Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

site_owner · 14-08-2018 11:30pm

Technophobe wrote: »

Ignore the saddle bag..bad angle selected..

this lad wasnt giving me much space!

His outside wheel barely crossed the center line, that's ****ing mad considering the size of that thing

stopped_clock · 15-08-2018 12:10am

Bus, yesterday morning. Probably looks worse in the video. I think someone hailed the bus at the last minute so I don't think he was originally planning on pulling in at the stop.

ezgif.com-video-to-gif_zpsif4cft0j.gif

Duckjob · 15-08-2018 9:20am

Deleted User wrote: »

Maddening considering the nice pass the Nissan made right afterwards.

Also a textbook demonstration of the complete f**king lack of ability of a certain subset of Irish drivers to understand the most basic tenet of driving safely - Slow down and react to hazards.

I find it quite seriously disturbing that for drivers such like this, any sense of responsibility to other users safety is trumped by the need to "show those bloody cyclists"

Hungrycol · 15-08-2018 11:29am

Stopped on the path to cross the road (I took the bus in y'day) yesterday morning at the East Link Bridge and the two elderly tourists, who just stepped off a cruise boat that had docked, had a cyclist shout at them to get off the path so he could cycle on it across the bridge. I was incredulous and told him to use the bloody road :mad:. Cyclists do themselves no favours and I was embarrassed as a fellow cyclist but was perambulating that day.

mr spuckler · 15-08-2018 11:36am

Hungrycol wrote: »

Stopped on the path to cross the road (I took the bus in y'day) yesterday morning at the East Link Bridge and the two elderly tourists, who just stepped off a cruise boat that had docked, had a cyclist shout at them to get off the path so he could cycle on it across the bridge. I was incredulous and told him to use the bloody road :mad:. Cyclists do themselves no favours and I was embarrassed as a fellow cyclist but was perambulating that day.

what you meant to say was that this particular cyclist was a d1ck.

AndrewJRenko · 15-08-2018 11:43am

Hungrycol wrote: »

I was embarrassed as a fellow cyclist but was perambulating that day.

Do you get embarrassed as a fellow motorist when you see dickish driving on the road?

Hungrycol · 15-08-2018 11:48am

mr spuckler wrote: »

what you meant to say was that this particular cyclist was a d1ck.

Haa haa

. Yes, he is likely a d1ck off the bike, in a car, on the bus, in the office, etc, etc. Pity he tried to push us off the path on his chosen mode of transport that day so he could be on his way... on the footpad.

Hungrycol · 15-08-2018 11:53am

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you get embarrassed as a fellow motorist when you see dickish driving on the road?

In front of tourists 5 minutes in the country and making their first impressions then yes probably.

Ever got a taxi from a foreign airport who was a crazy driver and thought afterwards that all taxi drivers in that country are mad? I know I have. Is that wrong, yes.

ganmo · 15-08-2018 11:58am

site_owner wrote: »

His outside wheel barely crossed the center line, that's ****ing mad considering the size of that thing

look at his numberplate in relation to the white line in the still preview of the video, hes more than 'barely crossed the line' IMO

this is why the 1.5m law fell down

site_owner · 15-08-2018 12:29pm

ganmo wrote: »

look at his numberplate in relation to the white line in the still preview of the video, hes more than 'barely crossed the line' IMO

this is why the 1.5m law fell down

The wheel is the only part of the vehicle in contact with the ground, the rest is perspective. Compare truck license plate to the car license plate and position is massively different. The passenger side wheel should be near the white line to be 2.1m from the kerb on that road

ganmo · 15-08-2018 12:47pm

site_owner wrote: »

The wheel is the only part of the vehicle in contact with the ground, the rest is perspective. Compare truck license plate to the car license plate and position is massively different. The passenger side wheel should be near the white line to be 2.1m from the kerb on that road

in what way? distance from the front wheel?
where is 2.1m coming from?

site_owner · 15-08-2018 1:01pm

ganmo wrote: »

in what way? distance from the front wheel?
where is 2.1m coming from?

2.1m is 1.5m plus the 60cm that police often talk about.
its the bare minimum, and doesn't include handlebar length on the outside or actual real world situations

that truck is about 2m in width
taking a screenshot of where it appears to be further across the road, which is not where it is for most of the pass. drawing a line outside wheel edge to insite wheel edge it looks like about 10-15% of the truck is over the line, so 20-30cm

the angle and lens mess it about, so i think it may be closer to 30% but thats still 60cm over the line and 140cm on this side
on a 3m lane, which i dont think this is, it leaves only 160cm max for the cyclist

barrymanilow · 15-08-2018 1:54pm

A Misses Bucket(Bouqet) Type older Lady with a wide brimmed hat in a toyota Yaris nearly cut my young life short this morning .

Car in front of her was going right and so had moved in over center line a little so she decided to go left around it instead of waiting for it to turn off .

Didn't check her left hand mirror so this manouver took her right in on top of the "Bicycle lane " ( browny red strip of paint) that I was cycling in on next to her .

Luckily I was watching so had enough time to see it coming and could brake swerve and bail off onto footpath .

Miss Bucket carried on up the road unaware of the clatter I'd just barely avoided.

ganmo · 15-08-2018 2:06pm

ahh

vs

cycling-close-pass-mats_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqwD2sfO9joeQ6RY-qlTATNPfOUr7QrH2jsMvk-HZYugQ.jpg?imwidth=450

Ray Bloody Purchase · 15-08-2018 2:19pm

It should be 1.5m at all times. It's only confusing the issue having two different widths.

site_owner · 15-08-2018 2:22pm

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

It should be 1.5m at all times. It's only confusing the issue having two different widths.

agreed. by the time the motorist has opened the calculator app on their phone they'll already have hit the cyclist.

i think it should be simpler, overtake by fully moving the car to the opposite lane.

marvin80 · 16-08-2018 9:14am

marvin80 wrote: »

This sh*t happens the whole time in Dublin (at least) - cars/trucks/buses flying along and go through lights as they turn red and like that bus there a little afterwards as well - stand at any junction at any time and you'll see it happen consistently.

This is very reckless and dangerous but apparently cyclists breaking lights is far more of an issue.
Furthermore, any cyclist breaking a red light will check it's safe to do so, consequently not endangering peoples lives (not condoning breaking red lights).

(rant over!)

Saw a ridiculous example of this near Custom House this morning. Light turns red but cars kept streaming through. So much so that one car got stuck on the junction blocking cars, buses and cyclists that had right of way. After a few seconds he moved on.
Funnily enough the car behind him at the light was going to follow but had second thoughts and jammed on the brakes - stopped past the white line but fortunately didn't block traffic.

What Username Guidelines · 16-08-2018 9:19am

At christchurch this morning waiting for light to head down the hill to the Liffey, as usual lights go red for cars coming from left and a good few plough on through. Last guy was properly taking the p*ss. Light goes green for us before he even passes his stop line. I was going straight but the cyclist next to me was going right towards Dame Street and the car and cyclist ended up in a standoff in the middle of the junction.

Bloody Cyclists, eh.

Seth Brundle · 16-08-2018 9:30am

Motorist was completely in the wrong but cyclist shouldn't have left if the road wasn't clear (green light means you can proceed if it's safe to do so)

magicbastarder · 16-08-2018 9:47am

Light goes green for us before he even passes his stop line

the light went green, and the other motorist hadn't even entered the junction - so it was clear (unless some other cars had not exited fully)

AndrewJRenko · 16-08-2018 9:48am

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

At christchurch this morning waiting for light to head down the hill to the Liffey, as usual lights go red for cars coming from left and a good few plough on through. Last guy was properly taking the p*ss. Light goes green for us before he even passes his stop line. I was going straight but the cyclist next to me was going right towards Dame Street and the car and cyclist ended up in a standoff in the middle of the junction.

Bloody Cyclists, eh.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Motorist was completely in the wrong but cyclist shouldn't have left if the road wasn't clear (green light means you can proceed if it's safe to do so)

There's a good chance that the 'standoff' situation will stick in the mind of the motorist, especially when he comes to that junction again, and the light goes amber as he approaches. It creates a deterrent to doing the same thing again.

hesker · 16-08-2018 10:43am

site_owner wrote: »

agreed. by the time the motorist has opened the calculator app on their phone they'll already have hit the cyclist.

i think it should be simpler, overtake by fully moving the car to the opposite lane.

