light. You would have thought being highly visible was in their interest.
mike
^^ I agree with you - cycling ninja's do themselves no favours and I have seen a few these past few days.. Decent lights don't cost much either and even cheap ones would help.. As I have said before though - you can be lit up like a Xmas tree but still suffer a 'smidsy' ..
A non-scientific analysis from Tuesday at the Cycle Super Highway running down London's Blackfriars Road... I doubt anyone can say this is a rubbish cycle lane and was built only a year or two ago....
Out of 40 Cyclists at 7:00pm in the dark - 14 Had no lights, 16 had very faint lights, 10 had decent lights. 25 Had no Hi-Vis clothing, 10 had a bit of Hi-Vis and 5 had good reflective clothing.
Out of 20 I observed at The Cut/Blackfriars junction - 13 Stopped at the lights, 3 ignored the lights, 4 cut onto the pedestrian crossing to avoid the lights.
Three incidents in the area when people were walking across the road, a couple of shouts of "w******", One of "Tw*t" and no bells or other less offensive methods of communication.
As a cyclist, pedestrian and a driver, I unfortunately have to conclude that none of the other transport methods have such a loose interpretation of the rules.
Really? Over 80% of drivers don’t comply to speed limits.
https://assets.publishing.service.go...stics-2016.pdf
Please let us know about the “rules” regarding high-viz clothing.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
By ‘rules’ you mean common sense I assume.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You wrote ‘rules’. Please reference the ‘rules’ about cyclists and hi-viz. I’ve been riding a bike for years without wearing hi-viz and I’ve never been stopped by the police, I guess I’m just lucky huh?
Is adhering to the speed limit when driving a motor vehicle not common sense?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You are choosing to cherry pick... in some case what I wrote were blatant fragrance or rules, in some case “common sense” and others common courtesy.
I did say it was not scientific, but if riders continue to be lacking in self preservation, awareness and also flaunt the Highway Code then they will gain a reputation.
If you choose never to wear high visibility clothing, in dark conditions, in high traffic volume areas, then feel free to do so, but please do not be surprised when someone fails to see you... including other cyclists, cars or worse.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Funny how you ignored the majority of it that was clearly rule breaking ?
And to address you final comment, I do choose to adhere to speed limits, however I do not always see the same from other road users... including cyclists
Please start to accept that cyclists are not a ‘protected species’ and have priority... they are another form of road user with no special powers or rights
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You admit that your observations are not scientific.
Do the 80+% of drivers that exceed the speed limit not “gain a reputation”? Do you vociferously comment on motoring forums about the ignorance of law exhibited by drivers?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Frankly I do not vociferously comment on many forums about much... my post was about an observation at a busy road/cycle lane junction in central London while wandering around trying to top up my step count.
Do I think people speed, act without consideration, and flounce the rules... absolutely... but that INCLUDES cyclists as well as other road users.
You seem to have a viewpoint that the world owes cyclists (including me) a favour .... we all have the same rights and responsibilities, regardless of our mode of transport... and largely we have to follow the same rules.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It won't make a jot of difference when you are mown down by somebody who is texting & driving. There's an epidemic of drivers doing it. I'd rather take my chances against a driver with 3 pints of beer inside them than one engrossed in their mobile phone.
Cyclists can't break the speed limit, it doesn't apply to them.
I am fairly certain it is legal for me to dangle upside down from the roof of my house as well..... doesn’t mean it isn’t stupid, dangerous and unnecessary
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It's nice to know that after 381 posts, agreement has been reached and we can turn our attention to motorcyclists.
Thing is it often makes no difference. I wear various degrees of fluro/ reflectives and often use lights during the day if the conditions merit them, yet I have had numerous instances where motorists just don’t look or they seem to look where they want to be not at what is coming towards them.
I can think of one instance when wearing an orange jacket and indicating to turn right into a residential road a car pulled out to turn right at the same time (my right of way) she looked down the road and despite me eyeballing her just drove straight into me!?
Another SMIDSY to add to the list. I think it should be changed to “sorry mate I wasn’t looking”
I appreciate that this topic is devisive and rooted in highly subjective opinions. But whatever the view, surely it cannot be argued that reflective clothing does not improve the safety of cyclists? I appreciate it does but guarantee safety but surely it must improve it by several orders of magnitude.
Several years ago I was driven into by a driver pulling out of a parking space as I passed. I went over the car bonnet & face-planted into the road the far side. I heard the driver say to the attending police officer, " I didn't see him...&, to be honest, I didn't actually look!"
Another time I was riding slowly past the entrance to a petrol station within yards of a mini roundabout, when a woman in a Discovery started to drive out. I put my feet down & stood facing her windscreen with my hand up in a "STOP" gesture. She carried on moving forward & ran me over. Fortunately she did an emergency stop just as I was looking up at her front bumper. She had been moving forwards looking over her right shoulder & waving goodbye to her kids on the garage forecourt at the time. I was wearing High Viz.
There is actually a recognised phenomena that explains (mostly !), the 'sorry mate I didn't see you' failures, as explained by an RAF pilot;
https://www.portsmouthctc.org.uk/a-f...-on-the-roads/
he does state though that hi-vis improves your chances..
