Well done West Mids!
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/late ... px?id=4942
Looking after cyclists
- Mr Cholmondeley-Warner
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:01 pm
- Location: Swindon
Re: Looking after cyclists
Hmmm. In a time of limited resources, is this the biggest priority on our roads. Perhaps it is in the WM but I would venture to suggest that many road users may have other concerns.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
Re: Looking after cyclists
From the article - "Between 2010 and 2014 there were 530 KSI crashes (killed or seriously injured) in the West Midlands involving bicycles; the vast majority (84 per cent) of those saw riders colliding with cars."
Being vulnerable, I think it's effort well spent - easy for us ADers to say "it's easy to cope with cyclists", but a lot of people need reminding.
Being vulnerable, I think it's effort well spent - easy for us ADers to say "it's easy to cope with cyclists", but a lot of people need reminding.
Re: Looking after cyclists
dvenman wrote:From the article - "Between 2010 and 2014 there were 530 KSI crashes (killed or seriously injured) in the West Midlands involving bicycles; the vast majority (84 per cent) of those saw riders colliding with cars."
Being vulnerable, I think it's effort well spent - easy for us ADers to say "it's easy to cope with cyclists", but a lot of people need reminding.
How many of those 530 were caused by overtaking too close?
I don't disagree that cyclists are vulnerable, I'm just wondering if it's the biggest priority, as there aren't enough resources to deal with everything. As I say, perhaps it's a lot to do with location. Around here, many would be upset to see this amount of time and effort spent on this particular issue, while leaving others not dealt with.
- GTR1400MAN
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:23 pm
Re: Looking after cyclists
Then having overtaken them safely at the given distance they you will ride between you and the kerb as you are queuing to turn left with an indicator on!
I always do my best to give cyclists plenty of room but they really don't do their case any good by flouting common sense safety themselves.
I always do my best to give cyclists plenty of room but they really don't do their case any good by flouting common sense safety themselves.
Mike Roberts - Now riding a Triumph Explorer XRT. My username comes from my 50K miles on a Kawasaki 1400GTR, after many years on Hondas of various shapes and styles. - https://tinyurl.com/mikerobertsonyoutube
- Mr Cholmondeley-Warner
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:01 pm
- Location: Swindon
Re: Looking after cyclists
Yes, there are bad cyclists.
Yes, there may be other priorities (not sure I can think what's higher on the list except probably drink / drug driving, but this is just one campaign, they didn't say this is all they're doing).
I just thought it was worthy of note.
Yes, there may be other priorities (not sure I can think what's higher on the list except probably drink / drug driving, but this is just one campaign, they didn't say this is all they're doing).
I just thought it was worthy of note.
Nick
- GTR1400MAN
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:23 pm
Re: Looking after cyclists
I liked this one that did the rounds recently on Facebook. Thought it made the point quite well.
"If you are a driver who considers to pass a cyclist by less than one meter is safe, why not try to stand past the yellow line while a train is passing?"
"If you are a driver who considers to pass a cyclist by less than one meter is safe, why not try to stand past the yellow line while a train is passing?"
Mike Roberts - Now riding a Triumph Explorer XRT. My username comes from my 50K miles on a Kawasaki 1400GTR, after many years on Hondas of various shapes and styles. - https://tinyurl.com/mikerobertsonyoutube
Re: Looking after cyclists
that picture raises a valid question...
but... the difference between the affect that a train at speed has on a standing human (could be a small child) is different from a car and bike both travelling in the same direction with probably at maximum a 50 mph speed differential (v. train which is considerably more and the size and shape of the train cause a different air movement)
the concept of challenging drivers is a good one - however the law deliberately doesn't give precise distances because that would not be appropriate - it is guidance... some cyclists claim that the wording means at least the width of a car away (probably excessive), realistically it should be to give as much space as you would in overtaking a car (so 1.5m is probably good) - however it depends, if I was driving up the A38 through the centre of Birmingham, there may be points when the distance between cyclist and car could safely be less depending on speed etc.
