Another "cyclist vs driver" rage story in the news...

Another "cyclist vs driver" rage story in the news...

Author
Discussion

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Digby said:
1. I think the thing you are overlooking by mentioning a few tragic examples is that the above situations are evident hundreds of times a day in and around London etc. It's pointless to suggest that when a drunk trucker with no licence who is on his iPad runs someone over, it subsequently makes efforts by the haulage industry to keep cyclists safe fall flat on their face. It's the extremely safe and responsible drivers being surrounded by unaware cyclists that I am worried about.

2. Also from that link..

Marian Louise Noonan, 32, from south London, is a confessed kerb-hugger, and that leaves her feeling quite vulnerable on the roads, unlike her husband.

"He cycles much more aggressively and is aware of all the traffic around him. He cycles as if someone is going to hit him and makes sure he is in a safe position," she says.

"I'm much more nervous of my cycling ability, I'm frightened people might hit me, which means I don't cycle in a positive manner."

As I have said before, it's such a mixed bag. Whilst I am left wondering where the hell her husband has vanished to, I am left focusing 90% of my attention on her before any manoeuvre. That's just two cyclists. At busy junctions in the city, there will be twenty plus all around.

3. Again, I just can't get my head around H&S being involved in absolutely every rudimentary action these days, yet absolutely nothing is required to go play in traffic that can and will kill you if you or they get it wrong.
1. I think the point your missing, is that as tragic as these cyclist deaths are, they're not not high in number. We have about what, a dozen a year is it in London, in a city of millions? But the trouble seems to be that of that low number, the number faults from the hgv and driver are statistically high, I'd say 50% at least.

I would think that nationally, the number of rogue drivers is very, very low. But the number of rogue drivers in the construction industry in London seems far too high, and these are the people who seem to kill these people the most.

Tbh I don't have a problem with drivers on the phone so long as they can still drive ok at the same time, but if you kill somebody when you're on the phone then you've suddenly got an enormous problem. And when you look into these deaths in London it's hard to find evidence that the deceased did wrong but not at at all hard to find faults with the hgv driver or his vehicle.

2. This is one of the reasons I won't cycle on the roads in the UK - you cannot win. Whether you stay to the side or take a defensive, central position, the motorist seems incapable of understanding, as shown by the spokesman of motorists himself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk6Y2BUPciE
You can't win. Either way, the motorist is incapable of understanding and the cyclist is always in the wrong.

3. Well I can, I think it's very easy to understand. Cyclists are safer in numbers, and cyclists do less harm (on every level) than motorists. So the more cyclists you can get out on the road, the less congestion, pollution, obesity, casualties etc etc you will have.

The moment you start promoting cycling as dangerous, and that you can't do it without training and qualifications and licences etc then you reduce the numbers of cyclists and safety reduces.

I'd be for some sort of coercion into training, such as say, strict liability but only for those who can show they've done a training course in the past 5 years or somesuch, but if you're thinking of any form of compulsory training then you're immediately into making the roads less safe.




DoubleD

22,154 posts

107 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
That's a good video. Some great points by Clarkson.

saaby93

32,038 posts

177 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
That article gets worse the more you read of it
Theres nothing wrong with hugging kerbs if thats a safe place to be and many cyclists do it.
To try to say that being a kerb hugger is wrong is also wrong.
Its also wrong to say that someone who cycles aggressively is safe.
Weve seen from the youtube videos the position they put themselves in.
The worst thing to to do is to tell the kerb huggers to try to behave as the aggressives. As weve seen that means they blindly follow down the inside of left indicating trucks without realising what theyre doing.

The best idea was earlier where it said the kerb huggers tend to keep to the law (if they know it) so anything that would allow them to cycle with traffic rather than weave in and out of it up in the inside or outside must be a good thing
But dont assume thats the only issue
Its just one of those on the road to getting there

Cmann

53 posts

114 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
DoubleD said:
That's a good video. Some great points by Clarkson.
I liked his point about cyclists taking up less road space. I think I'm somewhere in between the two. We have way to many people on the roads and it causes chaos in every town every morning. More people should be cycling and they should be doing it off the roads.

walm

10,609 posts

201 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
Theres nothing wrong with hugging kerbs if thats a safe place to be and many cyclists do it.
To try to say that being a kerb hugger is wrong is also wrong.
I mostly disagree - although you have given yourself a sort-of get out by saying "if that's a safe place to be".
It is incredibly rare for it to be the safest place.
It might be "safe" but it's not safer than taking proper secondary position (=NOT less than 0.5m to the edge of the road).