Last edited by bry nylon; 3rd November 2018 at 20:22. Reason: typo
And I once was hit by a cyclist while in my car who was, by his own admission, traveling at 30-40mph, down the inside of stationary cars where he could not be seen. He hit my rear quarter and had his head down throughout.
It is not just motorists who are idiots
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I quite agree. The difference is that the motorist often ends up with a nasty dent in their car, whereas the cyclist often ends up dead.
Agree, so why do they continue to ride like morons? BTW I am also a cyclist; and a driver, it is my experience from both disciplines many cyclists are reckless idiots who continue to risk their lives and the safety of others; yet rarely realise their idiocy and self righteousness is the route cause of the problem. So the thread title should in fact be ‘cyclists stop killing yourselves’.
“They” so that’s you too then? Or should the title be ‘idiotic road users should pay attention and think of the consequences of their actions’ ?
My father hates cyclists, in a conversation with him I asked what “what would you say if Mum said she was going to cycle to the post office tomorrow?”
His reply: “watch out for the idiots on the road”
My reply: “is that the cyclists, the car drivers or the tippers from the large construction project?”
Remind me what the problem is again? Personally I see it as a mindeset based on lack of thinking beyond ones own little bubble.
They being many of them.
Don't wear Hi-viz, and then complain when other people don't see you. Classic
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
from another forum;
"taking up the space of 4 bikes while you sit on your fat arse and belch life-shortening sh*t into the air is more arrogant than any behaviour you will encounter from someone on a bike"
classic
Another example of derisory sentencing ;
https://road.cc/content/news/251211-...ollowing-fatal
The driver got a 240 hour 'community order', an 18 month ban and £250 fine / prosecution costs..
Meanwhile elsewhere in Bournemouth a cyclist who hurt no one cycles along Bournemouth promenade and receives a £330 fine ;
https://thisiswesternmorningnews.co....uth-promenade/
You couldn't make this sh*t up...
Last edited by bry nylon; 4th November 2018 at 10:29. Reason: forgot to say both cases in Bournemouth area
Pedestrians!Don't wear Hi-viz, and then complain when other people don't see you. Classic
The problem is not HiViz; the issue is not sééing.
There is ample research on the subject from various angkles; road furniture, road workers, motorcyclists, cyclists.
On this same note there is also well founded and repeatedly confirmed research proving that about 15% of motorists have insufficient sight to be driving ánything: the heavier, fatser their means of transport, the bigger risk they are; a half blind cyclist is mainly a risk to him/herself, a half blind car driver...
This latter is the crux of the rules concerning cyclist in the Netherlands.
It never ceases to amaze me that discussion like on this thread even take place; just look at the Netherlands; it works!! Without helmets, without HiViz.
Bottom line; when you step in you car, yoú decide to go into the public space with a grenade with the safety oin out. YOÚ are the only safety factor, so drive that way.
If you cannot deal with this responsibilty, take the bus.
There is an underlying theme in this thread of cyclists being a danger to themselves and others. To ‘support’ this perception we have had numerous posts communicating anecdotes about things that cyclists have been observed doing. We have even had a non-scientific study at a London junction.
Let’s get beyond anecdotes, what do the actual facts say?
Numerous road collision statistics have been published and are available online, several links have already been posted on this thread. In reported collisions between a cyclist and motor vehicle that results in a serious injury or fatality, cyclists are found to be at fault 20% of the time. Conclusion - in the majority of cases, cyclists are not a danger to themselves.
As for cyclists being a danger to others, I think anyone who thinks that cyclists are a significant threat to their safety is being ridiculous. You’re eight times more likely to be killed by your own bedsheets than a cyclist. However, I will give Surrey Road Policing Unit’s view on this matter. They were asked on Twitter what they were doing to stop cyclists riding on pavements and running red lights:
“Between 2007 & 2016 cyclists were responsible for 0.6% of fatalities involving pedestrians & 1.5% of serious injuries. Cars drivers were responsible for 67.5% of fatalities & 81% of serious injuries to pedestrians”
“Interestingly no pedestrians were killed by red light jumping cyclists between 2007&2016. But 5 pedestrians a year were killed by drivers of vehicles. 43 pedestrians died in collisions involving vehicles on footways, none by cyclists. We need to concentrate on the greater risk”
“All sections of road users have bad drivers/riders. However when it comes to who commits the most offences it is drivers of cars (again we point out that is not all car drivers). They are also responsible for more collisions than any other type.”
“The vast majority of collisions do not involve cyclists in any way. It is often car v car or inanimate objects (road signs, walls)”
“There are collisions where if there is a cyclist involved it may well be they are responsible/liable for what happened but the numbers are tiny compared to the amount caused by drivers of cars.”
I’m going to leave this thread now. My final question - since 99.4% of road fatalities are not caused by cyclists, why does it seem that 99.4% of tabloid press articles and comments threads appear to whinging about cyclists or downright anti-cycling? Can we now have 198 threads about idiot drivers to balance things out?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Can’t be bothered to read all that- seems you’re a little wound up of all the nasty commnets. There’s bellends on our roads coming from all angles but cyclist make up the largest proportion of the biggest bellends
In the main made of up nearly 30 years of anecdotal experience
Last edited by Franky Four Fingers; 4th November 2018 at 11:30.
jesus as this thread just got dumb
its not about Hiviz it’s about not seeing?
You mean not seeing them because they don’t have hiviz on ?
Ffs
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote