albion1971:
What really winds me up is hypocrisy. When a truck driver is killed and mentioned on this site it is all condolences and think of the drivers family but when a car driver or a cyclist or a pedestrian there is a completely different tone.WHY?
It’s not hypocricy to try to make the point that cyclists need to think about protecting themselves and everyone else around them thereby hopefully saving at least the ones in future who might decide to listen and possibly other types of road users considering the type of knock on effects which having to overtake such slow moving traffic on such high speed roads could possibly cause.As I’ve said the idea of keeping cyclists and slow moving traffic like JCB’s etc off of motorways makes no sense when they allow such slow moving traffic to use other types of roads subject to similar/same speeds.
FarnboroughBoy11:
Playing with fire again riding along a dual carriageway.
Have to agree, I’m afraid. I was public enemy number 1 after saying something similar in the bar after 2 brothers were killed by a coach on the 595 at Moota a couple of years ago, albeit not a DC in good conditions/visibility. Middle of the worst winter for years, snow & ice, mid-afternoon, minus god-knows-what, sun slap bang on the horizon, etc. IIRC the coach driver was hauled to Crown Court and found not guilty on all counts, but tragic as it was, they simply shouldn’t have been there, legally or otherwise.
Scanner:
Carryfast:
Scanner:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Playing with fire again riding along a dual carriageway.
Quite possibly, but they have a right to be there.
Using that logic they might as well allow cyclists to use motorways too being that there’s not much,if any,difference concerning the issues of speed differentials and/or fast moving traffic in lane 2 preventing vehicles in lane 1 from being able to overtake safely assuming they’ve had to slow down to the speed of the cyclists to maintain seperation distance. 
It’s not logic, it’s the law.
Accidentally apt description.
Carryfast:
albion1971:
What really winds me up is hypocrisy. When a truck driver is killed and mentioned on this site it is all condolences and think of the drivers family but when a car driver or a cyclist or a pedestrian there is a completely different tone.WHY?
It’s not hypocricy to try to make the point that cyclists need to think about protecting themselves and everyone else around them thereby hopefully saving at least the ones in future who might decide to listen and possibly other types of road users considering the type of knock on effects which having to overtake such slow moving traffic on such high speed roads could possibly cause.As I’ve said the idea of keeping cyclists and slow moving traffic like JCB’s etc off of motorways makes no sense when they allow such slow moving traffic to use other types of roads subject to similar/same speeds.
I think there are other road users that need to think about protecting themselves and others as well but it is all very one sided on here.
Let’s start with the lorry drivers that sit far too close to the lorry or car in front.Should they not think about their own safety or the danger they are putting others in?
Maybe if drivers kept a safe distance they might have more chance of seeing a cyclist on a busy road.
Personally I would never cycle on a busy road because of the way so many drive.Yes you are playing with fire being on a bike because of the way drivers drive.
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
What really winds me up is hypocrisy. When a truck driver is killed and mentioned on this site it is all condolences and think of the drivers family but when a car driver or a cyclist or a pedestrian there is a completely different tone.WHY?
It’s not hypocricy to try to make the point that cyclists need to think about protecting themselves and everyone else around them thereby hopefully saving at least the ones in future who might decide to listen and possibly other types of road users considering the type of knock on effects which having to overtake such slow moving traffic on such high speed roads could possibly cause.As I’ve said the idea of keeping cyclists and slow moving traffic like JCB’s etc off of motorways makes no sense when they allow such slow moving traffic to use other types of roads subject to similar/same speeds.
I think there are other road users that need to think about protecting themselves and others as well but it is all very one sided on here.
Let’s start with the lorry drivers that sit far too close to the lorry or car in front.Should they not think about their own safety or the danger they are putting others in?
Maybe if drivers kept a safe distance they might have more chance of seeing a cyclist on a busy road.
Personally I would never cycle on a busy road because of the way so many drive.Yes you are playing with fire being on a bike because of the way drivers drive.
It’s got nothing to do with how people drive.
Take a train for example, on a track in a straight line, impossible to change direction, but you still wouldn’t go and stand next to one within inches as it passes you at 130mph would you.
As I’ve said many many times, I am a cyclist as well as a driver so my opinion is completely unbiased but cyclists really don’t help themselves one bit. Everyone says lorry drivers are thick but Jesus Christ, cyclists are the ultimate in stupidity and carelessness, most of them are chancres with the brain cells equivalent to a sloth and then they moan and when it all goes wrong for them usually with devastating consequences.
The cyclists who died were on a John O Groats to Lands End ride, apparently, according to the cycling forums I use, the a30 makes up a small part of the recognised route.
