Near Miss of the Day 819: Filtering cyclist left-hooked by late-indicating driver

hirsute wrote:

I'm confused by this thread I was told

" I'm afraid to say you will find very little tolerance in this echo chamber for any view other than "two wheels good, four wheels bad" Any sugestion are ruthlessy quashed "

I can only assume someone has hacked the site and modified the comments here.

It's almost as though people who don't actually have usernames saying that they hate cyclists and/or who don't begin their posting history with dozens of posts extolling the virtues of car usage and saying what an appalling entitled bunch cyclists are, or trolling irrelevant political agendas, actually get a respectful fair hearing, isn't it? Odd that.

I get the feeling that our little precious space has been "discovered".

ktache wrote:

I get the feeling that our little precious space has been "discovered".

Shit! We've been rumbled

panda wrote:

If you want to mash your keyboards into the void of the road.cc forum, knock yourselves out; but if you want to win a popularity contest against the motoring lobby, you need to change your stance a bit.  Flame away.

The way to win a popularity contest against the motoring lobby is to either spend a LOT of money to re-influence politicians or to educate the population that car-oriented society is not the only choice. Posting videos on Road.cc is not going to make any realistic difference, but it does allow us to discuss some finer points of traffic laws and also innoculate us against common driving errors.

Panda, if you'd been hit by a sober motorist while on your ride today, entirely their fault of course, and something had to go in front of a jury, either criminal or not, most of that jury will be drivers and not cyclists and many of those will be blaming you just for daring to be using the roads.

panda wrote:

Find a video where the driver is in a queue of traffic the they leave a gap and wave through a driver turning right from the opposite direction and a cyclist filtering unequivacally sensibly (ideally on a murderstrip) goes over the bonnet.  Tell the audience that both drivers were traumatised and that the cyclist couldn't take their grandchildren to the park that afternoon.  Personalise it.  Make the viewer think "crikey, that could have been me in that car".

I am afraid that a video showing that would not influence many drivers at all, as it would only be seen by readers of road.cc; the Mail, Sun et al would have no interest in showing an unequivocal driver fault video (unless maybe one of the drivers was an asylum seeker so they could run a "how can he afford a car" story). Additionally, if their comments sections on bike/car collision stories are anything to go by, a cyclist could have been using Zwift in their own living room when a car crashed through the wall and hit them and it'd still be a ratio of 10:1 "The lycra lout put himself in harm's way, tough."

That is not to say I think your idea has no merit, just that I very much doubt it would ever see the light of day or be received the way you would like if it did.

panda wrote:

If you want to mash your keyboards into the void of the road.cc forum, knock yourselves out; but if you want to win a popularity contest against the motoring lobby, you need to change your stance a bit.  Flame away.

You are incredibly hopeful that posting on road.cc is going to achieve that.

It's only a body such as cycling uk that can might make small inroads.

There needs to be a political will to change things to move away from a driver centric society.

It is a tough one, especially as "news"papers like the Sun, Mail and others do have an agenda when asking "who is at fault"?

Recent ones have included the group of cyclists in their own lane who, whilst still in their own lane, moved to over take a stationary vehicle and got close driven at by on oncoming vehicle who crossed their own side of the lines for no reason.
The cyclists who were close passed at speed by a farm vehicle on single track who decided the rugged tyres and 4wd meant he had to stay on tarmac.
The driver who reversed over the dog because he wanted to reverse at speed back to a cyclist who shouted "woah" as he thought the car was too fast for the conditions and now enough space was given.
The driver who close passed a cyclist coming out of a welsh village and was incensed because he had never been caught driving badly before that. 

Three of those was dealt with by the laws of the land (you could argue the fourth one was as well being as the Police decided a driver revesring at speed, forcing another vehicle of the road and killing a defenseless animal is not anthing they need to be bothered about 'cause cyclist shouted "watch out")

So if those reasonably clear cut incidents provoked a "who is at fault" and comments below blaming the cyclist because they "were on the road without insurance, tax and reg plates and I once saw one go through a red light", I don't think we need to worry on the perceptions of one like the above. 

panda wrote:

Whilst I can see the merit of posting marginal cases to promote debate amongst sensible people, that video has found its way onto thesun.co.uk with the usual "who's in the wrong?" headline.  Which means some of the drivers I'm about to encounter when I roll out for an hour's worth of wishing I was thinner and fitter will have seen it and be looking for an excuse to punish pass someone.  Thanks for that.

You would acknowledge that that is the fault of the Sun and the drivers though, wouldn't you? Or is it now incumbent upon cyclists to self-censor every social media post in case the gutter press use it to stir up hatred amongst the Gammonati? I can guarantee that if every cyclist deleted every single social media post they've ever made the press would simply switch to car dashcam footage of cyclists instead.

There is no doubt in my mind that the motorist is in the wrong, in fact had it been in the UK this situation is specifically covered in the highway code rule 182 :

"Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists, motorcyclists and other road users in particular may be hidden from your view."

