Cyclist kills pedestrian

[Jaded]

Cars can cover a far greater speed range than bikes but it's still the responsibility of other road users to judge their speed accurately.

Not on urban roads they don't. Bikes have a far greater range.

 

[domtyler]

Not on urban roads they don't. Bikes have a far greater range.

LOL, no they don't. A car can be going anything from from 1mph to 50mph or even more, even a twenty limit. A bike has a much small range than this.

 

[Jaded]

LOL, no they don't. A car can be going anything from from 1mph to 50mph or even more, even a twenty limit. A bike has a much small range than this.

Have you ever been on a road? Have you ever observed traffic?

 

[marinyork]

Have you ever been on a road? Have you ever observed traffic?

Dom's right. There's large variability in driving styles and speeds.

Anyway, I meant cars underestimating cyclists speeds as a general principle rather than a discussion about why they do it. As for left hand chops, perhaps it is difficult in some circumstances to guage the speed but whenever I've had it done to me as a ped, on a bike or in a car it's been sheer bloody impatience that seems the likely culprit.

 

[Jaded]

Dom's right. There's large variability in driving styles and speeds.

I'm sorry, but dom is wrong. He is trying to make a point because he wants to argue with me.

In urban areas cars generally travel at roughly the same speed as others around them. Go out and watch.

Bikes do not. You get wonderfully slow matrons with cadence around 20 travelling so slowly you think they may fall over, and you get racing snakes going above the motor vehicle speed limit. That's why drivers are (to quote Mr Pig) "hopeless at judging the speed of a bicycle".

For many drivers a quick glance up; see a cyclist; which is it? Matron or Merx?

Do you feel lucky punk?

 

[goo_mason]

In urban areas cars generally travel at roughly the same speed as others around them. Go out and watch.

I'd agree there, but there's also the situation where suddenly there's less traffic, the road ahead seems empty as far as they can see to the next bend and the speed-merchants in their Subaru Imprezas and wee boys in their tarted-up Corsas suddenly decide they can drive like Michael bloody Schumacher as the road is now theirs and it's clear. Ooops - except for the cyclist and who cares if we brush their elbow at silly speeds because they have no right to be there.

In built-up areas though, the traffic is all generally going at the same rate as there's no room to speed up or slow down dramatically because they're nose-to-tail at around 30mph.

 

[Mr Pig]

In urban areas cars generally travel at roughly the same speed as others around them.

I think you'll find that they're still covering a wider speed range than bikes. Easily. Only in congested streets do cars clump together.

The road outside my house is a thirty limit. I'd say the average speed along it is forty, maybe ten percent do fifty to sixty and on a Friday/Saturday night when the road is quiet and the noobs are out I reckon some of them hit the ton! I sometimes wonder how they slow down in time for the 'S' bend under the bridge at the end.

Anyway, who cares. Car drivers should not cut-up cyclists, end of. If they can't judge the speed of a bike it's because they're too selfish to bother learning.

 

[Riding in Circles]

Well he was found guilty and fined £2200.

 

[mickle]

Guilty of what?

 

[Jaded]

I think you'll find that they're still covering a wider speed range than bikes. Easily. Only in congested streets do cars clump together.

The road outside my house is a thirty limit. I'd say the average speed along it is forty, maybe ten percent do fifty to sixty and on a Friday/Saturday night when the road is quiet and the noobs are out I reckon some of them hit the ton! I sometimes wonder how they slow down in time for the 'S' bend under the bridge at the end.

I take it that you think your road is a fairly representative urban road then?

Anyway, who cares. Car drivers should not cut-up cyclists, end of. If they can't judge the speed of a bike it's because they're too selfish to bother learning.

No, it is quite possibly because they actually have difficulty in judging someone's speed.

 

[marinyork]

Similarity or difference? I see differences in speed and style rather than similarity. Anyway we seem to agree there's a problem in judging speeds. I'd rather they exercise a bit more caution and patience if what Jaded said is true.

 

[Jaded]

Anyway we seem to agree there's a problem in judging speeds. I'd rather they exercise a bit more caution and patience if what Jaded said is true.

Yes.

I cycle whilst under the assumption that every other person is out to kill me. That way I'm pleasantly surprised quite often.

 

[Mr Pig]

It is quite possibly because they actually have difficulty in judging someone's speed.

So they're really well qualified to drive a motor vehicle then?! I don't care 'why' they can't judge the speed of a bike. The point is that if they're going to drive on public roads they should be able to, don't you think? Whatever kind of road it is?

If someone smacks into the back of a motorway traffic jam and kills three people do you think the judge will let him off because his lawyer says 'Well he's not very good at judging stopping distances, bless'? Nope, because if you drive a car it's something you are supposed to be able to do.

 

[Jaded]

Mr Pig, you obviously know little about the science of human perception.

 

[Riding in Circles]

Guilty of what?

Dangerous cycling. Still no real reports on what happened though, seems to be a lot of conflict in the statements of the eye witnesses.

The family are not happy with the verdict.

BBC News report