Why do cyclists try to undertake left turning trucks ?
Discussion
Graveworm said:
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. 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.
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
Watching the video back, I simply cannot see a point where the van was ahead enough of the cyclist and showing keenness to slow or turn left.
markyb_lcy said:
Bujinkhal said:
markyb_lcy said:
Manual?
A stunt, basically a wheely.Then good luck with that one (to the original poster)
I was obviously joking... it's somewhat different to a wheely though. And far more useful on the trail.
I am still confident I would be OK in London. So no need for luck, I am just a cycling god.
Dont like rolls said:
Just to correct you:
The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
So slowing by an average only of 3 mph for the 5 or so seconds when the van was alongside slowing and creeping across, would have turned that 1m into 7.5m or enough braking distance to stop from 25mph. At the cost of 1 second to his journey time. So definitely could have done something, which is not the same as criticising him as we are only guessing we would have done anything differently.The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
If I was the cyclist and saw that video I would be critical of myself and I still think it is fair to criticise how he doesn't appear to be looking behind, at all, once he is away from the lights. It is possible that could have helped him know what was going on.
Graveworm said:
Dont like rolls said:
Just to correct you:
The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
So slowing by an average only of 3 mph for the 5 or so seconds when the van was alongside slowing and creeping across, would have turned that 1m into 7.5m or enough braking distance to stop from 25mph. At the cost of 1 second to his journey time. So definitely could have done something, which is not the same as criticising him as we are only guessing we would have done anything differently.The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
If I was the cyclist and saw that video I would be critical of myself and I still think it is fair to criticise how he doesn't appear to be looking behind, at all, once he is away from the lights. It is possible that could have helped him know what was going on.
markjmd said:
Graveworm said:
Dont like rolls said:
Just to correct you:
The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
So slowing by an average only of 3 mph for the 5 or so seconds when the van was alongside slowing and creeping across, would have turned that 1m into 7.5m or enough braking distance to stop from 25mph. At the cost of 1 second to his journey time. So definitely could have done something, which is not the same as criticising him as we are only guessing we would have done anything differently.The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
If I was the cyclist and saw that video I would be critical of myself and I still think it is fair to criticise how he doesn't appear to be looking behind, at all, once he is away from the lights. It is possible that could have helped him know what was going on.
On Page 6 Graveworm states this:
Graveworm said:
They van driver was at fault, to blame and liable
This is quickly becoming a thread more about reading comprehension than dangerous driving!! 
markjmd said:
Graveworm said:
Dont like rolls said:
Just to correct you:
The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
So slowing by an average only of 3 mph for the 5 or so seconds when the van was alongside slowing and creeping across, would have turned that 1m into 7.5m or enough braking distance to stop from 25mph. At the cost of 1 second to his journey time. So definitely could have done something, which is not the same as criticising him as we are only guessing we would have done anything differently.The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
If I was the cyclist and saw that video I would be critical of myself and I still think it is fair to criticise how he doesn't appear to be looking behind, at all, once he is away from the lights. It is possible that could have helped him know what was going on.
I know of the guy who was taking the video. If you saw the whole thing, you’d see that the cyclist that got hit actually started from the ASL by the bridge, quite a distance back. The driver of the Tesco van knew he was there, he had to overtake him. Then he turned in on him anyway. If it happened to me, that driver wouldn’t have had a good day. It was disgraceful that he tried to swerve the penalties by not admitting he was driving. I hope he got sacked, and never gets another driving job again.
Edited by GOATever on Friday 14th February 14:18
GOATever said:
I know of the guy who was taking the video. If you saw the whole thing, you’d see that the cyclist that got hit actually started from the ASL by the bridge, quite a distance back. The driver of the Tesco van knew he was there, he had to overtake him. Then he turned in on him anyway. If it happened to me, that driver wouldn’t have had a good day. It was disgraceful that he tried to swerve the penalties by not admitting he was driving. I hope he got sacked, and never gets another driving job again.
A cyclist deliberately trying to antagonize the driver ?? Surely not, those brave heroes of the road..Edited by GOATever on Friday 14th February 14:18
Graveworm said:
would have turned that 1m into 7.5m or enough braking distance to stop from 25mph
That has to be another wind-up. 7.5m is probably the reaction time alone, not the distance needed on those skinny tyres. I would say he needs 20m to stop at least and if everything goes well which in the event of an emergency stop is a big ask. Decent chance of being on the deck by then and under the van with a somewhat worse outcome obviously. The issue with this thread is not reading comprehension deficiencies
k off please.Graveworm said:
Dont like rolls said:
Just to correct you:
The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
So slowing by an average only of 3 mph for the 5 or so seconds when the van was alongside slowing and creeping across, would have turned that 1m into 7.5m or enough braking distance to stop from 25mph. At the cost of 1 second to his journey time. So definitely could have done something, which is not the same as criticising him as we are only guessing we would have done anything differently.The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
If I was the cyclist and saw that video I would be critical of myself and I still think it is fair to criticise how he doesn't appear to be looking behind, at all, once he is away from the lights. It is possible that could have helped him know what was going on.