I don’t know the road, area or what happened to bring about this tragedy and I refuse to speculate. What I do know is that cyclists are entitled to ride on dual carriageways, they will carry on regardless of what’s said on here. You might not ride your motorbike in shorts & flip flops but some do. The cycling forums I read feel sorry for both cyclists & the driver, they do take issue with it being called a collision though.
Slackbladder:
The cyclists who died were on a John O Groats to Lands End ride, apparently, according to the cycling forums I use, the a30 makes up a small part of the recognised route.
I don’t know the road, area or what happened to bring about this tragedy and I refuse to speculate. What I do know is that cyclists are entitled to ride on dual carriageways, they will carry on regardless of what’s said on here. You might not ride your motorbike in shorts & flip flops but some do. The cycling forums I read feel sorry for both cyclists & the driver, they do take issue with it being called a collision though.
Bit like that poor oke who got slapped on the back of the head by the truck mirror, he was an ex Olympian I think, true they are taking a chance riding on roads like that, but still a tragedy remember everyone !!!
FarnboroughBoy11:
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
What really winds me up is hypocrisy. When a truck driver is killed and mentioned on this site it is all condolences and think of the drivers family but when a car driver or a cyclist or a pedestrian there is a completely different tone.WHY?
It’s not hypocricy to try to make the point that cyclists need to think about protecting themselves and everyone else around them thereby hopefully saving at least the ones in future who might decide to listen and possibly other types of road users considering the type of knock on effects which having to overtake such slow moving traffic on such high speed roads could possibly cause.As I’ve said the idea of keeping cyclists and slow moving traffic like JCB’s etc off of motorways makes no sense when they allow such slow moving traffic to use other types of roads subject to similar/same speeds.
I think there are other road users that need to think about protecting themselves and others as well but it is all very one sided on here.
Let’s start with the lorry drivers that sit far too close to the lorry or car in front.Should they not think about their own safety or the danger they are putting others in?
Maybe if drivers kept a safe distance they might have more chance of seeing a cyclist on a busy road.
Personally I would never cycle on a busy road because of the way so many drive.Yes you are playing with fire being on a bike because of the way drivers drive.
It’s got nothing to do with how people drive.
Take a train for example, on a track in a straight line, impossible to change direction, but you still wouldn’t go and stand next to one within inches as it passes you at 130mph would you.
As I’ve said many many times, I am a cyclist as well as a driver so my opinion is completely unbiased but cyclists really don’t help themselves one bit. Everyone says lorry drivers are thick but Jesus Christ, cyclists are the ultimate in stupidity and carelessness, most of them are chancres with the brain cells equivalent to a sloth and then they moan and when it all goes wrong for them usually with devastating consequences.
Now let me try to get this right? Nothing to with how people drive? A train passes you and cannot change direction (TRUE) You would not stand a chance as it passes you at 130mph.(TRUE)
I take it by that conclusion that if a car or lorry passes a cyclist they are passing too close and the cyclist does not stand a chance?
Maybe there are a few things that have escaped your mind.Let me remind you.
Motor vehicles have steering wheels which allow them to change direction.They also have mirrors which should be checked before changing direction.
They also have brakes which can slow them down if it is not possible to change direction.They also have the option of keeping a safe distance from the vehicle in front which gives them a much clearer view of the road ahead and any obstructions where they may need to change direction to avoid a collision.
From my conclusion then, is it not possible the motor vehicle could be at fault?
As usual I have great sympathy with all involved in the accident but am shocked and disappointed by some of the narrow minded views on here.
You’ve missed my point, I was just using the train as an example of stupidity by standing next to one as it passes. I’m not saying the driver wasn’t at fault either.
I think your views are narrow minded at the moment as you are looking at all the bad directed at the truck driver as usual.
What about the pot hole or drain the cyclists swung out suddenly to avoid, what about the front wheel bearing that broke that caused the bike to flip throwing the rider off, maybe the truck driver sounded his horn but because the cyclist had his headphones in on full blast, didnt hear him.
We don’t even no what happened, all I’m saying is why put yourself in a dangerous position in the first place, you said so yourself you wouldn’t ride along a dual carriageway.
Missed your point? Train was not really a good example.If a cyclist is cycling along the side of a road who is the one to decide whether he or she is left a safe distance?
Not much the cyclist can do apart from not be there but he or she is quite entitled to be there.
Both parties can be at fault but some of the views on here make out it is all the cyclists fault for just being there.
You say you are unbiased.I would have to disagree.
albion1971:
Missed your point? Train was not really a good example.If a cyclist is cycling along the side of a road who is the one to decide whether he or she is left a safe distance?
Not much the cyclist can do apart from not be there but he or she is quite entitled to be there.
Both parties can be at fault but some of the views on here make out it is all the cyclists fault for just being there.
You say you are unbiased.I would have to disagree.
I am completely unbiased, I’ve never been knocked off by a car neither have I ever been killed by a lorry…,. Why? Because I don’t put myself in stupid negligent situations.
I don’t think anyone on here is saying its the cyclists fault, it’s just that they don’t help themselves in the first place.
I got the right to swim the channel, I am entitled to be there, but I don’t incase a get run over by a boat.
I cycle every day and I don’t put myself in stupid negligent situations yet I’ve been knocked off my bike 3 times by cars. In all cases they said they didn’t see me. As I’m 6ft& 15 stone & wearing hi viz I would have to say they didn’t look too hard. In 2 cases they passed me on the road before turning sharp left. The point is it doesn’t matter how safe you are, where you cycle, drive, motorbike, swim, walk or any other form of movement, you have no control over what anyone else will do.
I wouldn’t swim the channel because I don’t want to swim in sewage & I couldn’t manage 21 miles.
I give cyclists plenty of room as I like a cheeky cycle myself when I can be arsed but you’ve got to be nuts to cycle on a dual carriageway.
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
What really winds me up is hypocrisy. When a truck driver is killed and mentioned on this site it is all condolences and think of the drivers family but when a car driver or a cyclist or a pedestrian there is a completely different tone.WHY?
It’s not hypocricy to try to make the point that cyclists need to think about protecting themselves and everyone else around them thereby hopefully saving at least the ones in future who might decide to listen and possibly other types of road users considering the type of knock on effects which having to overtake such slow moving traffic on such high speed roads could possibly cause.As I’ve said the idea of keeping cyclists and slow moving traffic like JCB’s etc off of motorways makes no sense when they allow such slow moving traffic to use other types of roads subject to similar/same speeds.
I think there are other road users that need to think about protecting themselves and others as well but it is all very one sided on here.
Let’s start with the lorry drivers that sit far too close to the lorry or car in front.Should they not think about their own safety or the danger they are putting others in?
Maybe if drivers kept a safe distance they might have more chance of seeing a cyclist on a busy road.
Personally I would never cycle on a busy road because of the way so many drive.Yes you are playing with fire being on a bike because of the way drivers drive.
None of which answers that question as to why the authorities ( rightly ) think that it’s too dangerous to allow cyclists to use motorways but the authorities and cyclists themselves think that it’s ok for cyclists to use fast running dual carriageways subject to the national speed limit in which exactly the same type of reasoning that stops them using motorways applies.
By your logic you’d actually support the idea of allowing cyclists and other slow moving traffic like JCB’s etc to use motorways on the basis that it’s drivers’ responsibility to maintain seperation distances and overtake safely under that type of regime regardless.If that isn’t your position in the case of motorways then why the difference in the case of dual carriageways subject to the national speed limit.
albion1971:
Both parties can be at fault but some of the views on here make out it is all the cyclists fault for just being there.
You say you are unbiased.I would have to disagree.
In the case of this type of scenario it is the cyclists’ ( and the authorities that allow it ) fault for being there in just the same way that it would be the cyclists’ fault for being knocked off their bikes on a motorway.
Slackbladder:
I cycle every day and I don’t put myself in stupid negligent situations yet I’ve been knocked off my bike 3 times by cars. In all cases they said they didn’t see me. As I’m 6ft& 15 stone & wearing hi viz I would have to say they didn’t look too hard. In 2 cases they passed me on the road before turning sharp left. The point is it doesn’t matter how safe you are, where you cycle, drive, motorbike, swim, walk or any other form of movement, you have no control over what anyone else will do.
I wouldn’t swim the channel because I don’t want to swim in sewage & I couldn’t manage 21 miles.
Very true, sometimes you can only do so much to prevent things from happening and you have to rely on the ability of the drivers on the road.
But these cyclists on the A30 didn’t have to put themselves there.
And I could probably only manage 4 miles before I drowned, that’s of course if I wasn’t run over by a ferry before hand 
Silver_Surfer:
I give cyclists plenty of room as I like a cheeky cycle myself when I can be arsed but you’ve got to be nuts to cycle on a dual carriageway.
Simply said and 100% right in my opinion.
So, to extend that logic! It’s my fault for sitting in my car at the lights and someone runs into me because if I wasn’t there I wouldnt have been hit. Not their fault because they didn’t see me.
Slackbladder:
So, to extend that logic! It’s my fault for sitting in my car at the lights and someone runs into me because if I wasn’t there I wouldnt have been hit. Not their fault because they didn’t see me.
No the correct logic in this case would be if you got knocked off a cycle on a motorway it would be your fault regardless of what the driver did or didn’t do.The problem is why do the authorities think that same logic shouldn’t be applied in the case of fast dual carriageways.