Today’s video in our Near Miss of the Day series is the second we’ve shown that features the same cyclist on the same roundabout – the Bamber Bridge interchange at Junction 26 of the M6 near Preston.
A motorist approaches the junction from the left and fails to spot the cyclist, who luckily managed to take evasive action.
Jon, who shot the footage, told us it happened while he was commuting to work.
“A gent came off the motorway slip road without looking. If I hadn’t have swerved we would have collided.”
In the description of the video on YouTube, he said: “I was within a foot or so of being taken out! I have a head torch which is bright so as I was looking in his direction it would have been very bright in his eyes and he still missed seeing me, as well as a big front light.”
Unfortunately Jon, whose previous video we featured here, was unable to get the licence plate details.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 – Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info@road.cc">info@road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won’t show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
41 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 480: Driver almost hits cyclist on roundabout (includes swearing)”
Idiot driver possibly failing
Idiot driver possibly failing to check A-pillar blindspot? IME capturing reg’n plates on video at night can be problematic, as mostly they’re a ‘burnt out’ highlight.
Personally he has just come
Personally he has just come off a motorway at 70mph and doesn’t want to adjust speed, looking for a large object and not seeing anything.
Well avoided Jon.
dassie wrote:
Looking at it again, I reckon you’re right, the A pillar is obscuring his view of the cyclist, and, like most drivers, he can’t be bothered to observe properly.
This is a very frequent event, caused by the massive A pillar, something supposed to make driving safer, which, to be fair, it does; unfortunately, it kills cyclists and motorcyclists. When are cars going to be designed for the safety of everyone, not just the occupants?
What are the chances that this driver will have learned his lesson, and make sure he observes properly? Or will he just shrug his shoulders and think “That cyclist was bloody lucky.” and carry on driving exactly the same way?
You’re absolutely right.
You’re absolutely right. There was a time when they used to advertise the % all round vision in cars, and given advances in design technology it must be possible to get it pretty close to 100% now. A cebtury ago a car had two panels of flat glass for a front windscreen. Now you can bend laminated glass to curve round to the shape you want. A couple of roll bars to keep the roof on and protect idiot drivers who turn their cars over, and maybe a small bit of metal and stuff to seal the doors and the rest is glass.
My wife had to borrow her mum
My wife had to borrow her mum’s Fiat (?) Punto a few years ago. She absolutely hated driving it: she said the visibility was appalling and all the pillars were so wide she could barely see out. The rear side windows were the size of a saucer, the bonnet was so steep you couldn’t see the front of the car from the driver’s seat, the pillars were all so chunky…
She loves driving her 1973 VW microbus, which is basically a greenhouse on wheels. You sit about fifty centimetres behind the front of the vehicle, and so much of the sides are glass… Wouldn’t want to have a collision while sitting in it, mind.
I’ve got a ’67 (typed 1) VW
I’ve got a ’67 (typed 1) VW Beetle. A pillar about as thick as my finger….I need to finish restoring it, get it back on the road so I can see cyclists properly 😉
Yeah: our other car is a 1970
Yeah: our other car is a 1970 type 1, so I know what you’re talking about 😀
But the event isn’t caused by
But the event isn’t caused by the A pillar, and A pillars don’t kill. Unobservant drivers can and will. Anyone who has driven a panel van knows that they have to find different ways of observation – more use of door mirrors etc.
The problem is the assumption that if the driver hasn’t seen something then they are free to move off, and that’s not really enough.
Must say I am glad that this debate can proceed at a level above some recent threads.
TheBillder wrote:
But, unfortunately, we know the behaviour of drivers; see nothing, therefore it’s safe to proceed. The fact that the bureaucrats have seen fit to obscure drivers’ vision for their own safety is not uppermost in their minds. That’s how humans behave, so we can either work with that and remove the obstruction, or somehow change human behaviour. Which do you reckon has more chance of success?
I’m not excusing drivers not
I’m not excusing drivers not checking their A-spots – and I don’t know if the driver’s side A-spot contributed to this near miss, but….
I for one was never taught about about the A-spots – perhaps because when I learnt to drive, vehicles didn’t have such large A-pillars. Okay, I’m reasonably intelligent, so I’ve figured out that I need to move my head around when the area I’m checking is obscured by an A pillar (or by the rear view mirror, in a lot of modern cars).
There’s nothing in the highway code that mentions what the A-spots are or how to deal with them. There are no warnings in cars to tell drivers about the A-spots. Finally, we have allowed (and continue to allow) manufacturers to produce cars with very large A-pillars – personally, I think the safety of vulnerable road users is more important than the safety of people who manage to roll their car, and allowing such large A-pillars was a mistake.
jh2727 wrote:
You’re right, and this should be specifically mentioned in the HC. The manufacturers didn’t just decide to make cars with huge A pillars, the bureaucrats of road safety told them to, so that the vehicle occupants were protected if car rolled, but like seat belts, at the expense of the safety of cyclists and motorcyclists.
