Near miss with a pedestrian

[Cunobelin]

There are two ways to look at this.

One should plan and drive/cycle so that you can stop in the distance that you can see. that is one's responsibility, however......

It is not possible to predict and plan for the truly unexpected.

Yes, I can stop if the lights ahead change, and my speed crossing the junction was appropriate, however all of that relies on the other road users doing the same, and you cannot plan force idiots who perform an unsafe act.

[sjs]

There are two ways to look at this.

One should plan and drive/cycle so that you can stop in the distance that you can see. that is one's responsibility, however......

It is not possible to predict and plan for the truly unexpected.

Yes, I can stop if the lights ahead change, and my speed crossing the junction was appropriate, however all of that relies on the other road users doing the same, and you cannot plan force idiots who perform an unsafe act.

Being able to stop in the distance seen to be clear may not be enough if the object at the other end of that distance is also hoping to use it. Perhaps the rule should refer to half the distance seen to be clear.

[Vorpal]

I like to think of near miss situations as an opportunity to learn. What could I have done to prevent it? It's not that I am at fault (I seldom am) but, rather what could have made the situation better, less risky, or less likely to end up in a crash. I haven't yet come accross a situation where I could have done nothing, although I have come across a couple where it wouldn't result in any change in my behaviour.

An example that is not very like what happened to the OP, but a good learning... Some years ago, I was overtaken by a van a little ways before a junction. I followed the van through the junction, and had a near miss with a BMW whose driver began to turn, after the van cleared the junction. The BMW driver saw me & stopped, and I wobbled around his front bumper, but my leg was shaving close to that bumper. When I analysed the incident later in my head, I realised that the BMW driver had not seen me (until the last moment) because of the van. Since, if I am following a vehicle that I cannot see over, I hang back a bit.

[pwa]

There are two ways to look at this.

One should plan and drive/cycle so that you can stop in the distance that you can see. that is one's responsibility, however......

It is not possible to predict and plan for the truly unexpected.

Yes, I can stop if the lights ahead change, and my speed crossing the junction was appropriate, however all of that relies on the other road users doing the same, and you cannot plan force idiots who perform an unsafe act.

Being able to stop in the distance seen to be clear may not be enough if the object at the other end of that distance is also hoping to use it. Perhaps the rule should refer to half the distance seen to be clear.

None of this "distance you can see to be clear" stuff is directly relevant to the incident described by the OP. As the OP tells it, the road ahead was clear one second, then someone stepped onto the road the next second. So the distance that appeared to be clear was reduced, in an instant, from enough to not enough. "Distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on. What we are talking about here is people / traffic that might move onto the road from adjacent locations.

I don't think you can 100% take account of that when you ride. Take the example of a car waiting to move out from a side road and onto the road on which you are cycling. If you are going through a built-up area you might encounter that situation numerous times on your way to work. Say your normal cruising speed is 12mph. Are we saying we should slow down so that we can stop in time if the car pulls out? If you are at the point where the waiting car is only three metres in front, and you are still doing that calculation, you will be down to maybe 5mph and slowing. Junction after tedious junction. I don't know anyone who cycles that cautiously and if I did I would wonder why they cycled at all.

[Vorpal]

Not necessarily, but rather be prepared to do so.

I think most of us use various clues to decide things like that... is the car creeping forward, has the driver looked at me? have they seen me? which way are the wheels going? are they turning?

It's almost instintive, and if I don't like what I am seeing, then yes, I do slow down so that I can stop if the driver pulls out. If I am reasonably confident that they aren't going to pull out, I may not slow down, or I may only slow dow a little. It has caught me out once or twice.

One time, I was chugging along a mostly residential street at a pretty good clip, and I saw someone looking like he was coming out of a petrol station. I looked at him, and he obviously saw me and came to a complete stop, so I carried along at my 20 mph. And then he pulled out anyway.

I slammed on the brakes, and all but threw myself over the handlebars to stop. Imagine my dismay, when he pulled out into the oncoming traffic lane, as if overtaking me.

It's kind of funny in retrospect, but it wasn't so much at the time.

[Phil Fouracre]

Everything is a compromise, you've got to do as much as you think reasonable. Not saying that you should spoil your enjoyment by being silly cautious, just try to be as aware as possible of your surroundings. Doesn't matter if you're cycling, driving, whatever.
Just as an afterthought - many, many years ago I did an Advanced M/C course with the police, a very interesting experience on many levels! Also got the chance to witness one of their drivers carrying out a practice commentated test at speed from the passenger seat. The levels of awareness and anticipation necessary were scary to witness, the guys say that they literally have to gabble to cover everything in the real test, never forgot the experience.

[AlaninWales]

The person behind you isn’t your responsibility, I do lift off (not brake) for most aideroads... it just makes sense.

Quite so, whether driving or cycling. Not only side roads either, there is such a thing as a "surprise horizon" - anywhere where something could emerge from. I slow and am prepared to brake as hard as necessary for any surprise horizon, yet I get to my destination as quickly as most.



Surprise horizon examples: Side road; driveway; parked car; field gate; sharp bend; hill crest; house door or gate with no or narrow footpath.

[Cugel]

Well done on being able to avoid them. Please keep riding so you can stop within what you can see to be clear - even allowing for other road users doing strange things!

Unfortunately it's impossible to make allowance for all strange happenings, otherwise you would be braking at every side road etc 'just in case' and probably be rear-ended by someone 'doing a strange thing' like travelling too close to you!

In practice (and it does take lots of practice) you can cycle, walk, drive or even ride a horse in a manner that can be characterised as "informed and aware". This means you're adept at assessing micro-risks of possible events manifesting as you go about the potentially dangerous environment of a road. This micro-risk assessment becomes embedded in your wetware so that you do it without conscious thought, in time. It's known as, amongst other things, "the cyclist's sixth sense".

Many road users (including pedestrians) don't develop this ability. They allow the concern of the moment (aka "distraction") to dominate their every act. In practice (!) this means that we who have a developed a high instinct for self-preservation must include such dunces in our range of subjects for "sixth sense" processing.

Some unfortunate events can be predicted, including the one described in this post. Pedestrians (and drivers; and horses; and mummies with pushchairs; and particularly old pharts driving cars) are prone to do the daft. If you can see the possibility, assume it will occur. If it doesn't in 99.9% of cases, this is all to the good.

Cugel

[[XAP]Bob]

There are two ways to look at this.

One should plan and drive/cycle so that you can stop in the distance that you can see. that is one's responsibility, however......

It is not possible to predict and plan for the truly unexpected.

Yes, I can stop if the lights ahead change, and my speed crossing the junction was appropriate, however all of that relies on the other road users doing the same, and you cannot plan force idiots who perform an unsafe act.

Being able to stop in the distance seen to be clear may not be enough if the object at the other end of that distance is also hoping to use it. Perhaps the rule should refer to half the distance seen to be clear.

For single track roads it is... because that's all you can see to be clear.

See to be clear isn't a static operator... The distance I can see to be clear isn't the distance where there isn't anything on the road, it's where there isn't anything that *could* encroach on your braking zone.

Yes, you have to make certain assumptions about other road users (like that they won't jump red lights, or that they'll stop at a junction) but you have to be aware that these are assumptions, and driving defensively will see you at least covering the brakes when those assumptions are being made...

Pedestrians are known to be less predictable than most drivers, children more so, elderly people can trip rather easily as well...
Cyclists and motorcyclists both need to make lateral corrections, and so need additional space in that direction.
Horses and other animals are unpredictable (except knowing that they are easily spooked)

Any time you're near a pedestrian you should be thinking about where they might go, where they might trip or fall...

Yes - there will still be occasions when a pedestrian does something particularly daft - but those should be very few and far between....

[mjr]

None of this "distance you can see to be clear" stuff is directly relevant to the incident described by the OP. As the OP tells it, the road ahead was clear one second, then someone stepped onto the road the next second. So the distance that appeared to be clear was reduced, in an instant, from enough to not enough. "Distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on. What we are talking about here is people / traffic that might move onto the road from adjacent locations.

I think "distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on OR that could reasonably get into your path before you do. If someone else can beat you to the space, it ain't clear for you - it's merely not yet occupied. I feel this distinction is routinely overlooked by so many road users, including motorists.

Weren't you taught (when learning to drive, more likely than to cycle) that the space you can see to be clear is roughly half what you can see because someone else could easily be coming the other way at the same speed as you?

[peetee]

I have had a few near misses and three collisions with people straying from the pavement non fortunately, were serious. The two that stick in my mind were a group of kids that appeared from an alley and ran straight across the road. I tried to avoid one and hit the next. Perhaps the most ridiculous and brainless action was that of a mum who, walking with her back to me, suddenly veered right putting her occupied pram into the road directly in my path on a steep hill with me a few metres away riding downhill, then stopped and looked to see if anything was coming. I missed both.

[Cugel]

As an incidental remark pertinent to this discussion albeit obliquely, may I recommend a technique for cycling narrow country lanes?

Often such lanes have bends & hedges that make it difficult to see very far ahead. However, given that they're narrow, one is justified in cycling down the "wrong" side in order to see further down the road that has a slow bend. You can sometimes add 50 yards of view forward by doing this. Moreover, the landrover charging at you will also see you 50 yards sooner than he would have otherwise.

One is still going at speed that allows stopping well within the seeing distance, mind. One is also ready to hug the hedge or even get on the verge (if there is one). Young Farmers (and the old ones) tend to go lickety-split in their landrovers, which sometimes lack proper brakes an' all!

