CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 2 hours 4 min ago

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 1:17pm
Only if Halfords and others stop selling headlight bulbs that are 40% brighter etc and manufacturers remove LED headlights which seem to produce much more glare even when they are dipped. And finally 'to advocate' is not the same as 'to instruct'.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 12:47pm
freeflow wrote:The theory of the tragedy of the commons isnt either an excuse for, or a call for, a race to the bottom.

I thought that was the whole point of TOC. It explains why, without appropriate governance, its always a race to the bottom/worst case. The use of the term 'Tradgedy' is quite deliberate as it described the inevitable remorseless of the process.
That is what it means, but that is not the same as instructing people to race to the bottom as fast as possible!

Re: New bike for commuting

13 October 2014 - 12:37pm
The cheapest Boardman CX bike is worth a look. Has the ability to fit mudguards anda rack if needed, and it's just within your budget at £599.99 with a Sora groupset and disk brakes:

http://www.halfords.com/cycling/bikes/r ... wgodGgcAfw

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 12:32pm
The theory of the tragedy of the commons isnt either an excuse for, or a call for, a race to the bottom.

I thought that was the whole point of TOC. It explains why, without appropriate governance, its always a race to the bottom/worst case. The use of the term 'Tradgedy' is quite deliberate as it described the inevitable remorseless of the process.

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

13 October 2014 - 12:21pm
beardy wrote:You can not let me off the hook that easily, we both felt it was our own fault rather than the other person's fault. However I think it was possibly not significant enough an accident to be in with the others, it was more of a "cleat moment" type severity.
Well, I've goofed and put no "yes, came off, fault shared with other non-motorised user" option. It doesn't matter too much for my purposes, I think.

On the severity, that's your call and I'm happy with whatever you decide. Thanks for giving it some thought.

Re: A warm dry winter?

13 October 2014 - 11:33am
the bbc television forecast often has a rider saying "we're not sure so far ahead as 5 day's time" then the website tries to predict up to a month ahead etc. vague 'forecasts' i know but they've no idea!!
winter in britain - dry and cold if the position of the jetstream pulls in air from the east. wet and windy if the position pushes systems from across the atlantic over the top of us.
i've got my studded tyres ready-ish in the shed but they rarely see much serious action.

Re: Clipping and running

13 October 2014 - 11:21am
I was out riding in a similar style ride to that yesterday. I was sometimes thinking about that film clip as the positions changed (in that sort of fluidity you get in informal groups like Audax compared to race pelotons), sometimes I was the guy behind and sometimes the guy infront. In every situation I would have thought the guy in front was wrong, when I was in his position I waited for a gap and that meant waiting for the normal flow to create a space or asking for one. When I was behind I would have seen what the guy infront did as causing the accident. There is one proviso though, if there was something on the road that made the guy in front have to make that move as an emergency action, pothole etc.

Though we have hit potholes in formation before and always the people I ride with have hit the pothole rather than sideswipe their companions. Not that they had much chance to make any decision.

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

13 October 2014 - 11:20am
When I was about 10 or 11 years old, I hit a parked car whilst cycling with a friend. That's the only collision I can recall ever having with a motor vehicle. I have never come off as the result of a collision. I did have an off when I was a teenager when the driver of a motor vehicle forced me off the road. I did not have any physical contact with the vehicle, but it was my belief that the driver deliberately forced me off the road, or at the least meant to intimidate me.

I have had several *very* near misses, and have been forced off the road by a motor vehicle twice (including the incident noted above). Those have all been the fault of the motor vehicle driver, although in a couple of cases, I probably could have prevented them or at least made them less likely, through my own actions.

Re: Clipping and running

13 October 2014 - 11:13am
Tonyf33 wrote:Please explain why in the context of the rules this is 100% the guy in fronts fault?
the guy stuck his arm out AND gave an auidble warning of his intention, and yes that doesn't give him priority and yes he moved over without checking over his shoulder.

That said the chap behind ignored his signal in reality, did not brake, did not adjust his own position & did NOT give him enough space when there WAS ample time (he stopped pedalling if you look), two wrongs don't make a right.
What if the guy in front had hit an obstacle or had to swiftly swerve to avoid something..what then?
the rider behind had ample opportunity to brake and move to the inside..50/50 if you ask me

Nah not 50 50 at all 100% the guy making the move. The general rule on the road is that you and you alone are responsible for making sure it's safe to perform a move. The other guy has no responsibility to facilitate it. Leaving a gap etc is polite but that's all it is, the guy behind has no more responsibility than to hold his line at a constant speed.

If the guy in making the move cannot find a gap he can ease off, let those guys go and *then* make his move across.

This would have been the same if it was cars on the motorway or whatever.

TL;Dr the guy behind is blameless and would be within his rights to sue for personal injury, it's that clear cut.

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

13 October 2014 - 11:10am
mjr wrote:beardy wrote:That is the only thing that has bought me off, both of us thought it was our own fault which was rather handy in not leaving us feeling bitter towards the other.
I'd like that sort of thing as "Yes, came off, other road user fault" please. Thanks.

You can not let me off the hook that easily, we both felt it was our own fault rather than the other person's fault. However I think it was possibly not significant enough an accident to be in with the others, it was more of a "cleat moment" type severity.

