I’m not getting involved in this too much cos there is enough ranting and raving going on but I will say this - if vehicles should rightly leave a car width between themselves and a cyclist, why doesn’t that rule apply to cyclists or cycle lane designers/installers? In the video - IMO - the cyclist is riding far too fast, and too close, for the amount of traffic around him. Thats not to absolve the tipper driver of any blame at all, but both are at fault!
Where’s magnetictom? He would be a definite asset to this thread!
Piston broke:
I’m not getting involved in this too…
Paul,
I said earlier that I would have held back, but that’s probably down to being better experienced and I completely agree that the cycle lane design is ridiculous - hence why I am saying that we should work towards saving the lives of people who do not understand the roads that well - through training and better designed cycle lanes. Done it to death in this thread, but some people appear to think HGV drivers should be excused for all their inadequacies. As someone who has driven just about every type of HGV (long, short and wide - with the exception of fuel tankers… I’d say professional drivers should have much more expected/demanded of them - especially if what they are driving is a HGV/LGV/Bus etc.
I think I’ve said all I can now on this subject, if anyone else wishes to challenge me, please read what I have written already first.
mickyblue:
So your saying, the cyclist who has no reguards for his safety goes up the inside of a truck, very close to him and then get’s taken down seconds later. shouldn’t take some of the blame?
Cyclists are quick to cry when they overtaken very closely but are willing to undertake vehicles very close, cannot have it both ways
The cyclist wasn’t ‘taken down’ by the truck at all because if he had been he’d have been under the front wheels and/or rear wheels and no longer in this world.What acually happened was that he got upset with the amount of clearance,( the same amount of which he was happy enough with when he undertook the truck previously ),and then went left into the bus stop and simply fell off his bike.
Then to add insult to injury the stupid lemming shouldn’t even have been on that part of the road anyway having been directed off it by the cycle lane which he’d been happy enough to take advantage of when it suited him.Luckily for him the truck driver hadn’t just taken the idea of the cycleway provision for granted and moved over to the left at that point.In which case then the cyclist would have really known what taken down by a truck really means in the last few seconds of his life.
Piston broke:
I’m not getting involved in this too…
Paul,
I said earlier that I would have held back, but that’s probably down to being better experienced and I completely agree that the cycle lane design is ridiculous - hence why I am saying that we should work towards saving the lives of people who do not understand the roads that well - through training and better designed cycle lanes. Done it to death in this thread, but some people appear to think HGV drivers should be excused for all their inadequacies. As someone who has driven just about every type of HGV (long, short and wide - with the exception of fuel tankers… I’d say professional drivers should have much more expected/demanded of them - especially if what they are driving is a HGV/LGV/Bus etc.
I think I’ve said all I can now on this subject, if anyone else wishes to challenge me, please read what I have written already first.
Cheers
Have a good weekend everyone.
Dave
The councils should actually work towards saving the lives of cyclists by providing them with offroad provision and allowing them to use pavements wherever possible.Which seems ironic considering the circumstances of the example in question.In which it’s obvious that cyclists and their idiotic supporters like Boomerang Dave are just taking the zb in regards to the issue of clearance and keeping out of harm’s way wherever possible.
Carryfast:
In which it’s obvious that cyclists and their idiotic supporters like Boomerang Dave…
As usual, Geoffrey, you come out with pointless, inflammatory and insulting comments when you have exhausted your ‘normal’ arguments…
As usual, Geoffrey, this was a very interesting and well-debated thread until you gate-crashed the party
As usual, Geoffrey, I’m sure you’re giving yourself a hearty pat on the back…
Well done you
Well debated thread with comments by those like Boomerang Dave and his supporters you’re having a laugh.I’m guessing that the driver of the tipper,in the example in question,concerning the latest part of the ‘debate’,probably ( rightly ) wouldn’t see it yours,( or their ),way.
I’d just like to congratulate Chris Froome on winning the Tour de France. A true sporting hero, a fantastic ambassador for Britain, and er, oh yes, a cyclist!
EastAnglianTrucker:
I’d just like to congratulate Chris Froome on winning the Tour de France. A true sporting hero, a fantastic ambassador for Britain, and er, oh yes, a cyclist!
The difference being that’s a once per year race on closed roads.While the problem is his supporters then try to re enact all that every day of the week around trucks and buses and cars etc on roads open to traffic taking suicidal risks,so as not to slow down their ‘progress’,then blaming the drivers of those vehicles for those cyclists own stupidity.
While just watching the antics of many of those supporters makes it clear just how deranged the whole cycling scene in general can be.
mickyblue:
So your saying, the cyclist who has no reguards for his safety goes up the inside of a truck, very close to him and then get’s taken down seconds later. shouldn’t take some of the blame?
