Scanner:
Carryfast:
Scanner:
Carryfast:
Slackbladder:
You call it bs while sat in your armchair, I do it 5 times a week sat in a MAN. As the driver in question managed to slaughter 2 cyclists in one go I would say he didn’t believe it at all, otherwise another preventable “accident” wouldnt have occurred. It would appear that, as this sort of thing happens rarely then most drivers are in fact able to avoid cyclists. The only difference is I would put it down to experience and you, well, as you don’t seem to think its possible to see a problem and act in time to avoid it, without getting right up behind it before pulling out, would put it down to blind luck. Just as well your not still on the roads I’m thinking.
Firstly you seem to have as much understanding of what I meant by reducing speed to that required to maintain seperation distance behind a cyclist as you have about the national speed limit on dual carriageways as they apply to cars.Reading your ideas I think it’s you who seems to be all about maintaining speed and then just hoping that someone at the side of you would let you force your way into lane 2 before you flatten yet another lemming.
Here’s an idea why don’t you get on your bike and spend a week riding it once a day between London and Guildford in lane 1 of the A3 and see how long you’d last.Being that it’s legal for you to do so. 
Strangely, I know a guy who commutes from Kent to Greenford every day by bicycle. He works for the Met Police Commercial Vehicle Unit - investigating HGV crashes. He has done so for sixteen years. He’s as fit as a fiddle and a ■■■■ good copper.
I’m fairly sure that narrows it down to one person.
I don’t know if he frequents these forums and I’m not about to name him, but if he does I’d love to hear his take.
Maybe he’d like to join in that challenge of riding a bike in lane 1 of the A3 between London and Guildford once a day for a week as it would be perfectly legal to do so. 
I know another fellow who commutes on that route but starts from a lot further away. He’s nothing to do with the transport industry, he is still alive though. You can see him riding an old Peugeot racer any weekday on that stretch of road.
Now that I really don’t believe.Although if it’s true then it just confirms the intelligence levels of many cyclists.Although I’m assuming the idiot is using the hard shoulder rather than having the bottle to do the whole journey in lane 1.
Carryfast:
Scanner:
Carryfast:
Scanner:
Carryfast:
Slackbladder:
You call it bs while sat in your armchair, I do it 5 times a week sat in a MAN. As the driver in question managed to slaughter 2 cyclists in one go I would say he didn’t believe it at all, otherwise another preventable “accident” wouldnt have occurred. It would appear that, as this sort of thing happens rarely then most drivers are in fact able to avoid cyclists. The only difference is I would put it down to experience and you, well, as you don’t seem to think its possible to see a problem and act in time to avoid it, without getting right up behind it before pulling out, would put it down to blind luck. Just as well your not still on the roads I’m thinking.
Firstly you seem to have as much understanding of what I meant by reducing speed to that required to maintain seperation distance behind a cyclist as you have about the national speed limit on dual carriageways as they apply to cars.Reading your ideas I think it’s you who seems to be all about maintaining speed and then just hoping that someone at the side of you would let you force your way into lane 2 before you flatten yet another lemming.
Here’s an idea why don’t you get on your bike and spend a week riding it once a day between London and Guildford in lane 1 of the A3 and see how long you’d last.Being that it’s legal for you to do so.
Strangely, I know a guy who commutes from Kent to Greenford every day by bicycle. He works for the Met Police Commercial Vehicle Unit - investigating HGV crashes. He has done so for sixteen years. He’s as fit as a fiddle and a ■■■■ good copper.
I’m fairly sure that narrows it down to one person.
I don’t know if he frequents these forums and I’m not about to name him, but if he does I’d love to hear his take.
Maybe he’d like to join in that challenge of riding a bike in lane 1 of the A3 between London and Guildford once a day for a week as it would be perfectly legal to do so.
I know another fellow who commutes on that route but starts from a lot further away. He’s nothing to do with the transport industry, he is still alive though. You can see him riding an old Peugeot racer any weekday on that stretch of road.
Now that I really don’t believe.Although if it’s true then it just confirms the intelligence levels of many cyclists.Although I’m assuming the idiot is using the hard shoulder rather than having the bottle to do the whole journey in lane 1.
It is true.
Are you accusing him of idiocy or bravery? Lack of courage seems to be common to many participants in this thread.
Carryfast:
Slackbladder:
I like to think that I’ve managed to avoid killing someone while driving is not because of some imagined perfection, just a simple adherence to the laws of the land, coupled with a bit of experience. Keeping an eye out for potential risks ahead is a basic concept for a driver isn’t it ? That’s all I do and well, bugger me, after over 30 years it still works.
