Actually this is quite pertinent to my ride yesterday - very good waterproof jacket meant the rain just ran down it and onto my nether regions - frozen bum for much of the ride. And when I finally got home and unpacked all my archaeological kit that was in the panniers from the previous day I found my waterproof trousers in there - d'oh.
Today (15th Jan) I was driving southwards on the A38, busy dual carriageway, between Burton On Trent and Lichfield. (Bare with with me, I'll get to the bit about the weather conditions in a minute)
If the rider of the modern road bike I passed just before Alrewas is on here, please listen up! (black helmet I think)
The sun was pretty low,directly in drivers eyes even at 11.30am when I passed you, the road was wet and extremely shiny and the conditions were such that no one could see you...it was like looking into the sun reflected off the wet road. It was dangerous to yourself and other road users and I just wondered what on earth you were thinking?
The car in front of me obviously didn't see you as he pulled round you at the very last second. I gave you as wide a berth as possible but didn't have as much warning as I wanted.
Now, I know he has every right to be there and as motorists we need to be aware etc etc, but get this.....there was a bloody cycle path to his left not 2 metres away!!! What on earth was that all about? What are you proving? I was scared for you and your safety. Wise up!
and yet if everyone had driven according to the conditions there shouldn't have been a problem. If someone's view forwards is such that they are not able to take sensible and easy avoiding action should there be an object there, then they need to slow down don't they. In this case it was a cyclist, in others it might be a broken down car, a fallen tree, an animal, etc etc.
So cyclist riding normally and legally, drivers driving dangerously and you make it sound like it is the cyclist who is in the wrong?
OK, OK, I get what you are saying: it doesn't matter who is in the wrong or right - it's not being flattened that is important. And that knowing that there are a lot of fast moving heavy vehicles being driven dangerously you would question the wisdom of cycling on the road, even if one has every right to. But let us try to separate out where the blame would lie for any unfortunate incident from the wisdom of riding amongst law breakers. Two different things and we must be guarded against victim blaming.
To use a hackneyed old cliche....just because she had a short skirt on.....
Si wrote:and yet if everyone had driven according to the conditions there shouldn't have been a problem. If someone's view forwards is such that they are not able to take sensible and easy avoiding action should there be an object there, then they need to slow down don't they. In this case it was a cyclist, in others it might be a broken down car, a fallen tree, an animal, etc etc.
So cyclist riding normally and legally, drivers driving dangerously and you make it sound like it is the cyclist who is in the wrong?
OK, OK, I get what you are saying: it doesn't matter who is in the wrong or right - it's not being flattened that is important. And that knowing that there are a lot of fast moving heavy vehicles being driven dangerously you would question the wisdom of cycling on the road, even if one has every right to. But let us try to separate out where the blame would lie for any unfortunate incident from the wisdom of riding amongst law breakers. Two different things and we must be guarded against victim blaming.
To use a hackneyed old cliche....just because she had a short skirt on.....
Si, totally accept your point except for the fact that there was a cycle path for the duration of that road just 2m to the left of the cyclist. That makes it foolhardy not using it. So, he may be right, but in my book he's foolish Thanks for letting me get it off my chest anyway and I appreciate your other side of the coin (I am a cyclist after all and champion the right of cyclists whenever I hear ignorant comments from car/van/lorry drivers in the pub or in other places)
Si wrote:and yet if everyone had driven according to the conditions there shouldn't have been a problem. If someone's view forwards is such that they are not able to take sensible and easy avoiding action should there be an object there, then they need to slow down don't they. In this case it was a cyclist, in others it might be a broken down car, a fallen tree, an animal, etc etc.
So cyclist riding normally and legally, drivers driving dangerously and you make it sound like it is the cyclist who is in the wrong?
OK, OK, I get what you are saying: it doesn't matter who is in the wrong or right - it's not being flattened that is important. And that knowing that there are a lot of fast moving heavy vehicles being driven dangerously you would question the wisdom of cycling on the road, even if one has every right to. But let us try to separate out where the blame would lie for any unfortunate incident from the wisdom of riding amongst law breakers. Two different things and we must be guarded against victim blaming.
To use a hackneyed old cliche....just because she had a short skirt on.....
