?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Usually it's the other way round - Off in the distance — LiveJournal
browse
my journal
links
May 2016
 

The Bellinghman
Date: 2008-04-03 11:26
Subject: Usually it's the other way round
Security: Public
Cyclists often rightly complain that other road users don't always see them. This is a problem - a number of collisions occur when vehicles pull out or cut across in front of them.

But this case is different: Cyclist doesn't see stationary van.

nil nisi bonum and all that, but <cynical>I can only think that, the van being stopped at a pedestrian crossing, the cyclist was too intent on running the red light and knocking over a pedestrian or two ...</cynical>
Post A Comment | 31 Comments | | Link



Andrew Mobbs
User: mobbsy
Date: 2008-04-03 10:35 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
A few weeks ago, I was waiting on the road from Horningsea to turn onto the A14. There was one car stationary behind me, then a 16 year-old lad on a scooter drove straight into the back of that car. He seemed a bit bashed up, hurt his leg, but was still conscious (I hung around until I'd given details as a witness and the ambulance turned up). His bike was a wreck though.

I think the problem must have been inattention and the sun being straight in his eyes.
Reply | Thread | Link



The Bellinghman
User: bellinghman
Date: 2008-04-03 10:43 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Some years ago, bellingwoman and I visited Amsterdam.

One evening, we went out for a walk. We were walking along a road (a main one, with wide verges and pavements, not a city street overshadowed with buildings) and a car was waiting to pull out. It stuck its nose out, and a short while later a moped crashed into it.

Three whole seconds later, a second moped joined the first.

Later on we reached the canals area, only to witness a third moped coming a cropper, although in this case it was just cornering too hard on wet cobbles and falling over.

Thereafter on that trip, we were extremely nervous anywhere near a moped.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Artela
User: artela
Date: 2008-04-03 10:59 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
My younger sister once cycled into the back of a stationary bright red post office van... she didn't live it down for quite a while! In her defence, it was hammering down with rain so she was in "head down" mode, but even so *LOL*.
Reply | Thread | Link



Linz
User: k425
Date: 2008-04-03 13:02 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Ex-husband cycled into the back of a stationary van too. He was in the lane, rather than in the gutter, and didn't spot that the white van ahead had stopped. In his defence, snowing a blizzard...
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



User: knell
Date: 2008-04-03 11:54 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:bibendum
It's easier than you might think. Don't forget that cycling in towns is a very high-concentration exercise - if you're in a car, for instance, people generally don't pull out in front of you (too often), but if you're on a bike people will often do things like starting to pull out before you've gone past because "hey, a bike is only narrow", or pulling out of parking spaces, or whatever. This is very distracting, and while distracted by someone dicking around in a BMW and pulling out of a parking space I ran into the back of a Smart stopped at a zebra crossing a while ago. No damage done, but it can easily happen. People sometimes forget that a bike can be doing 30 or 40 kph quite easily, and assume they're able to stop within 1 metre.

And yes, I stop religiously at red lights. No, I don't ride on the pavement. No, I don't ride the wrong way down one way streets. Or do any of the other things drivers seem to use as an excuse to spread the hatin'.

Edited at 2008-04-03 11:55 am (UTC)
Reply | Thread | Link



The Bellinghman
User: bellinghman
Date: 2008-04-03 12:22 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I ran into the back of a Smart stopped at a zebra crossing

If the Smart hadn't been there, would you have overrun the crossing, though? Judging by the lack of damage, I'd guess not, which distinguishes you from this cyclist.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Korenwolf
User: korenwolf
Date: 2008-04-03 12:40 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
if you're in a car, for instance, people generally don't pull out in front of you (too often),

Pretty much a daily thing in my experience, my default condition when driving is "assume the other road users have no brain and are actively trying to make me claim on my insurance".

Most of the time it's "can't be arsed to wait" or (this is a mini-roundabout special) "what!!! You're going round it rather than straight across, commie!!!"
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Bellinghman
User: bellinghman
Date: 2008-04-03 13:50 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
The difference I see is that when a car does it, it's (almost always) going through on the change. When cyclists do it, they seem to go through at any point of the cycle.

(Observational bias here - I don't live where you do.)

This means that the time you are most at risk from a rogue car is when the lights have just changed. As you don't usually know exactly when the opposing lights do change, you are already paying attention to the ends of the lines of traffic crossing, and since you won't be moving off before they have cleared, the effect is usually that you get delayed a bit.

By comparison, a car going through when the lights have been red for a while is incredibly dangerous. A cyclist going through at the same point is plain suicidal.

The modern road system being designed for cars, with pavements for pedestrians, cyclists do get a raw deal. As a motorist, I do try to give plenty of room, and I'm lucky to live somewhere where there don't seem to be hordes of insane cyclists.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Kimberley Verburg: manaia
User: sierra_le_oli
Date: 2008-04-03 12:12 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:manaia
I was tempted to make a smart remark about moonwalking bears, but then I clicked through and saw the cyclist had actually died, poor bastard.
Reply | Thread | Link



The Bellinghman
User: bellinghman
Date: 2008-04-03 12:19 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Indeed he did.

If the van hadn't been in the way, then there'd a pretty good chance that he'd have killed or badly injured whoever was on the crossing.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



The Bellinghman
User: bellinghman
Date: 2008-04-03 13:27 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Simply that he managed to kill himself. There was enough energy in the collision to do so, and it was all in him. If he'd struck the pedestrian (who I presume to have existed, since the van was stopped), then even partitioning that energy equally, there could esily have been serious injury.

Assuming you are correct in your statement of statistics, we already know that such injuries do happen.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link | Expand