Why do cyclists try to undertake left turning trucks ?

[Randy Winkman]

talksthetorque said:

It's also a good point that the cycle lanes are not designed for cycles travelling the same speed as cars.

Are they designed for where the cycles are going faster or slower than the motor vehicles?

[cb31]

nickfrog said:

In the context of this thread though, what, else do you think the cyclist could have done?

I cycle in London 3 days a week and can pretty much guarantee that wouldn't have happened to me. Van overtakes him and then starts slowing which is warning number 1, vans wheels start encroaching on the cycle lane, warning number 2 and now I would be braking so I wasn't alongside it. Warning number 3 is the indicator comes on very close to the cyclist on the wing mirror, at this point I would be full anchors on and ready to dive left into the side street. There is very little time from when the indicator comes on to the van cutting across but I'd already be in panic mode after the first 2 warnings.

For the avoidance of doubt 100% the vans fault but the cyclist should be more defensive. No point being in the right when dead.

[RobM77]

markyb_lcy said:

nickfrog said:

RobM77 said:

I don't think it's wrong to talk about defensive driving/cycling though.

In the context of this thread though, what, else do you think the cyclist could have done?

This question has already been answered. Read the thread.

I covered this adequately in my first post. All my posts subsequent to this have been defending misunderstandings and trying to get people to read that first post (typical PH!). The cyclist's dilemma is a common one and something I deal with every day as I run 6 days a week and am a keen cyclist.

This also applies to driving - read my story about the Audi this morning that cut me up!

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

chow pan toon said:

I suspect that had this been a van crashing across a car or some "worthy" road user in the same circumstances, the condemnation would have been universal.

The condemnation here has been pretty universal.

There have been questions as to whether the cyclist could have taken any defensive measures (I would say the same for a car driver in the same circumstances). No one has said the rider was at fault and it is clear the van driver is 100% knob.

[gazza285]

[oyster]

Your Dad said:

Anyone that thinks the cyclist was trying to undertake the Tesco van even 0.1% to blame for this should hand their driving licence in.

This is more correct.

That video is bad enough.
But some of the responses on here are more childish than my toddler son would manage.

[ukbabz]

markyb_lcy said:

Have you actually read this thread?

Barely anyone has said it was the cyclists fault, but don’t let that get in the way of a good rant.

Yeah mate, I was just addressing to the minority who seem to think the bike was somehow culpable in this situation in a way that may cause them to think about the situation if it happened to them.

[oyster]

u33db said:

Its the vans fault for sure.

However the cyclist is fairly motoring along and doesn't show any signs of slowing/erring on the side of caution...not that he should have to, but if he had have spared himself bouncing off the side a lorry and only been a few seconds slower to where ever hes going.

As i said not his fault but best to read the road a bit!

Do you cycle a lot?
You must do, because you're able to read the road vastly better than I can and indeed better than many on here who presumably cycle thousands of miles a year.

Can I just check - are you suggesting cyclists should slow for EVERY single vehicle that passes them in case that vehicle then makes a late turn?
Should I do that in my car too? Do you? Do you 'lift' off the throttle EVERY single time a vehicle passes you on the motorway? Just in case.

[oyster]

talksthetorque said:

As I've said before, 100% driver's fault, but the cyclist could have chosen to be further back when there was a junction ahead.

Can I ask you a question?

If you are in the process of being overtaken as you pass a junction, how can you then be further back at that point?
Physically, how is that possible?

[catso]

cb31 said:

I cycle in London 3 days a week and can pretty much guarantee that wouldn't have happened to me. Van overtakes him and then starts slowing which is warning number 1, vans wheels start encroaching on the cycle lane, warning number 2 and now I would be braking so I wasn't alongside it. Warning number 3 is the indicator comes on very close to the cyclist on the wing mirror, at this point I would be full anchors on and ready to dive left into the side street. There is very little time from when the indicator comes on to the van cutting across but I'd already be in panic mode after the first 2 warnings.

For the avoidance of doubt 100% the vans fault but the cyclist should be more defensive. No point being in the right when dead.

Agreed, for his own sake the cyclist would do well to expect the unexpected - I say this as a long time cyclist/motorcyclist not some anti-cycling nutter.

[Johnnytheboy]

oyster said:

Your Dad said:

Anyone that thinks the cyclist was trying to undertake the Tesco van even 0.1% to blame for this should hand their driving licence in.

This is more correct.

That video is bad enough.
But some of the responses on here are more childish than my toddler son would manage.

I've asked this before on various threads: does the DVLA have a special department for "handing licence in after forum advice to do so"? I've looked round their website and can't find one.

[RobM77]

ukbabz said:

markyb_lcy said:

Have you actually read this thread?

Barely anyone has said it was the cyclists fault, but don’t let that get in the way of a good rant.

Yeah mate, I was just addressing to the minority who seem to think the bike was somehow culpable in this situation in a way that may cause them to think about the situation if it happened to them.

It depends what you mean by culpable. Most people seem to have said what I've said, which is that the van driver was completely at fault - I used the term "100%" in fact. However, even if something's not your fault, there are steps that can be taken to minimise risk. As I explained in my first post, the problem is that whilst these steps work well in light traffic, in heavy traffic these steps can become onerous, so cyclists will differ in how much they implement them.

