Another cyclist dies in London

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

funinhounslow

1,630 posts

143 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
No that's all I have - pic from Twitter.

I don't want to rush to judgement but the road layout looks awful - for any road user. Vanishing bike lane, road narrows, and a pinch point on the approach to the crest of a weak bridge.

budgie smuggler

5,390 posts

160 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
funinhounslow said:
But putting cycle lanes in the gutter means cyclists have to take action to avoid drains, manhole covers and the general detritus that accumulates at the edges of the roads. If I avoid a pothole and get in the way of a car, then by definition that car was too close.

Here is a picture of where yesterday's fatality occurred. "Super highway" it isn't - in fact you will see the bike lane peters out just where it is needed most.

Surprise surprise, the infrastructure is a joke as usual.

Digby

8,242 posts

247 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
funinhounslow said:
If I avoid a pothole and get in the way of a car, then by definition that car was too close.
No, on congested city streets, it means you didn't bother to look before swerving. Seriously. Stop with all the "too close" crap.

HJE

14 posts

125 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
Seriously? If the motorist wasn't too close to the cyclist a swerve around a pot hole would not be an issue. Plus you would have spotted the obstruction with enough time to anticipate a cyclist moving to avoid it in the first place.

Digby

8,242 posts

247 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
HJE said:
Seriously? If the motorist wasn't too close to the cyclist a swerve around a pot hole would not be an issue. Plus you would have spotted the obstruction with enough time to anticipate a cyclist moving to avoid it in the first place.
So you are saying never pass a cyclist, then? That's what you are saying on the vast majority of London Streets I use because we are often a foot apart. Never pass one for fear they may dodge a black broken drain cover, on a black road, that I should have spotted. They do not need to look ahead to spot this drain cover themselves, nor do they need to look when they avoid it. All of that falls to the motorist?

Incredible.




HJE

14 posts

125 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
Don't believe I said any of that, no

Digby

8,242 posts

247 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
So if a cyclist is passing a vehicle on the inside or outside (as happens all day, every day) and the car driver swerves to avoid a pot hole, the car driver need not look because the cyclist should have anticipated this due to spotting the pot hole?

Fair enough. Sounds like we can all leave responsibility at home when we set off.

Digby

8,242 posts

247 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
budgie smuggler said:
funinhounslow said:
But putting cycle lanes in the gutter means cyclists have to take action to avoid drains, manhole covers and the general detritus that accumulates at the edges of the roads. If I avoid a pothole and get in the way of a car, then by definition that car was too close.

Here is a picture of where yesterday's fatality occurred. "Super highway" it isn't - in fact you will see the bike lane peters out just where it is needed most.

Surprise surprise, the infrastructure is a joke as usual.
I wouldn't have ridden over it. I would have walked along the pavement with my bike. I used to do such things as a kid.

funinhounslow

1,630 posts

143 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
Digby said:
So you are saying never pass a cyclist, then? That's what you are saying on the vast majority of London Streets I use because we are often a foot apart. Never pass one for fear they may dodge a black broken drain cover, on a black road, that I should have spotted. They do not need to look ahead to spot this drain cover themselves, nor do they need to look when they avoid it. All of that falls to the motorist?

Incredible.
Driving a foot away from a cyclist is far far too close, no matter how "congested" the street.


FourWheelDrift

88,547 posts

285 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
funinhounslow said:
Here is a picture of where yesterday's fatality occurred. "Super highway" it isn't - in fact you will see the bike lane peters out just where it is needed most.

It's not a full bike lane it's an advisory lane - see it's dashed Do you have a closer view of the road markings where it pops out?
The road layout could be implicated in this one frown



Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 25th May 17:10
Streetview dated June 2015 - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Lansdowne+Rd,+...

Simes205

4,539 posts

229 months

Wednesday 25th May 2016
quotequote all
At the top of the bridge is a turning to the left, the bridge narrows too. Nose to tail in the mornings. I used to live about 50m from there 20 years ago.

yellowjack

17,080 posts

167 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
Digby said:
HJE said:
Seriously? If the motorist wasn't too close to the cyclist a swerve around a pot hole would not be an issue. Plus you would have spotted the obstruction with enough time to anticipate a cyclist moving to avoid it in the first place.
So you are saying never pass a cyclist, then? That's what you are saying on the vast majority of London Streets I use because we are often a foot apart. Never pass one for fear they may dodge a black broken drain cover, on a black road, that I should have spotted. They do not need to look ahead to spot this drain cover themselves, nor do they need to look when they avoid it. All of that falls to the motorist?

Incredible.
The highway code is quite clear with it's advice on this very subject...

Rule 212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

Rule 213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.

...try reading it once in a while, and then apply that advice. Anyone who can't, or won't and thinks they are above it shouldn't be on the roads in the first place.

