Yeah, almost all the previous times I've reported someone using their phone, the excuse has been "It's not clear it's a phone". I wasn't expecting this new, awful excuse...
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
Today's rubbish driving...
(11339 posts)- Started 13 years ago by Stepdoh
- Latest reply from neddie
- This topic is
sticky
-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
I would have said my positioning here was just about right, but clearly I need to be further right.
Posted 5 years ago # -
.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Gah. Northbound.
@IWRATS - Hearing that a bus lane camera will be installed soon for the northbound lane of Liberton Road too.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Dear Driver,
Shouting "Get on the [Rule 2] pavement" and revving your engine whilst you tailgate me along a narrow residential street will not make me cycle faster. Indeed, I am likely to slow down.
Regards,
FrenchyPosted 5 years ago # -
“
Young drivers could be banned from the road at night under plans to improve safety, the Department for Transport has announced. Figures show that a fifth are involved in an accident during their first year behind the wheel, and ministers are considering introducing a graduated licence system for novice drivers in England.
“
Posted 5 years ago # -
A normal version of bad driving, but funny for the cyclist involved; turning left from North Bridge to Princes Street, the minicab in front of me decided that as the bus in front had run the red, he could too.
I walked around, and caught him at the very next light. Green light, off we went, two cyclists joined me...
Taxi ran the next three reds, with one of those cyclists drafting right behind him. Not sure if cyclist was just using taxi as a buffer, or trying to make a point, or not paying attention.
still funny, in a way.
Posted 5 years ago # -
i'm sure there's a way to use VR to train up young drivers better than our current system.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Me. Overtook a cyclist on double whites with a blind bend approaching. Gave the cyclist lots of room, but if something had come the other way it would not have been good.
Bad descision making on my part - I should have either committed to the overtake much earlier or got on the brakes much earlier. It is not like I don't know the road - I cycle it fairly regularly...
Posted 5 years ago # -
Cycling home during the 17:30ish downpour yesterday, I had 3 near misses in the space of 5 minutes.
The first from a PHV trying to pass me on Lochend Road South (as I go down the hill, so near 20 mph), when there's a parked car ahead on the left (so I'm moving out from the kerb), and while an oncoming car decides to turn right (so blocking the oncoming lane). Thankfully they aborted their overtake before they actually hit me.
Second was partly my fault - a car on Leith Walk indicating and then turning left across the bike lane in front of me. Partly my fault because I probably could have stopped in time when I saw them indicate, but I still had priority and they should have been looking for traffic in the cycle lane (And I even had my bright front light on, so no excuse for not seeing me).
Third was further up Leith Walk, there was a car abandoned in the bike lane with nothing parked in the loading bay anywhere near it. Instead of merging into the traffic lane, I went up the inside of the parked car, and then when I was back in the bike lane had a van lurch forwards, about to pull out in front of me because another driver had stopped to let them out and honked at them.
Posted 5 years ago # -
i'm sure there's a way to use VR to train up young drivers better than our current system.
Actually that's not a bad idea. It's definitely worth thinking about... The 'Google Cardboard' system makes it cheap to provide the real basics at the user's end (particularly if what's provided is just a 3d video, not the full 360 degree thing). Although as always it would be the quality of the content which would determine the value, not the technology itself.
Posted 5 years ago # -
About time too, but 70 is just tokenistic.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Dear Edinburgh Cycle Training
Regarding your three near misses, here's my take on your footage (after discussing with a good friend yesterday - for information we are both Cycle Trainers for Cycling Scotland).
We both accept that the footage probably doesn't give the full picture of events so apologise in advance if this is the case On the information and evidence you have presented here's my opinion offered to try and assist.Incident 1.
The car was out of order and shouldn't really have tried to overtake you at that point but your road position could have been a bit more assertive. On approach to the junction you were not really in the 'flow of traffic' so a move to the more dominate primary road position would have acted as a visual deterrent to the following car. By moving to the primary position a fraction earlier you could have 'closed the door' to the driver and there's a good chance they would not have attempted that manoeuvre. I'd apportion the majority of blame/responsibility for this stupid manoeuvre on the driver but you could have done more to look after yourself.Incident 2.
Totally your faulty. The car was clearly indicating to turn left so I fail to see how you can assert you had right of way. Your speed looks reasonable but I would have slowed at that point and let the car complete its manoeuvre. The visibility is pretty poor and the road surface wet so a lower speed would be even more sensible.
For this one I'd respectful suggest this was not bad driving but rather an example of poor cycling.Incident 3.
