# Another cyclist down



## oldwheels (26 Sep 2019)

Earlier this week a female cyclist died after a collision on Isle of Mull near Ulva Ferry. Information is very sparse but rumour has it she was struck by a trailer. Her male companion was also possibly struck. Everyone is very tight lipped about this and my info only comes from someone working nearby who did not witness the incident but was alerted by the noise of emergency vehicles and helicopter.


----------



## Drago (26 Sep 2019)

R.i.p.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (26 Sep 2019)

There was a very brief report about this on the BBC news site but I can't find it now.

I recall it referred to a collision involving "a livestock trailer". I wonder if it was the classic overtake and cut back in, without taking account of the trailer being towed.


----------



## Globalti (26 Sep 2019)

My sister was almost killed in that way in the Yorkshire Dales. She recovered but less than a year later developed MS and I often wonder if the trauma triggered the illness.


----------



## Domus (26 Sep 2019)

Climbing (very slowly) up Cragg Vale last year when I was subject to a slow close pass, I thought to myself, this car is a bit close, then the caravan being towed came past.................... about 9 inches closer


----------



## Paulus (26 Sep 2019)

I do get quite concerned that many trailers are wider than the towing vehicle. The driver may give enough room but forgets/disregards the extra width needed for the trailer to pass.


----------



## Domus (26 Sep 2019)

Exactly.


----------



## Baldy (26 Sep 2019)

I was hit the same way about six years ago in Doller. Range rover towing a house box. The b****r just drove off.


----------



## Mo1959 (26 Sep 2019)

.....and another. 
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/new...ells-after-crash-closes-main-road-near-cupar/


----------



## glasgowcyclist (26 Sep 2019)

And this one too :https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-49809119

_"A cyclist on an "unusual three-wheeler bike" has died in a crash with a lorry.
The collision, on the westbound carriageway of the A303 near Solstice Park Services, happened just after midday on Monday.
Wiltshire Police said the 71-year-old man died at the scene and the road was closed for five hours"_


I don't think there's anything inherently unusual about a 3-wheeler, even if it's something like a recumbent.


----------



## Drago (26 Sep 2019)

You or I don't, but Joe D. Mail will think it's the work of Satan and Richard Nixon.


----------



## numbnuts (26 Sep 2019)

RIP


----------



## Slick (26 Sep 2019)

Mo1959 said:


> .....and another.
> https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/new...ells-after-crash-closes-main-road-near-cupar/


Terrible. Is that not the second in Fife in just a few months?


----------



## Slick (26 Sep 2019)

oldwheels said:


> Earlier this week a female cyclist died after a collision on Isle of Mull near Ulva Ferry. Information is very sparse but rumour has it she was struck by a trailer. Her male companion was also possibly struck. Everyone is very tight lipped about this and my info only comes from someone working nearby who did not witness the incident but was alerted by the noise of emergency vehicles and helicopter.


Thanks for the information, seems strange they are keeping it quiet, please update the thread when you can.


----------



## Globalti (26 Sep 2019)

I wonder if Spring and Autumn are worse times for cars hitting cyclists due to dazzling low sun shining on windscreens misty with plasticiser film or just moisture? 

My last two close passes were by elderly men driving tiny cars and heading towards the sun. I don't believe either driver actually saw me. Older drivers sometimes don't use the demister on low speed to ventilate the car as they believe it's only for the first few minutes in the morning. It's why they often drive huddled in hat, coat and gloves with little holes wiped in the condensation.


----------



## Slick (26 Sep 2019)

Globalti said:


> I wonder if Spring and Autumn are worse times for cars hitting cyclists due to dazzling low sun shining on windscreens misty with plasticiser film or just moisture?
> 
> My last two close passes were by elderly men driving tiny cars and heading towards the sun. I don't believe either driver actually saw me. Older drivers sometimes don't use the demister on low speed to ventilate the car as they believe it's only for the first few minutes in the morning. It's why they often drive huddled in hat, coat and gloves with little holes wiped in the condensation.


That's probably true but a bit early for the sun to be that low is it not?


----------



## Globalti (26 Sep 2019)

How so? The sun is low for about an hour after sunrise and before sunset and at the moment that's around commuter time.

For the last couple of weeks heading SE on my route to work over the Haslingden Grane road at around 07.30 I've been blinded by the sun right in my eyes as the road climbs gradually.


----------



## Slick (26 Sep 2019)

Globalti said:


> How so? The sun is low for about an hour after sunrise and before sunset and at the moment that's around commuter time.
> 
> For the last couple of weeks heading SE on my route to work over the Haslingden Grane road at around 07.30 I've been blinded by the sun right in my eyes as the road climbs gradually.


Maybe it's a geographical thing but I have seen a serious head on crash caused by low winter sun but if I remember correctly it was much later in the year and I personally haven't had any issues whilst out on the bike yet. Just my experiences though.


----------



## Slow But Determined (26 Sep 2019)

Funnily enough I was driving into low sun yesterday and actually said to my passenger this would be a bad time to be cycling as I could see next to nothing.

I suppose as a cyclist it would be something I would think about but a non cyclist probably wouldn't.


----------



## Globalti (26 Sep 2019)

The sun doesn't even have to be shining in your eyes, just illuminating the grey plasticiser film or moisture inside the windscreen is sufficient to blind a driver.

You can sometimes be driving behind a car and wondering if the driver can actually see anything. I'm afraid I classify this kind of driver as just stupid, along with people who post videos filmed in portrait or leave dog poo hanging in plastic bags on bushes.


----------



## Mrs M (26 Sep 2019)

There’s far too many Mr Magoos on the road and the low sun just makes things worse.
I try to avoid these times or go out in very bright clothes and lights a plenty, also sticking to off road or shared paths whenever available.
Very sad to hear about these latest casualties.


----------



## raleighnut (26 Sep 2019)

Awful news RIP


----------



## mjr (26 Sep 2019)

Drago said:


> You or I don't, but Joe D. Mail will think it's the work of Satan and Richard Nixon.


Which is why the police deserve criticism for saying that in https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/5002/Witness-appeal-after-cyclist-dies-in-A303-collision

RIP all.


----------



## mjr (26 Sep 2019)

Slow But Determined said:


> Funnily enough I was driving into low sun yesterday and actually said to my passenger this would be a bad time to be cycling as I could see next to nothing.


So you flipped down your sunglasses, set your sun visor to block out nearly all the sky, dropped your speed due to the reduced visibility or in the worst case, pulled over and waited the 30 minutes it takes the sun to set before you continued, rather than driving blind, right? 

https://www.wheels.ca/news/sunrise-sunset-driving-tips-to-keep-you-safe-during-both-events/ although I think the last one is iffy.


----------



## Globalti (26 Sep 2019)

Not so iffy. That's a pretty well-written little piece actually.


----------



## JPBoothy (26 Sep 2019)

mjr said:


> So you flipped down your sunglasses, set your sun visor to block out nearly all the sky, dropped your speed due to the reduced visibility or in the worst case, pulled over and waited the 30 minutes it takes the sun to set before you continued, rather than driving blind, right?
> 
> https://www.wheels.ca/news/sunrise-sunset-driving-tips-to-keep-you-safe-during-both-events/ although I think the last one is iffy.


The problem is that you may be perfectly comfortable with the conditions one minute, but then turn a corner and find that it is like somebody shone a search-light onto your windscreen. As already mentioned it is a good time to stay off the main road and, if necessary 'share' the path with others until conditions improve.


----------



## Mo1959 (26 Sep 2019)

Slick said:


> Terrible. Is that not the second in Fife in just a few months?


I think so. Sure there was one around a month or so ago.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (26 Sep 2019)

Very sad news, RIP all.
Some roads on Mull are twisty and narrow, you can't see what's round the corner.


----------



## mjr (26 Sep 2019)

Globalti said:


> I wonder if Spring and Autumn are worse times for cars hitting cyclists due to dazzling low sun shining on windscreens misty with plasticiser film or just moisture?


It's difficult to tell, but it looks like Spring is the worst in the UK. I threw the just-published RRCGB 2018 tables into a stats package and the rate that accidents happen seems fairly constant over most of the year but for a noticeable surge around April.

Although, if we suspect people cycle a bit less in winter, then the rate that accidents happen seeming fairly constant would mean that winter has a higher risk. As usual, we are limited by how little cycling trip data we have.

In case anyway has a copy of R (from r-project.org) to hand, here's what I was looking at. I'm a bit rusty at this language and I apologise for some of this terminology ("Accidents"!) but it's what RRCGB still uses:

Accidents <- read.csv("Accidents_2018.csv")
Casualties <- read.csv("Casualties_2018.csv")
Vehicles <- read.csv("Vehicles_2018.csv")
cycles <- subset(Vehicles, Vehicle_Type==1)
cycle_accidents <- subset(Accidents, is.element(Accident_Index, cycles$Accident_Index))
plot(sort(as.Date(cycle_accidents$Date, "%d/%m/%Y")))


----------



## mjr (26 Sep 2019)

JPBoothy said:


> The problem is that you may be perfectly comfortable with the conditions one minute, but then turn a corner and find that it is like somebody shone a search-light onto your windscreen.


It shouldn't be a problem. It should be a quick adjustment to a reasonably forseeable change in conditions: the sun rises and sets every day!



> As already mentioned it is a good time to stay off the main road and, if necessary 'share' the path with others until conditions improve.


I am not comfortable with advice that seems like blaming cyclists for riding on roads at certain times.


----------



## Globalti (26 Sep 2019)

Fine as long as you're alive!


----------



## classic33 (26 Sep 2019)

mjr said:


> It shouldn't be a problem. It should be a quick adjustment to a reasonably forseeable change in conditions: the sun rises and sets every day!
> 
> 
> I am not comfortable with advice that seems like blaming cyclists for riding on roads at certain times.


It was gone 11:00 when the incident happened.

You saying that the time of day a cyclist was killed is a cheap way of blaming of blaming a person who cannot answer back. And at present we don't have the full story yet.


----------



## mjr (26 Sep 2019)

classic33 said:


> It was gone 11:00 when the incident happened.


Not the incident I was posting about but I apologise for continuing the thread drift.


----------



## classic33 (26 Sep 2019)

mjr said:


> Not the incident I was posting about but I apologise for continuing the thread drift.


Put another way, neither sunrise nor sunset played a direct part in the incident. Sunrise being nearly four hours earlier.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 Sep 2019)

glasgowcyclist said:


> And this one too :https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-49809119
> 
> _"A cyclist on an "unusual three-wheeler bike" has died in a crash with a lorry.
> The collision, on the westbound carriageway of the A303 near Solstice Park Services, happened just after midday on Monday.
> ...



It was an upright trike and he rode it on that road regularly. When they say unusual they mean not common in my view.


----------



## part-timer (27 Sep 2019)

Slick said:


> Thanks for the information, seems strange they are keeping it quiet, please update the thread when you can.


As both a part-time cyclist on Mull and a driver I have sympathies with both. Some things cyclists do here I've seen make your hair stand on end. We have only 20 miles of double track here, and only 3 places on that double track where it's safe to overtake another car. So you can imagine the frustration when you're heading for the ferry and 2 or more cyclists hear you coming and suddenly swing out in front of you, to force you to overtake wide. The only trouble is, as a local, you know you've got another 5 miles to go before you can overtake safely, so have to lose maybe 15 minutes. I've actually been taking a sick child to the hospital and slowed down by this. So that's the first thing to realise. When I'm cycling here I pull over if I'm not at a safe overtaking place, but so often visitors (sadly usually central belt Scots - the English tend to be a bit more humble) won't do this. Secondly, it's not unusual here to have a cyclist toiling uphill in front of you at 2 or 3 miles an hour on a single track who refuses to pull over at the next passing place to allow overtaking (which is actually illegal). The third and most terrifying thing is the cyclist who is inexperienced and suddenly loses balance and lurches out in front of you (often without a helmet). I'm a cyclist too, we like to see cyclists, but it would be good to see a bit more humility and an understanding that - even if you're a Scot - there might be lots of local knowledge about roads that you don't know. I noticed that someone talked about a driver heading right at them. It's normal practice for local drivers to maintain their usual speed here on single tracks when approaching one another, and time their passing to coincide with a passing place. To the newbie it looks like there's going to be a head-on collision. You get the hang of that after a couple of years. I can see why cyclists find that scary, but local driving here is actually actually exceptionally good and courteous most of the time. Cyclists do also need to realise that this is a working island and those here for leisure should have the courtesy to give way for that.