Si, totally accept your point except for the fact that there was a cycle path for the duration of that road just 2m to the left of the cyclist. That makes it foolhardy not using it. So, he may be right, but in my book he's foolish Thanks for letting me get it off my chest anyway and I appreciate your other side of the coin (I am a cyclist after all and champion the right of cyclists whenever I hear ignorant comments from car/van/lorry drivers in the pub or in other places)
When did you last try that cycle path? I often won't try a cycle path somewhere I don't know - because it could do anything - at least I know what the road is doing.
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.
I doubt I would have been using a cycle path either, if anything like hereabouts the road will be salted and not the cycle path.... As said cars should be driving according to conditions, though I would probably have had rear light on to aid visibility in such a situation.
I stand and rejoice everytime I see a woman ride by on a wheel the picture of free, untrammeled womanhood. HG Wells
eileithyia wrote:I doubt I would have been using a cycle path either, if anything like hereabouts the road will be salted and not the cycle path.... As said cars should be driving according to conditions, though I would probably have had rear light on to aid visibility in such a situation.
A rear light would do nothing though - you just need to make a big shadow
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.
eileithyia wrote:Well actually having been behind a cyclist in low sun, a back light can make a difference.
Today I was concerned with riders I saw in shorts!!!! EEEEEEK!
Whenever I'm in that situation I've no chance of seeing a rear light - they just don't pierce the glare.
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.
groberts wrote:I swear I saw a guy touring this morning just outside Reigate in Surrey on the A217 heading north. The weather was awful: cold, sleet + windy, he had a full set of red of Orliebs + dry bag and (I think) camping gear + was well kitted out with Gore top etc = respect!
You could have spotted me in a similar situation a few times over the years, and the reason would have been that that I was just cycling to/from from the airport.
Sooper8 wrote: Bare with me, I'll get to the bit about the weather conditions in a minute
Not in this weather mate, brrrr. But I admire your pluck (that's "pluck" BTW).
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Sooper8 wrote:Today (15th Jan) I was driving southwards on the A38, busy dual carriageway, between Burton On Trent and Lichfield. (Bare with with me, I'll get to the bit about the weather conditions in a minute)
If the rider of the modern road bike I passed just before Alrewas is on here, please listen up! (black helmet I think)
The sun was pretty low,directly in drivers eyes even at 11.30am when I passed you, the road was wet and extremely shiny and the conditions were such that no one could see you...it was like looking into the sun reflected off the wet road. It was dangerous to yourself and other road users and I just wondered what on earth you were thinking?
The car in front of me obviously didn't see you as he pulled round you at the very last second. I gave you as wide a berth as possible but didn't have as much warning as I wanted.
Now, I know he has every right to be there and as motorists we need to be aware etc etc, but get this.....there was a bloody cycle path to his left not 2 metres away!!! What on earth was that all about? What are you proving? I was scared for you and your safety. Wise up!
sooper8: I agree with you - it was dangerous. I would certainly have thought twice about driving in those conditions with the possibility that there may be cyclists that you couldn't see. How risky does it have to be before motorists are prised from their vehicles?
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
I was doing a bit of riding into a low sun yesterday, wondering if the high-viz jacket would get me killed after some Judge stated that one had made it difficult for a motorist to spot the cyclist in those circumstances.
I didnt think of riding on the pavement though.
The hard facts are that in the UK the motorists can drive as they please. "I didnt see them because of the sun" is considered a perfectly valid defence now.
Sooper8 wrote:Today (15th Jan) I was driving southwards on the A38, busy dual carriageway, between Burton On Trent and Lichfield. (Bare with with me, I'll get to the bit about the weather conditions in a minute)
If the rider of the modern road bike I passed just before Alrewas is on here, please listen up! (black helmet I think)
The sun was pretty low,directly in drivers eyes even at 11.30am when I passed you, the road was wet and extremely shiny and the conditions were such that no one could see you...it was like looking into the sun reflected off the wet road. It was dangerous to yourself and other road users and I just wondered what on earth you were thinking?
The car in front of me obviously didn't see you as he pulled round you at the very last second. I gave you as wide a berth as possible but didn't have as much warning as I wanted.
Now, I know he has every right to be there and as motorists we need to be aware etc etc, but get this.....there was a bloody cycle path to his left not 2 metres away!!! What on earth was that all about? What are you proving? I was scared for you and your safety. Wise up!
sooper8: I agree with you - it was dangerous. I would certainly have thought twice about driving in those conditions with the possibility that there may be cyclists that you couldn't see. How risky does it have to be before motorists are prised from their vehicles?
Nice sarcastic dig mate....did you ever have to drive a car, or are you a hard core bike everywhere kind of guy?