I think it has to be distance to cyclist. Some roads don’t have lane markings or white lines in the middle. Also cyclist could be positioned to the extreme right of a lane in some circumstances

site_owner · 16-08-2018 10:54am

hesker wrote: »

I think it has to be distance to cyclist. Some roads don’t have lane markings or white lines in the middle. Also cyclist could be positioned to the extreme right of a lane in some circumstances

from a legal point of view i'm sure they need a measurable distance. i mean from a safety point of view.

and in both situations you have described there, i don't think the car should be overtaking anyway.

saw this visual this morning and thought it was good. i dont know why they tried to confus it with multiple passing distances tho

'68 Fastback · 16-08-2018 11:33am

site_owner wrote: »

from a legal point of view i'm sure they need a measurable distance. i mean from a safety point of view.

and in both situations you have described there, i don't think the car should be overtaking anyway.

saw this visual this morning and thought it was good. i dont know why they tried to confus it with multiple passing distances tho

After seeing that I think I could fill a near miss thread all on my own.

16-08-2018 11:33am

Some quality balancing there.

Duckjob · 16-08-2018 12:20pm

site_owner wrote: »

from a legal point of view i'm sure they need a measurable distance. i mean from a safety point of view.

and in both situations you have described there, i don't think the car should be overtaking anyway.

saw this visual this morning and thought it was good. i dont know why they tried to confus it with multiple passing distances tho

I'm not a fan of the portrayal of the cyclist position on the road in that image - it perpetuates the idea that the cyclist belongs at the side of the road.

For a car to overtake safely there the opposite side needs to be clear from oncoming traffic anyway, so a responsible motorist has the full width of the road with which to pass safely. It makes sense then, for the cyclist to take some space on the left for comfort and safety. It's nuances of safe road use like this that the RSA should be picking up and educating on.

Personally on a road like that i'd be riding somewhere between the left and middle of the 50/80 arrows, and probably nearer the middle of the speed signs, in order to have the comfort/escape space on my left when the inevitable gob****e overtake happens.

Edit; just noticed it looks like there's a footpath on the other side, in which case the road is narrower than I thought, so I would probably ride on the left side of the arrows. I still think though the rider isn't giving himself quite much space to deal with gob****e overtakes. It looks like there's about 1.5 metres between the car and the opposite kerb.

The Kop · 16-08-2018 12:23pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you get embarrassed as a fellow motorist when you see dickish driving on the road?

Still obsessed with motorists I see.

Danjamin1 · 16-08-2018 12:36pm

The Kop wrote: »

Still obsessed with motorists I see.

Is your Boards account set up purely to stalk AndrewJRenko? I've yet to see you actually make a point on Boards.

Corca Baiscinn · 16-08-2018 9:27pm

Duckjob wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the portrayal of the cyclist position on the road in that image - it perpetuates the idea that the cyclist belongs at the side of the road.

Personally on a road like that i'd be riding somewhere between the left and middle of the 50/80 arrows, and probably nearer the middle of the speed signs, in order to have the comfort/escape space on my left when the inevitable gob****e overtake happens..

I think you're reading too umch into the position of the rider. The demo is designed to educate drivers re what 1.5 metres looks like and how the car needs to be at least partially over on the opposite side. ( I take your point that in that case it may as well be fully over the white line) . For the purpose of the demo the rider is taking a "normal" riding position, ie about .75 metres out from the kerb. . The positioning of the rider here doesnt imply anything about the road positioning he should adopt when he feels the need to deter dangerous overtakes. In that case the driver would need to hang back and not overtake until safe to do so.

Corca Baiscinn · 16-08-2018 9:44pm

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

It should be 1.5m at all times. It's only confusing the issue having two different widths.

The idea was adapted from practice in other countries with a MPDL as it was felt that at slower speeds one could go a bit closer without intimidating the cyclist. However, it looks like the plan has hit the rocks in any case as the AG has advised that it's not going to be possible to legislate for a defined overtaking distance at all as it's too open to legal challenge. Mind you it's in effect in 47 jusrsdictions worldwide but we seem to need an Irish solution. Instead DTTAS has proposed a new "dangerous overtaking of cyclists" law which wont specify any particular distance. AG still has to give his view on this but Phil Skelton is taking heart from the fact that West Midlands Police have been very successful with their safe passing initiatives which have led to a reduction in cyclist fatalities and this has been done without a specific UK MPDL. He feels Garda buy-in, continued awareness raising via RSA ads etc and changes in driver training combined might get us somewhere.

I read all this last night on his latest blog. Wont work without a sea-change in garda attitudes to cyclist safety. Think the Near-Miss thread wil be around for a while yet, though in fairess not all incidents involve dangerous overtaking

Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Comments