nickfrog said:
That has to be another wind-up. 7.5m is probably the reaction time alone, not the distance needed on those skinny tyres. I would say he needs 20m to stop at least and if everything goes well which in the event of an emergency stop is a big ask. Decent chance of being on the deck by then and under the van with a somewhat worse outcome obviously.
The issue with this thread is not reading comprehension deficiencies.
Talking of reading comprehension I said braking distance. The issue with this thread is not reading comprehension deficiencies.
Skinny tyres don't make that much difference in good conditions, at low speeds and weights. In theory they make none at all but rubber has its limits and small contact areas make it harder to average for materials, debris etc.
I worked on about 2/3 rds that of a car which isn't terrible. I said an average of 3mph slower to illustrate how a little can help. I included what that was the braking distance for, to give context.
In terms of actual speeds I think 3mph is pessimistic, he could easily have slowed more if he went that way. As for the 25mph (after that required to reduce the speed average) would be faster than he would have been travelling.
In any event it would have meant he was going significantly slower before the truck turned and would have been further back, which would have given him more room and time to avoid it and the truck may have seen him or got out of the way.
None of which the cyclist should of done and none of it makes it his fault.
Edited by Graveworm on Friday 14th February 14:53
As both a cyclist and a car driver, I honestly despair at some of the posts on this thread. I've been cycling on the roads for over 30 years and I'm always extremely cautious when in traffic. I've had someone do exactly the same thing as in this video to me when I was racing a time-trial and it was only because it was a car, not a van, and it got a little further ahead of me before turning left, that I managed to avoid it. The fact that I avoided an impact was nothing to do with my awareness or the nuances of the how the car was being driven - just pure luck that the car was far enough ahead to leave me a tiny gap to get around it when it turned. It all happened in an instant, but even this was longer than the cyclist had to react in the case here. I also had a tiny gap to aim towards, the cyclist here had absolutely nowhere to go.
There is simply no way the cyclist could A. predict what the van was going to do, nor B. have any time to react and do anything that would have resulted in a different outcome once the van decided to turn left. The van driver appears to have been completely oblivious to all the other traffic around him. 100% his fault, 0% the cyclist.
There is simply no way the cyclist could A. predict what the van was going to do, nor B. have any time to react and do anything that would have resulted in a different outcome once the van decided to turn left. The van driver appears to have been completely oblivious to all the other traffic around him. 100% his fault, 0% the cyclist.
OK I try to avoid cyclist v car threads on PH but here we go...
Driver 100% to blame, obvs.
The video had my alarm bells ringing from when the cyclist did a shoulder check. In my mind I’m like ‘lift off, lift off’. Don’t think he could have avoided, but he could have mitigated.
I have done a fair bit of Class C HGV delivery work of all kinds around London and these cycle superhighways are a mare if you are in any kind of van or lorry with restricted vision. They do not segregate the cyclists from the traffic at all, and they give a false sense of security - it’s just a bit of paint not a physical barrier - to extremely vulnerable road users of varying skill levels. It is surprising that side swipes like this are not a lot more common. I do also worry that the Cycle Superhighways bring out a bit of a competitive edge in cyclists, PB's to work/ being at the front of the pack alpha type of thing but I have no evidence for that - just a feeling.
From a driver’s perspective it can be very tempting to try to put some distance between you and the pack after the lights and quickly ‘chuck the left’ in these situations. Anyone with a bit of experience in town/ common sense understands that a cyclist will be up to speed just as fast as you are, and that this won't work, but the temptation is there. Even more so when it is an extended peloton undertaking you. You could be stuck out there for ages with people beeping relying on one little mirror to spot a gap. It’s really not an ideal position to find yourself in on MIllbank. Once you get used to driving in town for a living you work out that trundling about is the only approach that works, and if you hold up the traffic due to poor road design then so be it. Meh.
I did a quick Google and Tesco pay their drivers less than £9 per hour which makes this very much a 'low barrier to entry' role. So it is entirely possible that a driver of this type of vehicle may not be an experienced driver, let alone a professional or have any actual experience driving in London. Couple that with a time slot sensitive, multi drop schedule in a low visibilty vehcle, lots of manual handling, every stop being unfamiliar/ down residential streets, dealing with the great unwashed, long shifts to make the money up etc and you can understand how these situations arise.