Re: Clipping and running

13 October 2014 - 11:09am
Very similar maneuver to the cars you can see on the motorways now and again, they start the maneuver then indicate. One of my pet hates. OK, he does indicate first then move, but the time gap is so small I would not expect anyone to react that quickly. Definitely the fault of the guy in front, you've got to make sure it's safe to move before making the move...

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

13 October 2014 - 11:02am
I've only once been knocked off and that was when I was "track standing " while pedestrians were walking over a zebra crossing. My rear wheel was hit by a motorbike. The motorbike was sliding along the ground - the rider having lost control after braking at the last minute. Apparently he hadn't noticed me or the pedestrians in time
I wasn't hurt and my bike was undamaged.
I've had a few falls in group riding though

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

13 October 2014 - 10:58am
Over 40 odd years I could probably answer all of the above. Worst accident I have had though was from a wheel touch whilst cycling in a group, end up in hospital having 2 of my fingers pinned back on. Fortunately all incindents with cars I have managed to either not come off or land well, and walk away .


.

Re: Clipping and running

13 October 2014 - 10:55am
I agree, the onus is always on the person making the manoeuver to make sure the way is clear so the issue of fault is pretty clear cut. Of course there is always courtesy. The cyclist behind had time to slow and allow the cyclist much more space to fit in. It is what I would have done in the situation in the video and on a motorway when faced with somebody wishing to pull into my lane

Re: A warm dry winter?

13 October 2014 - 9:57am
Postboxer wrote:The BBC website doesn't even match the current weather. Took a risk of it staying dry versus the wet all day forecast and luckily it did. I should have however paid attention to the wind which was fairly strong and in my face for the first half, with some benefit on the second half though.

The BBC stopped updating their forecasts over the weekend some time ago. Unless they have started again, there's no point using it at weekends.

Been using the Met office for walking in Cumbria this week. Only trouble is, the mountain forecast is now updated at ridiculous hours in the morning- one was just after 1 pm. In changeable weather like at present, that makes it little more than a waste of time. It's ironic that the town forecasts are updated regularly and the mountain ones (designed for safety and including things like cloudbase and specific weather warnings for high ground) are hours out of date before most people would start walking- it isn't the Alps where people start before dawn.

I also note that often the forecast dated times are often up to an hour before the forecast has actually been posted.

Re: Clipping and running

13 October 2014 - 9:45am
[XAP]Bob wrote: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?

If I'm in lane three and half alongside a vehicle in lane 2 of a motorway I don't expect it to slam the brakes on when I start to indicate - it's my job to ensure a gap is present before I move.

It's not a question of ahead and behind - only one cyclist made a move on the road.


+1

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 9:38am
As a driver I find flashing red rear lights on bikes more noticable than steady ones.
Pedal reflectors are fine, but my pedals don't take them. So perhaps anklets that are reflective, or have lights, would be a decent substitute if the law were to catch up with modern bike design.
Spoke reflectors can be useful to catch the attention of drivers coming out of side roads. I'd have them on now if I didn't do all my cycling in daylight these days. (I do carry lights in winter in case of sudden bad weather).

I wouldn't want my front light to be dazzling anyone.
Quite apart from the anti-social aspect of it, as a driver, if I'm dazzled by sun or lights I do indeed slow down, or stop. But in that respect I'm far more the exception than the rule. The most dangerous drivers are the very ones who won't slow down if they're dazzled, they just carry on regardless and use 'I was dazzled' as an excuse for everything up to and including what I'd call murder. And of course, slowing down or stopping can be instrumental in causing a shunt, which can run across the carriageway too, although it's always the driver behind's fault if there is one.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 9:15am
The theory of the tragedy of the commons isnt either an excuse for, or a call for, a race to the bottom.

I do find the defining feature of night driving nowadays to be some git behind me with their dipped headlights brightly illuminating my car ceiling and mirror region. I dont see me being a git like them too as an answer to that problem.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 9:10am
You will car that you dazzle others when they can't judge your speed and have you off.

As opposed to having me off because I can't be seen against the glare of dipped headlights.

My accumulated experience as a car driver and as a cyclist with increasingly bright lights is that if I am dazzled I slow down and maybe even stop. This also seems to apply to other car drivers.

A dazzled car driver is probably in less control and less able to see where you are. Dazzling car drivers will be counter productive when it comes to your own safety, dangerous to others, totally inconsiderate. Sort of behaviour that a few car drivers get so badly criticised for on forums like this. And you don't care when you do it to others.

No I don't because I consider car drivers, even with dipped headlights, to be constantly guilty of dazzling me. You may set you standards low to accommodate such behaviors, I don't and see no need to moderate my behavior when I have to deal with what I consider to be inconsiderate behaviour from every car I meet coming in the opposite direction.

If folks want to understand the dynamics of the lighting situation then I'd recommend reading up on 'The tradgedy of the commons' because night lighting is one such scenario.

Re: Navdy

13 October 2014 - 9:06am
Lance Dopestrong wrote:I really can't see the point. Even my creaky old Sat nav gives clear and timely voice commands, so why the need to have a screen whacked up in your line of sight? Unless you're deaf, where's the benefit?
But does your satnav show you incoming Twerps and the attached photos of their dog pulling a funny face or their child doing something weird ... And then having read that Twerp, does you satnav encourage you to completely take your eyes and concentration off the road whilst you type in some inane response ?

Ian

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