Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
irc
Posts: 4673
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby irc » 5 Sep 2015, 4:59pm

Excellent blogpost analysing an accident where the injured cyclist said

“Any cyclist who goes out without a helmet telling his wife and children he loves them is lying.”


https://beyondthekerb.wordpress.com/201 ... -happened/

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 48255
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby Mick F » 6 Sep 2015, 7:31am

It makes my blood boil!
As the blogger said, the injured cyclist could easily have avoided the accident.
It's as if he wasn't watching the road ahead!
He hit the car, not the car hitting him. He rode straight into it.

Maybe he thinks that wearing a helmet cam is a substitute for eyes?
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10188
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby Cunobelin » 6 Sep 2015, 9:21am

I thought that the comments on "eye contact" were interesting ( and also misunderstood)

The whole idea of eye contact is that you have ensured they have seen you and you then interact through that contact

However if there is no eye contact then the simple plain unequivocal and unarguable fact is that they have NOT seen you... and you act accordingly


The latter point is often missed

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3875
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby pjclinch » 6 Sep 2015, 9:53am

Cunobelin wrote:However if there is no eye contact then the simple plain unequivocal and unarguable fact is that they have NOT seen you... and you act accordingly


Oh, you might have been seen before you've sought the eye contact (you can't look everywhere at once and straight away), so you can argue it... but out there on the road up against a tonne or more of metal, you'd be pretty daft to!

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17179
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby [XAP]Bob » 6 Sep 2015, 11:27am

Mick F wrote:It makes my blood boil!
As the blogger said, the injured cyclist could easily have avoided the accident.
It's as if he wasn't watching the road ahead!
He hit the car, not the car hitting him. He rode straight into it.

Maybe he thinks that wearing a helmet cam is a substitute for eyes?

The car turned onto a road that wasn't clear and proceeded down the wrong side of that road - he drove into the cyclist as much as the cyclist rode into him, except that his movement created the collision path.

Yes the cyclist could have avoided it, so could the motorist - and the motorist should have done, whereas the cyclist could have done.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

reohn2
Posts: 37928
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby reohn2 » 6 Sep 2015, 11:41am

IMHO This quote is the nub of the whole thing and something I try to practice when using the road in or on whatever vehicle:-
But the first rule of defensive riding or driving is to assume everyone else is driving without due care and attention, and to anticipate accordingly. A car waiting at a side road represents a hazard in itself, let alone one that has already been driven into the lane ahead.


This quote is victim blaming IMHO and trying to impose moral blackmail on the most benign form of transport after walking:-
“Any cyclist who goes out without a helmet telling his wife and children he loves them is lying.”

With this kind of attitude from a cyclist spread across 'news'papers ho long before compulsory helmet law in the UK????? :twisted:
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

reohn2
Posts: 37928
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby reohn2 » 6 Sep 2015, 12:02pm

Cunobelin wrote:I thought that the comments on "eye contact" were interesting ( and also misunderstood)

The whole idea of eye contact is that you have ensured they have seen you and you then interact through that contact

However if there is no eye contact then the simple plain unequivocal and unarguable fact is that they have NOT seen you... and you act accordingly


The latter point is often missed

Agreed!
This is nearer the mark IMO:-
I just don’t buy eye contact as a reliable tool. More reliable information comes from watching the vehicle’s wheel arches: the pitch and roll of the body and the turning of the wheels tells you far more. And when it comes to the weath of information that that doesn’t give you, you just assume the worst case scenario.

But certainly the only time that proceeding through that gap might approach what I’d call worthwhile would be after eye contact and a gesture.

Having made eye contact I flick between driver and wheels to see they're about to move and which way they're being pointed,they're the first indications.
I'm always looking for the get out clause in such situations,the which way for me should the potential loonie decide I'm not there.
Eye contact is no guarantee the driver has seen you and that you've registered as important enough not to carry on with their manoeuvre,but only one of many indicators of what may happen next!
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 48255
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby Mick F » 6 Sep 2015, 12:18pm

[XAP]Bob wrote:The car turned onto a road that wasn't clear and proceeded down the wrong side of that road - he drove into the cyclist as much as the cyclist rode into him, except that his movement created the collision path.
It was as if the cyclist was surprised that a car was in his path. It was as if he wasn't reading the road in front of him.

The car driver was in the wrong, there is no doubt, but the cyclist did nothing but plough on regardless. The cyclist was moving much faster than the car and therefore he hit the car, not the car hitting him.
Mick F. Cornwall

reohn2
Posts: 37928
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby reohn2 » 6 Sep 2015, 12:44pm

Mick F wrote:..........The car driver was in the wrong, there is no doubt, but the cyclist did nothing but plough on regardless. The cyclist was moving much faster than the car and therefore he hit the car, not the car hitting him.


