The BBC get it wrong, AGAIN!!!

[Poacher]

From my skim reading a lot of thought seems to have been put into the study by the student.

As one of the controls, and having recruited further controls, I think you're right - he seemed very professional in his attitude.

 

[glenn forger]

Wot MJ said.

 

[GrasB]

GrasB, its not pot luck which one you see first. You will see the hi viz one first.

The one I see first is the person that enters my visual search pattern first, pot luck really.

My search pattern started at the red blob & went along the red line toward the bar. It then jumped to the green blob & ran along the line to the bar. Finally I jumped to the blue blob followed the nearside line of the road round the corner.

As I encounter the darker horse rider first they were identified first, swap the horse riders round so the hi-viz was at the back you'd be saying that it was because they were wearing hi-viz but actually no, they were simply encountered first on my search pattern. The hi-viz horse rider was down as a bit of field for a split second!

 

[Drago]

I wouldn't trust the TRL to manage a good s***. Recently they were doing some motorbike crash analysis. The only bike they could lay their hands on was a BMW with a boxer engine. Being a fairly unusual layout they simply removed the engine, and crash tested the rolling chassis. Seeing as most motorbikes that crash, even BMW boxers, usually have an engine in them, and these days that engine tends to be structural member they were slaughtered by the motorcyling press over that one. It's scary to think the evidence these guys scrape up is used to guide government policy, or is quoted by the Beeb to further ill inform a public with an already skewed view.

 

[Mugshot]

Having worn hi vis gear at work for thirty years and seen the difference, especially at night or poor light I can't see a reasoned argument for not wearing it.
Not to wear - 1 - I don't see why I should take responsibility for my own safety - it's always someone else’s fault and of course 2 - I want to prove a point [even if it kills me].
Reasons to wear 1- you have to wear something anyway [if not it can get a bit chilly]. If you ride to work cycling gear and most work gear are not the same so you can't usually use the same stuff. 2 - it just isn't expensive. 3 - it might save your life - especially at night reflective strips etc really do work. Finally there are no statistics for accidents that don't happen. To say "oh x number of motorists passed just as close" is irrelevant - the point is they saw you anyway however close they came. Only by being involved in an accident and then duplicating the exact circumstances again [impossible] with different riding gear can the theory be in anyway proved.

What the report says is that the driver didn't look properly, maybe I'm over simplifying it but to my mind its seems rather obvious that if they did look properly they would see you hi-viz or not, that doesn't have anything to do with a cyclist not taking any responsibility for their own safety but it has an awful lot to do with other road users accepting that they at least have a share in the responsibility.

 

[Mugshot]

Which rider is most conspicuous?

View attachment 60927

If I don't look properly I can't see either of them.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Which rider is most conspicuous?

View attachment 60927

"Call that music? Where's Radio Clyde? Oh look, Becky on Facebook can't believe how fast the weekend's gone! LOL
Fark, where'd those bloody horses come from?!?!"​

GC

 

[Pumpkin the robot]

In July of this year I was cycling home and a car pulled out in front of me from a road on my left. I went through the drivers window at 30mph. The first thing it said on her witness statement was that she didnt see me. It then went on to say I was doing about 25mph and was in the middle of the road and if I was not in the middle of the road I would have gone around her. She also stated I my clothing was black.
The police officer told her the reason I was in the midde of my side of the road was to stop cars overtaking me on the blind corner I had just gone around, my speed was under the speed limit and that it doesnt matter what colour clothing I wear. His report put 100% of the blame on her.
If I had done what she had done, I would hold my hands up, I didnt look, Its my fault rather than trying to shift the blame. That seems to be how people think now. How can I shift the blame for my actions. The top I was wearing and the kit should have caught her eye as there was no block colours. Basically (and she admitted it in her statement) she didnt look.

The top I was wearing was indeed black, but it did also have fluorescent yellow stripes on the sleeves, shoulders and chest as well as a red sleeve and neck. (excuse the pics below, I have washed the shirt and all the blood has gone now!) I was wearing a white rucksack at the time as well and my helmet was a light silver/brown colour.

 

[Mugshot]

Calls for people to wear hi-vis are either deliberate attempts or clueless help to distract from the bigger source of danger: bad motorists.

Exactly this. Halfway through the BBC article we are told that 44% of fatalities are caused by drivers not looking properly, surrounding this we have various pieces about helmets, hi-viz, headphones and flashing or steady lights. None of this addresses the issue which is relegated to a single sentence, where is the BBC article which discusses whether looking properly would improve cyclist safety?

 

[summerdays]

Has anyone found that it seems to be worse out there this week in terms of motorists /cyclists relationships and behaviour.

Even Mr Summerdays was having to defend cyclists in his office today!

 

[Pumpkin the robot]

Exactly this. Halfway through the BBC article we are told that 44% of fatalities are caused by drivers not looking properly, surrounding this we have various pieces about helmets, hi-viz, headphones and flashing or steady lights. None of this addresses the issue which is relegated to a single sentence, where is the BBC article which discusses whether looking properly would improve cyclist safety?

It would improve the roads for everyone not just cyclists.

 

[Mugshot]

It would improve the roads for everyone not just cyclists.

You are absolutely right!

 

[PK99]

Exactly this. Halfway through the BBC article we are told that 44% of fatalities are caused by drivers not looking properly,

Actually we are told in the nhs article that in 44% of fatal accidents driver not looking properly was A contributory factor not THE cause

 

[Mugshot]

Actually we are told in the nhs article that in 44% of fatal accidents driver not looking properly was A contributory factor not THE cause

Yes, sorry, you're quite correct.

Edit: Apologies, I misread your reply, I was quoting the BBC article, not the NHS article. The BBC does not say a contributory factor.

 

[400bhp]

Has anyone found that it seems to be worse out there this week in terms of motorists /cyclists relationships and behaviour.

Even Mr Summerdays was having to defend cyclists in his office today!

Driving standards have been poor this week for me. Nothing to do with them vs us, just simply bad driving. Some of this, I suspect, is down to a load of roadworks they have on the M60/M62 and it is clogging up south Manchester badly. Drivers get impatient and/or lose focus.