A white van approaches...

[Sh4rkyBloke]

The positioning was a little too submissive, agreed... but the van driver was a total cock! There was no indication of him slowing down regardless of whatever position was chosen. I'd have chosen the safer route too I suspect.

 

[domtyler]

The positioning was a little too submissive, agreed... but the van driver was a total cock! There was no indication of him slowing down regardless of whatever position was chosen. I'd have chosen the safer route too I suspect.

How was being forced into parked cars safer?

 

[magnatom]

Not perfect but pretty good. I certainly would have avoided that incident.

I'd like to think I was pretty good as well, but we all make mistakes. I pass that section 5 days a week 45 weeks a year. I've never had such a close pass there (in fact I have had drivers behind me complain, remember the angry man?). There is no way in the world that you could categorically say that a momentary lapse would not lead to you being in the same position. It can happen to all of us, even the best of us (I'm not claiming....), and I am sure it could happen to you.

 

[magnatom]

How was being forced into parked cars safer?

I'd just like to point out, that despite my questionable position, I still had easy escape routes. I would not have hit the parked cars, had I had to continue towards them. As I started to swerve I braked, but once I was sure I was out the way and that I could pass the cars safely I stopped braking.

So due to my circumstances it was the safest option.

 

[Sh4rkyBloke]

How was being forced into parked cars safer?

...than being squished by a van... errr, let me think...

 

[Cab]

That is irrelevant. When out cycling on the roads we need to deal with real world behaviour not "ideal world" stuff.

The question is not whether or not we have to deal with 'real world behaviour', the question is whether or not the van driver should have slowed down. And yes, he should have done; Mag could have done more to make the dodgy overtake less likely, but responsibility for that manoevre still lies squarely with the van driver. Its kind of sad that you're blaming the cyclist for a dangerous manoevre from the van driver.

 

[domtyler]

Its kind of sad that you're blaming the cyclist for a dangerous manoevre from the van driver.

No I don't think it is sad. Like it or not we are at the bottom of the pile out there on the roads and we only have one thing to keep us safe, our wits. We need to make sure we are using them at all times.

People in vans, cars and lorries can afford to relax a little as they have a small amount of protection built in. They can have low speed collisions all day long and not get hurt.

 

[magnatom]

No I don't think it is sad. Like it or not we are at the bottom of the pile out there on the roads and we only have one thing to keep us safe, our wits. We need to make sure we are using them at all times.

People in vans, cars and lorries can afford to relax a little as they have a small amount of protection built in. They can have low speed collisions all day long and not get hurt.

Just because we are at the bottom of the pile (I assume you mean by the amount of respect we have), doesn't mean we need to accept it.

If I was given the respect by the white van driver, that I am due, then this incident would not have occurred. The real world is a hard place, but it doesn't mean that we cannot demand and get respect, just as all road users deserve.

 

[Cab]

No I don't think it is sad. Like it or not we are at the bottom of the pile out there on the roads and we only have one thing to keep us safe, our wits. We need to make sure we are using them at all times.

True. We do. Yet theres an element of passive defeatism about what you're saying; yes, we need to do what we can to reduce the incidence of other people endangering us. When we get it wrong, and someone else as a result does something dangerous, its still their fault. Do you not agree? Our relative vulnerability does not, even slightly, vindicate the view that other peple making mistakes and endangering us is our fault?

People in vans, cars and lorries can afford to relax a little as they have a small amount of protection built in. They can have low speed collisions all day long and not get hurt.

True, but again, not really relevant; we all accept that we should be vigilant and, where appropriate, be assertive to minimise risk. We also accept that sometimes even the best of us will get that wrong; that is no absolution for others to endanger us.

 

[domtyler]

True. We do. Yet theres an element of passive defeatism about what you're saying; yes, we need to do what we can to reduce the incidence of other people endangering us. When we get it wrong, and someone else as a result does something dangerous, its still their fault. Do you not agree? Our relative vulnerability does not, even slightly, vindicate the view that other peple making mistakes and endangering us is our fault?



True, but again, not really relevant; we all accept that we should be vigilant and, where appropriate, be assertive to minimise risk. We also accept that sometimes even the best of us will get that wrong; that is no absolution for others to endanger us.

Don't get me wrong I can see what you're saying. I am just being realistic though and recognising that cycling on the roads has many advantages, but also many drawbacks. We have a responsibility to ourselves to take mitigating action to counteract the threat of collision with other road vehicles. In many cases this means either taking a dominant road position (taking the lane), or taking a submissive position whereby you always give way to other traffic.

 

[Nigeyy]

It seems the general opinion is that Magnatom was a little off positioning (including Magnatom himself). I thought it was pretty good that he recognized the danger and reacted to it.

Which brings up a question: had Magnatom been in a primary, would he have been in more danger though? Would the guy have just ploughed through him? Or still tried to overtake? It seems we're placing a little faith (ok, in some ways very little faith!) in drivers being somewhat attentive around us.

I ask this question because I consider road positioning to be a bit of a measured gamble: by being assertive I believe you reduce the overall probability of an accident, but then again, if you are going to be hit, you'll probably be hit very severely. I think of this as the "helicopter argument". Helicopter's are great when they're flying and in the air, but once there's a serious failure, you're in big trouble.

I'm not entirely sure I would move out and be assertive at the time given Magnatom's description of the speed of WVM, but probably would have cycled more primary exiting the roundabout though (hindsight, never putting up videos of me cycling and internet message boards increase my judgement skills incredibly, by the way).

And agreed, the WVM looks like he was driving like an idiot.

The positioning was a little too submissive, agreed... but the van driver was a total cock! There was no indication of him slowing down regardless of whatever position was chosen. I'd have chosen the safer route too I suspect.

 

[tdr1nka]

1/ WVM was very very wrong.
2/ Mag, you could have been in a better position but swift assessment of the situation just kept you out of danger.

I have to say, having discussed this with TheDoctor after giving him an insight Sarf London roads at rush hour in the p*ss*ng rain last night, what Dom is saying is that most definately no, you shouldn't 'accept' driving like this but in some areas you have to 'expect' it or risk putting yourself in even greater danger.

Where I experience the most dangerous overtaking is in bus lanes and by taxi's who straddle the lanes rather than make a complete overtake in the next lane often passing less than a foot and a half from my bars.
If I have enough time I maintain and defend my primary position but if I get any sign of menace, horn blasts or over revving I will simply slow and find a safe place to pull over.






Then give them the two finger salute!!

 

[4F]

Magnatom, please don't take this the wrong way but I think you seem more pre-occupied with what other road users may be doing with your front and rear camera's rather than just getting out and enjoying the pleasures of being on 2 wheels.

 

[ComedyPilot]

In this situation you did the right thing and avoided any form of collision. I take it from your frequent life savers (backwards glances) you don't have a mirror attached? It might be an idea to get one if you are a frequent rider in heavy town traffic because you need to see what's going on behind you as well as in front. It's better to avoid a bump than be in a hospital bed shouting about how much it was someone else's fault. I'll have to check out more of your vids.

 

[dodgy]

Magnatom, please don't take this the wrong way but I think you seem more pre-occupied with what other road users may be doing with your front and rear camera's rather than just getting out and enjoying the pleasures of being on 2 wheels.

My thoughts exactly.

Dave.