The only discusson is about whether we as cyclists have some reponsibility to alter our behaviour to accomodate poor driving. In this case I think most of us would have avoided a collision but that doesn't make the driver right.

It's interesting that we are expected to cycle assuming that drivers will make mistakes but motorists don't have the same responsibility to cyclists eg NMOTD 818. I would have thought it should be the other way round based on the "higherarchy of road users".

panda wrote:

Whilst I can see the merit of posting marginal cases to promote debate amongst sensible people, that video has found its way onto thesun.co.uk with the usual "who's in the wrong?" headline.  Which means some of the drivers I'm about to encounter when I roll out for an hour's worth of wishing I was thinner and fitter will have seen it and be looking for an excuse to punish pass someone.  Thanks for that.

There are so many better videos of drivers behaving terribly towards cyclists doing nothing more than having the temerity to ride along a quiet road.  Why not use those instead?

I think we need to hold drivers accountable for their own actions and not defer blame to whichever Murdoch rag is spreading divisive hate this time. Road.cc is AFAIK going to publish any cyclist's video as it's a quick and easy way for them to make content (and some of them get loads of comments and presumably page views), so it's down to each submitter as to whether it's worth submitting or not (I don't bother if I think it's a typical incident).

There is never a decent excuse for a coward's/punishment pass, so blame the individual that does it - preferably by recording it and submitting it to the police. Similarly, blame Murdoch for the atrocious reporting in his rags. (Maybe blame Road.cc for the poor proof-reading though it does seem much better than it used to be).

Fignon's ghost wrote:

Filtering (in the UK) should be done on the right side of the vehicle.

I'm not sure that's correct. I call filtering on the right "overtaking"!

Fignon's ghost wrote:

TFiltering (in the UK) should be done on the right side of the vehicle.

According to the Highway Code, filtering by cyclists in slow moving motor traffic can be legitimately done on either side of the vehicle and it expresses no preference as to which is more appropriate. 

The links I sent to Jim about filtering for 818 (ignored because they were from cycling organisations though) do state either side, but right hand side is better due to drivers being more ready for right hand side then left etc. Also need to be aware of cars sudden movements, left hooks or spaces left for turning traffic from the right.. However as with everything, it depends what suits the situation at the time. 

better for whom ? I dont like filtering RHS you end up like with 818 having to hope someone isnt fully lined up if things start getting too close which you can never anticipate or predict in advance. So I always favour LHS filters unless Im blocked but I proceed purely on the basis no one ahead of me knows Im there, I can moan & complain about those who might have overtaken me once and then forgotten I was still there. But Im not riding up side any vehicle left or right who has the opportunity to turn across me without being damn sure Im not in harms way.

"Better" was probably the wrong words. Recommended if possible is probably more appropriate as they reckon drivers would be more likely to look for overtakes on the right, cars in the other lane turning right are more noticeable AND if there is no oncoming traffic, you can give more room. Of course there is still vehicles turning right out of junctions (and people crossing) who would be less likely to be looking that side for people travelling. 

For my own experiences, I just take the appropriate side I feel more safer on depending on road knowledge, conditions and which bike I'm on. So will filter one road pretty much purely on the right for a distance, then cut through to the left at a corner just before the lights, first because of a central refuge but also because 90% of the traffic is turning right at the lights so they will be more towards that side of the lane leaving a large section at the left. 

Nope.

espressodan wrote:

To put arguments about the effectiveness of painted murderstrips to one side, there was no bike lane so he was undertaking the vehicle in the same lane. 'Filtering' is moving between lanes in stationary or slowing moving vehicles.

Doesn't really matter what you want to call it, the Highway Code specifically warns drivers to look out for cyclists (and motorcyclists) passing them on either side and states NOT to cut across in front of them. At the speed the rider was going, it cannot even be argued that the rider would be in the driver's blind spot. 

This happened in the Republic of Ireland. What the highway code says is irrelevant.

Look at it from the driver's perspective. They are in backed up traffic. There are two filling stations - which has the best price? It seems to me that the driver has dropped back as they are deciding which one to go to, has decided on the second and signals, they then drift to the left as they go for the rather undefined entrance of the second station - the signal isn't especially late in that context, they haven't made their exit, the road seems a little undefined at that point. I'd suggest most of us have made a late decision at some point, for example on unfamiliar roads or in heavy traffic so passing just before a turning is unwise.

From the cyclists perspective he is riding fast. There is something odd about the queue, why is the car in front not keeping pace? I don't count riding at that speed as filtering, in my book filtering is something done with stationary or near stationary traffic at low speed - as soon as traffic is much above walking pace, too much can change in a built up area.

Generally, riding at your own pace without consideration to events around you are going to have a problem like this, and you cannot lean on drivers being perfect - as we know how poor drivers can be.