CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 5 min ago

Re: The Poplar High St collision

10 February 2016 - 7:54pm
Other than slowing down and not cycling like an eejit, I can't see any way that the cyclist would have been able to avoid that bump.
8mph may not seem like much on paper, but it's still a fair old pace from which to stop quickly especially with wet brakes and wet roads, both of which will test the tyres grip. Bring hard cornering into that mix and there's the risk of losing all front grip. From the way the camera tilted just before impact, I'd say the rider knew braking alone wasn't going to cut it at that moment and did start turning to the left.
As much as I don't like to paint everyone with the same brush, most of us have figured out that steering wheel + engine + human = utter chaos and the only way to survive the motorised morons is not being morons ourselves, such as not speeding up the inside and treating drivers like nuclear bombs with faulty wiring.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 7:40pm
I'm often cycling on narrow rural lanes, and many drivers are extremely courteous and patient.

However on that day on that particular road there seemed to be just too many vehicles on that road.
It has a 3 ton weight restriction along it and I don't think many were "rat running" - whatever that means. However I had expected that little lane to be virtually traffic free and give me a chance of cycling up it. As it turned out I probably would have had to give up on it as it was steeper than I expected, but I won't know.

There are other hills which I know I can climb - even if only slowly - and although I don't like holding up a vehicle I do so because I know their delay will be short. That hill was an unknown to me, and I'm now a bit wary of trying again. Still it was good view at the top. , but I would have liked a better surface on the B road down.

Re: The Poplar High St collision

10 February 2016 - 7:14pm
mjr wrote:reohn2 wrote:In that circumstance s/he would simply not have had chance or hope in hell of avoiding the collision,however slower and with a small dose of anticipation,s/he would have been able to stop in time.
I'm not convinced. They were only doing 8mph when the car came into view and the roads were pretty wet.

These two bold bits are extremely relevant,IMO the cyclist may with a hard left,have even been hit by the nearside wing/front wheel,we'll just have to agree to differ.

The vast majority of drivers like the one in you're video clip are courteous but it's that small percentage that are the problem,the other problem is defining which are which

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 6:04pm
Shire reeve = sheriff.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 5:46pm
mjr wrote:(near me, they're called the Reeve but I hadn't heard that term before)
Hadn't heard the term 'Reeve' before? Surely you knew about the Shire Reeves (and their recruitment by Sharky's men during the takeover of the Shire before that was ended at the Battle at Bag End?

Re: The Poplar High St collision

10 February 2016 - 5:17pm
reohn2 wrote:In that circumstance s/he would simply not have had chance or hope in hell of avoiding the collision,however slower and with a small dose of anticipation,s/he would have been able to stop in time.
I'm not convinced. They were only doing 8mph when the car came into view and the roads were pretty wet.

I think the best tactic would have been to turn very hard left into the side road, into the gap between car and kerb, and stopped behind the blue car parked in the side road, or run left over the kerb (the entrance to the side road appears to be on a ramp). The cyclist managed to slow to 5mph by the impact and the car didn't get close to the kerb as it turned it because it stayed out to help get around the parked cars.

When cycling I'm always acutely aware of my vulnerability,some cyclists just aren't.
I know how that may read but in the present circumstances on UK roads,I take no chances when cycling,but treat the rest of the road users around me as potential unpredictable lunatics and murderers.
I know what you mean. I've a list of tips compiled by local cyclists that I'll publish soon and watching for other road users doing daft and unusual things is one of them, but many of them are blissfully ignorant. Fortunately, we're blessed around here with lots of helpful motorists like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih70HEFE0TY

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 5:08pm
Bmblbzzz wrote:The same for buses too, of course, though I doubt if many of them use such narrow lanes.
No, there are minimum clearances which most single-track+passing-place roads don't have. I did once see a 49-seat bus where the non-local driver had tried to use a single-track shortcut between two villages to avoid congestion on the main road: the bottom of the door had caught on the raised verge, dug in and bent, preventing the door from opening. Passengers were disembarking through the emergency exit and I don't think that driver will have been popular when he returned to the garage. I think it's the second-worst case of ignoring warning signs that I've seen.

It would technically be possible to use rising bollards to allow access for buses, taxis, certain utilities and of course emergency vehicles, in which case deliveries might be added to the permitted vehicle list – perhaps for a fee – but whether it would be financially practical I doubt.
Or just fit old-fashioned gates - with a gap to allow people to walk or cycle past, of course. That's usually enough to deter anyone who doesn't have to use the road. You do need someone who occasionally checks that the gate's closed (near me, they're called the Reeve but I hadn't heard that term before) but if they're there by popular consent, it won't be a problem.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 4:42pm
pwa wrote:Bmblbzzz wrote:I agree totally that it's better to get along with people. This is so obvious to my mind it hardly is worth saying! And I don't think that patience (in drivers) is a particularly Welsh trait, though there are regional variations. To most people it's obvious that a cyclist going up a steep hill is working hard and they appreciate you're not wanting to hold them up.