Not really an incident. Agreed the car shouldn't have been there but we/you don't know the context (there could have been something in the loading bay which has since left). Either way the car was stationary, you passed it in a safe manner, no other traffic posed you any immediate or significant danger. As you mention you said you could have merged and that's probably what I would have done but your manoeuvre was a reasonable alternative which you carried out safely. I fail to see what the incident is.Hope you find these observations of some use.
TMS
Posted 5 years ago # -
Totally your faulty. The car was clearly indicating to turn left so I fail to see how you can assert you had right of way.
Strong disagree. Sticking your indicators on doesn't give you priority over traffic in adjacent lanes. Driver absolutely needs to wait until it is safe to turn, regardless of whether they are indicating.
I'm not saying it's a good idea to overtake/undertake vehicles which are indicating, but I think the fault is very clearly with the driver here.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Frenchy
Well we'll need to agree to disagree.
Not only was the driver indicating, they had already started the manoeuvre. IMHO this is clearly poor cycling.
As bike users we'd all be up in arms if we'd started a manoeuvre then a motor vehicle cuts us up. We can't have it both ways.Posted 5 years ago # -
Edit: Sorry, can't be bothered with the argument on this, so have deleted post.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Highway Code Rule 183 is pretty explicit:
When turning...give way to any vehicles using a bus lane, cycle lane or tramway from either direction.
There will almost certainly be other rules saying "watch out for turning vehicles" etc., but I still think it's clear that the cyclist has (and should have) priority in this situation.
Posted 5 years ago # -
As is Rule 72 specifically for cyclists:
72
On the left. When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Just before you turn, check for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left.(my bold as it goes further than the 'watch out etc. wording)
So the HC is contradictory.
In those instances I take what I personally consider to be the safest option for me. And personally if I'd seen that car signalling, a good 10-15 yards before I got there, I'd have applied that bold item.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Wilmingtons Cow.
Not sure that this is an argument so I would welcome your comments.
Frenchy's making some good points & is doing so in a very civilised manner.
This is what healthy debate is about.
I am still of the opinion this was poor cycling. Not sure it matters what the HWC says (there's lots in there that is questionable) for me ECT made a poor decision to undertake a car that was already committed to a manoeuvre, had indicated their intentions, and in conditions of poor visibility.
It's for each of us to decide what we'd have done and for me that would have been to have held back in that situation.Posted 5 years ago # -
My comments were pretty much as above in the post I left, but in a more argumentative way ;)
I'm basically with you - though I do use the HC as a base, questionable though it sometimes is. Seeing that car indicate from that far back, I'd not have gone up the inside.
I'm not saying there's 'no' fault for the driver, but I reckon it's a good 80/20 towards the cyclist in this instance, simply because I think there's more onus on the person whose visibility is uncompromised. This would be the case if the car was substituted for another cyclist. An over-the-shoulder check will never have as much visibility as someone staring straight ahead at what's happening.
Which is another reason I wouldn't have gone up the inside, you can never be 100% sure they've seen you.
"I still think it's clear that the cyclist has (and should have) priority in this situation" I'm torn on this - mainly for the reasons already given. I think in this specific situation, seeing the indicators so far ahead of the turn, I don't think the cyclist should have priority. And while I rail against the 'share the road' nonsense that will allegedly keep cyclists safe, I do think there's space for what might be termed 'sensible caution in the face of human failings'.
All IMHO. We also wouldn't be human if we all agreed on everything.
Posted 5 years ago # -
i can't comment on the legality of the left-turning car, but am pretty sure that they would not likely have expected another mother vehicle to slam on the brakes for their manoeuvre.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The distance away when the indicators are clearly flashing (in my opinion) there would have been no need to 'slam on the brakes'.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I hate to break up the flow of the argument, but: large white Hummer-limo sort of thing ("Terminator" brand) beeping and flashing me on Queensferry Road/A90 despite me going at nearly the speed limit in a motor car.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@themightysimmonite Thanks for the feedback! I've never done any sort of cycle training, and I'm a pretty... let's say "assertive" cyclist, so it's entirely possible that I'm in the wrong here, and of course criticism is welcome.
Incident 1: your road position could have been a bit more assertive
Agreed, but I was gaining speed at this point, having come from the flat, and a standing start (turning my lights on). I was keeping a straight line towards the outer edge of the parked car, but yes, I could have been in more of a primary position.Incident 3: Not really an incident
Also agreed, but you can see my swerve from the rear footage. Having someone lurch towards you just as you pass a side-road isn't particularly pleasant, even if it's not bad driving as such.