Of course the speed difference is of consequence, if you’re tooling along the dual at an illegal 56mph you have less time & distance to react to any potential problems that may occur, did you not know that?
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the driver in this case believed all that bs too.Until now.Firstly you don’t have any evidence that the driver in question was running at 56 mph and even if he was you’re deluding yourself if you think that the extra 6 mph would make the slightest difference in the case of the speed differential between a truck running at the legal dual carriageway national limit and a cyclist.In addition to which you’ve then totally ignored that issue of cars running at the legal national speed limit for such roads ( probably because you obviously didn’t even know it ) which needs to be taken into account assuming that a driver has been as good as you’d like to think they are in slowing up to maintain seperation distance behind the cyclist and then overtaking in lane 2 from that speed.Your ideas seem to be based on the views of such cyclists certainly not from that of a driver who understands all the implications of what you’re saying.
First of all, I don’t know if the vehicle was speeding but as far as the difference betwwen 50 & 56 mph is concerned an extra 6mph over a period of time could make a lot of difference. Converting MPH into feet travelled per second using the calculation I was told by the IAM, had the vehicle been doing that extra 6mph for just ten minutes it would have been 5,400 feet further along the A30 than it should have been and the outcome could have been so very different for all concerned had it been doing 50mph. 5,400 feet is a long way!!
Secondly, I’m a lorry driver & a keen cyclist and I too support cyclists rights to be on the road. Having said that, knowing the roads around here I stay well away from main roads as much as possible because I know the roads and how busy some of them are. As I understand it these cyclists were on a charity ride and were possibly riding a route which was provided for them.
Last point. We’re all debating the rights and wrongs of cycling on a major road and arguing amongst ourselves here instead of recognising two people have lost their lives, families have been devastated and there’s a driver out there who may well need counselling to help him/her come to terms with what’s happened.
I hope the driver receives the support he/she requires & I send my condolences to the familes & friends of the two people killed.
BB.
Basilbrush:
Carryfast:
Slackbladder:
I like to think that I’ve managed to avoid killing someone while driving is not because of some imagined perfection, just a simple adherence to the laws of the land, coupled with a bit of experience. Keeping an eye out for potential risks ahead is a basic concept for a driver isn’t it ? That’s all I do and well, bugger me, after over 30 years it still works.
Of course the speed difference is of consequence, if you’re tooling along the dual at an illegal 56mph you have less time & distance to react to any potential problems that may occur, did you not know that?
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the driver in this case believed all that bs too.Until now.Firstly you don’t have any evidence that the driver in question was running at 56 mph and even if he was you’re deluding yourself if you think that the extra 6 mph would make the slightest difference in the case of the speed differential between a truck running at the legal dual carriageway national limit and a cyclist.In addition to which you’ve then totally ignored that issue of cars running at the legal national speed limit for such roads ( probably because you obviously didn’t even know it ) which needs to be taken into account assuming that a driver has been as good as you’d like to think they are in slowing up to maintain seperation distance behind the cyclist and then overtaking in lane 2 from that speed.Your ideas seem to be based on the views of such cyclists certainly not from that of a driver who understands all the implications of what you’re saying.
First of all, I don’t know if the vehicle was speeding but as far as the difference betwwen 50 & 56 mph is concerned an extra 6mph over a period of time could make a lot of difference. Converting MPH into feet travelled per second using the calculation I was told by the IAM, had the vehicle been doing that extra 6mph for just ten minutes it would have been 5,400 feet further along the A30 than it should have been and the outcome could have been so very different for all concerned had it been doing 50mph. 5,400 feet is a long way!!
Secondly, I’m a lorry driver & a keen cyclist and I too support cyclists rights to be on the road. Having said that, knowing the roads around here I stay well away from main roads as much as possible because I know the roads and how busy some of them are. As I understand it these cyclists were on a charity ride and were possibly riding a route which was provided for them.
Last point. We’re all debating the rights and wrongs of cycling on a major road here instead of recognising two people have lost their lives, familes have been devastated and there’s a driver out there who may well need councelling to hlp him/her come to terms with what’s happened.
I hope the driver receives the support he/she requires & I send my condolences to the familes & friends of the two people killed.
BB.
You’re right. I did say I was leaving this thread, but made the mistake of looking at it and contributing again.
That’s it for me.