Motorbike incident

[Mad at urage]

The HC is in fact reasonably clear. For the hard of reading (and Clive the :troll: ) there's even a pretty picture of how much space "at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car" means.

Rules in the HC are not simply suggestions. Whilst they do not have the force of law and "failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see 'The road user and the law') to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’."

I also suggest that any of the posters on this forum who think a vehicle should follow them ad infinitum until there is a completely clear oncoming lane available to enable an overtake do not drive cars or ride motorcycles, so are posting from a standpoint of ignorance (provocative I know but how about an admission by everyone here what their experience is?)

I would suggest that you are wrong.

Sorry, I am definitely right.

No Clive, you are simply stating a non-fact, which means that you are wrong. Most definitely and comprehensively wrong. There are posters here " who think a vehicle should follow them ad infinitum until there is a completely clear oncoming lane available to enable an overtake" and who do drive cars or ride motorcycle. I am one of them, an advanced motorist, driver and sometime motorcyclist. Others have posted the rules of the road and I repeat they are not "suggestions. When you inevitably (if you do drive as your posts imply) knock someone off, I hope you are caught because driving in the manner you suggest is both dangerous and illegal.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

In my experience Motorcyclists are very courteous towards me when I am on my bicycle.

 

[cjb]

[QUOTE 1531329"]
Guess what happened to me on the way home tonight?
[/quote]

And there I was thinking I was in a minority of one here!

 

[element]

You can argue about Highway code and official rules and right and wrong all day. It does not hang the fact that in reality the 'what is' will kill you while you are debating the 'what should be'.
Motorbikes can be stupidly stupidly fast and that creates a certain mentality that at times and can lead to red mist riding where every thing else in the road seems like its stationary. When you are wrapped up properly in your leathers and helmet it can make people feel invulnerable. That's why I stopped wearing the leathers and started riding in shorts and T-shirt. It certainly slows you down. The trouble if is you are on a cycle to some one traveling on a sports bike at real pace they have no free brain energy to think about the cyclist, you are just an obstacle to be got past, it is inconsiderate motorcycling but not deliberately hostile. Most Motorbike riders in the cold light of day will sympathize with the vulnerability that cyclists have on the road.
I would suggest that as a cyclist you be aware that a fast moving sports bike has to plan from much further back what lines he can take to get around the next bend and keep your cycle close to the gutter when you hear one coming , there is plenty of room for a motorcycle and a cycle to pass on the same side of the road and 99 percent of bikers see no problem with that. I am not going to say its right but it definitely 'IS'.

 

[Clive Atton]

In reply to Mad@urages last post, let me suggest a situation:

I am riding my motorbike during the rush hour in the left hand lane on a dual carriageway at 60mph with cars behind me (normally too close for comfort). There is a constant stream of cars in the fast lane travelling at a similar or faster speed with minimal gaps between them (not correct practise but that's reality for you). If I come up to a cyclist I have three options: I pass the cyclist by moving as far to the right in the left hand lane as is safe and pass with a five to eight feet gap, I squeeze into a small gap between fast moving cars, driven by lemmings in order to give your required ten foot gap or I brake heavily down to the cyclists speed and follow him until the rush hour is over and I can pull into the fast lane.

What would you do?

 

[BSRU]

In reply to Mad@urages last post, let me suggest a situation:

I am riding my motorbike during the rush hour in the left hand lane on a dual carriageway at 60mph with cars behind me (normally too close for comfort). There is a constant stream of cars in the fast lane travelling at a similar or faster speed with minimal gaps between them (not correct practise but that's reality for you). If I come up to a cyclist I have three options: I pass the cyclist by moving as far to the right in the left hand lane as is safe and pass with a five to eight feet gap, I squeeze into a small gap between fast moving cars, driven by lemmings in order to give your required ten foot gap or I brake heavily down to the cyclists speed and follow him until the rush hour is over and I can pull into the fast lane.

What would you do?

Option 1, should have slow down so that the passing speed is not too excessive, this gives the cyclist the potential opportunity to have a look behind and see the bike coming also some cyclists can be very unpredictable, more speed equals less time to react.

 

[Glow worm]

keep your cycle close to the gutter when you hear one coming ,

I'm not riding in the gutter for anyone. I don't think you'll get much sympathy with suggestions like that on here, but I suspect you are probaly on a wind up. You have to be right?!

TBH if some motorbiker cocks up his judgement at speed then frankly that's his problem. I'll keep my 3 feet distance from the verge thanks!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I would suggest that as a cyclist you be aware that a fast moving sports bike has to plan from much further back what lines he can take to get around the next bend and keep your cycle close to the gutter when you hear one coming , there is plenty of room for a motorcycle and a cycle to pass on the same side of the road and 99 percent of bikers see no problem with that. I am not going to say its right but it definitely 'IS'.

Tosh. Utter tosh.

 

[Clive Atton]

Option 1, should have slow down so that the passing speed is not too excessive, this gives the cyclist the potential opportunity to have a look behind and see the bike coming also some cyclists can be very unpredictable, more speed equals less time to react.

That's reasonable, but I would only roll off the throttle rather than brake sharply due to the following traffic so I would probably only slow 10 mph or so. Any 'unpredictable ' cyclist should probably not be on such a road if they have any sense of self-preservation, but that's not to say something may cause even a 'predictable cyclist to swerve (stray dog etc). I believe driving/riding/cycling is more of an art than a hard and fast adherence to suggestions in the HC, you cannot legislate for every eventuality and safe operation of any vehicle requires intelligence and consideration to other road users, tempered with what is practical on crowded roads. Yes, a ten foot gap between you and every cyclist is a wonderful idea but realistically it cannot be achieved much of the time.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

That's reasonable, but I would only roll off the throttle rather than brake sharply due to the following traffic so I would probably only slow 10 mph or so. Any 'unpredictable ' cyclist should probably not be on such a road if they have any sense of self-preservation, but that's not to say something may cause even a 'predictable cyclist to swerve (stray dog etc). I believe driving/riding/cycling is more of an art than a hard and fast adherence to suggestions in the HC, you cannot legislate for every eventuality and safe operation of any vehicle requires intelligence and consideration to other road users, tempered with what is practical on crowded roads. Yes, a ten foot gap between you and every cyclist is a wonderful idea but realistically it cannot be achieved much of the time.

Would you give a HGV more or less passing room than a bicycle?

 

[Mad at urage]

In reply to Mad@urages last post, let me suggest a situation:

I am riding my motorbike during the rush hour in the left hand lane on a dual carriageway at 60mph with cars behind me (normally too close for comfort). There is a constant stream of cars in the fast lane travelling at a similar or faster speed with minimal gaps between them (not correct practise but that's reality for you). If I come up to a cyclist I have three options: I pass the cyclist by moving as far to the right in the left hand lane as is safe and pass with a five to eight feet gap, I squeeze into a small gap between fast moving cars, driven by lemmings in order to give your required ten foot gap or I brake heavily down to the cyclists speed and follow him until the rush hour is over and I can pull into the fast lane.

What would you do?

Plan in advance, be aware that I was approaching a cyclist, be aware that I would either need to change lanes or slow down, if changing lanes is not going to be possible before arriving within a couple of seconds behind the cyclist, slow down until it is. Really that is a simple question and you should have learned that answer with basic motorcycle training.

Edit to add: If you find you need to "brake heavily" then you are simply not looking far enough ahead and are not planning sufficiently in advance for your speed. Try (slowing down for a while whilst you practice) commentary driving.

 

[Ivan Ardon]

That's reasonable, but I would only roll off the throttle rather than brake sharply due to the following traffic so I would probably only slow 10 mph or so. <SNIP>

You're not helping the cyclist here at all, even if you do manage to pass with a five to eight feet gap.

You've already said that you're being followed by cars (too closely). Unless you do something to raise their awareness that there's a slower moving object in front of you, eventually one's going to follow you through the gap and collide with the cyclist. Yes they should see the cyclist, but you may be obstructing their view until it's too late. You aren't responsible for the poor actions and judgement of the following drivers, but you could help to give the cyclist a chance of being seen and acknowledged.

So instead of just rolling off the throttle, I'd be applying the brakes - not necessarily to slow down much, but to put the brake lights on, and popping the R/H indicator on. The following drivers should then get the idea that something's going on that may require some caution on their part.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

You're not helping the cyclist here at all, even if you do manage to pass with a five to eight feet gap.

You've already said that you're being followed by cars (too closely). Unless you do something to raise their awareness that there's a slower moving object in front of you, eventually one's going to follow you through the gap and collide with the cyclist. Yes they should see the cyclist, but you may be obstructing their view until it's too late. You aren't responsible for the poor actions and judgement of the following drivers, but you could help to give the cyclist a chance of being seen and acknowledged.

So instead of just rolling off the throttle, I'd be applying the brakes - not necessarily to slow down much, but to put the brake lights on, and popping the R/H indicator on. The following drivers should then get the idea that something's going on that may require some caution on their part.

I'm pretty sure I was taught to use my indicators to show I was overtaking something.

 

[Clive Atton]

Plan in advance, be aware that I was approaching a cyclist, be aware that I would either need to change lanes or slow down, if changing lanes is not going to be possible before arriving within a couple of seconds behind the cyclist, slow down until it is. Really that is a simple question and you should have learned that answer with basic motorcycle training.

Perhaps there is a stream of vans/lorries in front of you or curve in the road making it difficult to see the cyclist. Maybe an arse in a 1.2 litre Nova up yer chuff creating a distraction, bloke in right hand lane thinking that as you are only on a motorcycle he can pull into your lane (and you!). All stuff to be considered.

You cannot seriously suggest every vehicle slows to the cyclists speed and follows them until the outside lane is clear! In the war zone of modern commuting if a cyclist thinks it is fine to wobble about in traffic then it is time for them to consider their personal responsibility to other road users. If it isn't a dual carriageway but you can pass with a decent gap (five or more feet I would suggest) then I suggest that is safe, providing you slow a little, keep an eye on the cyclist and watch for a swerve and prepare to react. This then doesn't hold up or piss off following traffic. In urban situations I slow for kids on pavements (on bikes or walking), also idiot adults on mobile phones that believe they can walk into a road without looking just 'cos they are obviously so important and it's everybody else's responsibility to avoid them. It doesn't matter how careful you are though, there will always be an element of risk and if you tried to remove ALL risk then you would have to ban all human travel.

 

[Mad at urage]

Perhaps there is a stream of vans/lorries in front of you or curve in the road making it difficult to see the cyclist. Maybe an arse in a 1.2 litre Nova up yer chuff creating a distraction, bloke in right hand lane thinking that as you are only on a motorcycle he can pull into your lane (and you!). All stuff to be considered.

You cannot seriously suggest every vehicle slows to the cyclists speed and follows them until the outside lane is clear! In the war zone of modern commuting if a cyclist thinks it is fine to wobble about in traffic then it is time for them to consider their personal responsibility to other road users. If it isn't a dual carriageway but you can pass with a decent gap (five or more feet I would suggest) then I suggest that is safe, providing you slow a little, keep an eye on the cyclist and watch for a swerve and prepare to react. This then doesn't hold up or piss off following traffic. In urban situations I slow for kids on pavements (on bikes or walking), also idiot adults on mobile phones that believe they can walk into a road without looking just 'cos they are obviously so important and it's everybody else's responsibility to avoid them. It doesn't matter how careful you are though, there will always be an element of risk and if you tried to remove ALL risk then you would have to ban all human travel.

If there is an obstruction ahead of you, be it a stream of vehicles (which will in any case need to move out to overtake the cyclist - big clue there, which you should be able to spot) or a curve in the road, then you should be driving / riding at a speed at which you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. This means you do not come round the curve and find yourself unable to slow (indeed stop) simply because there is a cyclist in your path.

If there is a vehicle tailgating you, then you should be looking to increase the available stopping distance (i.e. ride/drive slower) rather than closing in on an unknown situation ahead: Riding faster because you are tailgated is what causes multiple pileups.

The bicycle is a vehicle and progressing at its own vehicular speed. If there is no overtaking lane then the cyclist should be looking for sensible place to let any queue that is forming go past. 'Sensible' in this context includes the cyclist's right to make progress at cycling pace however, and this does not mean diving out of the way of every Clive Toad.

Where there is an overtaking lane, that is the place where overtaking vehicles should be when carrying out that manoevre. It matters not a jot whether they are overtaking a cyclist, a tractor or a granny in a Suzuki Roll-over. In my experience 90+% of drivers manage this quite conveniently; Sure they sometimes have to wait for a gap, but that's just the way it is in crowded road conditions caused by the number of cars (usually with one occupant). I suspect that you are one of those who finds this impossible. I strongly suggest that you look into (as in take) some advanced driving lessons. This is a good site to start with http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/

Commuting is not a war zone BTW, it is (or should be) about reasonable people cooperating to allow everyone a safe and predictable journey with their chosen form of transport. Heavy metal dragged by engines increases the risk exponentially and it is incumbent on the drivers of these vehicles to drive safely around all more vulnerable road users, including the ones who actually belong on the road with the motorists.