Quote:
Is this an attempt to evade local lockdowns???
of course an ultra bright
of course an ultra bright headtorch pointing at someones eyes in the dark is going to blow any chance of them actually seeing you as a person on a bike, youll just be a gigantic bright light, they wont even see you indicating or anything, and may even wrongly conclude from the size or angle its shining from its a bright light from a lot further away. thats also why using two steady front lights is also a bad idea.
personally Id never ride on the road with those types of lights,as temporarily blinding people in control of vehicles has always seemed like a really bad idea to me.
I agree with not blinding
I agree with not blinding people, but if you’re blinded or have difficulty seeing, then maybe pulling out of a junction is going to be dangerous – wait until you can see for chris-sake.
Why would you pull out if
Why would you pull out if blinded?
Also 2 lights helps you judge the distance better due ot the stereoscopic effect on the eye. Harder to judge a single light source.
well because people do do
well because people do do stupid things like that 🙂 we’ve plenty of evidence of that and the consequences, a car at a junction is always wanting to pull away first, not wait, so build that into an expectation of whats going to happen, and then work out how to mitigate that risk to you.
and the two lights thing if they are parallel (or near to parallel) across a handlebar,, the issue is people are just used to seeing cars, so the brain translates the lights as a car, but the size of the light is smaller than a car, so the brain translates it as a car thats further away and safe to pull out on, not a cyclist who actually is only feet away, it used to be a known reason for why motorcyclists with dual lights often got hit by cars pulling out of junctions.
Is there a study that
Is there a study that supports the view that dual lights cause more accidents? Even if so, how would fast moving motorcylists be a proxy for slow moving cyclists ?
@Awavey. Nice spot of victim
@Awavey. Nice spot of victim blaming there – what do you do for an encore?
Also whats the point of 2 steady lights comment – he obviously had at least 1 flasher and 1 steady. (or a bright/dim pulser).
As a I driver – I personally don’t pull out unless I can see the way is clear, including when there is a bright light shining at me. I assume its a vehicle and give way until proven otherwise.
The trouble with comments like yours are if you take them to a logical conclusion we shouldn’t ride/commute
at nightbecause there are too many variables (too many lights, the wrong kind of light, no Hiviz, too much HiViz) where drivers will knock us off. See also the recent case where sunlight dapples were used to implicitly critise the wearing of HiViz.Cyclists should have a reasonable expectation of safety when out on the roads. Too many allowances made to drivers means they will never learn, we will ride less, and the situation will never change. Not Good.
its not victim blaming at all
its not victim blaming at all, where have I said it was the riders fault ?
all Ive said is an ultra bright head torch light is actually not going to have helped there regardless of how much you think it makes you be seen, because the light blows out key information, like an arm indicating, or that can help a driver calculate your speed & distance correctly, it may make them do all those things incorrectly and that then increases the risk to you they do something stupid, like pull out on you at a roundabout.
Sure youd like to them stop and wait till they are sure, but you havent ridden very long on the road if you expect drivers to behave like that all the time.
and its just this time of year and when the clocks go back theres this arms race of putting more and more and brighter and brighter lights to “be seen” and noone it seems ever stops to think so how does this actually look to people I encounter on the road ? are they seeing me ? am I actually making it harder for them to see me ? which is why I mentioned the thing with two lights, youve got to understand how people interpret sets of lights they see in the dark, to ride safely. As I said Id never ride with an ultra bright head torch on the road, nor dual lights, for those reasons Ive mentioned
I mean its funny, in the daylight everyone always says youve got to make eye contact with drivers, as thats the link that makes them recognise you as a person and stops them commiting to pulling out on you, and yet when its dark all that goes out the window and its ramp up the lumens and no chance of anyone seeing your eyes.
Totally agree.
Totally agree.
Glad you’re ok rider and bring back that Fly6 – I always ride with mine and do numerous Police complaints.
I take your point about not
I take your point about not dazzling, but HP is right, if you can’t see, don’t move.
From the video it seemed as if the bike light was pointed correctly to illuminate the road (still very visible to the driver) and the head torch was probably moving quite a bit with Jon’s observations and general movement unless he’s a commuting TT rider.
Following on from “I couldn’t see Mr James because of the hi viz against the trees” do we now have “I couldn’t see Jon because his light was too bright against the darkness”? Perhaps the alien spaceship from Close Encounters was landing behind him?
be an interesting legal case
be an interesting legal case though wouldnt it, as there are rules on lights and the legally permitted positions they can be placed in
Awavey wrote:
Only on the bicycle, not on the body.
AFAIK the law mandates the
AFAIK the law mandates the positions of 1 light each for front and back, as long as that is met it says nothing about whether you can also be lit up like a Christmas tree or not.
Not too bright, not too dim,
Not too bright, not too dim, but juuust right.
I have an old volkslicht on my bike – it’ll burn your retina if you get it in your eyes. That’s why I direct it down to a few metres in front of me. It’s not the size of your light, it’s what you do with it that counts
There seems to have been an arms race re vehicle lights too. Modern halogen and LEDs can be far brighter than the old standard incandescents. Can we imagine that being used as an excuse?
“of course ultra bright headlights pointing at someones eyes in the dark is going to blow any chance of them actually seeing you as a person in a car, youll just be a gigantic bright light, they wont even see you indicating or anything, and may even wrongly conclude from the size or angle its shining from its a bright light from a lot further away. thats also why using two steady front lights is also a bad idea.
personally Id never drive on the road with those types of lights,as temporarily blinding people in control of vehicles has always seemed like a really bad idea to me.“
Seems to make little sense when the perspective changes….
Curse of the A pillar
Curse of the A pillar
spen wrote:
Not going by the still image above, showing the driver had an unobstructed view.
All my cars have A-pillars.
All my cars have A-pillars.
Luckily my body has articulated joints.
Two guys came cycling towards
Two guys came cycling towards me, last winter with very bright head torches on and as they were approaching, I could not figure out what they were untill they were very close.
The lights in the position they were in and the head movement, did not say ‘bike’ to my brain and I am a cyclist, so I could understand a non cycling motorist getting confused perhaps – no excuse mind you.
But you didn’t need to figure
But you didn’t need to figure out what they were. You knew something was there, so that was enough info for you to decide ‘ I need to give way’, ‘ I need to stop’. If am I driving and I see ahead something in the road but have no idea what it is, I slow down so that I can take the appropriate action, I don’t carry on at 60, hit a deer and think ‘o shit’.
In the situation in the near miss, the driver does not need to specifically know what is on the actual road – John Deere V20, a ford focus, a cyclist, Red Rum, a tank or the 101st Royal Marine regiment.
I agree absolutely, that’s
I agree absolutely, that’s why I stated ‘no excuse mind you’ the driver was a complete aresehole, but unfortunately many drive like this, on ‘instinct’ rather than having safety at the front of their minds. They just want to get from A to B as fast as possible and they don’t care who gets in their way.
In my opinion, and experience (been cycling for over 50 years) in the real world, a light on the handlebars when on the road is safer, You have to use psychology when cycling especially at night.
yupiteru wrote:
Unless the driver is confused to the point where s/he thinks that the lights are magic pixies or perhaps unseasonal fireflies, they’ve got to stop. Being confused should make them more ready to stop and check!
It doesn’t work like that
It doesn’t work like that though does it? A certain type of driver in these circumstances thinks ‘what the fuck is that’ and in that split second decides to take a chance, and doesn’t decide what the light was, but decides what it was not.
You have to ‘say’ bike to the morons brains and not leave it to reason or logic, because many drivers are simply not intelligent like you are.
It’s magic mushroom season around here at this time of year and literally many drivers will be driving under the influence and may indeed see ‘magic pixies’. This is not a joke, please dont have inscribed on your gravestone ‘They’ve got to stop’ or ‘I had right of way’.
if you want to stay alive you have to always asume that the tossers are going to pull out in front of you!
yupiteru wrote:
Oo-er, missus! 😉
Lights say nothing. It’s your
Lights say nothing. It’s your brain’s response that counts, and that response should be “hazard”.
Exactly.I’ve come to a full
Exactly.I’ve come to a full stop in the car before now because of a light and I thought something might have been coming towards me. Turned out to be attached to a house! At the end of the day, if you’re not sure of something in front of you, you slow down or stop. Far too many drivers just carry on because of confirmation bias, it’s never been anything before so it’s never going to be anything.
yupiteru wrote:
So, perhaps you, and these kind of typical dangerous motorists you are speaking up for, your ‘brains,’ abnormally, said it was a UFO, and stubbornly decide not to give it way, expecting it can ‘fly’ out of your way, from the stories you hear, and as your entiled right of way over anthing your kind don’t recognise.
Exactly – I rest my case.
Exactly – I rest my case.
It says something when a
It says something when a cyclist is equipping themselves with 3 cameras and several lights, both steady and flashing. Yet this is still not enough to be seen and for drivers to be diligent. What’s next, a flare gun mounted to the bars?!
Also – Sod’s Law. The moment the Fly6 packed up, that almost guaranteed you were due some car based commotion. Good job you were on top of your swerve game.
The driver likely looked, and
The driver likely looked, and was looking up the road, but the slower speed of the cyclist left them in the blind spot as the car slowed and turned on the slip road. As a driver looking down the road how could something appear when they have been looking the whole time? because people dont realise this effect and therefore driver didnt lean forward to check the blind spot. Yet another thing for cyclists to be aware of on angled approaches like many roundabouts use.
There is a very good youtube video about this on a junction where a number of cyclists have been killed or injured.
https://youtu.be/SYeeTvitvFU
Having experienced the
Having experienced the terrifying near miss, it clearly had a serious impact on you not being able to follow the reckless motorist and positively ID the number plate.
Certainly, a big loss to road safety as this one gets off scot free – something cops, including courts, favour over cyclist victims.