Car turns left into police station across bike lane
Discussion
I am not going to fall into the trap of attributing fault but I will just say that that is the sort of thing that has happened when you read about cyclist getting killed by lorries.
The whole cycling up the left at speed thing is the problem here, you are relying too much on the motor vehicle driver seeing you in time to act, the faster you go the harder it is to see you.
The whole cycling up the left at speed thing is the problem here, you are relying too much on the motor vehicle driver seeing you in time to act, the faster you go the harder it is to see you.
BFleming said:
This one was in Ireland, the country where cyclists are permitted to cycle on pavements. It's a bizarre thing, which stems from allowing kids to cycle on pavements. Irish law didn't go far enough to say who could & who couldn't, so now everyone can. Outside my in Dublin there's a cycle lane marked on the wide pavement, then it sort-of disappears. Lethal. It gets worse though, in the Phoenix Park there's a road, then a pavement, then a cycle lane. Anyone coming from the park to get to the pavement must cross the cycle lane. This time the cyclist didn't fare so well... https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/cour...
There's something seems not quite right about the way that article is written article said:
....was a former engineer, a keen cyclist and an organ donor
Willy Nilly said:
The car crossed the path of the bike, or am I missing something?
Nope, that's what happened, the debate is over the finer point of how far away the cyclist was when the car committed to the turn and whether the motorist could reasonably have seen him cycling quickly down the little cycle lane from that distance away.Also, how the cyclist failed to spot all the clues that some doom was impending, I spotted an indicator flashing, a vehicle almost stopped and a turning for the vehicle to go into. The car was well into the turn when the impact happened so in my mind the chap riding could have eased up a bit avoided the whole thing altogether.
Getragdogleg said:
Willy Nilly said:
The car crossed the path of the bike, or am I missing something?
Nope, that's what happened, the debate is over the finer point of how far away the cyclist was when the car committed to the turn and whether the motorist could reasonably have seen him cycling quickly down the little cycle lane from that distance away.Also, how the cyclist failed to spot all the clues that some doom was impending, I spotted an indicator flashing, a vehicle almost stopped and a turning for the vehicle to go into. The car was well into the turn when the impact happened so in my mind the chap riding could have eased up a bit avoided the whole thing altogether.
Willy Nilly said:
The car crossed the path of the bike, or am I missing something?
Simple rule, don't overtake/pass something that's clearly ahead of you that's clearly signalling intention to make a turn accross your line. Not on the right, definitely not on the left. The cyclist should have seen the car slow, indicate and start his turn, and should have slowed and taken self preservation action.
The car driver has some responsibility as there is clearly a signed cycle path. But the majority of the blame has to be the cyclist as they are not riding with any regard to what they can far more clearly see could happen than the car driver.
TTmonkey said:
Willy Nilly said:
The car crossed the path of the bike, or am I missing something?
Simple rule, don't overtake/pass something that's clearly ahead of you that's clearly signalling intention to make a turn accross your line. Not on the right, definitely not on the left. The cyclist should have seen the car slow, indicate and start his turn, and should have slowed and taken self preservation action.
The car driver has some responsibility as there is clearly a signed cycle path. But the majority of the blame has to be the cyclist as they are not riding with any regard to what they can far more clearly see could happen than the car driver.
Self preservation, yes, but he car was the one crossing the path of the cyclist.
Willy Nilly said:
Getragdogleg said:
Willy Nilly said:
The car crossed the path of the bike, or am I missing something?
Nope, that's what happened, the debate is over the finer point of how far away the cyclist was when the car committed to the turn and whether the motorist could reasonably have seen him cycling quickly down the little cycle lane from that distance away.Also, how the cyclist failed to spot all the clues that some doom was impending, I spotted an indicator flashing, a vehicle almost stopped and a turning for the vehicle to go into. The car was well into the turn when the impact happened so in my mind the chap riding could have eased up a bit avoided the whole thing altogether.
The car turned over the cycle lane, no dispute there. The cyclist got hurt because he was attempting to exercise his right of way where no room existed to do so.
Alex_225 said:
I may get flayed alive for this one but was the car not clearly indicating and virtually in the position to turn already? Wouldn't it have made some sense for the cyclist to slow down?
Not saying the driver shouldn't have checked but it's not as if the driver wildly swung left into the entrance.
it's impossible to tell from the footage. the car has the indicators on as soon as you see the rear light clusters. there is no way of knowing how long that car was indicating for.Not saying the driver shouldn't have checked but it's not as if the driver wildly swung left into the entrance.
if it was for a long time leading up to that, then not the cars fault.
if the car only just put the indicators on out of shot then it's the cars fault.
I think a very large problem with cycle lanes that are integrated with roads in the UK is the issue of momentum.
Cyclists cover ground differently from car drivers. They get up to speed, and want to maintain it. Building up a head of speed in urban environments takes effort and time on a bike, and I see cyclists slow slightly but not coming totally off 'the gas' when in traffic. They maintain the momentum, often going through junctions and ignoring side turnings.
I don't think the road planners give this issue enough attention when putting cycle lanes in.
In fact, I'd say the roads are possibly safer for cyclists without these joking little integrated cycle lanes. They give the cyclist an incorrect sense of safety and precedence. Cyclists might have an incorrect or unsafe sense of right of way.
Cyclists cover ground differently from car drivers. They get up to speed, and want to maintain it. Building up a head of speed in urban environments takes effort and time on a bike, and I see cyclists slow slightly but not coming totally off 'the gas' when in traffic. They maintain the momentum, often going through junctions and ignoring side turnings.
I don't think the road planners give this issue enough attention when putting cycle lanes in.
In fact, I'd say the roads are possibly safer for cyclists without these joking little integrated cycle lanes. They give the cyclist an incorrect sense of safety and precedence. Cyclists might have an incorrect or unsafe sense of right of way.
Randy Winkman said:
"Cyclist with no helmet"! What the flip has that got to do with it?
nothing, but that's dailymail for you. they say those things to make idiots react to their stuff such as 'why wasn't he wearing a helmet'. its the same like whenever there's a car crash and the mention a cars value, or the fact that it can reach 150mph, even though it crashed at 20mph.
ambuletz said:
Alex_225 said:
I may get flayed alive for this one but was the car not clearly indicating and virtually in the position to turn already? Wouldn't it have made some sense for the cyclist to slow down?
Not saying the driver shouldn't have checked but it's not as if the driver wildly swung left into the entrance.
it's impossible to tell from the footage. the car has the indicators on as soon as you see the rear light clusters. there is no way of knowing how long that car was indicating for.Not saying the driver shouldn't have checked but it's not as if the driver wildly swung left into the entrance.
if it was for a long time leading up to that, then not the cars fault.
if the car only just put the indicators on out of shot then it's the cars fault.
king earth movers. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff