Witness or victim?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
thirdcrank
Posts: 29481
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby thirdcrank » 6 Aug 2020, 3:27pm

tim-b wrote: ... The problem with Bikeability is the low number of motorists that are aware of it, ...


As the result of the OP's successful report to the police, it seems that one driver at least - plus any others they chunter to - may have a greater awareness of the safety of cyclists.

tim-b
Posts: 1552
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 8:20am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby tim-b » 6 Aug 2020, 3:38pm

Hi
As the result of the OP's successful report to the police, it seems that one driver at least - plus any others they chunter to - may have a greater awareness of the safety of cyclists.

Agreed, but I'd suggest that they're more aware of the 1.5m advice than anything else. There are plenty who clearly don't understand the Highway Code advice on cycling side-by-side never mind something that isn't required reading before passing a driving test :) :)
Regards
tim-b
~~~~¯\(ツ)/¯~~~~

thirdcrank
Posts: 29481
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby thirdcrank » 6 Aug 2020, 4:48pm

tim-b wrote: ...
Agreed, but I'd suggest that they're more aware of the 1.5m advice than anything else. There are plenty who clearly don't understand the Highway Code advice on cycling side-by-side never mind something that isn't required reading before passing a driving test ...


I can only guess what's included on these courses and that would be that they are quite general in nature and based on the Highway Code. Perhaps they ask people on the course to explain what caused them to be there and then use that as a basis for pointing them in a safer direction. Your alternative for the OP and others preferring to ride in a style of which you disapprove seems to be to ride in a way which invites more overtaking.

I'm still pleased that the police have decided to act on the evidence. As this type of course is offered as an alternative to prosecution, as I think I've already posted, I'd hope that's the way it would go if the refused that option. I'd also hope that the CPS / magistrates were not in favour of cycling in the gutter

thirdcrank
Posts: 29481
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby thirdcrank » 7 Aug 2020, 7:17am

For many years, cyclists' reports of bad driving often got nowhere because of a lack of independent witnesses. The introduction of practical video cameras recording decent footage seemed to give a way of getting the evidence, but that too has been routinely rejected following the unchallenged assertion by top cop Suzette Davenport at the All-Party Parliamentary Cycling Charade. The OP has achieved a measure of success and Halleluiah!

Since the police stopped investigating the majority of collisions, prosecutions for bad driving have plunged. Fixed penalties for careless driving were announced and reannounced at least once to a media fanfare, close passing of cyclists being the usual media example of when tickets might be issued. Potential offenders know the score, and they know that most of this is mere spin. With something like this, they do what they believe they can get away with. IMO.

paddler
Posts: 163
Joined: 8 Oct 2017, 9:13am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby paddler » 7 Aug 2020, 9:16am

Jdsk wrote:
DaveBeck wrote:Where do you live? It must be a bloody awful place wherever it is, because I really don't recognise the situation you describe where I live in Cornwall. Ok, you get the very occasional driver who may get a bit close, but very, very rarely do I get what feels to be a deliberate close pass, or what we would refer to as a "punishment pass." But by and large, I find that drivers give me space, don't follow too closely (sometimes they hang back too far, so they loose the opportunity to pass at a suitable spot when I would like them to get past), they certainly don't terrorise me.

Same here. Most drivers give me enough room whether I'm cycling or walking. Most stop at most Stop signs. Most negotiate appropriately in tight situations.
And, funnily enough, most other cyclists on open roads smile or wave or greet.
And it doesn't seem to vary much wherever I am. I wonder if some of the problems might be in the eye of the beholder rather than associated with location.

DaveBeck wrote:I'm sure it will be slightly different in cities, purely because of the increased volumes of traffic, both cyclists and motorists. But I think that as the numbers of people cycling increases and hopefully stays that way, more and more will appreciate life from our side and things will improve even more.

Agreed. And as well as more people cycling and directly delivering benefits to themselves and others that will also mean that more people driving vehicles have also cycled in the recent past. And that should decrease the tribalism.

Jonathan


Well said both.

Dave

jatindersangha
Posts: 152
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby jatindersangha » 7 Aug 2020, 9:23am

Hi all,

Within this thread, these words were used to describe the driving of the Golf - "The car approaches slowly and cautiously giving room". "wasn't really a close pass".

I disagree with both of those. The driver may have initially wanted to overtake safely but let his desire to get in front trump everything else. The two cars in front of the Golf overtook with most of the vehicle in the oncoming lane. The driver of the Golf just about gets his offside wheels over the central line, sees the oncoming car so speeds up and starts to pull in.

Video at full speed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BQkXBiQBNs

1st 40 seconds is rear/forward video of the incident - and the rest is the same but just longer segments so that you can see the other overtakes. From traffic lights I was overtaken by a number of cars - the one by a Mazda MX-5(?) convertible was fast and close too - another driver who couldn't be bothered to wait for an oncoming vehicle to pass before overtaking.

From what I see in the video, once I'm overtaken by the white Transit - there's quite a gap behind me to the Golf - which moves over and I suspect can clearly see the oncoming vehicle but decides to speed up and overtake anyway - 5seconds after the Transit has overtaken me. The driver of the Golf then starts pulling in before he's even reached me.

Remember, this incident occurred during the early days of lockdown - and the roads were essentially very quiet. This stretch of the A322 was the busiest section that day - and of the 18miles I cycled that day - this was the only section I felt unsafe on due to the actions of those two drivers (Golf & Mazda).

--Jatinder

Pebble
Posts: 216
Joined: 7 Jun 2020, 11:59pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby Pebble » 7 Aug 2020, 9:26am

Jdsk wrote:
DaveBeck wrote:Where do you live? It must be a bloody awful place wherever it is, because I really don't recognise the situation you describe where I live in Cornwall. Ok, you get the very occasional driver who may get a bit close, but very, very rarely do I get what feels to be a deliberate close pass, or what we would refer to as a "punishment pass." But by and large, I find that drivers give me space, don't follow too closely (sometimes they hang back too far, so they loose the opportunity to pass at a suitable spot when I would like them to get past), they certainly don't terrorise me.

Same here. Most drivers give me enough room whether I'm cycling or walking. Most stop at most Stop signs. Most negotiate appropriately in tight situations.

Yes most drivers do, probably well in excess of 99% get it right, but it only takes that one idiot driver who could end your days or put you in a wheel chair for the rest of your life. Even small low speed collisions can have life changing consequences for cyclists. There needs to be a zero tolerance approach.

For me I will endure about one close call every couple of month (1,500 mile) and that is one too many. The answer is not for me to move to Cornwall, I already live in a beautiful place with hundreds and hundreds of miles of very quiet roads, the answer has to be in better enforcement and more drivers losing their licences.

Jdsk
Posts: 2497
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby Jdsk » 7 Aug 2020, 9:29am

jatindersangha wrote:"wasn't really a close pass".

I disagree with both of those. The driver may have initially wanted to overtake safely but let his desire to get in front trump everything else. The two cars in front of the Golf overtook with most of the vehicle in the oncoming lane. The driver of the Golf just about gets his offside wheels over the central line, sees the oncoming car so speeds up and starts to pull in.

Not to mention:

Rule 167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road

Jonathan

slowster
Posts: 1614
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby slowster » 7 Aug 2020, 1:16pm

PDQ Mobile wrote:The pass itself does not appear to be that close, the driver appears to prepare to give plenty of room, appears to hesitate, and then goes halfway into to other carriageway and this results in the "cut in" as he runs out of room.

I agree. That sort of misjudged overtake and premature cut in is so common that, probably like a lot of cyclists, I am almost inured to it.

PDQ Mobile wrote:I would argue that had the OP not been so far out, he is in the middle of his carriageway at times, the outcome would have been more acceptable.

There is no good evidence for such a presumption, only evidence for the opposite. What happens in these scenarios is predominantly dependent on the driver. The only thing we can say for certain about the driver is that they show poor judgement when faced with a very simple situation on the road. Whilst such driving may not be uncommon, I think such a manoeuvre would have resulted in an instant failure by an examiner if it happened during a driving test.

The OP was far enough out into the road that the driver was presented with a situation where they had to make a conscious decision to overtake, and to assess the space available for doing so as well as the presence and speed of vehicles in the oncoming lane into whose path they would have to move during the overtake. This was a very basic, easy situation for a driver to see, assess, and act accordingly, despite which they did the wrong thing. Such a poor driver is probably much more likely to be one who makes a close pass when presented with a cyclist who is closer to the the gutter. If anything based on the actual evidence we do have, the OP's position did produce a better outcome, given that an actual close pass would have been worse and more dangerous to him.

PDQ Mobile wrote:While I fully understand Pete's opinion that taking primary here improves the driver of the waiting car's view, I think in view (no pun etc!) of the bollard and badly positioned lamppost this is open to question.

There are genuine blind spots for the driver wherever the oncoming cyclist is positioned.
I refer to my earlier opinion that there is no better guarantee of safety in such a place than decent eye contact with the driver.

It is no 'guarantee' whatever, as countless SMIDSY incidents indicate. More importantly it's not just a matter of the waiting car driver's view, it's a matter of the margin of safety when riding across the path of a car waiting to pull out. A cyclist has no control over the driver, whether with eye contact or telepathy. The only thing they can control is their own road position/speed and the margin of safety it provides against sudden unpredictable action by the driver. If the OP had been half a metre out and the driver started to pull out or their foot slipped off the clutch, the OP would either go over the bonnet or have to swerve very sharply and dangerously to the right (potentially into the path of an/the overtaking car).

I think it's reckoned to be better to watch the front wheels of cars waiting to pull out, rather than trying to make eye contact, because the wheel movement will give the earliest warning of the car moving.

To come back to the following point:
PDQ Mobile wrote:I would argue that had the OP not been so far out, he is in the middle of his carriageway at times, the outcome would have been more acceptable.

The only time he is in the middle of the carriageway is for a couple of seconds after the overtake, when he is doutbless shaken up, and he then pulls back in.

In short, we are discussing how to minimise risk. Where the risk stems from a manifestly poor driver who makes bad decisions, arguing that presenting the driver with a different scenario - where they can just as easily make an equally bad or worse decision - is likely to significantly reduce the risk is indeed victim blaming and not constructive. Ultimately this is about the degree to which the OP and all of us are able to control and influence what happens on the road around us, which for the most part is relatively little.

Hence my comments about the OP's two other videos - probably the greatest control the OP had over the Warburtons lorry was where it would overtake him, and slowing down would have resulted in the overtake well before the danger zone of the hill. Similarly with the staggered junction, keeping left in that situation would have controlled how close the van passed, because the van travelled in a straight line from its position in the middle of the road towards the junction.

Jdsk
Posts: 2497
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby Jdsk » 7 Aug 2020, 2:04pm

PDQ Mobile wrote:SMIDSY is best avoided by eye contact in my opinion, I would sooner watch the driver, their eyes and overall behavior than rely on just front wheel movement as a clue.
But we are all different and it may be useful.

Both useful and I don't see them as alternatives.

And, yes, knowing where they're looking and not looking is a much a part of it as making eye contact.

Jonathan

Cowsham
Posts: 667
Joined: 4 Nov 2019, 1:33pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby Cowsham » 7 Aug 2020, 2:10pm

Anybody got a link to the motorcyclist tapping him on the head ?

Cowsham
Posts: 667
Joined: 4 Nov 2019, 1:33pm

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby Cowsham » 7 Aug 2020, 2:25pm

Just watched the " normal speed version " or as I'd like to call it " how not to cycle in traffic "

https://youtu.be/4BQkXBiQBNs

One piece of advice mate --- don't ever take up motorcycling !

jatindersangha
Posts: 152
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby jatindersangha » 7 Aug 2020, 2:44pm

Cowsham wrote:Just watched the " normal speed version " or as I'd like to call it " how not to cycle in traffic "

https://youtu.be/4BQkXBiQBNs

One piece of advice mate --- don't ever take up motorcycling !


In all seriousness, I have been thinking of doing an intensive motorcycle course ;-)

--Jatinder

jatindersangha
Posts: 152
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby jatindersangha » 7 Aug 2020, 2:50pm

Cowsham wrote:Anybody got a link to the motorcyclist tapping him on the head ?


Original thread here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=117261

--Jatinder

DaveBeck
Posts: 58
Joined: 10 Aug 2019, 10:07am

Re: Witness or victim?

Postby DaveBeck » 7 Aug 2020, 3:08pm

Pebble wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
DaveBeck wrote:Where do you live? It must be a bloody awful place wherever it is, because I really don't recognise the situation you describe where I live in Cornwall. Ok, you get the very occasional driver who may get a bit close, but very, very rarely do I get what feels to be a deliberate close pass, or what we would refer to as a "punishment pass." But by and large, I find that drivers give me space, don't follow too closely (sometimes they hang back too far, so they loose the opportunity to pass at a suitable spot when I would like them to get past), they certainly don't terrorise me.

Same here. Most drivers give me enough room whether I'm cycling or walking. Most stop at most Stop signs. Most negotiate appropriately in tight situations.

Yes most drivers do, probably well in excess of 99% get it right, but it only takes that one idiot driver who could end your days or put you in a wheel chair for the rest of your life. Even small low speed collisions can have life changing consequences for cyclists. There needs to be a zero tolerance approach.

For me I will endure about one close call every couple of month (1,500 mile) and that is one too many. The answer is not for me to move to Cornwall, I already live in a beautiful place with hundreds and hundreds of miles of very quiet roads, the answer has to be in better enforcement and more drivers losing their licences.


Hi Pebble,

I quite agree with you actually. But there is a gentleman on these forums who insists that most motorists (or mortons as he insists on calling them) break all traffic laws, and as most of us here probably also drive, by implication he is including all of us in that category. And by him trying to perpetuate the, "them and us" attitude really doesn't help matters, anymore than somebody standing by a pelican crossing, pushing the buttons in order to frustrate the free movement of traffic, which obviously includes cyclists. That's actually rather childish!

Hopefully if the new recommendations for the Highway Code come into being, they may help redress the balance so to speak. But I agree, harsher penalties for causing damage to a person, driving to be seen as a privilege, not a right and more licences revoked and not returned.

Dave B