CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 14 min ago

Re: Have you been knocked OFF in a collision while cycling?

14 October 2014 - 2:25pm
Maybe all this high mileage and no accidents is not luck ...... Maybe cycling is simply not dangerous.
51 years cycling and only 1 knock off, by a fellow cyclist, as previously detailed.
I think there may be small group who like to believe it's dangerous.... makes them look more macho perhaps ...

Re: Have you been knocked OFF in a collision while cycling?

14 October 2014 - 2:14pm
I voted "knocked off - motorist's fault"

"Offed" by motons 3 times. Come off not my fault twice. Come off was my fault once.

When I was 6 a total <correct word not allowed on a family-friendly forum> of a motorist thought it would be a great idea to reverse into the kiddy out cycling with his Mum.

When I was 7, while extricating myself from the upside-down-in-the-ditch position I decided that riding along the cycle path with my eyes shut was not a very good idea

At 15 I was left-hooked by a Letchworth taxi.

At 17 a patch of loose gravel removed all grip from my front tyre (From this incident I learned that by standing on a bent rim and shifting your weight about you can straighten it enough to get you home. Once home Dad took the bendy wheel into the shed and un-bendied it for me, so it couldn't have been that bad)

About 5 years ago I had a very gentle low-speed "off" on a patch of black ice.

55 weeks ago I was T-boned on an otherwise empty roundabout on a clear sunny morning by another <appropriate-word-not-allowed> of a moton.

No serious damage has been done to me and, more importantly, to any of the bikes I was riding at the time. Not a bad record for over 40 years and at least 350,000 miles of regular cycling.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 1:47pm
If it is two people agreeing to ride together, it is a mutual responsibility to ride so as not to endanger each other (which is why I'm surprised that Tonyf33's responses are not more widely echoed)
There is no formal agreement and no written rules that I know of. However people who regularly ride in informal groups like this (I am thinking mainly Audax and CTC rides here) seem to normally ride quite close without any incidents, even when he have not met before that ride.

In my experience anybody doing what that guy in front did (unless there was a brick in front of him) would be given a wide berth by anybody who saw it for the rest of the ride. We do have a mutual responsibility and most of us see the guy in front rider as being the one who acted recklessly.

There are no rules that I know of, this could be a similar situation to cars using the headlight flash as a signal to go ahead, widely done but not quite right.

If I was going on a ride this weekend, I dont want any like the guy in front in my group and have no worries about sharing roadspace with the one that he "offed".

If I am wrong in this I would like to know it and why, it is rather like riding on the left side of the road, if we are all following the same rules it is safer for all.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 1:36pm
beardy wrote:Rule 163 has those unfortunate words "as much room as you would give a car".

Plenty of filtering cyclists do not give cars anywhere near that much room.
I would give a cyclist as much room as on that picture if I was doing the same speed as a car (around 30mph), I dont when we are both pootling along at 10-20mph.
Please do if you pass me. As the HC used to say "Remember that cyclists may be unable to maintain a straight line, particularly due to adverse wind conditions or poor road surface".
beardy wrote:Also it appears that there is no law against riding two abreast, so is this really overtaking or riding two abreast? The highway code was written because motorists were too stupid to work this out between themselves and kept killing and injuring, it isnt really written with cyclists (or even motorcyclists) in mind most of the time, it is after all a car overtaking in that picture.
If it is two people agreeing to ride together, it is a mutual responsibility to ride so as not to endanger each other (which is why I'm surprised that Tonyf33's responses are not more widely echoed); if they were simply two cyclists (who happened to dress similarly ) passing in the street, then I would expect (well, wish for more like) something more akin to the HC passing distance.
beardy wrote:I have no objection to a published set of rules which were actually written with cyclists in mind (may be the Dutch have such a thing) but I dont think we have any such thing in the UK. However being a pretty civilised bunch and with a degree of self preservation, such incidents are not a major problem and the need for a specific code isnt that great.
I can not think of any group of cyclists who I have ever ridden with considering what the guy in front did was right and what the guy behind did was wrong, yet others on the forum do think so so doubt is there.
I do think we would have a different viewpoint if the rider was not part of the group and just a "passer by" in which case they should be given a wider berth.
I would hope so, but my experience with some overtaking cyclists is that they treat other cyclists they encounter as if they were part of the same club peloton (sp?); I find this unnerving and in traffic, dangerous.
beardy wrote:I never ride in formal groups and dont have that background (all those funny masonic handsigns) but have thousands of miles of informal group riding behind me. I have taken out one person's rear light and had one taken out myself. I think there is an unwritten, informal, incomplete agreement amongst such riders about what is acceptable. We are actually using each others close physical proximity for a mutual benefit.Yeah well like I said I dislike riding in groups (actualy I will accept someone slip-streaming if asked, but generally it's not my thing).

Re: Have you been knocked OFF in a collision while cycling?

14 October 2014 - 1:35pm
The more I read, the more I feel I must be leading some sort of charmed life!

In 30+ years, I remember coming off the bike three times, all of my own fault: one riding into the back of a car as we pulled away from traffic lights (I hadn't realised before then that I accelerate faster than some cars, at least at first) where I did at least stay on my feet; one when I was swerving left-right to clean mud from the tyres (oh vanity), left the roadway to the left and then fell back onto it (landed on my side); and one on ice on a corner at the end of last year (landed on my side). There's another time when I rode into a ditch, but I'd class that as learning to ride because it was my first try at using downtube shifters.

I've also been crashed into by other bikes various times but I don't remember any of them knocking me off. I've had various near-misses with motor vehicles, including being clipped by a car wing mirror, leaning on the side of a white van that pulled out while I was using a mini-roundabout and deliberately riding up the verge to avoid a bad overtaker oncoming, but I don't think I've yet been knocked off by one.

I've ridden quite a lot. Not great distances often (it's only the last few years that I've done 30-100 mile day trips) but most days to school and then university and work and now every day for my health. My riding has probably been a little atypical with a lot of the urban bits on cycleways around Milton Keynes, Norwich and King's Lynn - and I often ride cycleways unless they're utter rubbish - but I also spent a few years near Weston-super-Mare (which doesn't have many cycleways and even fewer decent ones) and I've ridden in various cities, most often Cambridge and London... I'm no speed demon, but I think I hold a steady 30kph in typical good conditions (rare in the cities). There are always claims that cycleways are more dangerous how we build them in this country because of the increased number and lower priority of junctions, so surely I should have crashed more than most? Could it be partly that I'm a better judge of cycleway dangers than many because I've been riding them since I was young and some of MK's are pretty awful?

Anyway, I'm now not so sure about dismissing the claim that most cyclists have been knocked down by cars. The results were looking pretty tight this morning

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 1:35pm
Tonyf33 wrote:the move was done swiftly but it would make no difference to the outcome as the rider behind failed to move/slow.

Moving across the road with a big swerve like this, means he travels further than if he had gently moved across, which means that the collision is more likely to occur as the rider behind will then catch him up more than if he'd just slowly moved across, even if both are travelling at the same speed. So its possible that moving across quickly did make a difference.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

14 October 2014 - 1:32pm
If they were that powerful that they needed dipping then sure.

However even the really good lights are only on a par with a dipped car headlight and we almost never need the highbeam on our cars when travelling at cycling speeds.

I think it would be quite good to have lights set up in a way that fits motorcycle/car dipheadlight regs and any additional lights on an instant switch under what ever rules cover highbeam (and attached aux lights) lamps.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 1:26pm
The person behind fails to yield to a clear and dinstinctive signal.

Yes he does fail to yield but as any (and every)body knows indicating alone does not give you a right to proceed.
The nearest I can find in the HC is overtaking rules and they say when being overtaken do not deviate from what you were doing.
Similarly when we cycle in the gutter and find our path obstructed by a pothole (or parked car) we have to indicate and manoeuvre in good time. If that good time doesnt exist we have messed up and have to stop and wait for a gap in the traffic (cursing because we didnt get out soon enough).