Driver 100% to blame, obvs.
The video had my alarm bells ringing from when the cyclist did a shoulder check. In my mind I’m like ‘lift off, lift off’. Don’t think he could have avoided, but he could have mitigated.
I have done a fair bit of Class C HGV delivery work of all kinds around London and these cycle superhighways are a mare if you are in any kind of van or lorry with restricted vision. They do not segregate the cyclists from the traffic at all, and they give a false sense of security - it’s just a bit of paint not a physical barrier - to extremely vulnerable road users of varying skill levels. It is surprising that side swipes like this are not a lot more common. I do also worry that the Cycle Superhighways bring out a bit of a competitive edge in cyclists, PB's to work/ being at the front of the pack alpha type of thing but I have no evidence for that - just a feeling.
From a driver’s perspective it can be very tempting to try to put some distance between you and the pack after the lights and quickly ‘chuck the left’ in these situations. Anyone with a bit of experience in town/ common sense understands that a cyclist will be up to speed just as fast as you are, and that this won't work, but the temptation is there. Even more so when it is an extended peloton undertaking you. You could be stuck out there for ages with people beeping relying on one little mirror to spot a gap. It’s really not an ideal position to find yourself in on MIllbank. Once you get used to driving in town for a living you work out that trundling about is the only approach that works, and if you hold up the traffic due to poor road design then so be it. Meh.
I did a quick Google and Tesco pay their drivers less than £9 per hour which makes this very much a 'low barrier to entry' role. So it is entirely possible that a driver of this type of vehicle may not be an experienced driver, let alone a professional or have any actual experience driving in London. Couple that with a time slot sensitive, multi drop schedule in a low visibilty vehcle, lots of manual handling, every stop being unfamiliar/ down residential streets, dealing with the great unwashed, long shifts to make the money up etc and you can understand how these situations arise.
FiF said:
Fully agree with comments re original Tesco van video. Van driver idiot, difficult to see where cyclist was in anyway to blame.
Now anyone like to comment on one from That Jeremy Vine?
Lorry turning left without indicating, true, very bad form. But I wouldn't have been heading up the left of him as Vine was but then he is a bellend so maybe that's the reason. Just my 2p.
https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/122683469...
Agreed - I'd never pass on the inside of a moving vehicle near a junction, or stationary ones where I'm not certain I can get ahead of it in time. That said, in his replies he said he anticipated/planned for it to happen.Now anyone like to comment on one from That Jeremy Vine?
Lorry turning left without indicating, true, very bad form. But I wouldn't have been heading up the left of him as Vine was but then he is a bellend so maybe that's the reason. Just my 2p.
https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/122683469...
RobM77 said:
As far as I know, that's what everyone has been saying haven't they? Often in those exact words.
Yes, everyone blames the van driver, but there's also a few comments about how the cyclist should have done more to protect himself and predict what was going to happen. The implication is that some people think there was something he could have done differently to avoid the incedent. It all seems a little petty to me - like at least a tiny amount of blame has to be apportioned to the cyclist, because cyclist... He's apparently supposed to be regularly checking behind him while at the same time presumably also looking ahead and judging increases and decreases in other vehicles speed, predicting what the vehicle that just passed him might/might not decide to do. To all intents and purposes, these are impossible to do to the unrealistically high standards that some are suggesting when cycling at speed in traffic. Really the only way for him to avoid being taken out at all would have been to have gotten off and pushed his bike on the pavement. someone said:
it is fair to criticise how he doesn't appear to be looking behind, at all, once he is away from the lights
someone said:
the cyclist is fairly motoring along and doesn't show any signs of slowing/erring on the side of caution
someone said:
Never assume (as a cyclist) that a driver is going to make all the required checks periodically / before turning.
someone said:
the cyclist could have chosen to be further back when there was a junction ahead.
someone said:
for his own sake the cyclist would do well to expect the unexpected
someone said:
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 Jeremy Vine one by contrast is completely different. He chose to undertake a lorry on the left at a junction which is just stupid by any measure. In this instance, I think he deserves to take at least as much blame as the lorry driver.Dont like rolls said:
talksthetorque said:
The cyclist had been passed by the time the junction arrived.
So yes, you can ask the question but I'm not going to answer it as it's not much use to you if you can't tell the difference between passing a junction and approaching a junction.
Just to correct you:So yes, you can ask the question but I'm not going to answer it as it's not much use to you if you can't tell the difference between passing a junction and approaching a junction.
The cyclist was past by the van by about 3 feet for about 1/2 a second.
)Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff