A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Who is to blame



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 7th 17, 09:52 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Who is to blame

On 07/07/17 09:49, doug wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yc2x8slo

Opinions are divided on this.

Was the cyclist in the wrong lane?

Did he put himself in the blind spot?


As ever, we don't have enough information. How do we know it was a left
turn only lane, apart from the driver's say so? Did the lorry reach the
line first and the bicycle go up the inside or did the bicycle reach the
line first? So we have no idea whether the rider went up the inside.

Once in that position the rider doesn't hang back where the driver could
make a left turn (apart from lack of indicator we have no idea it
couldn't happen). The rider on the left, in white, was the one in that
danger zone.
Ads
  #12  
Old July 7th 17, 10:18 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Who is to blame

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 9:52:16 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/07/17 09:49, doug wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yc2x8slo

Opinions are divided on this.

Was the cyclist in the wrong lane?

Did he put himself in the blind spot?


As ever, we don't have enough information. How do we know it was a left
turn only lane, apart from the driver's say so? Did the lorry reach the
line first and the bicycle go up the inside or did the bicycle reach the
line first? So we have no idea whether the rider went up the inside.


Watch the youtube video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vzv11EyiMvw
It was a left turn only lane.


Once in that position the rider doesn't hang back where the driver could
make a left turn (apart from lack of indicator we have no idea it
couldn't happen). The rider on the left, in white, was the one in that
danger zone.


What the cyclists as a group did is probably acceptable for London apart from cycling beside a moving HGV.

  #13  
Old July 7th 17, 10:51 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Peter Parry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,164
Default Who is to blame

On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 21:52:13 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 07/07/17 09:49, doug wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yc2x8slo

Opinions are divided on this.

Was the cyclist in the wrong lane?

Did he put himself in the blind spot?


As ever, we don't have enough information. How do we know it was a left
turn only lane, apart from the driver's say so?


See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vzv11EyiMvw



  #14  
Old July 8th 17, 12:25 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Who is to blame

On 07/07/17 22:18, wrote:
On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 9:52:16 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/07/17 09:49, doug wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yc2x8slo

Opinions are divided on this.

Was the cyclist in the wrong lane?

Did he put himself in the blind spot?


As ever, we don't have enough information. How do we know it was a
left turn only lane, apart from the driver's say so? Did the lorry
reach the line first and the bicycle go up the inside or did the
bicycle reach the line first? So we have no idea whether the rider
went up the inside.


Watch the youtube vide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vzv11EyiMvw It
was a left turn only lane.


OK

Once in that position the rider doesn't hang back where the driver
could make a left turn (apart from lack of indicator we have no
idea it couldn't happen). The rider on the left, in white, was the
one in that danger zone.


What the cyclists as a group did is probably acceptable for London
apart from cycling beside a moving HGV.


But we still don't see the order of arrival.

Although I suggest the left turn lane is a bit of a red herring. All it
it means is that a driver will be aiming at the left hand lane on the
other side of the junction. I think the technique would be to start
ahead of the lorry across the first half of the junction but set a
course along the left edge of the yellow box then make a judgement when
halfway across.

There are a couple of junctions I use, not laned like that but narrowing
down, where running a wide course and doing a life saver part way just
seems instinctive to me. Even though it usually happens that the car
behind cannot overtake me because the car in front is delaying proceedings.
  #15  
Old July 8th 17, 02:11 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Who is to blame

On 07/07/2017 16:44, Nick wrote:
On 07/07/2017 16:37, Tony Dragon wrote:
On 07-Jul-17 3:48 PM, Nick wrote:
On 07/07/2017 15:26, wrote:
On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 9:49:19 AM UTC+1, doug wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yc2x8slo

Opinions are divided on this.

Was the cyclist in the wrong lane?

Did he put himself in the blind spot?

On the face of it the cyclists was at fault.
It depends on whether the lorry driver knew the cyclist was there,
you can't just drive into someone just because you think you have
right of way.


The cyclist was in front of the Lorry. The Lorry driver could see a
lot of cyclists were on his inside at the lights. He tried to out
accelerate the cyclists as the road narrowed. I would ban him as
dangerous.

If lorry drivers cannot see in front they should be more careful.
They should ban lorries which do not have a proper field of vision.


It has been suggested that the cyclists were in a left hand turn lane.


Yes I understand that...


....but take no cognisance of it?

The Lorry driver could see that there were some
cyclists in the left hand lane. The road was narrowing and he was
effectively pulling in toward the curb. It doesn't take much skill to
realise the danger. That is why I think he should be banned.


Are you sure?
  #16  
Old July 8th 17, 07:52 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Ian Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,622
Default Who is to blame

On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:48:07 +0100, Nick wrote:

The cyclist was in front of the Lorry. The Lorry driver could see a lot
of cyclists were on his inside at the lights. He tried to out accelerate
the cyclists as the road narrowed. I would ban him as dangerous.


You say the lorry driver should be banned because he dangerously tried
to out-accelerate the cyclists as the road narrows. Why not say the
cyclists should be banned because they tried to out-accelerate the
lorry as the road narrowed?

If two cars were side-by-side and one in a left-turn lane decided to
go straight on, which would you consider to be to blame in any
resulting collision?

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
  #17  
Old July 8th 17, 10:14 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Nick[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,323
Default Who is to blame

On 08/07/2017 07:52, Ian Smith wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:48:07 +0100, Nick wrote:

The cyclist was in front of the Lorry. The Lorry driver could see a lot
of cyclists were on his inside at the lights. He tried to out accelerate
the cyclists as the road narrowed. I would ban him as dangerous.


You say the lorry driver should be banned because he dangerously tried
to out-accelerate the cyclists as the road narrows. Why not say the
cyclists should be banned because they tried to out-accelerate the
lorry as the road narrowed?


The cyclist was ahead of the lorry, was aware of the vehicles in front
of him and most critically of all did not significantly endanger the
life of another road user. So no I don't think the cyclist should be banned.

This is the way cyclists ride in London, it was entirely predicable. The
lorry driver is likely to kill someone of he continues to drive in that way.


If two cars were side-by-side and one in a left-turn lane decided to
go straight on, which would you consider to be to blame in any
resulting collision?


What if a child kicked a ball into the road and was running toward it. A
car driver saw this but didn't brake because he knew safety campaigns
warned children not to run into the road without looking. Who would be
to blame if there were a collision?

  #18  
Old July 8th 17, 11:41 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Who is to blame

On 08/07/17 10:14, Nick wrote:
On 08/07/2017 07:52, Ian Smith wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:48:07 +0100, Nick
wrote:

The cyclist was in front of the Lorry. The Lorry driver could see
a lot of cyclists were on his inside at the lights. He tried to
out accelerate the cyclists as the road narrowed. I would ban him
as dangerous.


You say the lorry driver should be banned because he dangerously
tried to out-accelerate the cyclists as the road narrows. Why not
say the cyclists should be banned because they tried to
out-accelerate the lorry as the road narrowed?


The cyclist was ahead of the lorry, was aware of the vehicles in
front of him and most critically of all did not significantly
endanger the life of another road user. So no I don't think the
cyclist should be banned.

This is the way cyclists ride in London, it was entirely predicable.
The lorry driver is likely to kill someone of he continues to drive
in that way.


The driver knew there were bicycles there. This much is obvious. The
difficulty is when it is necessary to keep track of many things - plus
the time the optics can not update because of the need to scan to the
right hand mirror. The visual system is utterly remarkable but it has
limits.

If two cars were side-by-side and one in a left-turn lane decided
to go straight on, which would you consider to be to blame in any
resulting collision?


It's a matter of laning. We'll assume there are three lanes before the
lights and two after the lights so the left hand lane disappears and the
middle lane becomes the new left lane, ie lanes Z, 1 and 2. The lorry
driver started lane 1 and correctly remained in lane 1. The bicycle
riders started in lane Z and had to make a lane change into lane 1.

With two cars, if the collision was before the pinch, the driver (A),
starting in lane Z would be at fault for failing to make a correct
change to lane 1. A collision could not take place after the pinch in
the same circumstances as with the bicycles. The only possibility for a
collision after the pinch is that that if driver (B), starting off in
lane 1 had recognised what A was doing and moved over to lane 2 on the
approach to the pinch then tried returning to lane 1 after the pinch. By
moving to lane 2, control of lane 1 was relinquished therefore B would
be at fault.
  #19  
Old July 8th 17, 04:41 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Who is to blame

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 11:41:25 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:
On 08/07/17 10:14, Nick wrote:
On 08/07/2017 07:52, Ian Smith wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:48:07 +0100, Nick
wrote:

The cyclist was in front of the Lorry. The Lorry driver could see
a lot of cyclists were on his inside at the lights. He tried to
out accelerate the cyclists as the road narrowed. I would ban him
as dangerous.

You say the lorry driver should be banned because he dangerously
tried to out-accelerate the cyclists as the road narrows. Why not
say the cyclists should be banned because they tried to
out-accelerate the lorry as the road narrowed?


The cyclist was ahead of the lorry, was aware of the vehicles in
front of him and most critically of all did not significantly
endanger the life of another road user. So no I don't think the
cyclist should be banned.

This is the way cyclists ride in London, it was entirely predicable.
The lorry driver is likely to kill someone of he continues to drive
in that way.


The driver knew there were bicycles there. This much is obvious. The
difficulty is when it is necessary to keep track of many things - plus
the time the optics can not update because of the need to scan to the
right hand mirror. The visual system is utterly remarkable but it has
limits.


The more times I watch the video (now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH7i5KFnPzI) the more I side with the lorry driver.
The sensible cyclist was the girl on the left with the white top who waited for the lorry to pass before merging.
  #20  
Old July 9th 17, 01:03 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Who is to blame

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 10:14:15 AM UTC+1, Nick wrote:
On 08/07/2017 07:52, Ian Smith wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:48:07 +0100, Nick wrote:

The cyclist was in front of the Lorry. The Lorry driver could see a lot
of cyclists were on his inside at the lights. He tried to out accelerate
the cyclists as the road narrowed. I would ban him as dangerous.


You say the lorry driver should be banned because he dangerously tried
to out-accelerate the cyclists as the road narrows. Why not say the
cyclists should be banned because they tried to out-accelerate the
lorry as the road narrowed?


The cyclist was ahead of the lorry, was aware of the vehicles in front
of him and most critically of all did not significantly endanger the
life of another road user. So no I don't think the cyclist should be banned.

This is the way cyclists ride in London, it was entirely predicable. The
lorry driver is likely to kill someone of he continues to drive in that way.


If two cars were side-by-side and one in a left-turn lane decided to
go straight on, which would you consider to be to blame in any
resulting collision?


What if a child kicked a ball into the road and was running toward it. A
car driver saw this but didn't brake because he knew safety campaigns
warned children not to run into the road without looking. Who would be
to blame if there were a collision?


That is not a fair comparison.
Certainly if you are diving a car on a residential street you have to be prepared for such but where does the driver's responsibility end and the parent's begin?
If you are driving on a NSL road do you slow to walking pace at every side turning or do you expect those joining the main road to cede priority?
At some point you have to expect adults to behave as adults.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When you can't blame the Sun Alycidon UK 1 May 18th 16 07:55 AM
Not to blame !!! Mrcheerful UK 51 December 24th 14 03:38 PM
Blame to Go Around Mike Vandeman[_4_] Mountain Biking 6 May 12th 13 04:28 PM
Who’s to blame Simon Weissel UK 42 March 25th 13 05:24 PM
I blame it all on Mr. Tom Sherman Mike Kruger Recumbent Biking 0 September 29th 07 05:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.