and please use their services
Cyclists - what's with the head cams?
- Thread starter JonathanRyan
- Start date
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
It's been edited. I mean come on, what cyclist stops at red lights...
That's how I knew it wasn't filmed in Kent
Mattyd
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 364
- Edit My Images
- No
On a normal road it wouldn't be a problem. At the traffic lights, directly behind the cyclist setting off it is.
Part of overtaking correctly (as specified in the highway code) is knowing the path is clear, and being patient/careful around vulnerable road users. I don't believe the van driver was.
And yet it serves cyclists well year on year. And I have yet to have a close pass when I take primary. Had plenty when I hugged the curb though.
Look up "Door zone" too. its another reason to take primary.
Of course none of that advice (sanctioned by motoring/cycling groups as well as the government, and has been taught for about 30 years now) would be needed if motorists where more patient. But its very much a by product of the general road attitude we have.
BTW - Dark clothing on daylight is fine and wont hold up as an excuse if a motorist hits a cyclist or a pedestrian.
Past that should they be more illuminated? Maybe (but that's a whole other discussion).
They do not apply sorry. There are too many variables on the road, and one road users experiences are not a template for others.
example - I can cycle at 30+mph, and regularly cycle very long distances, cover around 5-8k miles a year. My experiences on the road as a cyclist are miles away from say my mother who cycles to the shop, or my wife who cycles to work and back, or even my sons who one day might cycle to school.
I would ask that all road users act responsibly. That would include both of the people in that vid to some degree (I very critical of both btw)
But, What if anything would you do if you felt someone was not "treating the road and other users with respect and consideration"?
And how do you define considerate?
Not hard to do for you and me, not always easy todo for everyone. Ive walked all my life, I still occasionally slip on ice, or twist my ankle.....Which leads me to this.....
1st off...For the most part they are not causing any danger at all. If they wobble/hit a pothole and fall in front of a car and get hit the 1st thing the police will ask is was the motorist following the highway code and giving the cyclist space, where they speeding, where they paying attention, and did they see the cyclist (if not why not)?
2nd point... In legal terms the road is exactly like the pavement in the respect that everyone (from 8-80) has a legal right to use it. Motorists use it by license as its those who have the power to harm*, and that license can be revoked. And as a result have to (legally speaking) put up with anyone who chooses to cycle (or ride a horse, or play in the street etc). That's not to say everyone else is free to act like idiots at motorists expense, common sense is important. But a wobbly old man, or a wobbly child have more rights, and more of a right to use the road than a licensed motorist.
I appreciate you may not like that, but that is the way it is, and its was like that when you and I chose to take driving lessons.
...this is one of the most in depth conversations about cycling ive ever had...and on a photography forum of all places
*Should just stipulate than everyone on the road has to potential to harm, not just motorists. Its not my intention to paint cyclists as saints and motorists as idiots. I see d******ds on both sides.
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
On a normal road it wouldn't be a problem. At the traffic lights, directly behind the cyclist setting off it is.
Part of overtaking correctly (as specified in the highway code) is knowing the path is clear, and being patient/careful around vulnerable road users. I don't believe the van driver was.
And yet it serves cyclists well year on year. And I have yet to have a close pass when I take primary. Had plenty when I hugged the curb though.
Look up "Door zone" too. its another reason to take primary.
Of course none of that advice (sanctioned by motoring/cycling groups as well as the government, and has been taught for about 30 years now) would be needed if motorists where more patient. But its very much a by product of the general road attitude we have.
BTW - Dark clothing on daylight is fine and wont hold up as an excuse if a motorist hits a cyclist or a pedestrian.
Past that should they be more illuminated? Maybe (but that's a whole other discussion).
They do not apply sorry. There are too many variables on the road, and one road users experiences are not a template for others.
example - I can cycle at 30+mph, and regularly cycle very long distances, cover around 5-8k miles a year. My experiences on the road as a cyclist are miles away from say my mother who cycles to the shop, or my wife who cycles to work and back, or even my sons who one day might cycle to school.
I would ask that all road users act responsibly. That would include both of the people in that vid to some degree (I very critical of both btw)
But, What if anything would you do if you felt someone was not "treating the road and other users with respect and consideration"?
And how do you define considerate?
Not hard to do for you and me, not always easy todo for everyone. Ive walked all my life, I still occasionally slip on ice, or twist my ankle.....Which leads me to this.....