Cugel.

[pwa]

None of this "distance you can see to be clear" stuff is directly relevant to the incident described by the OP. As the OP tells it, the road ahead was clear one second, then someone stepped onto the road the next second. So the distance that appeared to be clear was reduced, in an instant, from enough to not enough. "Distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on. What we are talking about here is people / traffic that might move onto the road from adjacent locations.

I think "distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on OR that could reasonably get into your path before you do. If someone else can beat you to the space, it ain't clear for you - it's merely not yet occupied. I feel this distinction is routinely overlooked by so many road users, including motorists.

Weren't you taught (when learning to drive, more likely than to cycle) that the space you can see to be clear is roughly half what you can see because someone else could easily be coming the other way at the same speed as you?

Yes (answering the last question) and it makes perfect sense. And I don't really disagree with any of what you are saying. I do wonder, though, whether it would be possible to cycle in a practical way in an urban area if we treated every possible entrant to our path with extreme caution. Like you, I keep and eye on people who look like they may be about to try to cross the road, and I never really trust a car waiting at a side road. But as I get really close to the point of no return I do reach a moment where, if they lunged out, I would be unable to stop in time. So I just hope for the best at that point. It's either that or get off and walk. I suppose what I am trying to say is that I exercise reasonable caution, and mostly it keeps me and those around me out of trouble.

Thinking back, in more than fifty years of cycling I've been hit twice by another road user lunging out. One was the pedestrian I talked about upthread, who began her dash out into the road backwards and thereby caught me off guard. I was cycling at something like walking speed at the time, and not especially close to the kerb. She biffed into the side of me. The second was a van that came out of a side road as I passed. He had been waiting for me but began to move forward before I had finished passing, and took out my rear wheel. Again, I wasn't close to the kerb and I wasn't going fast. Maybe 15mph on that occasion. There are times when you can be doing everything right and still get caught out.

[pwa]

As an incidental remark pertinent to this discussion albeit obliquely, may I recommend a technique for cycling narrow country lanes?

Often such lanes have bends & hedges that make it difficult to see very far ahead. However, given that they're narrow, one is justified in cycling down the "wrong" side in order to see further down the road that has a slow bend. You can sometimes add 50 yards of view forward by doing this. Moreover, the landrover charging at you will also see you 50 yards sooner than he would have otherwise.

One is still going at speed that allows stopping well within the seeing distance, mind. One is also ready to hug the hedge or even get on the verge (if there is one). Young Farmers (and the old ones) tend to go lickety-split in their landrovers, which sometimes lack proper brakes an' all!

Cugel.

I use that sort of positioning on lanes. And it only takes a split second to get back on your own side when you need to.

[[XAP]Bob]

None of this "distance you can see to be clear" stuff is directly relevant to the incident described by the OP. As the OP tells it, the road ahead was clear one second, then someone stepped onto the road the next second. So the distance that appeared to be clear was reduced, in an instant, from enough to not enough. "Distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on. What we are talking about here is people / traffic that might move onto the road from adjacent locations.

I think "distance you can see to be clear" is about stuff already on the road/ path you are on OR that could reasonably get into your path before you do. If someone else can beat you to the space, it ain't clear for you - it's merely not yet occupied. I feel this distinction is routinely overlooked by so many road users, including motorists.

Weren't you taught (when learning to drive, more likely than to cycle) that the space you can see to be clear is roughly half what you can see because someone else could easily be coming the other way at the same speed as you?

Yes (answering the last question) and it makes perfect sense. And I don't really disagree with any of what you are saying. I do wonder, though, whether it would be possible to cycle in a practical way in an urban area if we treated every possible entrant to our path with extreme caution. Like you, I keep and eye on people who look like they may be about to try to cross the road, and I never really trust a car waiting at a side road. But as I get really close to the point of no return I do reach a moment where, if they lunged out, I would be unable to stop in time. So I just hope for the best at that point. It's either that or get off and walk. I suppose what I am trying to say is that I exercise reasonable caution, and mostly it keeps me and those around me out of trouble.

Thinking back, in more than fifty years of cycling I've been hit twice by another road user lunging out. One was the pedestrian I talked about upthread, who began her dash out into the road backwards and thereby caught me off guard. I was cycling at something like walking speed at the time, and not especially close to the kerb. She biffed into the side of me. The second was a van that came out of a side road as I passed. He had been waiting for me but began to move forward before I had finished passing, and took out my rear wheel. Again, I wasn't close to the kerb and I wasn't going fast. Maybe 15mph on that occasion. There are times when you can be doing everything right and still get caught out.

By adjusting position in lane (as a cyclist) you can normally maintain a gap even as you pass someone.
In a car you do have to rely on people to some extent, but many drivers rely on them entirely, not just in the five yards in front of their bonnets.