----------



## lazybloke (27 Sep 2019)

glasgowcyclist said:


> And this one too :https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-49809119
> 
> _"A cyclist on an "unusual three-wheeler bike" has died in a crash with a lorry.
> The collision, on the westbound carriageway of the A303 near Solstice Park Services, happened just after midday on Monday.
> ...





Drago said:


> *You or I don't, but Joe D. Mail will think it's the work of Satan and Richard Nixon*.





mjr said:


> *Which is why the police deserve criticism for saying that* in https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/5002/Witness-appeal-after-cyclist-dies-in-A303-collision
> 
> RIP all.



I'm with @YukonBoy on this. When I see a bike on the roads it usually has two wheels, so it seems fair to describe a 3-wheeler as unusual, especially in a police appeal for witnesses. Why would you omit an unusual characteristic, if trying to jog memories?


Of course I'm aware of anti-cycling bias in the media (and have complained about it previously on CC), but I just don't see it here, and I wonder exactly what concerns are being raised in the above quotes.


Let me finish by condemning the terrible and _avoidable _events in Mull as well as on the A303, and the continuing level of carnage on all our roads in general.
So many drivers, including but not limited to the the group of so-called "professional" lorry-drivers, drive their lethal weapons with a sometimes casual & careless indifference to other road users, perhaps given that opportunity because the police have been deprived of funding to adequately patrol the roads. And when this appalling standard of driving results in death, it's particularly galling to hear jurors excusing it.
Those are issues that demand urgent attention.


----------



## oldwheels (27 Sep 2019)

Part-timer makes a few good points but I would argue about the helmet remark. I never wear one.
Regarding the fatality one should never jump to conclusions. The latest information I have from a reasonably reliable source is that the woman suffered a massive heart attack before the collision and in a rare case she is said to have collided with the trailer rather than the other way round and was dead before the collision. There are still a few strange aspects in that the road was closed for several hours and recovery vehicles and coastguard teams were seen heading out so not that simple but perhaps just normal practice.
More may emerge in time.


----------



## Drago (27 Sep 2019)

part-timer said:


> As both a part-time cyclist on Mull and a driver I have sympathies with both. Some things cyclists do here I've seen make your hair stand on end. We have only 20 miles of double track here, and only 3 places on that double track where it's safe to overtake another car. So you can imagine the frustration when you're heading for the ferry and 2 or more cyclists hear you coming and suddenly swing out in front of you, to force you to overtake wide. The only trouble is, as a local, you know you've got another 5 miles to go before you can overtake safely, so have to lose maybe 15 minutes. I've actually been taking a sick child to the hospital and slowed down by this. So that's the first thing to realise. When I'm cycling here I pull over if I'm not at a safe overtaking place, but so often visitors (sadly usually central belt Scots - the English tend to be a bit more humble) won't do this. Secondly, it's not unusual here to have a cyclist toiling uphill in front of you at 2 or 3 miles an hour on a single track who refuses to pull over at the next passing place to allow overtaking (which is actually illegal). The third and most terrifying thing is the cyclist who is inexperienced and suddenly loses balance and lurches out in front of you (often without a helmet). I'm a cyclist too, we like to see cyclists, but it would be good to see a bit more humility and an understanding that - even if you're a Scot - there might be lots of local knowledge about roads that you don't know. I noticed that someone talked about a driver heading right at them. It's normal practice for local drivers to maintain their usual speed here on single tracks when approaching one another, and time their passing to coincide with a passing place. To the newbie it looks like there's going to be a head-on collision. You get the hang of that after a couple of years. I can see why cyclists find that scary, but local driving here is actually actually exceptionally good and courteous most of the time. Cyclists do also need to realise that this is a working island and those here for leisure should have the courtesy to give way for that.



I just don't know where to begin with that little lot!


----------



## glasgowcyclist (27 Sep 2019)

Drago said:


> I just don't know where to begin with that little lot!



It’s the final sentence that is a give away for the writer's sense of entitlement.


----------



## Phaeton (27 Sep 2019)

glasgowcyclist said:


> And this one too :https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-49809119


This is taken from a Motorcycling forum, but copied from a Lorry/HGV forum, don't know which one,

Fatal 23/09/19

On Monday I was heading back up the A303 from Oxford back to my depot in Henstridge after tipping my steel load. One or two hills before Solstice Services the small black car in front of me put on its right indicator and changed lanes. Despite questioning why on earth he was moving out of the empty inside lane to the outside lane I followed suit. I squinted my eyes, it was noon and the light was good. Was that a bike? Omg there was a 3 wheeled bike cycling on the 70mph dualed A303 - I could barely see him! From the view in my cab looking down on the bike who was travelling uphill, the backdrop was tarmac. Trust me that bike was nearly invisible to me. Non lorry drivers think that because of our elevated view we have a better view of everything but this is not always the case. The view of the bike from a car was probably much better. They would have been at a very similar height so a car drivers view would probably have silhouetted the cyclist against the skyline making him much more visible. I remember passing the bike with the cyclist standing up in his pedals trying to get up the hill thinking that was an accident waiting to happen!

5 minutes later that cyclist was dead.

A truck hit him just after that junction before the top of the last hill before Solstice. It was literally a couple of minutes after I passed him. Now obviously it’s terribly sad and condolences to the family and friends but WHY??!! What sort of person cycles up what is effectively a motorway without a hard shoulder? He can’t have been doing more than 10-15mph uphill.

I feel desperately sorry for the truck driver as that could have been any one of us. The police appealed for anyone who saw either vehicle shortly before the incident to ring 101. I did what I thought was right and rang up describing the view I had from my cab. They are taking a statement from me next week.

Why oh why are bicycles allowed on dual carriageways like the A303??


----------



## Drago (27 Sep 2019)

It's not "effectively a motorway", and shouldn't be treated as one. That lorry driver is so far up his own rear he probably lives on Mull.


----------



## JPBoothy (27 Sep 2019)

mjr said:


> It shouldn't be a problem. It should be a quick adjustment to a reasonably forseeable change in conditions: the sun rises and sets every day!
> 
> 
> I am not comfortable with advice that seems like blaming cyclists for riding on roads at certain times.


Ha Ha, yes it does come out 'most' days.. There was no blame being implied by my comment, it was just my own opinion. We are all free to make our own choices, and mine is to anticipate the unexpected and arrive at my destination safely. If that means giving up my 'right' to mix it with heavy traffic at the busier times of the day and/or when the conditions aren't the best then so be it. I don't have to wear a helmet but I choose to, I don't have to ride in single file but I choose to, I don't have to use lights and a bell so often but I choose to. Each to their own


----------



## fossyant (27 Sep 2019)

part-timer said:


> Cyclists do also need to realise that this is a working island and those here for leisure should have the courtesy to give way for that.



Troll alert !

Joker. Everywhere is a 'working place'.

We've all got rights, and it's not always needed to pull over - it's quite hard to stop on a hill and get going. 

Your attitude is exactly why I've stopped riding on roads, as a 'similar' person broke my bloody spine because they couldn't be bothered 'waiting' - oh it's a bike, I'll pull across him.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Sep 2019)

Drago said:


> It's not "effectively a motorway", and shouldn't be treated as one. That lorry driver is so far up his own rear he probably lives on Mull.



Agreed and that is part of the issue. Lordy drivers treating it as a motorway and not looking out and taking care around more vulnerable road users.


----------



## mjr (27 Sep 2019)

lazybloke said:


> Of course I'm aware of anti-cycling bias in the media (and have complained about it previously on CC), but I just don't see it here, and I wonder exactly what concerns are being raised in the above quotes.


I feel that "unusual" is othering, implicitly agreeing with the Mister Toads of this world that these are deviant vehicles unsuitable for Very Important Roads, and it's also odd to say "3-wheeled bike" which encourages images of a Shane-Sutton-style wobbly using stabilisers swaying along the road, instead of the shorter and more accurate "tricycle" or "trike".


----------



## mjr (27 Sep 2019)

JPBoothy said:


> Ha Ha, yes it does come out 'most' days.. There was no blame being implied by my comment, it was just my own opinion. We are all free to make our own choices, and mine is to anticipate the unexpected and arrive at my destination safely. If that means giving up my 'right' to mix it with heavy traffic at the busier times of the day and/or when the conditions aren't the best then so be it. I don't have to wear a helmet but I choose to, I don't have to ride in single file but I choose to, I don't have to use lights and a bell so often but I choose to. Each to their own


People who have no viable alternative to do otherwise are not choosing to die and the above sorts of comments do actually imply blaming them if they are hurt by another road user.


----------



## Phaeton (27 Sep 2019)

fossyant said:


> Troll alert !


I'm not sure you are correct, if you are working on the island (I have never been) & your livelihood depends on you getting from one side to the other I'm sure it's very infuriating when cyclist don't give way. I was in a line of traffic the other day in Cumbria, must have been 30 cars, vans. lorries all following a tractor & trailer, after about 10 minutes he pulled into a lay-by & allowed all the following vehicles to pass, he didn't have to but it was a nice gesture. If I was on holiday & cycling across the island, I'd like to think I would probably pull over & allow following traffic to pass.


----------



## fossyant (27 Sep 2019)

The get out of the way attitude is what gets folk killed. Sorry, but I have to wait for cyclists when Im driving to work in Manchester, so why does this little place need special treatment.


----------



## mjr (27 Sep 2019)

Phaeton said:


> I'm not sure you are correct, if you are working on the island (I have never been) & your livelihood depends on you getting from one side to the other I'm sure it's very infuriating when cyclist don't give way.


Should anyone who gets furious at other road users have a driving licence? And what about those working in tourism whose livelihoods depend on those cyclists visiting? And is a livelihood that depends on improbably clear roads sustainable anyway?



> I was in a line of traffic the other day in Cumbria, must have been 30 cars, vans. lorries all following a tractor & trailer, after about 10 minutes he pulled into a lay-by & allowed all the following vehicles to pass, he didn't have to but it was a nice gesture. If I was on holiday & cycling across the island, I'd like to think I would probably pull over & allow following traffic to pass.


How does anyone know whether a particular cyclist is on holiday anyway? You may guess but there was undue certainty in the post, plus a helmet comment, which smelt odd.


----------



## Phaeton (27 Sep 2019)

mjr said:


> Should anyone who gets furious at other road users have a driving licence?


What has that got to do with the price of chips?


----------



## Glow worm (27 Sep 2019)

part-timer said:


> I'm a cyclist too.



Sure. Here's some live footage of your bike...


----------



## oldwheels (27 Sep 2019)

Part-timer makes a few valid points but I am puzzled how you can tell Scottish cyclists from English. 
Cyclists are a continual bone of contention. Yes Mull is a working island and not a Theme Park devoted entirely to tourists. Visitors are welcome but they should adapt to local conditions and act accordingly. Too many take the attitude that they are giving us money and therefore they can behave as they wish.
It is not difficult to let following traffic past without losing too much speed. The only exception would be uphill where most local drivers wait for a struggling cyclist to reach the top. Tourist drivers are a different matter. 
I have driven and cycled on Mull now for nearly 50 years and the roads now cannot cope with the current traffic volume. The tourist industry is mostly driven by incomers who in many cases have no interest other than making money. Bit of a rant well off topic but I feel strongly about road behaviour.


----------



## JPBoothy (27 Sep 2019)

mjr said:


> People who have no viable alternative to do otherwise are not choosing to die and the above sorts of comments do actually imply blaming them if they are hurt by another road user.


Mmm, I am still not seeing how my comments can be taken as implying that somebody is to blame for anything.. Nobody (motorist or cyclist) is choosing to die when they set off on their journey and, there is nothing that we can do to guarantee that it won't happen either. What I did say is, that we are free to make our own choices and, that mine is to not mix it with traffic if 'I personally' don't believe it to be a good time to do so. However, I agree with you that it isn't always viable to do so and I often find that my journey will force me to use sections of road that I would rather avoid but can't. At the end of the day we can only protect ourselves so much, and the best protection of all (IMO) is experience 'of being out in different conditions/situations' and anticipation of the unexpected. There was no blame intended and I apologise if I have 'unintentionally' managed to do so


----------



## classic33 (27 Sep 2019)

oldwheels said:


> Part-timer makes a few valid points but I am puzzled how you can tell Scottish cyclists from English.
> Cyclists are a continual bone of contention. Yes Mull is a working island and not a Theme Park devoted entirely to tourists. Visitors are welcome but they should adapt to local conditions and act accordingly. Too many take the attitude that they are giving us money and therefore they can behave as they wish.
> It is not difficult to let following traffic past without losing too much speed. The only exception would be uphill where most local drivers wait for a struggling cyclist to reach the top. Tourist drivers are a different matter.
> I have driven and cycled on Mull now for nearly 50 years and the roads now cannot cope with the current traffic volume. The tourist industry is mostly driven by incomers who in many cases have no interest other than making money. Bit of a rant well off topic but I feel strongly about road behaviour.


I cycle on holiday, I can't drive. With a fair amount of that being on single track roads, with very few places to pass anything else on the road. I'll turn the head, face the driver and acknowledge that I know they are there. Often with work to be done. A few days of the correct weather can see them "flying about", from one place to the next, whilst the weather holds. 

I've yet to be inconvenienced by simply acknowledging that they may be fighting the weather, not the clock. So it's a good idea to let something bigger past me, when it's safe for both of us, to do so. Having them in front can improve your safety.


Your earlier post, giving the additional information, shows what knee jerk reactions can bring. Until there is more detail on what actually was the cause, we should be careful of blaming someone who may be innocent.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Sep 2019)

oldwheels said:


> I have driven and cycled on Mull now for nearly 50 years and the roads now cannot cope with the current traffic volume.



You've hit the nail on the head. The real issue on Mull is all the motorised traffic clogging up the roads. How much of this motorised traffic pulls over, or do they just expect others to get out of their way? How do we get rid of this menace?


----------



## oldwheels (28 Sep 2019)

The subject of behaviour on singletrack roads has been done to death before so I will not continue on that theme. Mostly traffic on Mull is reasonable towards cyclists who are reasonable. Traffic leaving a ferry in large numbers of mixed ability and locals desperate to get in front are best just sat out for the short time it takes.


----------



## Drago (28 Sep 2019)

If the trucker could barely see a cyclist, then he has zero chance of spotting a pedestrian - and they do pop up on motorways and dual carriageways, stranded motorists, illegal immigrants, etc - then he shouldn't be driving the vehicle. Park it u,p, wait until the conditions improve. But oh no, he's self entitled and up his own behind, so he's entitled to plough on regardless of the conditions and it's the victims fault if they get in someone's way.

And as for our chap on mull....well, the sooner he and his ilk are legislated and priced off the roads the better.


----------



## Slick (28 Sep 2019)

part-timer said:


> As both a part-time cyclist on Mull and a driver I have sympathies with both. Some things cyclists do here I've seen make your hair stand on end. We have only 20 miles of double track here, and only 3 places on that double track where it's safe to overtake another car. So you can imagine the frustration when you're heading for the ferry and 2 or more cyclists hear you coming and suddenly swing out in front of you, to force you to overtake wide. The only trouble is, as a local, you know you've got another 5 miles to go before you can overtake safely, so have to lose maybe 15 minutes. I've actually been taking a sick child to the hospital and slowed down by this. So that's the first thing to realise. When I'm cycling here I pull over if I'm not at a safe overtaking place, but so often visitors (sadly usually central belt Scots - the English tend to be a bit more humble) won't do this. Secondly, it's not unusual here to have a cyclist toiling uphill in front of you at 2 or 3 miles an hour on a single track who refuses to pull over at the next passing place to allow overtaking (which is actually illegal). The third and most terrifying thing is the cyclist who is inexperienced and suddenly loses balance and lurches out in front of you (often without a helmet). I'm a cyclist too, we like to see cyclists, but it would be good to see a bit more humility and an understanding that - even if you're a Scot - there might be lots of local knowledge about roads that you don't know. I noticed that someone talked about a driver heading right at them. It's normal practice for local drivers to maintain their usual speed here on single tracks when approaching one another, and time their passing to coincide with a passing place. To the newbie it looks like there's going to be a head-on collision. You get the hang of that after a couple of years. I can see why cyclists find that scary, but local driving here is actually actually exceptionally good and courteous most of the time. Cyclists do also need to realise that this is a working island and those here for leisure should have the courtesy to give way for that.
> I'm sorry, I can't agree with most of your statement. I've driven an 8 wheeled crane truck on the island and know the roads fairly well and have never had an issue with cyclists even during the busy season when that ferry is crammed full from morning to night.





Phaeton said:


> This is taken from a Motorcycling forum, but copied from a Lorry/HGV forum, don't know which one,
> 
> Fatal 23/09/19
> 
> ...


I just don't know where to start with this or how to respond. Hopefully someone somewhere is able to educate this driver sooner rather than later.


----------



## Uphilldowndale (28 Sep 2019)

oldwheels said:


> Earlier this week a female cyclist died after a collision on Isle of Mull near Ulva Ferry. Information is very sparse but rumour has it she was struck by a trailer. Her male companion was also possibly struck. Everyone is very tight lipped about this and my info only comes from someone working nearby who did not witness the incident but was alerted by the noise of emergency vehicles and helicopter.


There were no eye witnesses to the accident, hence the sparse information. Once the accident investigation is complete I will update this thread. Thoughts are with the Partner and family of the lady killed.


----------



## mjr (2 Oct 2019)

Phaeton said:


> What has that got to do with the price of chips?


Well, road rage is both a crime and contrary to the driving standards and IMO incompetent and illegal motorists (who shouldn't be on the road to start with) have absolutely no right to demand that legal road users get out of their way. Quite the opposite, in fact.


----------



## icowden (2 Oct 2019)

Drago said:


> It's not "effectively a motorway", and shouldn't be treated as one. That lorry driver is so far up his own rear he probably lives on Mull.



As one of the busiest fastest A roads in the UK, the majority of it is often considered to be part of the motorway network. It's a very fast road with heavy traffic. I suspect that the only reason it hasn't been upgraded to motorway status is the difficulty around Stonehenge and the fact that it is difficult to widen / make safe in many places.
https://www.roads.org.uk/motorway/a303

I definitely wouldn't cycle on it. Cycle Route 24 and 3 both avoid it.


----------



## mjr (2 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> As one of the busiest fastest A roads in the UK, the majority of it is often considered to be part of the motorway network. It's a very fast road with heavy traffic. I suspect that the only reason it hasn't been upgraded to motorway status is the difficulty around Stonehenge and the fact that it is difficult to widen / make safe in many places.
> https://www.roads.org.uk/motorway/a303
> 
> I definitely wouldn't cycle on it. Cycle Route 24 and 3 both avoid it.


Route 24 is Southampton to Bath (similar to the A36) and Route 3 is Bristol to Land's End (similar to the A38-A39 route). I struggle to think of a journey on either route where the A303 would make sense as an alternative, so could they really be said to avoid it?

Also, is most of the route really that difficult to widen? It seems to have been widened to two lanes both ways in many places, in preference to using any of the width for cycling and sometimes not even for walking.

There does not seem to be an alternative cycle route to the A303 or even many routes that near. Maybe there should be. Until then, it seems odd to respond to a cycling death by saying you wouldn't cycle on that road.

What would readers of this site do if they were living in, say, Stoke-sub-Hamdon and going to Ilchester, then? Drive? And if you can't? Just meekly accept that you must ride 11½km including 2km across basically open fields and 1km on another iffy A road, or 15km with 5km on unsurfaced bridleway? Would you really never be tempted by the 9km on smooth tarmac? And do you think that's good for the nation if cycling between places along most big A-roads is discouraged like that?


----------



## icowden (2 Oct 2019)

I was mostly replying about whether the A303 is pretty much considered a motorway.
As to your second question, yes I'd drive, or take the bridleway. 

Yep. I would discourage cycling on major A roads where the speed limit is 70mph in the same way that I would discourage 40 tonne trucks from using minor B roads and driving past schools. Common sense tells me that a vehicle moving between 10mph and 30mph is not compatible with a 60-70mph speed limit and carries a high risk of death. 

Seven Hills road near me is 40mph and narrow. I wouldn't cycle down that one either unless I was on the pavement. Do I think it should have a proper segregated cycle lane? yes. Same goes for the A303. If there isn't a suitable route, then we should be looking to make a safe one. I don't want my epitaph to be "Well, I had right of way!". Being "right" is useless if you're dead.

As for whether it is difficult to widen, that bit near Stonehenge seems to be causing a lot of problems for a start.


----------



## mjr (2 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> Yep. I would discourage cycling on major A roads where the speed limit is 70mph in the same way that I would discourage 40 tonne trucks from using minor B roads and driving past schools.


Does this mean "not at all in most cases" (the current UK practice) or that you would ban cyclists from major A roads?



icowden said:


> Common sense tells me that a vehicle moving between 10mph and 30mph is not compatible with a 60-70mph speed limit and carries a high risk of death. [...]


So why is the reaction to inconvenience the least harmful users by banning them, instead of lowering the speed limit there for the deadliest ones until a separate route is provided?



icowden said:


> As for whether it is difficult to widen, that bit near Stonehenge seems to be causing a lot of problems for a start.


Well, yes, because the half-length tunnel plan approved by Grayling is yet another cheapskate piecemeal upgrade which even got objections from UNESCO. I doubt adding cycleways would provoke anything like as much objection. http://stonehengealliance.org.uk/


----------



## icowden (2 Oct 2019)

mjr said:


> Does this mean "not at all in most cases" (the current UK practice) or that you would ban cyclists from major A roads?
> 
> So why is the reaction to inconvenience the least harmful users by banning them, instead of lowering the speed limit there for the deadliest ones until a separate route is provided?



I didn't say anything about banning. However as much as we can dream about turning the UK into a dutch style cycling utopia, it isn't going to happen overnight, and there is a much stronger argument for banning cycles to ensure safety than reducing speeds for motor vehicles. It would affect delivery logistics, pollution, times to get to work for a much larger number of people etc.

I'm a realist, and realistically providing a route for a smallish number of cyclists is going to be a lower priority than the huge number of motorists that use that road. Of course, you can cycle on that road. But personally I wouldn't.


----------



## Uphilldowndale (4 Oct 2019)

Having read some of the above comments, its probably worth confirming that the accident happened close to mid-day, in good visability. The accident happened on a single track road, and her Partner (who was ahead) had already pulled into the Passing Place to let the vehicle behind pass . Its also apparent from comments above, that this sort of accident/near miss happens way too often on our Roads. Words fail me that people think a few seconds or minutes of their time are worth more than someone else's life. I can only urge everyone to carry front and rear cameras - so if the worst happens, there is at least a record of what happened, and a way open to prosecute dangerous drivers.


----------



## mjr (4 Oct 2019)

Thanks for the update. I do carry cameras, but we also need to keep up the pressure on police and CPS to actually use the evidence and on politicians to undo the watering down of motorised killing offences.



icowden said:


> I didn't say anything about banning.


Indeed, but I was trying to work out what the heck "I would discourage cycling on major A roads where the speed limit is 70mph in the same way that I would discourage 40 tonne trucks from using minor B roads and driving past schools" meant - what way would you do that?



icowden said:


> However as much as we can dream about turning the UK into a dutch style cycling utopia, it isn't going to happen overnight,


And it'll never happen if we don't get a move on.



> and there is a much stronger argument for banning cycles to ensure safety than reducing speeds for motor vehicles. It would affect delivery logistics, pollution, times to get to work for a much larger number of people etc.


Logistics would cope and might even be easier with more people cycling, similar for times to get to work but probably wouldn't cope as well. Pollution would reduce if speed limits were lower (lower speeds require less energy requires less fuel burnt). Doesn't seem a strong argument at all.



icowden said:


> I'm a realist, and realistically providing a route for a smallish number of cyclists is going to be a lower priority than the huge number of motorists that use that road.


The main reason it's a smallish number of cyclists is probably because it's so crap. As is often said, you don't judge the demand for a bridge on the numbers swimming across the river.



icowden said:


> Of course, you can cycle on that road. But personally I wouldn't.


Great for you, but people who live along it probably have few viable alternatives.


----------



## Drago (4 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> I was mostly replying about whether the A303 is pretty much considered a motorway.



It is not a motorway. 

It should not be considered a motorway. 

It should not be treated by its users as if it were a motorway. 

It is open to all classes of traffic, and all users should consider that before driving upon it. 

Motorised users who trot out the "it's a motorway in all but name" platitude should be relieved of their licences. That's a fundamentally dangerous attitude for the pilot of a metallic kinetic weapon to hold.

The "it's a motorway in all but name" attitude is somewhat disturbing, the cycling equivalent of telling women not to wear short skirts and low necklines when going out if they don't want to fall victim to unpleasant types of crime. Blaming the victim for the actions of the offender is utterly reprehensible.

Even worse, if we surrender the A roads, then what's the progression? Having set the precedent we then risk being forced off the B roads too. Then off the 40 MPH roads, then the 30, then off the roads altogether. When that happens we know who to thank.


----------



## Skanker (4 Oct 2019)

I work in logistics and have done for about 20 years.
Most hgv’s are still physically limited to 56mph even after the speed limit was raised to 60mph in 2015.
So even if it is a 70mph road the lorries will never be travelling at that speed, and if they are travelling up any kind of steep incline they will probably only be doing about 45mph. If they can’t see and avoid a cyclist at that speed on any road then they should consider a different profession!


----------



## icowden (4 Oct 2019)

Drago said:


> It is not a motorway.
> It should not be considered a motorway.
> It should not be treated by its users as if it were a motorway.
> It is open to all classes of traffic, and all users should consider that before driving upon it.



That's a great standpoint. How do you intend to educate the many thousands of drivers who use the road having come off a motorway? Opinion is all very well but at the moment the reality of the situation is very different.

@Skanker, whilst I agree with you, there are a number of steep inclines, and when that truck hits the top of the hill at 20-25 metres per second and encounters a bike starting to speed up from 5mph or less, there may not be time to react. Line of sight is not uniform unless the route is flat, and the road is often not wide.


----------



## Drago (5 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> That's a great standpoint. How do you intend to educate the many thousands of drivers who use the road having come off a motorway? Opinion is all very well but at the moment the reality of the situation is very different.


It's not up to me educate anyone. It's down tp the government, the motoring interest groups, and individual motorists themselves to ensure the road network is used properly, and not to the detriment or endangerment of legitimate users who don't happen to own a 40 tonne suit of armour.

And it's not an opinion, it is a fact. The roads are open to all legitimate users, fact. Not just the ones that want to blithely blast along at speed and without consequence, fact. 

If you don't want to use major roads then that's fine, I've no personal issue with that, but please keep your reasoning to yourself - every time that line of reasoning is trotted out it adds legitimacy to those that want us off such roads, and even off the roads altogether.

As an aside, but a very pertinent one, do you believe women should not go out at night wearing "provocative" outfits? Please explain the difference

Should victims of auto crime not own nice cars, or victims of burglary not keep nice things in their houses? Please explain the difference.

crime is crime, regardless of whether it is sex crime, property crime, or road crime, and none of it is the fault of the victim, and in this day and age it is absolutely preposterous to suggest that a person desist from a lawful and legitimate action in order to appease the criminals.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (5 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> How do you intend to educate the many thousands of drivers who use the road having come off a motorway?



If they’re having trouble with reading and understanding the big road signs for 'motorway ends' and the associated speed limit signs then we ought to introduce the same measures for them as councils do for people who cycle. 

Maybe the motoring equivalent of one of these at the end of every motorway off-slip...







Oh, you can’t fit anything but a standard car through there? Never mind.


----------



## icowden (5 Oct 2019)

Drago said:


> crime is crime, regardless of whether it is sex crime, property crime, or road crime, and none of it is the fault of the victim, and in this day and age it is absolutely preposterous to suggest that a person desist from a lawful and legitimate action in order to appease the criminals.



It isn't a crime to drive at 70mph on a dual carriage way. It also isn't a crime to kill a person by accident travelling at a tenth of the speed of your car, if you have no time to react to them or stop. It might be a crime if a prosecutor can persuade a magistrate or judge that you were driving without due care and attention, but that's going to be difficult.

Drivers aren't criminals per se. Neither are cyclists. It is fundamental that a road with a speed limit of 70mph is generally incompatible with cyclists unless safe provision is made for them. Just because you can cycle on a road, it doesn't follow that it is wise to do so. There are many A roads I would not cycle on. The A3 for example. I have never seen a cyclist on the A3, but it isn't illegal to cycle there. Just unwise.

I have never suggested appeasement of a criminal and the majority of motorists are law abiding citizens driving perfectly safely and reasonably well. What I have suggested is that a lawful and legitimate action can also be extremely unwise.

@glasgowcyclist - motorway ends is fine. But the speed limit remains unchanged. The perception of danger for the driver also tends to remain unchanged precisely because so few characteristics change. We can wish it were otherwise, but it isn't.



> As an aside, but a very pertinent one, do you believe women should not go out at night wearing "provocative" outfits? Please explain the difference
> 
> Should victims of auto crime not own nice cars, or victims of burglary not keep nice things in their houses? Please explain the difference.



I don't believe anything. That can lead to religion. Of course women should not be dictated to regarding what they wear and neither should men. However it seems likely based on human nature, research, statistical analysis etc that some outfit choices may be better than others depending on the environment you are going into regardless of gender.

If I own an expensive car I would avoid parking it in an area with high car crime. If I have nice possessions I wouldn't leave them in the window for all to see. When I leave my bike I try to find the most secure place possible, and avoid locking it up in a public place if I can help it due to the certain knowledge that I have had a bike stolen from me in a public place.

This isn't a binary right / wrong. The world doesn't work like that.


----------



## Slick (5 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> I don't believe anything. That can lead to religion. Of course women should not be dictated to regarding what they wear and neither should men. However it seems likely based on human nature, research, statistical analysis etc *that some outfit choices may be better than others *depending on the environment you are going into regardless of gender.


Really?


----------



## DCBassman (10 Oct 2019)

Which bit are you 'really' ing at? Not prodding, just trying to understand.


----------



## Drago (10 Oct 2019)

Icowden seems to think that if you don't go put wearing a chastity belt and suit of armour then whatever happens is the victims fault. Charming attitude.


----------



## icowden (10 Oct 2019)

@Drago likes to infer things and make personal attacks rather than use reason?

See - not nice is it?

There seems to be a prevailing attitude that "i am allowed to do what I like and if bad things happen it's not my fault". On testing this theory with reality it just doesn't work. 

You can cycle down a 70mph road, but it's probably a bad idea. You can go out just wearing a jockstrap, but don't expect people to ignore you. Add to that human nature, mammalian instinct for procreation and the general strength difference between biological genders, whilst I'd be the first to say that absolutely you should be able to go out wearing two strips of material no wider than a belt, and I would totally defend your right to do so without molestation, the reality of life as it is now, means that no matter how woke or feminist you are, you take more risk than if you are wearing jeans and a t-shirt. 

Life is about more than just "self". I have to work very hard to understand people. I have been attacked in the past, and not wearing the right thing was part of the trigger for the attack (I was wearing an Elven cloak - long story). Maybe I am too cautious. Unfortunately most people are not logical, they are driven by hormones and emotion.

Making yourself safer is not about attributing blame to a victim.


----------



## Slick (11 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> @Drago likes to infer things and make personal attacks rather than use reason?
> 
> See - not nice is it?
> 
> ...


Ignore is exactly what I would do to someone out wearing nothing but a jock strap.


----------



## icowden (11 Oct 2019)

I bet you would find it tricky though...


----------



## Drago (12 Oct 2019)

icowden said:


> @Drago likes to infer things and make personal attacks rather than use reason...



Aha, commenting on someones perceived character, using a personal attack to decry someone else for making a personal attack! You did your own knees there.



icowden said:


> See - not nice is it?



No indeed, victing blaming is a terrible thing.


----------



## Tizme (14 Oct 2019)

I am obviously a bad person, I didn't realise that it was my fault for getting in the way, when a driver went passed me on a country lane so close he pulled his wing mirror in in order not to clip me. He was in so much of a hurry to get passed that he was forced to stop and explain that he had, in fact, given me enough room and therefore my hand signal and abusive shout were completely unwarranted. He even suggested I give him my name and address so that he could visit me in order to ensure I fully understood his point of view. As I am 5'6" tall and 9 1/2 st soaking wet he was absolutely stunned when I opened his car door and suggested he should get out to discuss the matter there and then! He appeared to be quite concerned that his door might get scratched on the hedgerow (it was that close) and shut it again quite quickly and drove off.

Perhaps if I only cycled/ran on cycle paths it would stop the drivers on "A" roads telling me to ride on country lanes and the drivers on "B" roads/country lanes telling me I shouldn't be on the road at all. 

But it's ok, as my cycle/run is clearly not as important as their journey, next time I will stop, jump in to the hedge/ditch and doff my cap as they pass, until I get to the nearest cycle path which is only about 5 miles away and shared with pedestrians, who politely tell me I should be on the road!


----------



## Mull cyclist (28 Nov 2019)

part-timer said:


> As both a part-time cyclist on Mull and a driver I have sympathies with both. Some things cyclists do here I've seen make your hair stand on end. We have only 20 miles of double track here, and only 3 places on that double track where it's safe to overtake another car. So you can imagine the frustration when you're heading for the ferry and 2 or more cyclists hear you coming and suddenly swing out in front of you, to force you to overtake wide. The only trouble is, as a local, you know you've got another 5 miles to go before you can overtake safely, so have to lose maybe 15 minutes. I've actually been taking a sick child to the hospital and slowed down by this. So that's the first thing to realise. When I'm cycling here I pull over if I'm not at a safe overtaking place, but so often visitors (sadly usually central belt Scots - the English tend to be a bit more humble) won't do this. Secondly, it's not unusual here to have a cyclist toiling uphill in front of you at 2 or 3 miles an hour on a single track who refuses to pull over at the next passing place to allow overtaking (which is actually illegal). The third and most terrifying thing is the cyclist who is inexperienced and suddenly loses balance and lurches out in front of you (often without a helmet). I'm a cyclist too, we like to see cyclists, but it would be good to see a bit more humility and an understanding that - even if you're a Scot - there might be lots of local knowledge about roads that you don't know. I noticed that someone talked about a driver heading right at them. It's normal practice for local drivers to maintain their usual speed here on single tracks when approaching one another, and time their passing to coincide with a passing place. To the newbie it looks like there's going to be a head-on collision. You get the hang of that after a couple of years. I can see why cyclists find that scary, but local driving here is actually actually exceptionally good and courteous most of the time. Cyclists do also need to realise that this is a working island and those here for leisure should have the courtesy to give way for that.


Rule 155
Single-track roads. These are only wide enough for one vehicle. They may have special passing places. If you see a vehicle coming towards you, or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing place on your left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right. Give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can. If necessary, reverse until you reach a passing place to let the other vehicle pass. Slow down when passing pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders


----------