It is against government advice, cycle training, Cyclecraft (the bible) and common sense.

Next to the kerb is a lot of detritus, drain covers and poorly maintained road.
Without 50cm of "wobble room" you are more likely to have an off.
Without 50cm of avoidance space, you have nowhere to go if you need to move left in an emergency.
It often encourages cars to overtake without thinking and when there isn't really enough room.

And possibly most importantly if you have a tendency to hug the kerb you are very likely to fail to leave enough room when you overtake parked cars putting yourself in prime "dooring" territory.

I am sure it can be "safe" on the very left hand edge of the road when it's a wide, well maintained carriageway with minimal traffic but it is simply a terrible habit to get into.

saaby93

32,038 posts

177 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
walm said:
Next to the kerb is a lot of detritus, drain covers and poorly maintained road.
Without 50cm of "wobble room" you are more likely to have an off.
Without 50cm of avoidance space, you have nowhere to go if you need to move left in an emergency.
It often encourages cars to overtake without thinking and when there isn't really enough room.

And possibly most importantly if you have a tendency to hug the kerb you are very likely to fail to leave enough room when you overtake parked cars putting yourself in prime "dooring" territory.

I am sure it can be "safe" on the very left hand edge of the road when it's a wide, well maintained carriageway with minimal traffic but it is simply a terrible habit to get into.
I did mean keeping close to the kerb where its safe place so where there isnt all the detritus you refer to and obviously keeping clear of parked cars as they prevent being near the kerb wink
Thought that was obvious in an obvious kinda way

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
That article gets worse the more you read of it
Theres nothing wrong with hugging kerbs if thats a safe place to be and many cyclists do it.
To try to say that being a kerb hugger is wrong is also wrong.
Its also wrong to say that someone who cycles aggressively is safe.
Weve seen from the youtube videos the position they put themselves in.
The worst thing to to do is to tell the kerb huggers to try to behave as the aggressives. As weve seen that means they blindly follow down the inside of left indicating trucks without realising what theyre doing.

The best idea was earlier where it said the kerb huggers tend to keep to the law (if they know it) so anything that would allow them to cycle with traffic rather than weave in and out of it up in the inside or outside must be a good thing
But dont assume thats the only issue
Its just one of those on the road to getting there
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.

Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.

The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.



saaby93

32,038 posts

177 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.
Why do you think I posted what I have - stop misreading it smile

And I guessed that article was designed to cause trouble as soon as it said kerb huggers hehe

Devil2575 said:
Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.
It depends what you call kerb hugging. Does it include your bit further outor not? Go to far and riding too far out can cause frustration and worse behaviour too.
What is kerb hugging? when and where is it too close. when is it too far out
Has it figured in any of the accidents weve seen (dont mention kerb hugging up the inside of a truck)

Devil2575 said:
The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.
I already covered that smile

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Kerb hugging infers riding as close to the kerb as possible. It isn't an especially ambiguous term.

Pete317

1,430 posts

221 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.

Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.

The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.

What's wrong with playing it as you see it?
If you know there's someone wanting to pass you, and you can see that the kerb area is free of detritus, drains etc for sufficient distance ahead and you're probably going to be safe moving over, then what's wrong with just moving over and letting them pass?
From some of the videos I've seen here, some cyclists simply don't think that way.

ETA: When I'm cycling, I often pull over and slow down or even stop if safe and convenient to do so and if I judge it to be the best course of action. Doing so only costs me a few seconds of my precious time.

Edited by Pete317 on Tuesday 24th November 13:26

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Pete317 said:
What's wrong with playing it as you see it?
If you know there's someone wanting to pass you, and you can see that the kerb area is free of detritus, drains etc for sufficient distance ahead and you're probably going to be safe moving over, then what's wrong with just moving over and letting them pass?
From some of the videos I've seen here, some cyclists simply don't think that way.