Re: Cafe & coffee

14 October 2014 - 12:16pm
Backing up the Italy experience, I've been to Venice twice: once as a day trip when an espresso was about 5 Euros and once with an overnight when, once the cruise liners had left port, we walked a few side-streets back from the main tourist thoroughfare and got the classic Italian coffee with a small cake for less than half that price.

And that's expensive compared to Rome side streets where the same is usually between 1 and 2 Euros.

All presuming that you are happy standing at the counter (usually for an espresso) or sitting at a formica table, and don't want a comfy sofa to sink into for an hour...

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 12:08pm
Rule 163 has those unfortunate words "as much room as you would give a car".

Plenty of filtering cyclists do not give cars anywhere near that much room.
I would give a cyclist as much room as on that picture if I was doing the same speed as a car (around 30mph), I dont when we are both pootling along at 10-20mph.

Also it appears that there is no law against riding two abreast, so is this really overtaking or riding two abreast? The highway code was written because motorists were too stupid to work this out between themselves and kept killing and injuring, it isnt really written with cyclists (or even motorcyclists) in mind most of the time, it is after all a car overtaking in that picture.

I have no objection to a published set of rules which were actually written with cyclists in mind (may be the Dutch have such a thing) but I dont think we have any such thing in the UK. However being a pretty civilised bunch and with a degree of self preservation, such incidents are not a major problem and the need for a specific code isnt that great.
I can not think of any group of cyclists who I have ever ridden with considering what the guy in front did was right and what the guy behind did was wrong, yet others on the forum do think so so doubt is there.
I do think we would have a different viewpoint if the rider was not part of the group and just a "passer by" in which case they should be given a wider berth.

I never ride in formal groups and dont have that background (all those funny masonic handsigns) but have thousands of miles of informal group riding behind me. I have taken out one person's rear light and had one taken out myself. I think there is an unwritten, informal, incomplete agreement amongst such riders about what is acceptable. We are actually using each others close physical proximity for a mutual benefit.

Re: Have you been knocked OFF in a collision while cycling?

14 October 2014 - 12:06pm
Almost twenty years ago now I had an elderly car driver coming towards me but, failing to see me, he then turned right across me causing me to put a huge dent into his nearside rear passenger door but also sending me over the roof of his car with my brand new 'Jeff Bruce' 653 road bike still firmly stuck to my feet. With no balance my head hit the road first (explains a lot) splitting the polystyrene inner part of my cycle helmet into two. When the birds stopped tweeting an elderly man appeared into view and, figuring it wasn't St. Peter, I gave him a burst of choice Anglo-Saxon before being told, "Whoa, that's not the driver"

Nothing broken - except my lovely new bike

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 11:44am
Gven that it is (or appears to be) some sort of club/sports event, in which cyclists have voluntarilly put themselves in close proximity, I'll just have to accept the word of those more experienced in that sort of thing. On the road in general though, we expect motor vehicle drivers to give us sufficient room:

Any cyclist not giving another this room when overtaking (outside of the club/sports events which appears to be being shown in the OP's clip, as noted above) would IMO be at fault.

Re: Have you been knocked OFF in a collision while cycling?

14 October 2014 - 11:23am
No collisions for me but my cycling has been sporadic and still is, so I haven't covered that many miles, so I'm probably skewing the results, it looks like it's only a matter of time if I keep riding. My brother's been riding for about 4 years I think and has been knocked off once and damaged his bike once bunny hopping onto the pavement after being forced off the road by a car, he carried on down the road as was too angry to go and speak to the driver.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 10:23am
Think of it in terms of driving along the motorway. You're in Lane 1 keeping a nice distance behind the lorry in front. There's plenty of space behind you.

Someone comes alongside in Lane 2 half overlapping you, and puts their left indicator on, before you process anything they've changed lanes right into you, sending you into a spin.

This is what happened here.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 9:38am
In 'normal' one to one interaction on the road, surely the 'vehicle' behind has to give way, and anticipate the actions of those in front?

I would agree with that and if the cyclist had been behind the accident would not have happened. He was however alongside rather than behind, not much, possibly even only a centimetre but that is what caused the collision.

I think in the highway code it says what you should do while being overtaken and this doesnt fit those instructions. Things may be different in the USA or wherever this was filmed.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 9:27am
We don't get much "post event" footage, but the camera bike would have moved if there was anything that required avoidance - and didn't.

They aren't in strict lanes, but that's not a free pass to swipe across someone's front wheel.
The move was sudden, was made without checking for safe space and resulted in several cyclists ending up on the floor, the first cyclist to go down looked as though they landed quite hard on their shoulder (i.e. collar bone territory).

When making a manoeuvre in a group (even a temporary group that has formed on the road) you really have to make sure you have enough space to make that manoeuvre...

He knew there was someone just outside him, and he cut across them, taking their front wheel away.

Re: Clipping and running

14 October 2014 - 8:52am
Phil Fouracre wrote:Interesting comments! Think it must show the differing expectations between 'serious' cyclists and 'leisure' ones. People jumped in and blamed the front cyclist, which might be expected if you ride in a group. In 'normal' one to one interaction on the road, surely the 'vehicle' behind has to give way, and anticipate the actions of those in front?
+1, and illustrative of why I hate riding in groups. I expect any overtaking vehicle to give me room to avoid potholes, leaf litter etc (and have been known to enforce tis agaisnt motor vehicles). Whilst I realise this looks like a club run, comparisons with motorway lanes is IMO excessive (which means it's probably a good thing I would never ride with a club); they are not in lanes and the camera does not show why he neds to turn (he may be avoiding an incident ahead)..

Re: Learning to ride yet again.

14 October 2014 - 7:33am
Upright or recumbent the tadpole configuration seems more intuitive for people to just mount and ride. The recumbent is easier again due to the low c of g. As an upright tricyclist of 45 years experience it amazes me that bicyclist will tell me that "I have to steer the wrong way " or "I have to lean the wrong way" even when They have been following me for a while. It is nice to see their faces when I accelerate into that tight bend and go round in a whoosh of tyres with my backside dragging on the tyre.

To parallel meic's experience; I seldom bother my bicycles since I much prefer the tricycles, but last Sunday I ventured out on 2 wheels. I settled down quickly and all was fine. However, if there is a problem then my first reaction is the tricyclist one which is invariably wrong for a bicycle and only makes matters worse. It takes only a fraction of a second for the brain to recalibrate and rescue the situation so is usually ok. This time I was a bit incautious approaching a longitudinal crack in the road.

Like meic I take an opportunity to ride something different and have owned or tried most things. I look forward to seeing a wanted advertisement from him to expand his cycling experience.

Re: Learning to ride yet again.

14 October 2014 - 6:44am
meic wrote:Yesterday, some nice guy let me have a ride of his upright tricycle. I half knew what was coming from when I rode motorcycle-sidecar units but it still took a few goes before I could make myself steer it (at all) rather than my subconscious taking over to stop me from crashing (which is what that sort of steering would do on my usual steeds). Though I used to be able to ride one when I was four!
About eight years ago, I went through the experience of learning to ride a recumbent. Then it is just the starting that gets you as you must apply weight the opposite way to normal when you react to the force that you apply on the pedals. The recumbent trike wasnt a problem at all, I havent quite figured out why I didnt have the steering issues on that.

It is nice when you have been around for a long time to get to try something new and different.

I failed on the Penny Farthing but I had had a few to drink and it was full size and the ground was rough gravel (excuses, excuses). I did only slightly better on the reverse steering bike.

I can not even get on to a unicycle.
Was the recumbent trike delta or tadpole? I have not tried a delta trike but I used to own a tadpole and they are the easiest things in the world to ride. The only things you have to learn is how to get in, how to get out and how fast you can go into a corner before the inside front wheel starts lifting. I often wish I still had mine.

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

 

Terms and Conditions