Agreed the car shouldn't have been there but we/you don't know the context (there could have been something in the loading bay which has since left)
There could. Which is yet another reason not to double park. There's also no dry patches in the parking bay (as there are before the bin), meaning it's not as if any parked vehicles have just left.Incident 2: Totally your fault
I think the car started indicating at roughly the same time you see in the video - before I passed on the inside (from going through frame by frame), yes, but the highway code explicitly states that traffic turning left must give way to any other traffic in a bus or cycle lane. I fully admit that being right doesn't help if you're hit by a car, of course.
Given the road conditions, I really don't think I could have safely stopped in time, considering I wasn't watching the car's indicators the whole time, so likely (I don't remember) notice them until a second or two after they go on.
Not only was the driver indicating, they had already started the manoeuvre
They had been driving along the cycle lane edging line the entire time I'd seen them, so were many other drivers. I don't believe driving an inch or two into the cycle lane counts as starting their manoeuvre.
I measure 3 seconds from them indicating (0:28) to the point that I pass them (0:31). Strava says I was doing a fairly steady 23 km/h (14 mph) here. I'm on a hybrid bike, with uhhh "hybrid" tyres (not entirely slick like a road bike, but not knobbly like a mountain bike). I really don't think I could comfortably and safely stop from when I saw them indicating (again, that's after you see in the video).
I'm rendering the "whole" video now for context, and will post it shortly - I'd been passing other slower moving traffic for 5-10 seconds before this, and the traffic had sped up, which was why I was going up the inside. Sort of. I'm not really explaining it well, hopefully the longer video will give more context.As I said in the video description: "Partly my fault for not stopping to let the car pass, but it's wet and I'm already moving at a reasonable speed - I'd have to basically emergency stop.". I still maintain "partly" my fault rather than "totally", but I'm happy to debate! And hopefully obviously open to the idea that I'm wrong :)
Posted 5 years ago # -
@wingpig - Ah yes, I've cycled on Queensferry Road 4 times than I can remember. 2 of those times I had someone honking at me, one of those times while staying behind me instead of overtaking for who knows what reason...
Long(er) version of #2 above for discussion:
Posted 5 years ago # -
ECT
Happy to debate, I don't consider this an argument as there is lots of agreement in our discussions.
My comments were not intended as criticism and I hope you haven't mistaken them as such. More they were intended to give an opinion in the hope that we can ALL learn from your experience.I've haven't seen the whole video which hopefully provided more context.
Incident 1
All contributions so far seem to accept that an early move to the more dominate/assertive primary road position might have helped. Unless there's anything else I would suggest case closed.Incident 3
Similar to incident 1. I agree about your point regarding double parking and that folk shouldn't do this but in the real world they will continue to do so until we get some enforcement. Until then personally I would always try to avoid undertaking parked vehicles.Incident 2
Probably the most contentious of all three and most open to debate. You make some valid points and context is everything, there's lots going on (some out-of camera shot like the encroaching van). I still believe you should accept majority responsibility but I have revised my opinion from 'completely your fault' to 'you could have done more to avoid getting into that situation'.One final point before I depart to thread.
You make several references to your speed or more precisely you ability to stop 'Given the road conditions, I really don't think I could have safely stopped in time' and 'I really don't think I could comfortably and safely stop from when I saw them indicating' so maybe that's something else to consider, especially with the road being so wet.I recognise others might have a completely different take on Incident 2
Happy to consider all views and revise my opinion if anyone can present compelling reasoning.TMS
Posted 5 years ago # -
Re incident number 2, even if ECC was in the wrong (and I don't think he was) the driver is very much at fault here.
HIGHWAY CODE
Turning left
182
Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just as you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle.Cyclists and motorcyclists in particular may be hidden from your view.
Highway Code for Northern Ireland rule 182 - do not cut in on cyclists
183
When turning:keep as close to the left as is safe and practicable
give way to any vehicles using a bus lane, cycle lane or tramway from either directionPosted 5 years ago # -
Which, as noted above, conflicts with rule 72 for cyclists.
72
On the left. When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Just before you turn, check for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left.I still think it's about 80/20, maybe down to 60/40, split of fault (the higher being ECC) because, as noted above as well, he has greater visibility, and while the driver shouldn't have been driving in the cycle lane (as ECC mentions) I also wouldn't go up the inside of a car that was encroaching the lane (while moving) simply from a self-preservation point of view.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I don't necessarily think the HC contradicts itself. I think they are trying to prevent what almost happened in the video. Driver, don't do x. Cyclist don't do y. Then nobody gets hurt.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
