A cyclist who lost her life after being hit from behind in Herefordshire last year wasn’t seen by the motorist because her rear light was out.
The Hereford Times reports that Pauline Towell had lights fitted to her e-bike, but the rear light had started “playing up a little”, sometimes turning off by itself.
Towell’s lights had been working when she left the branch of Morrison’s where she worked at around 6.30pm on September 28, but the rear light didn’t seem to be working when she was later seen by off-duty constable Alan Conway.
Conway said he considered stopping to speak to her, but was unable to do so due to traffic.
Shortly afterwards, Towell was hit while riding on the B4224 near Fownhope.
Driver Harry Sturgess said he hadn’t seen Towell and only became aware of her when his passenger, Daniel Williams, shouted a warning.
Williams said he only spotted her when they were just metres away.
An oncoming driver said Sturgess could not have swerves out of the way as it would have meant hitting cars on the other side of the road.
A crash investigator concluded that Towell would have been very difficult to see due to a combination of factors, including her dark clothing and oncoming headlights.
Add new comment
31 comments
Except, of course there are the 85% of motorists who, if given the opportunity, will break the 20mph speed limit.
Now 85% is a sort of definition of most isn't it?
I;m not going to bother commenting on the newspaper site, well done burt.
I notice the original letter is from a secretary of a Porsche owners club, paragons of roadcraft virtue porsche drivers, especially when it comes to the observance of speed limits
And one of the responses details the law-breaking by local Porsche drivers.
How about that last comment about anybody over 40 wearing lycra should be fined. I'm all for it provided that any fat bastard caught driving a car is also heavily fined. £10 a kilo?
Today's letter to the editor with comments suggesting close passes and sounding horn at cyclists nit using cycle lanes https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/18068691.letter-editor-cyclists-m...
Quite a few pro-cyclist comments on there now, including mine; lots of fun.
Yeah, some well penned responses now - you still get the occassional dick who writes stuff like "Given that most motorists break the law every time they get in their car" to bring it all back down to the level of the idiots that wrote the piece in the first place - but hey...
Hardly - it's only a slight exaggeration.
Even if you restrict it to speeding, more than half of drivers on 30mph roads are breaking 30mph limits, by the DoT figures, and about a 1/3 admit to exceeding the limit by over 5mph at least once a week according to the Brake survey.
Then add in all the dodgy MOTs, use of hand-held mobiles, breaking the rules on emissions (which would include about half of all new diesel cars, according to that last story), those lacking insurance etc, and the very very common illegal parking (e.g. blocking pavements, which is absolutely routine on all the streets round me - as soon as parking is permitted on one bit of the pavement motorists decide they can park on the whole length and width of it). and, I don't see why it's being a 'dick' to state what is pretty much a fact.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
https://www.brake.org.uk/assets/docs/dl_reports/DLreport-Speed-section2-...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/23/diesel-cars-pollution-l...
It may well be just a slight exaggeration, but an exaggeration none the less, you're right - or not - but introduced as it was, it will only serve to antagonise rather than inform (as some of their subsequent post did) - but as per your links, statistics are tricky even if their comment was based on any; which is doesn't look like it did.
Just taking the first study
* it's car journeys, not drivers
* is not to be taken as representative of national figures or behaviours (according to the study itself)
* is dependent on when sampled (lower violations during the week apparently).
I'm not claiming that it's all fine, it's not - it's shit especially the 20mph offences, but when you make a deliberately provocative statement while trying to educate people (as the post seemed to want to do) then it's (a) maybe worth backing it up and (b) not generally a constructive move in general - unsurprisingly - and that's what I meant about bringing things back down to a level.
"An oncoming driver said Sturgess could not have swerves out of the way as it would have meant hitting cars on the other side of the road."
I'm sure that many years ago as a learner driver I was taught that the correct thing to do in this situation would be to swerve out of the way, as hitting an oncoming car would be less likely to cause a fatality than hitting the cyclist. Whether I would do the correct thing in a split second decision is another matter, but I hope I would. But how depressing that this driver seems to think that a cyclist's life is worth less than damage to a car.
I don't know if it is of interest to anyone, but HexLox are doing a 25% off thing for Black Friday.
I was happy to get 10% off through StolenRide.
They are also doing a new Black range.
Shockingly expensive tiny magnets, so getting anything off is nice.
So far none of my expensive and protected bits have gone missing.
I'll nominate Sevenoaks, both the town and the wider district council, although I would appreciate there are probably much worse areas. Considering the number of recreational cyclists that travel through the area, there is basically no cycle specific infrastructure at all. The roads in and around the town are in an appalling condition in places, apparently deliberately kept so to deter cycling as any attempt to get the council to repair any defects results in no action and a reply that the defect is within tolerance/limits. Essentially, unless the defect is likely to damage one of the many 4x4/SUVs that dominate the area, they arnt interested.
Whilst they proudly proclaim there are 60 bike parking spaces in the main town station, if you want to visit the shops (why would you, there is nothing worthwhile there anyway) you have a 3/4 mile uphill walk to get there, as there are only a handful of places to secure a bike in the town centre.
I must have a quick post to defend Brum a little bit, when I left, admittedly in '03, I thought that the average west midland driver was somewhat more inclined to be nicer to me on the bicycle than the average driver in Reading, where I moved and continued my commuting. Oddly I rode on part of the NCN 5 as a section of my commute in both places. It starts as an offshoot of the NCN 4 at the pedestrian (and cycle) horseshoe bridge over the Kennet where it hits the Thames.
I put it down to a lot of the Birmingham drivers were driving around the city, whearas most of the Reading drivers were driving into the town.
Isn't Brum the latest hotpsot of drive-by shoves?
My deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Pauline Heather Towell.
Quick point of order, in this era of fake news. That's not 'thanksgiving traffic'. That's just 'traffic' - I first saw that tweet about a fortnight ago.
Insane.
There have been similar tweets. CBS posted this footage yesterday: https://www.facebook.com/CBSLA/videos/2478782192346483/
OK, so her rear light wasnt working. What is his excuse for his headlights apparently not working?
O. M. F. G.
I vote for Bournemouth/Poole/Christchurch conurbation and the New Forest. Both areas hate cyclists. Just check the local rags. The drivers here actively try to kill cyclists
Hands down the worst place I've ever cycled is my hometown's area of Torbay in South Devon. I can imagine at least the nominated cities of Bradford and Leeds have roads that are for the most part wide: in Torbay, pretty much all the roads are one traffic lane in each direction and narrow, meaning that you end up with many people behind you who can't pass easily...although the majority just go for it anyway beacuse giving a cyclist 40cm space is enough, right?
The area is also full of hills, with pretty much no flat parts at all except for two or so miles of seafront - great for building strength and stamina, but crap for when it's hot and you're cycling for transport (your slow speed also adds to the hatred from motorists behind you). There are no quiet back lanes or residential streets to avoid the main roads, and the "infrastructure" is either painted rubbish or shared paths - which are just ordinary pavements with some signs added, and one actually has a full steep flight of stairs on it with a handy "cyclists dismount" sign.
Motorists seem to hate anyone cycling, and I've had more and scarier close passes and near-misses than London, Bath and now where I live in Paris; I practically never had a ride that had no incidents with some w*nker. In my hometown of Brixham, there is literally no infrastrucure (painted or otherwise) at all, and the only flat route on the harbour front is strictly no cycling.
I'd take the cycling utopias of Bradford and Leeds over that anyday.
devon-631849.jpg
Warren Row tried it's hardest to be on the list.
Sydney, oh to be as good as Sydney… I’m in Maitland, about 160km from Sydney where the best you can say is they tried, but shouldn’t have. This believe or not is the cycle path into the CBD from the east of the city:
https://road.cc/sites/default/files/2823F698-EA0E-4E3D-8A1E-97CFA665F222...
We have on road cycle lanes where parked cars take half the lane because the council didn’t make the parking wide enough for a car, the road isn’t wide enough for traffic, parking and bike lanes. We have the access to the bike path across double lines on a blind corner. We have gates across paths that are too small to fit a bike through. We’ve even got a bike lane that goes from the street the length of a house, onto a public reserve where cycling is banned. I’m waiting to see if they’ve heeded my advice for an intersection upgrade in my suburb, where they had no provision for bicycles despite there being paths across the bridge into the suburb, and on and off road paths for the next stage on a road from the intersection. You could not make this stuff up.
Come to think of it, that’s just situation normal in Australia.
2823F698-EA0E-4E3D-8A1E-97CFA665F222.jpeg
I nominate Lundy Island.
I'll see your Lundy and raise you Steep Holm.
I was stretching the idea of town with Lundy, but Steep Holm isn't even inhabited.
I reckon most, if not all major cities in Indonesia are not cycle-friendly. Why? Lack of adequate cycling infrastructure is one reason. Another is the heavy motorist-dominated traffic, coupled with the "bigger ride, more power/authority over other road users" mentality. Unless you ride very early and with a group, you're better off Zwifting.
I'm guessing Indonesia is still at the stage where not using a motor vehicle is a sign of lack of wealth and hence low-status? (And not at the point where that correlation has started to reverse, star-bellied-sneetch style...which, I've heard, is even starting to happen in China now). Which is I guess going to compound the might-is-right effect of the mass of the vehicle.
I nominate York, a city which apparently had visions of a cycle freindly future and so took millions in funding from Cycling England, after which the local Council made the city centre and all its arterial routes the most inaccesable places to be for cyclists. Even central London is easier to navigate round on a bike these days.
Pages