the question though I would like to ask lots of drivers around here is:
- would you overtake the car in front of you on a country road if a cyclist was coming the other way - most wouldn't
- if not why do you insist on overtaking cyclists when there is a car coming the other way - exactly the same, 2 cars and a bike across the road, and no it is not safe - that is why I move to the crown of the road to stop you - because otherwise you are going so close to the cyclist you are likely to hit them - and we are both doing c. 60mph - really not safe...
for me that is the biggest issue, cars being impatient behind bicycles on a country road - the number who overtake on blind corners is ridiculous - I had one ahead of me last week who started to do that, until I flashed my lights and sounded my horn - I had spotted the very large tractor and plough coming around the corner, having seen it earlier over the hedge - there is no way that they wouldn't have collided... very scary (I was virtually stopped some distance back at this point!).
So generally I approve of this scheme - as long as it is done sensibly then it is a good thing - if it is all about cars = bad / cyclists = good, then I would not be so happy - and hopefully in parallel they might like to deal with the cyclists who jump lights / squash themselves under arctics turning left etc.
Alasdair
but... the difference between the affect that a train at speed has on a standing human (could be a small child) is different from a car and bike both travelling in the same direction with probably at maximum a 50 mph speed differential (v. train which is considerably more and the size and shape of the train cause a different air movement)
the concept of challenging drivers is a good one - however the law deliberately doesn't give precise distances because that would not be appropriate - it is guidance... some cyclists claim that the wording means at least the width of a car away (probably excessive), realistically it should be to give as much space as you would in overtaking a car (so 1.5m is probably good) - however it depends, if I was driving up the A38 through the centre of Birmingham, there may be points when the distance between cyclist and car could safely be less depending on speed etc.
the question though I would like to ask lots of drivers around here is:
- would you overtake the car in front of you on a country road if a cyclist was coming the other way - most wouldn't
- if not why do you insist on overtaking cyclists when there is a car coming the other way - exactly the same, 2 cars and a bike across the road, and no it is not safe - that is why I move to the crown of the road to stop you - because otherwise you are going so close to the cyclist you are likely to hit them - and we are both doing c. 60mph - really not safe...
for me that is the biggest issue, cars being impatient behind bicycles on a country road - the number who overtake on blind corners is ridiculous - I had one ahead of me last week who started to do that, until I flashed my lights and sounded my horn - I had spotted the very large tractor and plough coming around the corner, having seen it earlier over the hedge - there is no way that they wouldn't have collided... very scary (I was virtually stopped some distance back at this point!).
So generally I approve of this scheme - as long as it is done sensibly then it is a good thing - if it is all about cars = bad / cyclists = good, then I would not be so happy - and hopefully in parallel they might like to deal with the cyclists who jump lights / squash themselves under arctics turning left etc.
Alasdair
- GTR1400MAN
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:23 pm
Re: Looking after cyclists
The cars coming towards you overtaking a cyclist is something we always cover with m/c associates. If you think it is bad for you as a car driver then it is horrendous on a motorbike. The car/lorry/van coming towards you WILL overtake the cycle and you need to be ready for it. Sometimes commanding your piece of the road works but most of the time you have to yield and end up with a motorcycle car cycle sandwich!
Mike Roberts - Now riding a Triumph Explorer XRT. My username comes from my 50K miles on a Kawasaki 1400GTR, after many years on Hondas of various shapes and styles. - https://tinyurl.com/mikerobertsonyoutube
Re: Looking after cyclists
GTR1400MAN wrote:The cars coming towards you overtaking a cyclist is something we always cover with m/c associates. If you think it is bad for you as a car driver then it is horrendous on a motorbike. The car/lorry/van coming towards you WILL overtake the cycle and you need to be ready for it. Sometimes commanding your piece of the road works but most of the time you have to yield and end up with a motorcycle car cycle sandwich!
there should be a little bit more room though than 2 cars!
but agree, there is little consideration for bikers
Alasdair
Return to “Advanced Driving - Cars”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests