A close call with 2 time trialists.

[Alex321]

I agree that cyclists are not expected to change lanes so suddenly/carelessly/dangerously, but I strongly disagree with your assertion it cannot be anticipated.
Had Brandane described a car swerving in that manner, we'd all nod and say how depressingly common it was.
So common, in fact, that I already avoid using lane 2 for overtaking if there is a car in the adjacent lane1/exit slip - far safer to move out into lane 3 in that situation.



Obviously I'm diverging from the scenario described by Brandane, but the principles of anticipation are just the same.
I give bikes an even wider safety margin than cars... don't you?

Yes, but I wouldn't hesitate to stay in the 2nd lane if there was a car in the first lane not indicating they wanted to pull out. There are a few junctions like that on the M4 in this area.

And the assertion you are disagreeing with is not one I made. Only a subtle difference, but "can't be anticipated" is not quite the same as "can't be expected to anticipate".

 

[PK99]

Am i on the petrol heads forum? You new it was a time trial, Give them plenty of room.

He did but they rode like dickheads.

 

[PK99]

I’m glad someone got it. Yes, I was offering some insight as to why competitive time trialists might forego safety observations and signals in favour of streamlining and momentum.

That might be seen by some as a reason to ban timetrialling on the public highway.

 

[berty bassett]

so cyclists

I agree that cyclists are not expected to change lanes so suddenly/carelessly/dangerously, but I strongly disagree with your assertion it cannot be anticipated.
Had Brandane described a car swerving in that manner, we'd all nod and say how depressingly common it was.
So common, in fact, that I already avoid using lane 2 for overtaking if there is a car in the adjacent lane1/exit slip - far safer to move out into lane 3 in that situation.



Obviously I'm diverging from the scenario described by Brandane, but the principles of anticipation are just the same.
I give bikes an even wider safety margin than cars... don't you?

are you suggesting that all vehicles that see a cyclist in lane 1 should filter into lane 3 so said cyclist can continue with his hobby ? That is gonna make us popular isn’t it

 

[Time Waster]

Do we have to agree with cyclists being absolved of personal responsibility because they're a vulnerable road user? I doubt the HC and legislation/ regulations expect that of us when a motorist nor allow for that should cyclist actions warrant enforcement.

I only ask because imho there's two points I believe apply. The motorist has to take responsibility for their driving by anticipating behaviour of all other road users and similarly the cyclists have to take responsibility for their cycling and anticipating other road users. It's kind of the same point really, personal responsibility of a road user, sorry adult road user. I think children often require supervision of an adult so perhaps lesser responsibility applies.

It does seem that cycling forums do not accept equal responsibility to anticipate and react appropriately to other road users. In this I do not see level of vulnerability changing it. What you do n as part of that responsibility I think it's where the differences start to apply. I don't see any reasonable reaction to other road users by the time triallists. A lack of personal responsibility for their own actions.

 

[matticus]

It does seem that cycling forums do not accept equal responsibility to anticipate and react appropriately to other road users. In this I do not see level of vulnerability changing it.

Hang on a sec - am I missing something here? I thought the current Law/HC enshrines greater responsibility by users of larger/deadlier vehicles?

Do you not agree with that? Or are you talking about a different concept?

 

[Alex321]

Hang on a sec - am I missing something here? I thought the current Law/HC enshrines greater responsibility by users of larger/deadlier vehicles?

Do you not agree with that? Or are you talking about a different concept?

HC is not the law, and that part is guidance, so not law.

But more to the point, "greater responsibility "doesn't mean "it's always your fault".

Everybody has a responsibility for their own safety.

Everybody else has a responsibility to not do anything which infringes your safety, and yes, those in vehicles which can cause much worse damage have a higher responsibility there. But it isn't unlimited.

 

[Time Waster]

Hang on a sec - am I missing something here? I thought the current Law/HC enshrines greater responsibility by users of larger/deadlier vehicles?

Do you not agree with that? Or are you talking about a different concept?

Everyone has a responsibility to ride or drive to what's there. That's not the same as the various points relating to duty of care to more vulnerable, whatever the correct phrasing is.

Nobody can or should be absolved of the responsibility to be aware of what's around them and riding/driving/walking appropriately. If you disagree would you not think a pedestrian walking along who suddenly jumped off the footway into your path without looking as you were cycling about, was in the wrong for doing so and not looking out to see if anyone was there or not? It's crazy to think that having a higher duty of care towards more vulnerable road users absolves the more vulnerable to have responsibility for themselves too.

 

[matticus]

Everybody has a responsibility for their own safety.

<a diversion to the Ayrshire TT Incident, but a fun one, I hope:>
I do wonder what this phrase means. I don't tend to use it myself. Does it mean that smoking - for example - is unethical and really should be banned?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

You can't just change lanes without checking there is nothing coming up behind you in that lane.

We dont know that they did not check, only that the OP didn't notice them checking.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Do we have to agree with cyclists being absolved of personal responsibility

Has someone put that idea forward in this thread?

 

[Time Waster]

Has someone put that idea forward in this thread?

Pretty close to that I reckon.

 

[Mike_P]

We dont know that they did not check

And totally miss a car in the lane they were going to move into ?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

And totally miss a car in the lane they were going to move into ?

We only have ine side of the story, told from one persoective. Maybe they thought he was going slower than he was. We dont know.

 

[Smokin Joe]

We only have ine side of the story, told from one persoective. Maybe they thought he was going slower than he was. We dont know.

If they did check behind and saw him approach they should have made sure of his closing speed before switching lanes.