ETA: When I'm cycling, I often pull over and slow down or even stop if safe and convenient to do so and if I judge it to be the best course of action. Doing so only costs me a few seconds of my precious time.

Edited by Pete317 on Tuesday 24th November 13:26
I have pulled over and stopped to let vehicles past before now and there is nothing wrong with moving to the left if you can see it is is safe. However it can get you into trouble.
You judge that it is ok so you move over anticipating that the car behind will pass but they take their time at which point you end up going into a pot hole/massive puddle etc.
You judge it is safe so you move over, the car passes but then so does another and another and another. You then end up having to stop and wait to pull out again as there is an obstruction ahead.

I think of moving over as in effect pulling of the road. You have to check it is clear before you pull back on and so you need to be prepared to stop. In some situations i'm happy to do this, if for example i'm on a hill and going slowly or if there is a large tailback of cars behind, but I have as much right to use the road as other people so I don't see any reason to always be pulling over.

saaby93

32,038 posts

177 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
but I have as much right to use the road as other people so I don't see any reason to always be pulling over.
Loaded statement alert there wink
You may have as much right but there's due care for other road users
which is why we tend to walk along the side of the road if there's no pavement, or keep left when cycling, slow vehicles pull over from time to time etc
There's no right to hold people up regardless and you've probably seen where police deal with drivers with a long queue behind
'Failure to pull over when there is a long queue of traffic behind can constitute an offence of inconsiderate driving, which can be punished with three to nine points on a driver’s licence and a fine of up to £5,000.'
Bikes may be different






Pete317

1,430 posts

221 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
I have pulled over and stopped to let vehicles past before now and there is nothing wrong with moving to the left if you can see it is is safe. However it can get you into trouble.
You judge that it is ok so you move over anticipating that the car behind will pass but they take their time at which point you end up going into a pot hole/massive puddle etc.
You judge it is safe so you move over, the car passes but then so does another and another and another. You then end up having to stop and wait to pull out again as there is an obstruction ahead.

I think of moving over as in effect pulling of the road. You have to check it is clear before you pull back on and so you need to be prepared to stop. In some situations i'm happy to do this, if for example i'm on a hill and going slowly or if there is a large tailback of cars behind, but I have as much right to use the road as other people so I don't see any reason to always be pulling over.
Yes, a little bit of commonsense and foresight can go a long way, as can sharpening up one's judgement skills.

But I've seen a lot of cyclists, also evident in these videos, who apparently don't consider doing such things even when it's perfectly safe and convenient to do so.

And yes, cyclists do have as much right to the road as anyone else, but when they're effectively taking up as much roadspace as a car would with no good reason, and actually taking up that roadspace for longer than a car would, then it kind of dampens the argument for more cyclists meaning less congestion.

WinstonWolf

72,857 posts

238 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Pete317 said:
Devil2575 said:
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.

Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.

The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.

What's wrong with playing it as you see it?
If you know there's someone wanting to pass you, and you can see that the kerb area is free of detritus, drains etc for sufficient distance ahead and you're probably going to be safe moving over, then what's wrong with just moving over and letting them pass?
From some of the videos I've seen here, some cyclists simply don't think that way.

ETA: When I'm cycling, I often pull over and slow down or even stop if safe and convenient to do so and if I judge it to be the best course of action. Doing so only costs me a few seconds of my precious time.

Edited by Pete317 on Tuesday 24th November 13:26
Generally if you need to pull over or stop there isn't room for a safe overtake in the first place.

Pete317

1,430 posts

221 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
WinstonWolf said:
Pete317 said:
Devil2575 said:
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.

Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.

The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.

What's wrong with playing it as you see it?
If you know there's someone wanting to pass you, and you can see that the kerb area is free of detritus, drains etc for sufficient distance ahead and you're probably going to be safe moving over, then what's wrong with just moving over and letting them pass?
From some of the videos I've seen here, some cyclists simply don't think that way.

ETA: When I'm cycling, I often pull over and slow down or even stop if safe and convenient to do so and if I judge it to be the best course of action. Doing so only costs me a few seconds of my precious time.