[ukbabz]

RobM77 said:

It depends what you mean by culpable. Most people seem to have said what I've said, which is that the van driver was completely at fault - I used the term "100%" in fact. However, even if something's not your fault, there are steps that can be taken to minimise risk. As I explained in my first post, the problem is that whilst these steps work well in light traffic, in heavy traffic these steps can become onerous, so cyclists will differ in how much they implement them.

The only things that a cyclist can do in that position are to cycle out of the lane and prevent an overtake at all (love to see the reaction there), or not ride.

The van driver is 100% wrong to just pull left without looking, if the bike had ridden upside him then there'd be a little doubt on the bike. However, the behaviour of the van is often seen in this country, the mentality of "Bike, I must pass" regardless of whether its required or safe.

[Graveworm]

oyster said:

Do you cycle a lot?
You must do, because you're able to read the road vastly better than I can and indeed better than many on here who presumably cycle thousands of miles a year.

Can I just check - are you suggesting cyclists should slow for EVERY single vehicle that passes them in case that vehicle then makes a late turn?
Should I do that in my car too? Do you? Do you 'lift' off the throttle EVERY single time a vehicle passes you on the motorway? Just in case.

In a car on a motorbike or pedal cycle, I would have slowed in this situation. I do all three mostly in London and (not that it matters) have never had an accident fault or otherwise. These things happen.

I am not saying there is a requirement for the cyclist to do anything different. However, what the van did was not just pass, there were more clues, which may have been more obvious, if the cyclist looked behind him more often (or at all) as he may have had a better idea of the demeanour of the driver but most importantly that the van was slowing, the on the approach to a junction with no other obvious reason why it should.
They van driver was at fault, to blame and liable, I don't think it even gets close to should, but the cyclist could have done more.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 14th February 11:05

[RobM77]

ukbabz said:

RobM77 said:

It depends what you mean by culpable. Most people seem to have said what I've said, which is that the van driver was completely at fault - I used the term "100%" in fact. However, even if something's not your fault, there are steps that can be taken to minimise risk. As I explained in my first post, the problem is that whilst these steps work well in light traffic, in heavy traffic these steps can become onerous, so cyclists will differ in how much they implement them.

The only things that a cyclist can do in that position are to cycle out of the lane and prevent an overtake at all (love to see the reaction there), or not ride.

The van driver is 100% wrong to just pull left without looking, if the bike had ridden upside him then there'd be a little doubt on the bike. However, the behaviour of the van is often seen in this country, the mentality of "Bike, I must pass" regardless of whether its required or safe.

Yes, I said 100% in my post (I've highlighted it for you).

There's a lot the cyclist could do actually - it's been discussed a lot in the thread if you read through. A London cyclist made a very good post earlier actually.

[markyb_lcy]

I think we’re going round in circles here. Is there a point at which people put the pitchforks away and we can just have a grown up discussion about an event none of us were directly involved in and the lessons that can be learned?

[S100HP]

Are people watching a different video to me? There is barely anything the cyclist could do differently in that situation. At a real push he could have eased off the cadence as the van started to slow, but it would have made naff all difference to the outcome. He had no time to react really.

[julian64]

ukbabz said:

The only things that a cyclist can do in that position are to cycle out of the lane and prevent an overtake at all (love to see the reaction there), or not ride.

The van driver is 100% wrong to just pull left without looking, if the bike had ridden upside him then there'd be a little doubt on the bike. However, the behaviour of the van is often seen in this country, the mentality of "Bike, I must pass" regardless of whether its required or safe.

Why would you say this, trying to dominate the road as a cyclist is a terrible thing to do.?

When I was coaching my son on his motorcycle there were a few golden rules. One of them was blindspots. Its inevitable you will be in peoples blindspots while riding. The rule was to know when you are in someone blindspot, and start counting, never get two '2'.

On a motorway when a lorry was overtaking you that would mean dropping back the minute the lorry on your right could no longer see you to make sure the time in the blindspot was limited to a maximum of two seconds. If needed you would brake to do this but most of the time it was simply coming off the throttle.

Its not right that a lorry or in this case a van requires you to brake or alter what you are doing but it is the safe, defensive thing to do.

---AGAIN FOR CLARITY I BELIEVE THE VAN DRIVER IS 100% AT FAULT-----

[Johnnytheboy]

S100HP said:

Are people watching a different video to me? There is barely anything the cyclist could do differently in that situation. At a real push he could have eased off the cadence as the van started to slow, but it would have made naff all difference to the outcome. He had no time to react really.

I agree - even if he'd lifted off a bit, anticipating that the van was going to turn he'd just of hit a different bit of van.

[Graveworm]

S100HP said:

Are people watching a different video to me? There is barely anything the cyclist could do differently in that situation. At a real push he could have eased off the cadence as the van started to slow, but it would have made naff all difference to the outcome. He had no time to react really.

He had about 5 seconds from when the van was alongside and slowing, bikes brake not as well as cars, but braking sheds about 25mph per second in a car so there was enough time if he was minded.