However, I do think it's worth instituting car bans on many narrow lanes. Not just the steep ones, either! Or perhaps better than bans would be 'filtered permeability'; yes, I'm talking bollards! Or gates or whatever physical means may be used. The idea would be to stop through traffic – shortcuts, rat runs – while maintaining access for all.

And all deliveries to remote houses by Tesco, Yodel, etc, etc?
Yes, they'd take the main roads too, of course. So along the main road, into village A then back to the main road and on to village B, rather than cutting down the lanes between the villages. The same for buses too, of course, though I doubt if many of them use such narrow lanes. It would technically be possible to use rising bollards to allow access for buses, taxis, certain utilities and of course emergency vehicles, in which case deliveries might be added to the permitted vehicle list – perhaps for a fee – but whether it would be financially practical I doubt.

Re: The Poplar High St collision

10 February 2016 - 4:29pm
mjr wrote:Oh and I haven't mentioned it, but I'm surprised the cyclist didn't seem to attempt an emergency turn left. I've escaped the odd SMIDSY that way over the years.

In that circumstance s/he would simply not have had chance or hope in hell of avoiding the collision,however slower and with a small dose of anticipation,s/he would have been able to stop in time.

When cycling I'm always acutely aware of my vulnerability,some cyclists just aren't.
I know how that may read but in the present circumstances on UK roads,I take no chances when cycling,but treat the rest of the road users around me as potential unpredictable lunatics and murderers.

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 4:21pm
irc wrote:
Obviously as a cyclist I feel the case wasn't given a high enough priority by the police or CPS but there is a lot of competition for limited police and court time.

I think there's a lot of "push and pull" between the outrage felt against the driver and the lameness of the prosecution. If either one could be resolved, then the other would cease to be significant. I think that's what gives this case legs. I agree with you that prosecution is a tricky matter for all sorts of reasons and often no other redress is sought - somebody gets off a drug possession charge for example or a shoplifter at Tesco walks free from court (there are plenty of so-called "victimless crimes"). OTOH, had the driver owned up or been named and shamed in the press (not physically attacked or bricks through the window) then I think people would be more accepting of the lack of police action.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 4:17pm
pwa wrote:And all deliveries to remote houses by Tesco, Yodel, etc, etc?

That would come under the "access only" application,which would cut down traffic to a bare minimum,and which TBH people living on a narrow lane rat run at present,would more than likely welcome such restrictions along with a 20mph speed limit.
We've go to remember we're discussing avoidable and difficult/narrow/dangerous routes even if driven along at speed,which they often are,that are being used to simply shorten car journeys by no more than a few minutes.

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 4:06pm
tyreon wrote:The saps are the ones who get the convictions. The Masters are those that evade. Whilst many things appear to me inequitable the lower orders are looking to our Masters in Westminster in how chicanery works. And,you know what? they're catching up. It's both depressing and cheering.

I'm not quite clear in how the flow-chart works in evading justice but in the Top Ten must be...spin the case out...defer,ignore,go sick,lose papers...I think with no offence,Italy's justice system maybe a tad above our own. We're learning tho!

Ain't that the truth?

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 3:55pm
The saps are the ones who get the convictions. The Masters are those that evade. Whilst many things appear to me inequitable the lower orders are looking to our Masters in Westminster in how chicanery works. And,you know what? they're catching up. It's both depressing and cheering.

I'm not quite clear in how the flow-chart works in evading justice but in the Top Ten must be...spin the case out...defer,ignore,go sick,lose papers...I think with no offence,Italy's justice system maybe a tad above our own. We're learning tho!

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 3:54pm
I think we're all agreed the incident was investigated with any amount of vigour or expertise,that as I speculated up thread is most likely due to a poor and undermanned police force followed by a poor and insufficient CPS.
As Samuel D it means the guilty go free and the system is played like cheap violin in the hands of a maestro who knows just what the instrument is capable of.
You don't need to be Philadephia lawyer to see what's going on,close the loopholes,equip the police,enable the courts and the bad guys lose,or at least the majority do.
But the major plus is that the rest of society get a better night's sleep and an easier life.
As it is the system is pathetic to the n'th degree,and no one gives a stuff.

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 3:36pm
Samuel D wrote:Taking seriously problems such as the present hit-and-run incident has many knock-on benefits. It is certainly worth the time of any police force or criminal justice system that can see beyond its nose.

