Common Assault

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
jatindersangha
Posts: 155
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Common Assault

Post by jatindersangha »

The "moped" was a HONDA CBR 125 R.

So, yes a 125cc "small motorbike".

--Jatinder
jatindersangha
Posts: 155
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Common Assault

Post by jatindersangha »

PDQ Mobile wrote:But surely on a normal A road or B road, where there is a white line which signifies statutory minimum width, there should be room for a cycist and a motorcycle two abreast?
That is the point.
...


I agree that in general, there should be room for a cyclist & a motorbike two abreast on a "normal" road, however I was in primary so there wasn't a great deal of room for the motorbike.

He should have read the situation - I'm in primary and there's a bend in the road.

Would you overtake here?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.33737 ... 312!8i6656

--Jatinder
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11011
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Common Assault

Post by Bonefishblues »

If a cycle was just to the left of the roadworks line, then yes, I don't see why not on a small motorbike?
tatanab
Posts: 5033
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: Common Assault

Post by tatanab »

Bonefishblues wrote:If a cycle was just to the left of the roadworks line, then yes, I don't see why not on a small motorbike?
Agreed, on any motorcycle since the motorcyclist position approaching that will be right out by the white line hence will have a better view into and perhaps through the bend.
PDQ Mobile
Posts: 4659
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Common Assault

Post by PDQ Mobile »

It's pretty academic really. I am old and that was the classification of a moped when I had one.
It is a small motorcycle which way whatever.

And on a road with a white line ((which does signify minimum width just as absence signifies the opposite and for the observant driver can be a great safety aid)) a small motorcycle should be able to pass the cyclist without crossing the line.
That is my firm opinion.
Can't see a problem with it actually, everybody's happy!


And to the OP who PM'd me asking for places in his videos where I considered him to be unnecessarily in "primary plus" - I would reply;
"just there where the bike overtakes you, is the best concrete evidence, that that is the case."
I think you often ride generally too far out.
I think many of the problems you experience with aggressive drivers are at least in part to do with that.
There's always going to be the odd one whatever you do.

Furthermore might I suggest a good mirror (Mirycle being my personal favourite) is a great safety aid?

For example you could take primary (not primary plus!) as you enter the bend to maintain visibility of yourself to following traffic but then come in as soon as safe to do so. However if you saw the motorbike as a single vehicle behind you or nothing at all then you don't need to be so far out.
A mirror allows such "delicate" fine tuning especially in heavy traffic.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20309
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Post by mjr »

jatindersangha wrote:There is a statutory minimum width: 2.5metres.

What statute, please, and is it recent?

I know many sections of A road in Somerset which are signed as narrow but still a lane each way (wider vehicles simply have to wait for it to be clear). There used to be one in Buckinghamshire which I suspect was narrower but it has been reclassified and is no longer an A road. I think I know one in Norfolk but it's in shadow on all streetview images so I can't tell whether the markings deliberately stop or have just been worn away from all the motorists driving over them!
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.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20309
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Post by mjr »

tatanab wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:If a cycle was just to the left of the roadworks line, then yes, I don't see why not on a small motorbike?
Agreed, on any motorcycle since the motorcyclist position approaching that will be right out by the white line hence will have a better view into and perhaps through the bend.

And do either of you feel that a cycle should be to the left of the roadworks line there? :shock: If so, I hope you never ride a motorbike near any cyclists.
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.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11011
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Common Assault

Post by Bonefishblues »

If I was cooperating with other road users as I try to do, and aware of my surroundings, then yes, I might be found there to assist a motorbike to pass. If I felt it was unsafe to do that, then I wouldn't be found there. I don't ride to a formula.
tatanab
Posts: 5033
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: Common Assault

Post by tatanab »

mjr wrote:And do either of you feel that a cycle should be to the left of the roadworks line there? :shock: If so, I hope you never ride a motorbike near any cyclists.
It is not that straightforward. My overtake would depend on the speed of both vehicles and the positioning of the pedal cycle. Motorcycle at 50mph and pedal cycle at 10 - yes. Pedal cycle at 30 mph then I would not pass because the speed differential would be too small and the pedal cyclist would possibly (probably) be positioned further to the right. My experience - 60 years riding all sorts of pedal cycles for racing and touring; only about 20 years riding motorcycles, again racing and touring - also some IAM training. So, I repeat what I started with ---- it depends.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20309
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Post by mjr »

Bonefishblues wrote:If I was cooperating with other road users as I try to do, and aware of my surroundings, then yes, I might be found there to assist a motorbike to pass. If I felt it was unsafe to do that, then I wouldn't be found there. I don't ride to a formula.