1st off...For the most part they are not causing any danger at all. If they wobble/hit a pothole and fall in front of a car and get hit the 1st thing the police will ask is was the motorist following the highway code and giving the cyclist space, where they speeding, where they paying attention, and did they see the cyclist (if not why not)?
2nd point... In legal terms the road is exactly like the pavement in the respect that everyone (from 8-80) has a legal right to use it. Motorists use it by license as its those who have the power to harm*, and that license can be revoked. And as a result have to (legally speaking) put up with anyone who chooses to cycle (or ride a horse, or play in the street etc). That's not to say everyone else is free to act like idiots at motorists expense, common sense is important. But a wobbly old man, or a wobbly child have more rights, and more of a right to use the road than a licensed motorist.
I appreciate you may not like that, but that is the way it is, and its was like that when you and I chose to take driving lessons.
...this is one of the most in depth conversations about cycling ive ever had...and on a photography forum of all places
*Should just stipulate than everyone on the road has to potential to harm, not just motorists. Its not my intention to paint cyclists as saints and motorists as idiots. I see d******ds on both sides.
You do realise point 2 is, well, wrong...yes?
Mattyd
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 364
- Edit My Images
- No
neil_g
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 30,364
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm sure the video showed the cyclist in the middle of the road when he passed?
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
Well...8 to 80?
Also you're suggesting that it's the right of any kid to be larking around on the road, and even if it were, then that right supercedes the rights of the motorist?
And all this peppered with "legal terms", "legal rights", and "legally speaking".
Craig1912
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,205
- Edit My Images
- Yes
just watched it again- the van driver did not do anything wrong - he was miles away from the cyclist and gave more than enough room. This sort of cyclist is one that gives them a bad rep and anyone that defends him does likewise.
Pathetic
Pathetic
POAH
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,882
- Edit My Images
- No
except to over take when not safe to do so. he'd not have overtaken a motorcycle. driver is a knobend for not waiting a few more seconds and cyclist is a knobend for his reaction.
omens
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,082
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Only bothered watching the first half. If there was adequate room, I may well have overtaken the cyclist.
In my eyes, the cyclist lost all credibility when he flipped the bird.
White van men cannot be compared to normal drivers. They are in a subspecies of their own. They are generally regarded as the worst drivers and there is a reason for this.
In my eyes, the cyclist lost all credibility when he flipped the bird.
White van men cannot be compared to normal drivers. They are in a subspecies of their own. They are generally regarded as the worst drivers and there is a reason for this.
neil_g
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 30,364
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- No
Yup this.
The Highway Code suggests to treat a bike (motor or motor less) to be the same size as a car. There wasn't enough room to meet those requirements. The cyclist shouldn't have reacted that way and the van driver should not have tried to retaliate (if anything that makes the van driver 2-1 up in the nob stakes).
Mattyd
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 364
- Edit My Images
- No
Children have a right to use the road - they do so every day. And so to do 80 year olds. There are no age restrictions on road use, only age restrictions to drive a car. Im happy to agree its silly to let an 8 year old play in the road, and in many cases a judge would agree, but that's not the point im making.
England also has no jaywalking laws. If it did this conversation would be a touch different
But we do have motorways which pedestrians/cyclists etc have no right to use.Partly yes and partly no
Part of using the road for all road users is common sense.
In situations where you are driving in a built up area you should expect people, kids and all sorts, it is after all the motorists in charge of a load of metal. That does not mean that someone can throw themselves under a car (I did mention common sense
) but it does mean they when interacting with pedestrians they always take priority, the highway code is much more weighted in their favor over that of a motorist. And even if they are being total idiots they still take priority.And all this peppered with "legal terms", "legal rights", and "legally speaking".
Well, Im no lawyer. So maybe I was a but free and easy with legal "terms, rights etc". But my overall point still stands. Pedestrians have a right to the road, motorists use it by license.
Last edited:
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Totally agree. I've been cycling since I could walk. And I just can't believe the dangerous manoeuvres I see other cyclist make in the uk and how unstable many seem. Swerving, avoiding man hole covers etc. although the I have some sympathy for the later if you are on a road racer. However I grew up with that being a specific use bicycle.
Anyway many car drivers here in the uk seen really not sure how to act around bicycles either. Some never overtake and when they do seem to give way more than required space. Whilst others skim them in passing on a blind bend.