I agree. I think it should have had a higher priority. It still doesn't mean there would have been a conviction though.

I don't think the victim has mentioned whether his incident was investigated by a traffic cop. Probably not. Traffic depts used to have the expertise and time to investigate serious road traffic crimes. I'd class this as serious due to the nature of the apparently deliberate nature, the vulnerable victim and the injuries. Traffic depts have been one of the places where police budget cuts have hit. If the traffic cops aren't there anymore then traffic enforcement is not going to be as good.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/c ... five-years

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 3:20pm
irc wrote:Obviously as a cyclist I feel the case wasn't given a high enough priority by the police or CPS but there is a lot of competition for limited police and court time.
But it’s a vicious circle: many of those who get away with a crime feel they may get away with another, and another, and another. Thus lives are wrecked (both victims and serial perpetrators), societies are blighted with the fear of crime and a sense of injustice, and even more time is ultimately needed by the police and court to deal however sloppily with the higher resulting levels of crime.

Taking seriously problems such as the present hit-and-run incident has many knock-on benefits. It is certainly worth the time of any police force or criminal justice system that can see beyond its nose.

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

10 February 2016 - 3:06pm
reohn2 wrote:All odd, and smacks of organised crime IMHO.

Sounds not too unusual for an overworked prosecution and court service. Once it's at court and the defence and prosecution agree there is insufficient evidence to identify the driver it's always going to be a conviction of S172 RTA and nothing else.

Go and sit in a court. There are always amendments getting made, charges dropped for lack of evidence, charges dropped to get a plea on other charges. If it's a anything the way it works in Scotland there is one prosecutor per court. On the day there will be a dozen or more cases scheduled for trial. The prosecutor won't necessarily have seen any of the cases before that morning. So he won't be up to speed with the finer points of the evidence. Some cases will be put off because the accused hasn't turned or witnesses haven't turned up. Other may be delayed for legal reason. The prosecutor will be left with a handful of cases ready to go to trial but with a court that only has time to run one or two trials per day.
Some cases may have to be put off to another day. Do that too often though and a defence lawyer will argue it get dropped as the delay is unfair to his client. The comes the negotiation. Lawyers will suggest that while their client would plead to charge A he denies charges B & C. If the actual evidence is not 100% perhaps relying on witnesses of variable quality it might be thought that a plea to charge A is acceptable.

I believe Glasgow Sheriff and Magistrates courts are not as busy as they used to be. More low level crimes getting dealt with by tickets etc. But Tuesday this week there was 281 criminal cases being dealt with by Glasgow Sheriff Court.

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/current-b ... 74aa7#COP2

Obviously as a cyclist I feel the case wasn't given a high enough priority by the police or CPS but there is a lot of competition for limited police and court time.

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 2:13pm
Bmblbzzz wrote:I agree totally that it's better to get along with people. This is so obvious to my mind it hardly is worth saying! And I don't think that patience (in drivers) is a particularly Welsh trait, though there are regional variations. To most people it's obvious that a cyclist going up a steep hill is working hard and they appreciate you're not wanting to hold them up.

However, I do think it's worth instituting car bans on many narrow lanes. Not just the steep ones, either! Or perhaps better than bans would be 'filtered permeability'; yes, I'm talking bollards! Or gates or whatever physical means may be used. The idea would be to stop through traffic – shortcuts, rat runs – while maintaining access for all.

And all deliveries to remote houses by Tesco, Yodel, etc, etc?

Re: Downslink works: Bramber to Shoreham-by-Sea

10 February 2016 - 1:39pm
Drake wrote:Does anybody know if the re-surfacing on the Bramber to Shoreham part of the Downs Link has been completed yet. Could find any info on the website.
See my post above. The current work was only intended to go as far north as the South Downs Way bridge. With the caveats I posted in a later post, the section from the A27 to the Cement Works site is 'complete' although whether the 'Footpath Closed' barriers and heavy plant have yet been removed I can't say, but will update once I get time.
HTH (not a lot, I suspect - but probably more informative than WSCC's site )

Re: Too many vehicles!!!

10 February 2016 - 1:26pm
I agree totally that it's better to get along with people. This is so obvious to my mind it hardly is worth saying! And I don't think that patience (in drivers) is a particularly Welsh trait, though there are regional variations. To most people it's obvious that a cyclist going up a steep hill is working hard and they appreciate you're not wanting to hold them up.

However, I do think it's worth instituting car bans on many narrow lanes. Not just the steep ones, either! Or perhaps better than bans would be 'filtered permeability'; yes, I'm talking bollards! Or gates or whatever physical means may be used. The idea would be to stop through traffic – shortcuts, rat runs – while maintaining access for all.

About

CTC

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

Copyright © CTC 2015

Terms and Conditions