Yep,agreed.
The car was in the wrong both technically and legally,but it was a head on crash that could've been avoided by a bit of anticipation and roadcraft by the cyclist.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

irc
Posts: 4673
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby irc » 6 Sep 2015, 2:08pm

To me safety is about seeing other road users and having a plan. So in the case of a car waiting at a side road it is obviously going to emerge at some point. The plan might include easing off on the pedals to slow down, covering the brakes, going to primary, going to the centre line if no oncoming or following traffic, all the while assessing whether I could go behind him if he pulled out or brake hard enough to miss him.

Where as in this case the car has already pulled well out on to the road any plan has to include braking to get the speed well down and being slow enough that when it turned right into your path you could either get through a gap or bunny hop onto the kerb.

Criticising other cyclists always runs the risk of using the benefit of hindsight but some people in all walks of life are more accident prone than others. It isn't always random bad luck.

Phil Fouracre
Posts: 817
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 12:16pm
Location: Deepest Somerset

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby Phil Fouracre » 6 Sep 2015, 2:18pm

Read this blog before, makes so much sense, loads of other good stuff as well. Don't get the total lack of anticipation of the cyclist, he had so much time? Trouble is he is acting just like a lot of motorists, it's my right of way, therefore I will just keep going, why should I make any allowances for anyone else. After all, 'I'm worth it' rules nowadays.
Not just saying he is blameless, he then goes on to emphasise how others should follow his lead and wear a helmet - so he didn't suffer from any other injuries apart from to his head!
What gets me about helmet 'obsessives' is when they say 'my helmet has saved me so many times when I fall off' . Well don't bloody fall off then!
Had two offs in decades, one bashed knee, and one elbow - so I'm a perfect candidate for a helmet then?
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

reohn2
Posts: 37928
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby reohn2 » 6 Sep 2015, 4:02pm

irc wrote:To me safety is about seeing other road users and having a plan. So in the case of a car waiting at a side road it is obviously going to emerge at some point. The plan might include easing off on the pedals to slow down, covering the brakes, going to primary, going to the centre line if no oncoming or following traffic, all the while assessing whether I could go behind him if he pulled out or brake hard enough to miss him.

Where as in this case the car has already pulled well out on to the road any plan has to include braking to get the speed well down and being slow enough that when it turned right into your path you could either get through a gap or bunny hop onto the kerb.

Criticising other cyclists always runs the risk of using the benefit of hindsight but some people in all walks of life are more accident prone than others. It isn't always random bad luck.


+1
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby TonyR » 6 Sep 2015, 6:31pm

I'm completely puzzled. A magic foam HGV-deflector beanie should have had no trouble deflecting a car. How come it didn't work? No wonder the cyclist was surprised!

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10188
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby Cunobelin » 6 Sep 2015, 6:35pm

pjclinch wrote:
Cunobelin wrote:However if there is no eye contact then the simple plain unequivocal and unarguable fact is that they have NOT seen you... and you act accordingly


Oh, you might have been seen before you've sought the eye contact (you can't look everywhere at once and straight away), so you can argue it... but out there on the road up against a tonne or more of metal, you'd be pretty daft to!

Pete.



That is why I said that if there is no clear eye contact you assume they haven't

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10188
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Love Your Family - Wear A Helmet

Postby Cunobelin » 6 Sep 2015, 6:38pm

Phil Fouracre wrote:Read this blog before, makes so much sense, loads of other good stuff as well. Don't get the total lack of anticipation of the cyclist, he had so much time? Trouble is he is acting just like a lot of motorists, it's my right of way, therefore I will just keep going, why should I make any allowances for anyone else. After all, 'I'm worth it' rules nowadays.
Not just saying he is blameless, he then goes on to emphasise how others should follow his lead and wear a helmet - so he didn't suffer from any other injuries apart from to his head!
What gets me about helmet 'obsessives' is when they say 'my helmet has saved me so many times when I fall off' . Well don't bloody fall off then!
Had two offs in decades, one bashed knee, and one elbow - so I'm a perfect candidate for a helmet then?


Yebbut....


His helmet failed totally

broken collar bone, broken shoulder blade, a collapsed shoulder, eight broken ribs, collapsed lungs, a haemothorax, pneumothorax and smashed teeth


Why didn't the helmet prevent these injuries?