Edited by Pete317 on Tuesday 24th November 13:26
Generally if you need to pull over or stop there isn't room for a safe overtake in the first place.
I never said anything about need - just about doing it if you judge it to be the best course of action, like, for example, in order to create a safe opportunity to overtake in a situation where there isn't going to be room for a safe overtake for a long way ahead.

WinstonWolf

72,857 posts

238 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Pete317 said:
WinstonWolf said:
Pete317 said:
Devil2575 said:
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.

Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.

The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.

What's wrong with playing it as you see it?
If you know there's someone wanting to pass you, and you can see that the kerb area is free of detritus, drains etc for sufficient distance ahead and you're probably going to be safe moving over, then what's wrong with just moving over and letting them pass?
From some of the videos I've seen here, some cyclists simply don't think that way.

ETA: When I'm cycling, I often pull over and slow down or even stop if safe and convenient to do so and if I judge it to be the best course of action. Doing so only costs me a few seconds of my precious time.

Edited by Pete317 on Tuesday 24th November 13:26
Generally if you need to pull over or stop there isn't room for a safe overtake in the first place.
I never said anything about need - just about doing it if you judge it to be the best course of action, like, for example, in order to create a safe opportunity to overtake in a situation where there isn't going to be room for a safe overtake for a long way ahead.
My commute is twenty miles and I'm often stuck behind HGVs. Do you think the bds pull over, do they fk...

Mave

8,208 posts

214 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
Devil2575 said:
but I have as much right to use the road as other people so I don't see any reason to always be pulling over.
Loaded statement alert there wink
You may have as much right but there's due care for other road users
which is why we tend to walk along the side of the road if there's no pavement, or keep left when cycling, slow vehicles pull over from time to time etc
There's no right to hold people up regardless and you've probably seen where police deal with drivers with a long queue behind
'Failure to pull over when there is a long queue of traffic behind can constitute an offence of inconsiderate driving, which can be punished with three to nine points on a driver’s licence and a fine of up to £5,000.'
Bikes may be different
Doesn't stopping "if there's a large tailback of cars behind" cover this point?

Pete317

1,430 posts

221 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
WinstonWolf said:
My commute is twenty miles and I'm often stuck behind HGVs. Do you think the bds pull over, do they fk...
Well I also think they should! They have no more right to hold up the traffic - any traffic - than anyone else.

Hackney

6,811 posts

207 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
saaby93 said:
That article gets worse the more you read of it
Theres nothing wrong with hugging kerbs if thats a safe place to be and many cyclists do it.
To try to say that being a kerb hugger is wrong is also wrong.
Its also wrong to say that someone who cycles aggressively is safe.
Weve seen from the youtube videos the position they put themselves in.
The worst thing to to do is to tell the kerb huggers to try to behave as the aggressives. As weve seen that means they blindly follow down the inside of left indicating trucks without realising what theyre doing.

The best idea was earlier where it said the kerb huggers tend to keep to the law (if they know it) so anything that would allow them to cycle with traffic rather than weave in and out of it up in the inside or outside must be a good thing
But dont assume thats the only issue
Its just one of those on the road to getting there
Do you ride a bike?

Because of you did you might realise that kerb hugging can be bad for a number of reasons.

Kerb hugging encourages vehicles to drive along side you and/or pass you without any consideration. Riding a bit further out makes drivers wait until the other lane is clear before passing you.

The kerb is where the drains tend to be as well as more potholes. Remember once you are hugging the kerb drivers are going to treat the lane like it is empty so you are not going to be able to pull out to avoid a particularly nasty pot hole or drain cover, unless you wait for a gap in traffic.

Leaves and other detritus collect there. At this time of year the kerb is lethal as it's full of decaying leaves and mud. Great if you like falling off.

If they'd changed "aggressively" to "assertively" it'd be a lot more helpful.
Assertive is holding your space, making decisive moves etc. very different to aggressive. Assertively, to me, means I take what I can from driving a car and apply it to cycling, eg I don't drive in the gutter; I don't squeeze up the side of a queue at the lights etc, etc.

walm

10,609 posts

201 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
There's no right to hold people up regardless and you've probably seen where police deal with drivers with a long queue behind.
Yes. I have seen that, along with some unicorns, flying pigs and HS2 coming in under budget. wink