Cyclists are quick to cry when they overtaken very closely but are willing to undertake vehicles very close, cannot have it both ways
The cyclist wasn’t ‘taken down’ by the truck at all because if he had been he’d have been under the front wheels and/or rear wheels and no longer in this world.What acually happened was that he got upset with the amount of clearance,( the same amount of which he was happy enough with when he undertook the truck previously ),and then went left into the bus stop and simply fell off his bike.
Then to add insult to injury the stupid lemming shouldn’t even have been on that part of the road anyway having been directed off it by the cycle lane which he’d been happy enough to take advantage of when it suited him.Luckily for him the truck driver hadn’t just taken the idea of the cycleway provision for granted and moved over to the left at that point.In which case then the cyclist would have really known what taken down by a truck really means in the last few seconds of his life.
Curryfart do me a favour and go and take your meds
Stop repeating yourself in every bloody post.
So if he didn’t take the cyclist down then how the ■■■■ did he fall to the ground then? and bear in mind, what I mean by taken down is being hit by the truck.
mickyblue:
So your saying, the cyclist who has no reguards for his safety goes up the inside of a truck, very close to him and then get’s taken down seconds later. shouldn’t take some of the blame?
Cyclists are quick to cry when they overtaken very closely but are willing to undertake vehicles very close, cannot have it both ways
The cyclist wasn’t ‘taken down’ by the truck at all because if he had been he’d have been under the front wheels and/or rear wheels and no longer in this world.What acually happened was that he got upset with the amount of clearance,( the same amount of which he was happy enough with when he undertook the truck previously ),and then went left into the bus stop and simply fell off his bike.
Then to add insult to injury the stupid lemming shouldn’t even have been on that part of the road anyway having been directed off it by the cycle lane which he’d been happy enough to take advantage of when it suited him.Luckily for him the truck driver hadn’t just taken the idea of the cycleway provision for granted and moved over to the left at that point.In which case then the cyclist would have really known what taken down by a truck really means in the last few seconds of his life.
Curryfart do me a favour and go and take your meds
Stop repeating yourself in every bloody post.
So if he didn’t take the cyclist down then how the [zb] did he fall to the ground then? and bear in mind, what I mean by taken down is being hit by the truck.
Now reply with a repeated post
The way I see all your replies in my case is that you’re a troll so if the cap fits then wear it and in which case I’ll just do what others do and put you on ignore.Although not because I disagree with your opinion but because you’ve obviously got issues with anything which I say personally even to the point of trying to argue about my view on the subject when you’ve shown that you don’t agree with the cyclist’s actions either.
Meanwhile anyone with any sense can see that the cyclist in that video,shouldn’t have been in that position and because of that it was all just an issue of clearance,which was actually the same amount as which he’d selectively been happy with previously when he undertook the truck.Even Stevie Wonder could see that the idiot wasn’t hit by the truck at all.He was still on his bike and upright riding towards the bus stop where the idiot should have been in the first place on the cycle way provided he then seems to have mysteriously fell off his bike ( obviously just to make a bs point ) miles away from the road where the truck was when it actually passed him.If he had have been hit by that truck at any point when it was alongside him he wouldn’t have been alive to tell the story.Which seems to be confirmed by the fact that the cyclist doesn’t seem to have brought charges with the police against the truck driver as a hit and run in the case of leaving the scene of an accident.Probably not surprising being that the cyclist probably knew that any decent defence brief would have torn the prosecution in that case to pieces.
Or at least hopefully would.Because if not then there’s plenty of drivers out there who could find themselves at the wrong end of such a prosecution just because a cyclist takes offence at being overtaken with the same clearance as they’d been happy with then they undertook moments previously,on a stretch of road where they’d been diverted onto the pavement anyway,by the council,for their own safety,as in this case.Or in fact thakes offence for any reason whatsoever.Which in the case of the average raving Critical Mass supporting cyclist would be plenty.
As I said the cyclist should actually be thankful that the truck driver in question had the sense to not take the cycle way diversion for granted in just moving across to the nearside at the point where it diverged from the road without having supicions that the cyclist was probably stupid enough to still be there at that point.
As long as cyclists are on the road with motors they’ll get killed. I was down in Kent Saturday in my car, just off the A2 towards Canterbury. Took a slip road, single lane, decent width. Four cyclists (old enough to know better) riding single file close to the nearside, bit of an uphill so going quite slowly. Cross hatching on my right, plenty of room so moved over to give them a wide berth, started to overtake. When I’m about twenty yards behind, the one at the back swerved out to overtake the other three, didn’t look, just went. If I hadn’t given them plenty of room (and many drivers wouldn’t) I’d have had him. I can’t understand what they see in riding a bike on a busy “A” road anyway, but to swerve about without looking ? Mad.
Bernard
The way I see all your replies in my case is that you’re a troll so if the cap fits then wear it and in which case I’ll just do what others do and put you on ignore.Although not because I disagree with your opinion but because you’ve obviously got issues with anything which I say personally even to the point of trying to argue about my view on the subject when you’ve shown that you don’t agree with the cyclist’s actions either.
Troll■■?
You think I am a troll, I class myself as a ■■■■ taker rather then a troll, so please explain.
Yawn Curryfart, you need to get out more. “As others” also think you speak utter crap 80% of the time because you also disagree with anyone’s post who challenges your post, that’s if you catch my drift.
makes me laugh that you posted a opinion in relation to my post and once I have repaid my compliments you come back calling me a troll, well I am shocked. There’s me thinking your TNUK’s nerd
albion1938:
As long as cyclists are on the road with motors they’ll get killed. I was down in Kent Saturday in my car, just off the A2 towards Canterbury. Took a slip road, single lane, decent width. Four cyclists (old enough to know better) riding single file close to the nearside, bit of an uphill so going quite slowly. Cross hatching on my right, plenty of room so moved over to give them a wide berth, started to overtake. When I’m about twenty yards behind, the one at the back swerved out to overtake the other three, didn’t look, just went. If I hadn’t given them plenty of room (and many drivers wouldn’t) I’d have had him. I can’t understand what they see in riding a bike on a busy “A” road anyway, but to swerve about without looking ? Mad.
Bernard
Why do they also ride on a busy duel carriageway with vehicles going past at 70mph
Boomerang Dave:
The thing is - YOU DO NOT see the Dutch system being used everyday in Britain. That is my point.
With reference to the cyclist trapped between the bus and the pickup - in a Dutch style cycle lane, that would not have happened.
Look at this another way. Truck runs over a cyclist. Truck driver is arrested, charged with manslaughter - sent to prison - licence removed - out of prison - out of work.
That scenario cannot happen if the cyclist is in a Dutch design cycle lane. If the cycle lane is there - the trucker could easily produce a defence against any case brought against him/her.
What you have done is what I predicted and produced bad comparisons.
Don’t know about you, but he sort of put himself in that position by undertaking him whilst the truck was moving, but on the other hand, the driver should have seen him as the cyclist is now in front
he undertook the truck on the zig-zags - don’t overtake the nearest moving vehicle to the crossing, the truck was nearest. he didn’t complete the the manoeuvre in the cycle lane, so to me he undertook and i don’t think he made it far enough forward to come out of the blind spot.
don’t get me wrong, drivers should always be aware and looking for stuff, but you can’t cover 360° every second. if the driver had spotted him he should of held back, as i would’ve done if i’d spotted him, but then again, as a cyclist i wouldn’t of gone down the side of the truck like he did.
it’s a high risk strategy testing how aware / good random drivers are
Bikes are their own worst enemy,there should be a twenty foot exclusion zone round a truck for bikes, you would not get a small boat lording it around Portsmouth harbour telling aircraft carriers to get out the way.
Boomerang Dave:
The thing is - YOU DO NOT see the Dutch system being used everyday in Britain. That is my point.
With reference to the cyclist trapped between the bus and the pickup - in a Dutch style cycle lane, that would not have happened.
Look at this another way. Truck runs over a cyclist. Truck driver is arrested, charged with manslaughter - sent to prison - licence removed - out of prison - out of work.
That scenario cannot happen if the cyclist is in a Dutch design cycle lane. If the cycle lane is there - the trucker could easily produce a defence against any case brought against him/her.
What you have done is what I predicted and produced bad comparisons.
Don’t know about you, but he sort of put himself in that position by undertaking him whilst the truck was moving, but on the other hand, the driver should have seen him as the cyclist is now in front
he undertook the truck on the zig-zags - don’t overtake the nearest moving vehicle to the crossing, the truck was nearest. he didn’t complete the the manoeuvre in the cycle lane, so to me he undertook and i don’t think he made it far enough forward to come out of the blind spot.
don’t get me wrong, drivers should always be aware and looking for stuff, but you can’t cover 360° every second. if the driver had spotted him he should of held back, as i would’ve done if i’d spotted him, but then again, as a cyclist i wouldn’t of gone down the side of the truck like he did.
it’s a high risk strategy testing how aware / good random drivers are