I really don't enjoy cycling on uk roads. However can understand why many wear a camera. Funnily enough they are exactly the reason why I installed one in my car and a dual camera one in our family car. Three near misses in two days drove me to that.
Anyway the big winners are the camera companies.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No it doesn't. It says motorists should leave the same amount of room between themselves and a cyclist as they would a car. This is what the van driver did.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I used to cycle 5k+miles a year so perhaps your opinions and experiences are just as invalid then.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Exactly. Plenty of space. Guidelines suggest 3ft-1m, considering how swirly many uk cyclists are I tend to leave a pot hole size space or arms length so they can indicate easily.
neil_g
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 30,364
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- No
the diagram suggests different. but hey everyones an expert right?
fwiw the gap in the video while insufficient i don't think its worth of the cyclist getting too much of the hump. having been clipped by several wing mirrors in the past ive had closer
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As for cyclists swerving to avoid potholes, or drain grates etc. I always looked ahead when cycling, same as when driving, if I saw something I needed to cycle around, I had the decency to signal and glance behind me, giving drivers enough warning. If cyclists can't do that then perhaps it is about time they were licensed, took eyesight tests, and could be barred from the road for their own and everyone else's safety.
neil_g
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 30,364
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- No
although that IS part of the HWC, to allow cyclists enough room to swerve around dangers.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
It is not a case of everyone being an experts. The words are simply exact as they have been stated. However that is on gov.uk. I mean if you call that cynically that everyone is an expert, where there you go. I bet the next accusation will be that anyone not agreeing with you is trolling. :God:the diagram suggests different. but hey everyones an expert right?
fwiw the gap in the video while insufficient i don't think its worth of the cyclist getting too much of the hump. having been clipped by several wing mirrors in the past ive had closer
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
I tend to go more in towards the curb opposed to out in the path of other road users.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Which the van driver did. Anymore room and a motorist travelling in the opposite direction would have to pull off the road everytime they saw an approaching cyclist. I make the van driver right when he shouted at the cyclist to learn how to ride a bike.
4wd
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,224
- Name
- North York Moors
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The roadworks only take up half the lane, there is ample space to cycle without trying to block a swift overtake.
It's his generally aggressive manner that is disturbing, check almost any of his other cycling uploads, some are hilarious.
It's his generally aggressive manner that is disturbing, check almost any of his other cycling uploads, some are hilarious.
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
3ft - 1m is a difference of just 8.5cm, a distance we can all judge on the move, right?
neil_g
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 30,364
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- No
disagree. if the rider had lost his balance/chain slipped/hit diesel on the road and fallen over then he'd have been under the wheels.
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
I agree. Still a top tit though for repeatedly stopping to have a go just because he got the finger.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If possible so did I, I also adjusted my speed and prepared myself for any eventuality, but I also tried to give the drivers of cars, vans and lorries enough of a warning I was about to move out into the road further. I never wore a helmet, and I was well aware about my vulnerability. Perhaps cyclists wearing helmets develop a false sense of invincibility and think they are safe to do as they please.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not if he road on the correct side of the road where he had plenty of room. Read the rest of the post you quoted about oncoming traffic. The van driver gave more room than some of those drivers had. Some roads I've cycled approaching cars would never be able to give me that much room and I wouldn't expect a following car to stay behind me. I always had the decency to wave them through.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Leave the bike at home though.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
I mean it from a perspective of which unit of measure system you find easier3ft - 1m is a difference of just 8.5cm, a distance we can all judge on the move, right?
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Doesn't have to be in my opinion. Why put yourself in unnecessary danger and annoy other road users at it. I would argue it is common courtesy and sense. You drive to the left and leave plenty of space for others to overtake.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I reckon so, I can see uneven panel gaps on cars whilst I'm driving and that can be down to 1mm. But then I'm used to looking at such fine detail.3ft - 1m is a difference of just 8.5cm, a distance we can all judge on the move, right?
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
I reckon so, I can see uneven panel gaps on cars whilst I'm driving and that can be down to 1mm. But then I'm used to looking at such fine detail.
If you say so
Mattyd
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 364
- Edit My Images
- No
In most of those cases I would argue the issue is with you as a motorist (no offence - its a very very common view). Cyclists have been "wobbling" and avoiding obstacles on the road since the invention of the bike and the tarmacked road. The highway code covers this issue and in accordance with that you should expect it and anticipate it....It shouldn't come as a surprise.
Other obstacles worth a mention - potholes, oil, and painted wet lines, people opening car doors (I think getting "doored" results in something like 10% of cycling deaths each year). All have the potential to off a cyclist in a blink of an eye.
Reckless cyclists on the other hand a another matter all together.
Tell me about it, its the primary reason cyclists cycle defensively. Which is great for the fit and the young, sucks for everyone else.
Interesting fact - in London women cyclists are statistically much more likely to be killed than their male opposites. - One theory is males are more aggressive, fitter, and they have the strength to keep up with traffic.. Women on the other hand are too cautious, too defensive.
True. The wording sucks (like quite a lot of the highway code in fact). Here's a pic from the Highway code manual to illustrate a good overtake.
I firmly believe though - overtaking a cyclist though road works, at traffic lights, with limited space would fail you on a driving test. If anyone here can hand on heart say they would do the same thing while they have a driving examiner sitting right next to them I would be surprised.
I used to cycle 5k+miles a year so perhaps your opinions and experiences are just as invalid then.
I base my opinions not on me, but on the most vulnerable. Kids and OAPs and the like.
Only if you overtook badly. Overtake when there's a clear gap, like you would a car.
That's correct. Cyclists have as much right to cycle down the center of the road as motorists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation its a thing.
Small fact about helmets - Not proven to save lives. Lots of opinion that they do, and lots that they don't, but no hard facts either way. Also....Only tested to collision speeds of 12mph.
I do wear one, but Im of the opinion that its next to useless, but better safe than sorry.... I think that's a good attitude to have.
I would have taken primary though that set of lights.
The mistakes the cyclist made where not to position himself correctly from the start. Make your intentions clear, leave no room for confusion - he could have even indicated to the right. Past the road works I would pull over to the left where it would be safe for the van to proceed. No major shakes, 10 seconds added to the van drivers journey.
Remember though don't get bullied into cycling in the gutter. Way to many cyclists end up in hospital (or worse) doing exactly this. Bikability recommends cycling a meter away from the gutter.
I think the point worth making here is yes the cyclist has every right todo it. And I advocate that right, but only in as much as todo it when the cyclists safety requires. There are many reasons to take primary, but many of those reasons are not always obvious to the motorist.
.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
From that photo there is no reason for the cyclist to be that far out from the side of the road. The motorist has given excessive room, a lot more than he would give when overtaking another car, so not necessary. You say cyclists have as much right to cycle down the centre of the road yet where do they place cycle lanes in the road? By the kerb and if there was a cycle lane painted in the road in the highway code photo the cyclist would be right on the edge or over demarcation line. I'd like to hear more about why you feel that cyclists have a right and should take a primary position, so far from the side of the road and any likely hazard and just becoming a hazard themselves. I reiterate, there was no reason for this cyclist or any other to have been as far from the cones at the road works and even at the distance he was the van driver overtook with more than enough clearance and thus did so safely.Here's a pic from the Highway code manual to illustrate a good overtake.
I firmly believe though - overtaking a cyclist though road works, at traffic lights, with limited space would fail you on a driving test. If anyone here can hand on heart say they would do the same thing while they have a driving examiner sitting right next to them I would be surprised.
That's correct. Cyclists have as much right to cycle down the center of the road as motorists.
I think the point worth making here is yes the cyclist has every right todo it. And I advocate that right, but only in as much as todo it when the cyclists safety requires. There are many reasons to take primary, but many of those reasons are not always obvious to the motorist.
.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
I agree with many point and also disagree with many
I just wonder why this is all such an issue in the UK opposed to other countries where people are much more in harmony on the road. Sure cyclist have the right absolutely, doesn't mean they have to exercise it. Likewise doesn't mean that when you are properly on the left you should view yourself as a victim and be bullied.
To me it is these inflated views of self importance and entitlement on both sides that cause these issues in the first place.
I just wonder why this is all such an issue in the UK opposed to other countries where people are much more in harmony on the road. Sure cyclist have the right absolutely, doesn't mean they have to exercise it. Likewise doesn't mean that when you are properly on the left you should view yourself as a victim and be bullied.
To me it is these inflated views of self importance and entitlement on both sides that cause these issues in the first place.