presta
Guru
View: https://twitter.com/hackney_cycling/status/1842527626625229161
(I'm not talking about riding on the pavement.)
So, Who's at Fault Here?
- Thread starter presta
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
View: https://twitter.com/hackney_cycling/status/1842527626625229161
(I'm not talking about riding on the pavement.)
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
You, for going on X in the first place.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
I'm not saying that I am always perfect (although don;t tell the grand kids!!!)
but if I was riding on the road I would have stayed a lot further right than he was
he was heading for the island thingy - in fact direct for the bollard - as soon as the junction started so the cars just passed him while staying on their normal path as if he was not there
if he had been further to his right - clearly heading for the road- and also heading for the road with some significant clearance to the kerb - then they would have had to adopt a course that was further right themselves and hence risking getting onto the wrong side of the road
Of course, they SHOULD then have slowed down but.....
His route from the start means that he would have had to change course to his right to go where I presume he was going
I am not even sure he was not intending to go up that ramp onto the cycle path anyway!
Having said that - the cars certainly should have paid more attention to him and slowed down and given him more clearance just in case he was going down the same road as them
so I would have done it differently whether I was on the bikes, in a car or in the truck
but then I'm perfect and take everything into account at all times and never miss anything on the road
or not
but if I was riding on the road I would have stayed a lot further right than he was
he was heading for the island thingy - in fact direct for the bollard - as soon as the junction started so the cars just passed him while staying on their normal path as if he was not there
if he had been further to his right - clearly heading for the road- and also heading for the road with some significant clearance to the kerb - then they would have had to adopt a course that was further right themselves and hence risking getting onto the wrong side of the road
Of course, they SHOULD then have slowed down but.....
His route from the start means that he would have had to change course to his right to go where I presume he was going
I am not even sure he was not intending to go up that ramp onto the cycle path anyway!
Having said that - the cars certainly should have paid more attention to him and slowed down and given him more clearance just in case he was going down the same road as them
so I would have done it differently whether I was on the bikes, in a car or in the truck
but then I'm perfect and take everything into account at all times and never miss anything on the road
or not
Bristolian
Senior Member
- Location
- Bristol, UK
"This cyclist, in a split-second decision chose safety - to ride on the pavement, over danger - to ride in front of a tipper truck."
From what I can see in the clip, the cyclist wasn't even aware of the traffic behind him - he knew it was there but not what types of vehicle. I think he intended to take the path that he did right from the start irrespective of what was coming up behind.
I don't think anyone's at fault. The cyclist did what he planned to do and the vehicle drivers did what they planned to do.
From what I can see in the clip, the cyclist wasn't even aware of the traffic behind him - he knew it was there but not what types of vehicle. I think he intended to take the path that he did right from the start irrespective of what was coming up behind.
I don't think anyone's at fault. The cyclist did what he planned to do and the vehicle drivers did what they planned to do.
rogerzilla
Legendary Member
He didn't even look, did he?
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
I doubt those in command of any of the vehicles seen looked properly,if at all.
figbat
Slippery scientist
- Location
- South Oxfordshire, UK
He does a quick shoulder check as the truck approaches, perhaps as a consequence of hearing it coming, then jinks left to use the (empty) pavement.
Alex321
Guru
- Location
- South Wales
No he didn't. He was heading for that island all the time. There was no "jink" at all.
As Bristolian says above, that wasn't a "split second decision", that was him thinking that narrow road as it passses the island isn't safe, so use the island to avoid it.
The people "at fault" hgere are those responsible for that crappy road design.
figbat
Slippery scientist
- Location
- South Oxfordshire, UK
At the 4/5s mark there's is a right hand shoulder check. Then this (not heading for the pavement)...
...after which there is a definite move to the left.
From what I see they heard the truck, had a glance, did a rapid dynamic risk assessment and took the pavement.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
Good screen shot
at this point, if he intended to stay on the road then he would have to suddenly swing right into the traffic
His actual intended route is unclear but swinging to his right would be risky
Also - you can see that there is another bike (probably - it is grainy) on the route he actually took - so this may be a normal route to use
in any case, he was on the wrong part of teh tarmac if he was intending to stay on the road
BUT the cars etc should still have given his room just in case his concentration was dodgy and he suddenly swung right to stay on the road
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Elon Musk is the one at fault.
if he'd done a better job running X into the ground we wouldn't have to face such weighty questions.
if he'd done a better job running X into the ground we wouldn't have to face such weighty questions.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
OP
OP
presta
Guru
That's why I posted it. Riding in the mouth of the left turn so you leave yourself in the position of needing to swerve right into the path of the traffic to avoid hitting the island was madness. Once you've vacated the traffic lane you've put yourself in a position where you need to give way in order to get back into it again. Bikeability advocate Primary Position because keeping left is just inviting an unsafe overtake.
That said, if I was the lorry driver I'd have anticipated that he was likely to swerve right.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
TBH in that situation I could see myself thinking "There's a fecking big lorry behind me and I don't like him. I'm going to go as far left as possible and slow down a bit to make sure he gets past and then I can carry on behind him." And I'd end up doing something broadly similar to the rider in the video.
So he went the wrong side of a bollard or something. Meh.
So he went the wrong side of a bollard or something. Meh.
matticus
Guru
I'd say the lorry driver had a duty to anticipate that possibility. He(she) has no right to overtake the cyclist at will; when they choose to do so they have a responsibility to ensure they do it safely. Not just make an assumption that it will probably be OK to steam straight thru.
I think we're all/mostly in agreement that the rider didn't deal with the junction in the optimal way; but they have a right to do that.
