Car accident with a cyclist
Discussion
kambites said:
Fair enough, I've never seen any evidence to support the viewpoint but obviously it's impossible to prove either way.
True.But the absence of any required assessment of ability in one group and the presence of the aforementioned 'test' in the other would tend to support the view that average abilities might be dragged higher in the group that actually has to pass a minimum required threshold.
If you get my meaning.
gazza285 said:
So 80% of cyclists are w
kers because the OP knocked one over because the OP wasn't looking where he was going?
Funny old place at times.
No, you misunderstand causality, quite painfully it seems.kers because the OP knocked one over because the OP wasn't looking where he was going?Funny old place at times.
80% of cyclists are "w
kers" as you say because there is no requirement to be anything other than breathing to venture out on the roads astride a bike. DoubleSix said:
I'd love to agree as the thread would reach a natural conclusion at that point, BUT....
I think Pareto's Law applies in that 20% of drivers cannot be trusted not to do something stupid/dangerous but 80% are competent if not exactly exemplary.
However,
80% of cyclists cannot be trusted not to do something stupid/dangerous but 20% are competent if not exactly exemplary.
This is my honest assessment as both a driver and a cyclist.
The difference IMO is that cars are much more dangerous. Fiddling with the satnav, answering the phone, etc, while in charge of 2 tonnes at 70mph are things that 80% of drivers do one or another of. And the consequences are much worse because of the greater momentum.I think Pareto's Law applies in that 20% of drivers cannot be trusted not to do something stupid/dangerous but 80% are competent if not exactly exemplary.
However,
80% of cyclists cannot be trusted not to do something stupid/dangerous but 20% are competent if not exactly exemplary.
This is my honest assessment as both a driver and a cyclist.
Drivers and cyclists break different laws, as a cyclist I will go through a red light at a toucan crossing if there's no-one there, in my car I will wait patiently, in my car I will break the speed limit however.
People are a menace....
DoubleSix said:
True.
But the absence of any required assessment of ability in one group and the presence of the aforementioned 'test' in the other would tend to support the view that average abilities might be dragged higher in the group that actually has to pass a minimum required threshold.
If you get my meaning.
But studies repeatedly show that But the absence of any required assessment of ability in one group and the presence of the aforementioned 'test' in the other would tend to support the view that average abilities might be dragged higher in the group that actually has to pass a minimum required threshold.
If you get my meaning.
(a) the great majority of cycle-motor vehicle accidents are the fault of the motorist (the exception is for accidents involving children, where fault is more often with the child cyclist)
(b) most cyclists own cars and have passed the aforementioned 'test'.
There are far more accidents and deaths involving motorcyclists, who do have to pass a test. And there is in any case no ongoing assessment of driving standards, most people would fail on any given journey.
S10GTA said:
J4CKO said:
I wasnt aware of the pedal reflector legislation, my pedals are of the SPD variety that have no provision for reflectors, they are simply a mechanical connection to the shoe.
I have, based on this ordered some reflective black (Yes, really) 3M Scotchlite tape which I will add to the back of my cycling shoes by way of simulating pedal reflectors, makes sense really, the pedal stroke provides a good, visible movement that alerts drivers to a cyclist fairly well. The rest of it is going on my black rucksack that covers some of my winter hi viz coat and the rest on the bike at strategic points, being black it wont look so stupid in daylight.
Lots of shoes have reflective on the rear already, you just might not have noticed it yet.I have, based on this ordered some reflective black (Yes, really) 3M Scotchlite tape which I will add to the back of my cycling shoes by way of simulating pedal reflectors, makes sense really, the pedal stroke provides a good, visible movement that alerts drivers to a cyclist fairly well. The rest of it is going on my black rucksack that covers some of my winter hi viz coat and the rest on the bike at strategic points, being black it wont look so stupid in daylight.
Seven years I have had out of them.
DoubleSix said:
kambites said:
Fair enough, I've never seen any evidence to support the viewpoint but obviously it's impossible to prove either way.
True.But the absence of any required assessment of ability in one group and the presence of the aforementioned 'test' in the other would tend to support the view that average abilities might be dragged higher in the group that actually has to pass a minimum required threshold.
If you get my meaning.
DoubleSix said:
GarryDK said:
It still shocks me that some people still manage to turn these situations to the cyclist fault. To the OPs credit he clearly isn’t one of them but there are far too many of them on PH.
It still shocks me how many cyclists deem right of way to be the single most important factor in their decision making. To the OPs credit he didn't kill one of them but there are far too many on the road.kambites said:
DoubleSix said:
kambites said:
Fair enough, I've never seen any evidence to support the viewpoint but obviously it's impossible to prove either way.
True.But the absence of any required assessment of ability in one group and the presence of the aforementioned 'test' in the other would tend to support the view that average abilities might be dragged higher in the group that actually has to pass a minimum required threshold.
If you get my meaning.
That is to say that passing a driving test does not prepare you to be a cyclist - I don't think that is a leap too far.
I'd certainly say from my experience that it's extremely rare to find a good driver who doesn't have experience of either cycling or motorcycling on the road.
In terms of the skills required there's obviously a cross-over in terms of road-craft but there's also a large number which are unique to one or other form of transport. Overall I'd say the common skills outweigh the disjoint ones, at least in terms of their importance if not in absolute numbers.
In terms of the skills required there's obviously a cross-over in terms of road-craft but there's also a large number which are unique to one or other form of transport. Overall I'd say the common skills outweigh the disjoint ones, at least in terms of their importance if not in absolute numbers.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 22 October 16:06
DoubleSix said:
ikarl said:
Beer Man said:
DoubleSix said:
As a driver if I see a car attempting to turn across my path I cover or apply the brake. Cyclists seem to exercise their right of way very 'proactively' in my experience, despite being very squishy.
the clue is right there wouldn't you say??????DoubleSix is intimating that a cyclist would 'keep going' in some instances just because they were in the right.....regardless, in some cases, of the outcome.
One thing that's constantly drilled into you if you do any sort of advanced road-craft training, is that there is so such thing as "right of way". It's a priority - as soon as you start viewing it as a "right" you start to form an implicit expectation that other people will honour it and tend to lose your ability to deal with other people's mistakes.
For a car driver, that's less of a problem because most accidents involving cars don't result in injury. For a cyclist, a motorcyclist or a horse rider, it's suicidal.
For a car driver, that's less of a problem because most accidents involving cars don't result in injury. For a cyclist, a motorcyclist or a horse rider, it's suicidal.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 22 October 16:11
kambites said:
One thing that's constantly drilled into you if you do any sort of advanced road-craft training, is that there is so such thing as "right of way". It's a priority - as soon as you start viewing it as a "right" you start to form an implicit expectation that other people will honour it and tend to lose your ability to deal with other people's mistakes.
I automatically assume everyone else is trying to kill me, that way when they don't I'm pleasantly surprised 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff