Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Cyril Haearn »

mjr wrote:
Sum wrote:
Airsporter1st wrote:I can't help thinking that some of the antipathy towards cyclists comes from incidents such as you describe, where another road user is trying to be courteous and is either ignored or admonished for his pains.
+1

Come on then, please, would you rather we killed ourselves to avoid upsetting another road user who invites us into danger (possibly with good intentions) or something else? Two examples - what would you have done?

This week, I had some quite vociferous abuse from another road user who told me to jump a red light. They got really quite offensive, calling me a dick and so on, but it was a real red light, I know it detects bikes (but it's slow to change) and I'm not keen on making a right turn onto a 30mph dual carriageway against the lights. But do you think that was wrong? Should I have gone to avoid upsetting another road user who was trying to be helpful?

A few months ago, a white van stopped in the nearside lane of a fairly busy 2-lane road and waved me across from a side road. I was a bit late already, so I pulled out, but I treated the corner of his van as a blind corner and peered round it - just in time to snatch my front wheel back in away from a hot hatch close-passing him at speed. Was that wrong? Should I have gone ahead so as not to offend the van driver by implying he hadn't checked his side mirror properly before waving me out?

I think it's really better to ignore such misguided courtesy, or make some "no thanks" signal in reply.

+1
Only a policeperson in uniform may direct traffic
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Airsporter1st
Posts: 784
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Airsporter1st »

Vorpal wrote:
Airsporter1st wrote:I can't help thinking that some of the antipathy towards cyclists comes from incidents such as you describe, where another road user is trying to be courteous and is either ignored or admonished for his pains.


Maybe. But courteous isn't always safe.
A few weeks ago, a van driver tried to let me out when he had priority, but I couldn't see around him to tell if something else was coming, so I waited. And he was obviously irritated that I wouldn't go.


Naturally safety is always a priority.

Obviously, we don't know the details, but In your example, could you not have pulled out that bit further whilst protected by the van and then checked it was clear to continue? If not, did you thank him and wave him on? Hard to imagine he would have been irritated unless of course you blanked him as has been suggested.
Airsporter1st
Posts: 784
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Airsporter1st »

Cyril Haearn wrote:
Vorpal wrote:
Airsporter1st wrote:I can't help thinking that some of the antipathy towards cyclists comes from incidents such as you describe, where another road user is trying to be courteous and is either ignored or admonished for his pains.


Maybe. But courteous isn't always safe.
A few weeks ago, a van driver tried to let me out when he had priority, but I couldn't see around him to tell if something else was coming, so I waited. And he was obviously irritated that I wouldn't go.

Best to ignore them and stick to the law
My first motor vehicle was written off when someone tried to wave someone who did not have priority out


By all means stick to the law, but why ignore an act of courtesy? What would be wrong with a thumbs up and shake of the head, to say 'thanks but no thanks'? Simply ignoring someone is bound to convey a negative impression. The well-meaning motorist will likely drive off thinking "what ignorant 'caber throwers' these cyclists are"!
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by mjr »

Airsporter1st wrote:By all means stick to the law, but why ignore an act of courtesy? What would be wrong with a thumbs up and shake of the head, to say 'thanks but no thanks'? Simply ignoring someone is bound to convey a negative impression. The well-meaning motorist will likely drive off thinking "what ignorant 'caber throwers' these cyclists are"!

Some of them mistake it for a thumbs up for a finger up and see a headshake as being told they're in the wrong - BTDTGTTS! Ignoring well-meaning sadists may sometimes be the safest option.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Airsporter1st
Posts: 784
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Airsporter1st »

mjr wrote:
Sum wrote:
Airsporter1st wrote:I can't help thinking that some of the antipathy towards cyclists comes from incidents such as you describe, where another road user is trying to be courteous and is either ignored or admonished for his pains.
+1

Come on then, please, would you rather we killed ourselves to avoid upsetting another road user who invites us into danger (possibly with good intentions) or something else? Two examples - what would you have done?

This week, I had some quite vociferous abuse from another road user who told me to jump a red light. They got really quite offensive, calling me a dick and so on, but it was a real red light, I know it detects bikes (but it's slow to change) and I'm not keen on making a right turn onto a 30mph dual carriageway against the lights. But do you think that was wrong? Should I have gone to avoid upsetting another road user who was trying to be helpful?

A few months ago, a white van stopped in the nearside lane of a fairly busy 2-lane road and waved me across from a side road. I was a bit late already, so I pulled out, but I treated the corner of his van as a blind corner and peered round it - just in time to snatch my front wheel back in away from a hot hatch close-passing him at speed. Was that wrong? Should I have gone ahead so as not to offend the van driver by implying he hadn't checked his side mirror properly before waving me out?

I think it's really better to ignore such misguided courtesy, or make some "no thanks" signal in reply.


In the first scenario, as described, of course you should not have jumped a red light and the person suggesting it was obviously a prat.

In the second scenario, you had three choices in my opinion; pull out as far as necessary to see around him, which is what you did, give him a thumbs up and a shake of the head or hand - 'thanks but no thanks' or ignore him at risk of giving or reinforcing the impression that cyclists are ignorant caber throwers.
Airsporter1st
Posts: 784
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Airsporter1st »

mjr wrote:
Airsporter1st wrote:By all means stick to the law, but why ignore an act of courtesy? What would be wrong with a thumbs up and shake of the head, to say 'thanks but no thanks'? Simply ignoring someone is bound to convey a negative impression. The well-meaning motorist will likely drive off thinking "what ignorant 'caber throwers' these cyclists are"!

Some of them mistake it for a thumbs up for a finger up and see a headshake as being told they're in the wrong - BTDTGTTS! Ignoring well-meaning sadists may sometimes be the safest option.


Always a possibility of course, but the same person is equally likely to take offence at being ignored.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Cyril Haearn »

There is no commonly known way to indicate "thanks but no thanks" :?

The meaning of flashing headlights is clearly described in the HC, look how often it is abused. I often flash my lights when driving to warn other drivers of cyclists on the road, or to deter overtaakers coming the other way. I never flash them for the usual but completely wrong message ("you may go, mate" :( )
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by mjr »

Cyril Haearn wrote:The meaning of flashing headlights is clearly described in the HC, look how often it is abused. I often flash my lights when driving to warn other drivers of cyclists on the road, or to deter overtaakers coming the other way. I never flash them for the usual but completely wrong message ("you may go, mate" :( )

Both of your meanings are also abuses, and using them as a deterrent sounds like the "intimidate" which is a definite "do not". I wonder why the HC doesn't include the "go on" meaning as a "do not" too, as that's a more widespread source of trouble.

"Rule 110 - Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users."

I don't flash my headlights when driving, but that's partly because I don't trust myself not to latch the main beam on by mistake and dazzle everyone... if I want someone to give someone a chance to pull out in front of me, I just slow right down well before I get to the junction.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Airsporter1st
Posts: 784
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Airsporter1st »

mjr wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:The meaning of flashing headlights is clearly described in the HC, look how often it is abused. I often flash my lights when driving to warn other drivers of cyclists on the road, or to deter overtaakers coming the other way. I never flash them for the usual but completely wrong message ("you may go, mate" :( )

Both of your meanings are also abuses, and using them as a deterrent sounds like the "intimidate" which is a definite "do not". I wonder why the HC doesn't include the "go on" meaning as a "do not" too, as that's a more widespread source of trouble.

"Rule 110 - Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users."

I don't flash my headlights when driving, but that's partly because I don't trust myself not to latch the main beam on by mistake and dazzle everyone... if I want someone to give someone a chance to pull out in front of me, I just slow right down well before I get to the junction.


That's a bad design which several manufacturers use. Much better is the type where you pull for an unlatched flash and push for latched high beam.

The flashing of headlights is a whole other story. On today's busy motorways, it is very helpful to illegally flash an overtaking long vehicle to let the driver know when they can safely pull back in.

That actually helps with the flow of traffic, because they don't stay out in the overtaking lane longer than necessary and such a signal is usually rewarded with another illegal signal - an alternating flash of the indicators or a flash of the hazards by way of a thankyou.

Similarly, flashing someone who is waiting to turn right to let them know that they can cross ahead of you as you approach from the opposite direction is often appreciated not only by the turning driver, but also by those in the queue of traffic forming behind them.

I have even seen police vehicles following this unofficial 'protocol'.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by mjr »

Airsporter1st wrote:Similarly, flashing someone who is waiting to turn right to let them know that they can cross ahead of you as you approach from the opposite direction is often appreciated not only by the turning driver, but also by those in the queue of traffic forming behind them.

As noted previously, such misbehaviour is not at all appreciated by road users quite legally crossing the side road who such a turning driver often then drives straight at!

Airsporter1st wrote:I have even seen police vehicles following this unofficial 'protocol'.

There's a video doing the rounds including a police vehicle close-passing a cyclist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBahbH7j3Vo&t=55

That doesn't mean we should all go close-passing. Police are fallible humans too.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Vorpal »

Airsporter1st wrote:
Obviously, we don't know the details, but In your example, could you not have pulled out that bit further whilst protected by the van and then checked it was clear to continue? If not, did you thank him and wave him on? Hard to imagine he would have been irritated unless of course you blanked him as has been suggested.

Blanked? What does that mean? I waved him on, but there was lots of other stuff going on. A cyclist with a child trailer coming down the the shared use pavement, about to cross the road where I was coming out, a car coming up behind me, pedestrians, etc.

I *could* have pulled out and sat in front of him while I assessed the situation, but I feel quite vulnerable doing that, and I'd rather not. I'm certainly not going to do so to preserve courtesy with someone I don't know, and who seemed visibly irritated when I didn't take him up on his offer of pulling out.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Airsporter1st
Posts: 784
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Airsporter1st »

Vorpal wrote:
Airsporter1st wrote:
Obviously, we don't know the details, but In your example, could you not have pulled out that bit further whilst protected by the van and then checked it was clear to continue? If not, did you thank him and wave him on? Hard to imagine he would have been irritated unless of course you blanked him as has been suggested.

Blanked? What does that mean? I waved him on, but there was lots of other stuff going on. A cyclist with a child trailer coming down the the shared use pavement, about to cross the road where I was coming out, a car coming up behind me, pedestrians, etc.

I *could* have pulled out and sat in front of him while I assessed the situation, but I feel quite vulnerable doing that, and I'd rather not. I'm certainly not going to do so to preserve courtesy with someone I don't know, and who seemed visibly irritated when I didn't take him up on his offer of pulling out.


"Blanked" = "ignored" in this context. If you didn't ignore him, then it is irrelevant.
rfryer
Posts: 809
Joined: 7 Feb 2013, 3:58pm

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by rfryer »

I'm with Airsporter, I'm really surprised by the antipathy toward motorists who are trying to be courteous. I'd never "ignore" another road user in this scenario; I'd smile an acknowledgement, and either give a wave of thanks before proceeding, or a shake of the head while beckoning then to move.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by mjr »

rfryer wrote:I'm with Airsporter, I'm really surprised by the antipathy toward motorists who are trying to be courteous.

Trying but failing often. It would be more courteous if they were competent at motoring.

I'd never "ignore" another road user in this scenario; I'd smile an acknowledgement, and either give a wave of thanks before proceeding, or a shake of the head while beckoning then to move.

I won't beckon other road users and especially not motorists who have already demonstrated that they either don't know or don't obey the highway code rules. They may well misunderstand it, crash and then blame me for beckoning them.
Last edited by mjr on 19 Oct 2018, 9:41am, edited 1 time in total.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Bike crash: The first things to do in the aftermath

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Motons are unpredictable, the majority disobey the law but one never knows, a few obey the law

NEVER trust a moton!
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Post Reply