Actually, that's fair. If there's no following motorist likely to try a skim (unlike in the OP's incident), I may move left, but it should be very much at the front vehicle's discretion IMO.
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.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Common Assault

Post by meic »

When I am on the motorbike I use the gaps in the on coming cars to overtake, it would be even easier with a cyclist as they are going slower. The cars managed it, so it would be a doddle on the motorbike.

If I had to wait for a safe gap, that would just be what you do while driving/riding.
Yma o Hyd
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20309
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Post by mjr »

PDQ Mobile wrote:And on a road with a white line ((which does signify minimum width just as absence signifies the opposite and for the observant driver can be a great safety aid)) a small motorcycle should be able to pass the cyclist without crossing the line.
That is my firm opinion.
Can't see a problem with it actually, everybody's happy!

Everybody's happy, right up to the point where a motorist tries to follow the motorcycle and the cyclist gets knocked off. :-(

PDQ Mobile wrote:I think you often ride generally too far out.
I think many of the problems you experience with aggressive drivers are at least in part to do with that.

Because that's how we handle bullies in this country - we give in to them?

PDQ Mobile wrote:Furthermore might I suggest a good mirror (Mirycle being my personal favourite) is a great safety aid?

I suspect we've done this before but I neither remember nor found the answer: is there actually any evidence that they're "a great safety aid"?

Straight off, I can see two drawbacks which might outweigh any improvement in rear vision:
1/ most mirror users reduce the frequency of looking behind, which reduces the likelihood that a following motorist sees a human face on them, as well as reduces their awareness of what's behind outside the mirror's range; and
2/ most cyclists seem to put mirrors on the right (in the UK anyway) and using right-hand bar-end mirrors on left-hand bends easily results in people turning slightly right in an attempt to get a squarer view of the following traffic.

PDQ Mobile wrote:For example you could take primary (not primary plus!) as you enter the bend to maintain visibility of yourself to following traffic but then come in as soon as safe to do so.

Did you just make up "primary plus" to imply incorrectly that primary is to the left of the "centre of the leftmost moving traffic lane" position defined in Cyclecraft (and adopted by the OP) and imply that the OP did something wasn't following best practice?

Motorists behind the motorcycle means it wasn't safe for the OP to "come in".
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.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Common Assault

Post by MikeF »

If the motorcyclist had slowed slightly when approaching the cyclist the oncoming car would have passed, and he would have been able to give the cyclist a wide enough berth and probably not lost any time. It shows a lack of anticipation. I find it alarming that a learner motor cyclist should push a cyclist. As a learner he should be aware that he is not fully competent, but it seems his own ego is not recognising this fact. What would his reaction be to a nudge from a more powerful M/C or other motorist he was obstructing?
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Post by bovlomov »

mjr wrote:I suspect we've done this before but I neither remember nor found the answer: is there actually any evidence that they're "a great safety aid"?

Straight off, I can see two drawbacks which might outweigh any improvement in rear vision:
1/ most mirror users reduce the frequency of looking behind, which reduces the likelihood that a following motorist sees a human face on them, as well as reduces their awareness of what's behind outside the mirror's range; and
2/ most cyclists seem to put mirrors on the right (in the UK anyway) and using right-hand bar-end mirrors on left-hand bends easily results in people turning slightly right in an attempt to get a squarer view of the following traffic.

I wouldn't be without my mirror, but I think both those points are valid.
1) I make a point of frequently looking behind, even when I know what's behind me, just to let the drivers know I've seen them. Even so, I probably don't look back as much as I did before I had a mirror. Less of a stiff neck though!
2) I'm not aware of turning to get better vision in the mirror, but I do shift my position on the saddle.

I feel there's a small overall benefit to me, but I couldn't say the same applies to everyone.

On the other hand, the mirror is another thing that could be made mandatory without any evidence or any cost to the state. That's a win/win!
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20309
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Post by mjr »

MikeF wrote:What would [the learner motorcyclist] reaction be to a nudge from a more powerful M/C or other motorist he was obstructing?

To smear himself along the tarmac, perhaps?
(The question reminded me of the final one 2minutes 40 into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMwXMLQAoSg )
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.
Post Reply