SlimJim16v

5,669 posts

144 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
Ultimately, each of us are responsible for our own safety. What's the point in it being the car driver's fault and not yours, if you're dead.

Being on the road on 2 wheels is dangerous, even with an engine, YOU have to make doubly sure anything and everything you do is as safe as possible. You can't rely on anyone else doing what they should or shouldn't do.

Mave

8,208 posts

216 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
SlimJim16v said:
Ultimately, each of us are responsible for our own safety. What's the point in it being the car driver's fault and not yours, if you're dead.

Being on the road on 2 wheels is dangerous, even with an engine, YOU have to make doubly sure anything and everything you do is as safe as possible. You can't rely on anyone else doing what they should or shouldn't do.
But accepting that responsibility doesn't take away the driver's responsibility to also drive safely. Safety relies on everyone doing their part, so that if one party makes a mistake the other can accommodate it. Driving to close to a cyclist and then say they shouldn't swerve around potholes is not driving safely.

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

179 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
yellowjack said:
Digby said:
HJE said:
Seriously? If the motorist wasn't too close to the cyclist a swerve around a pot hole would not be an issue. Plus you would have spotted the obstruction with enough time to anticipate a cyclist moving to avoid it in the first place.
So you are saying never pass a cyclist, then? That's what you are saying on the vast majority of London Streets I use because we are often a foot apart. Never pass one for fear they may dodge a black broken drain cover, on a black road, that I should have spotted. They do not need to look ahead to spot this drain cover themselves, nor do they need to look when they avoid it. All of that falls to the motorist?

Incredible.
The highway code is quite clear with it's advice on this very subject...

Rule 212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

Rule 213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.

...try reading it once in a while, and then apply that advice. Anyone who can't, or won't and thinks they are above it shouldn't be on the roads in the first place.
Oi you lot smash
As far as I can tell there are no potholes in the photos so why does something that isn't present have to be discussed as a reason for something that has happened?

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

179 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
SlimJim16v said:
Ultimately, each of us are responsible for our own safety. What's the point in it being the car driver's fault and not yours, if you're dead.

Being on the road on 2 wheels is dangerous, even with an engine, YOU have to make doubly sure anything and everything you do is as safe as possible. You can't rely on anyone else doing what they should or shouldn't do.
Oh come on - of course being on 2 wheels isn't dangerous - unless you have a new definition of dangerous. Is driving around with a tank full of explosive liquid dangerous too?
Every day by far most people use roads on 2 wheels or otherwise perfectly safely




George111

6,930 posts

252 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
Digby said:
HJE said:
Seriously? If the motorist wasn't too close to the cyclist a swerve around a pot hole would not be an issue. Plus you would have spotted the obstruction with enough time to anticipate a cyclist moving to avoid it in the first place.
So you are saying never pass a cyclist, then? That's what you are saying on the vast majority of London Streets I use because we are often a foot apart. Never pass one for fear they may dodge a black broken drain cover, on a black road, that I should have spotted. They do not need to look ahead to spot this drain cover themselves, nor do they need to look when they avoid it. All of that falls to the motorist?

Incredible.
There's no point discussing things with the cyclists because they beat you down with stupidity - it's a waste of time. Happens all the time, every thread, they think they're entitled to 100% of the road and pavement 100% of the time.


walm

10,609 posts

203 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
George111 said:
There's no point discussing things with the cyclists because they beat you down with stupidity - it's a waste of time. Happens all the time, every thread, they think they're entitled to 100% of the road and pavement 100% of the time.
Quoted in case I need a good solid example of hypocrisy.

FrankAbagnale

1,702 posts

113 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
I live in an area where there is a high number of cyclists and the pub chat often comes round to "bloody cyclists".

In my eyes, it's a lack of proper infrastructure being ridden on by some idiot cyclists and driven on by some idiot drivers. The difference being that when the two collide only cyclists die.

As a cyclist, one thing that does supersede my rights is my safety. I always assume the car driver is an idiot and as such wont squeeze down gaps or undertake at speed approaching junctions. When i'm dead my rights don't mean a lot.

With proper infrastructure in place the frustrations would ease and we'd all get on. Until that day the cyclist vs driver argument will pointlessly carry on.

Digby

8,242 posts

247 months

Thursday 26th May 2016
quotequote all
yellowjack said:
The highway code is quite clear with it's advice on this very subject...

Rule 212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

Rule 213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.

...try reading it once in a while, and then apply that advice. Anyone who can't, or won't and thinks they are above it shouldn't be on the roads in the first place.
Cheers. That book is a new one on me. Will take a look.

Back on Earth, how do you keep away from cyclists when they enter gaps often leaving themselves less than a foot away from a vehicle and how do you keep track of dozens doing so at the same time? How can this happen on narrow and congested streets?

I look forward to your answer because it will have solved pretty much all the problems we all face on such roads.

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED