A Worrying & Serious Near Incident!

[growingvegetables]

Goodness - now where do I start?

I don't see your post as attacking me!

I'm guessing that something in the wording I used ....... kinda clicked positively? Only a suggestion then - come back in a coupla weeks, and you'll probably find I only re-worded Cubist, Night Train, and few others. They weren't attacking either

I wonder if you have seen my post 108?

Yes, I did - and (honestly) it was the trigger for me being thoroughly p!$$ed off ... and adding my tuppenyworth to the thread. You actually wrote "I can only conclude that yesterday when I met the cyclists they did not have any lights on."

Against that - good on you for posting, better still for realising that you need to rethink your perspective on speed ......... and we want to hear your reports on you cycling through those bends!

 

[sidevalve]

I just feel I must remake the following points, - 1 - were you going too fast - no, not in this instance 'cos you stopped. 2 - the phrase "stop in the distance you can see to be clear" is 100% relevant and always will be.
I also see two other things emerging here, a callous disregard for the fate of m/cyclists [also a minority road using group] by some contributers, to the extent that if the word cyclist were swapped for motorcyclist then there would be cries to have them hung from a lamp post and an almost total denial of the fact by some that yes sometimes cyclists also go too fast. If you have to swerve to avoid a box etc in the road then why ? If you come round a bend into a pothole you didn't see in time and come off, well who's fault is that ? The desire to go fast [and sometimes too fast] is NOT confined to the big bad car drivers.
I make no excuses here but the fact remains impatience is common to almost everyone and even though you may not be piloting a ton of metal you still have a resposibility to be able to stop, there are those who seem to forget .

 

[Big boy]

Ok lets presume that the driver wasnt lookin at the end of his bonnet the whole journey.
And lets presume the cyclist was doing 15mph, and that the drivers vision / reaction time was about average.
The road must be either really bendy with no str8 whatsoever before the bend, or the cyclists had been stopped and just set off as the driver rounded the bend.
I live out in the sticks myself , theres dodgy bends hills bushes trees and of course other cyclists.
As a motorist and a cyclist i can often se someone wearing high viz from quite a distance away.
Should i go into a blind bend i would anticipate that someone else may also be on that part of the road.
Maybe a pedestrian cyclist or a parked car, we have it all around here.
By the way as i mentioned before i have seen people in high viz gear hundreds of yards away.
Had they not have been wearing it i wouldnt have known they was there.
Im not blaming either the cyclist or the driver, just trying to understand how the driver never saw a thing untill he hit the abs..

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

I am pretty sure that all bends are marked with the appropriate road sign

If you get more warnings about cyclists on some roads, what consequence do you envisage on other roads without increased signage?

Roads are not dangerous, being inanimate objects. People behave in dangerous ways.

G2ews has confirmed there are no signs of warning at said bend. I have seen a few apparently dangerous bends which have appropriate signage. Problem is with these bends is it probably took a few accidents and road deaths to qualify as dangerous!! There is one blind summit 10 miles from my home town that caused several accidents. Nothing was done. 5 people died one night as a result of a head on collision. The driver over taking never saw the lights due to the blind summit. The result? A sign is now visible on both sides of the summit reading "Caution Blind Summit". Bit late. I am also pretty sure this after the parents petitioned to have this done!

Regarding possible consequences for cyclists without the pre mentioned signage? I would imagine the same for children who are not in the "20's plenty" zone near schools. Do you think motorists get out of the 20mph school zone, go back to driving up the pavements and through pedestrian crossings? Consider that rhetorical.

One pretty effective way to keep people at 30 mph, or less, in town is with the "Flashing 30 signs". They serve only as i reminder to the road user that they may be speeding when approaching a town. A possible solution to dangerous bends or sections of road that are high risk maybe. Though again that's all £££ and usually many people have to die for such money to be spent. What ever happened to prevention being better than the cure...................

 

[growingvegetables]

Im not blaming either the cyclist or the driver, just trying to understand how the driver never saw a thing untill he hit the abs..

Having a look at the Googleview of the road (as per the OP's link) might be a good start?

 

[srw]

s, in town is with the "Flashing 30 signs". They serve only as i reminder to the road user that they may be speeding when approaching a town. A possible solution to dangerous bends or sections of road that are high risk maybe. Though again that's all £££ and usually many people have to die for such money to be spent. What ever happened to prevention being better than the cure...................

Prevention would be drivers stoppping thinking that 30mph was a target speed, or a safe maximum in a 30mph zone. It's not. It's a legal maximum.

 

[tadpole]

Personally I don’t drive to the limit of “how far can I see” or “what is the speed limit”. I drive to the limit of my car braking system + my reaction time + weather conditions + road conditions + (the reaction time and braking of the cars behind me) = safe speed to travel. Every day is different. Even on the same road, some days I drive at 45mph and some days 18mph. If I’m being followed by some beat up piece of sh@t I’ll drive slower than if I was being followed by a S6 or BMW.
I know the limits of my reaction time and my car, so I know how fast I can go and still stop on a blind bend “fridge moment” but that is no help if the guy behind is too close/not able to stop when I haul on the brakes.
There again I’ve no room to talk as I’m the dick whose likely to be doing 70mph on the motorway, holding up all the traffic.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

Prevention would be drivers stoppping thinking that 30mph was a target speed, or a safe maximum in a 30mph zone. It's not. It's a legal maximum.

Of course that would be the ideal. I think it somewhat unrealistic though. With some measures in place, like the flashing speed signs, people would be forced to think about the possible danger ahead.

 

[ushills]

The way I understand the police drive and the way I was taught was to imagine line from the front of the car terminating in a dot that reflected the position I could come to a complete stop, this imaginary dot would be close or further out depending on speed and provided this dot is on the road you can see your speed is appropriate, or alternatively you're going as fast as you can for the distance you can see.

I also happen on country lanes to drive in a manner that gives the greatest sightlines and this is in stark contrast to taking the 'racing line', I am frequently across the white line on winding lanes using the method above as you can see further or drive faster.

I would say to the OP, you were going to fast for the distance you could see. For the cyclist I would position myself further out on bends to cars can see me sooner and I still have the opportunity of moving towards the kerb if I cannot hear the car behind slowing down.

 

[ushills]

Also I would suggest the following

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Roadcraft-d...tial-Handbook/dp/0117021687/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_t

Similar to cyclecraft for the cyclist and not just for Police drivers.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I can only conclude that yesterday when I met the cyclists they did not have any lights on. Forgive me for not realising that sooner as my concern was why it had gone wrong at the speed I was travelling at. This would mean that I saw them maybe a second later than I should have as the area is covered by trees and with a greying sky today as yesterday which makes the road very dark. If I saw them at 45 mph as I came round the bend, there is know no doubt in my mind that I could have stopped wherever they were on the bend.

You've reviewed your actions, driven the same road again at varying speeds, been given excellent driving advice by Night Train and others, and you've come to the conclusion that this "worrying and serious near incident" wouldn't have been such had the cyclist been using lights in the daytime.

I doubt you've learned anything from this.

By the way, what was the reponse from the police to your query?

GC

 

[cd365]

G2EWS I think the lesson you need to learn is not to post a critique of your own driving skills on Cyclechat, it does end up with you and your (lack of?) driving skills being attacked. You are far better of moaning about motorised vehicles and their drivers, claiming you have given up your car to cycle every where and being aware that all cyclists are always in the right unless another cyclist is having a go at said cyclist!

Personally I don't think you did much wrong, you slowed down and stopped in time for a hazard.

I regularly cycle around a similar bend but this bend is after a long steady climb where it has just got a lot steeper, it's a point where I normally get out of the saddle to get to the top. I often have cars who come zooming around the bend, they have not seen me on the long straight beforehand disappearing around the bend so get a shock when the see me. To mitigate an accident I try to be over to the left as far as possible and I always have rear lights on though the safest thing I could do is get off the bike and push it up past the blind bend. But that is not going to happen, but expecting car drivers to come around the bend at 10mph is not going to happen either.

Maybe the solution is to give jobs to all of the unemployed people, they can be given red flags and on dangerous bends, road sections etc. they can slow traffic down to a safe level.

 

[G2EWS]

You've reviewed your actions, driven the same road again at varying speeds, been given excellent driving advice by Night Train and others, and you've come to the conclusion that this "worrying and serious near incident" wouldn't have been such had the cyclist been using lights in the daytime.

I doubt you've learned anything from this.

By the way, what was the reponse from the police to your query?

GC

Hi GC,

You have made a totally incorrect conclusion from my analysis!

My purpose of pointing this out, is for my benefit and help understand what went wrong. There is no doubt whatsoever that had I hit the cyclist, it would have been my fault. After all, it could just as well have been a collapsed pedestrian or broken down vehicle. I have no issue in accepting that whatsoever nor the blame for the result that may have been!

My conclusion which should help any one of us, is that the bend can be driven, at least at 40 mph safely. I proved that again yesterday evening in the dark when I had to drive along the same road.

I believe that the biggest problem was probably that I was not as alert as I should have been, which the lights would have got over. But that does not excuse the fact that I, very likely similar to others was just not thinking properly or quickly. It is too easy to become involved with a drive and be contemplating the end result of that journey, rather than being alert to EVERY danger.

What I have tried to do is get us all thinking about that incident and CD365, no I am happy to have reported it on here. After all, we have surely all learnt something from it!

As to following it up with Police I am very sad to report that the Policeman whom I was going to talk to and have mentioned before in this thread was found dead on Sunday. At this stage we are not sure of the circumstances so that is a worrying turn of events.

Best regards

Chris

 

[benb]

Hi @G2EWS

I think you are confusing a speed at which you can negotiate a bend without spinning off, with the speed at which you can stop in time to miss an unexpected hazard in the road.

With modern cars, you will be able to drive quite fast round quite tight bends, so on that basis you could consider quite a high speed to be "safe" in that you can negotiate the bend without crashing. But if you are going so fast that you can't come to a stop within the road that you can see to be clear, then you are going too fast. End of.

What speed that is will change based on road conditions (rain, visibility, &c.) and what vehicle you are in (a modern car will stop much quicker than an old one).

As others have said: if you cannot stop within the road that you can see to be clear, you are going too fast.

 

[G2EWS]

Hi @G2EWS

I think you are confusing a speed at which you can negotiate a bend without spinning off, with the speed at which you can stop in time to miss an unexpected hazard in the road.

With modern cars, you will be able to drive quite fast round quite tight bends, so on that basis you could consider quite a high speed to be "safe" in that you can negotiate the bend without crashing. But if you are going so fast that you can't come to a stop within the road that you can see to be clear, then you are going too fast. End of.

What speed that is will change based on road conditions (rain, visibility, &c.) and what vehicle you are in (a modern car will stop much quicker than an old one).

As others have said: if you cannot stop within the road that you can see to be clear, you are going too fast.

Hi Ben,

Not the case at all. As mentioned previously, I am totally aware of the 'safe' maximum speed a bend can be taken at and how to calculate it.

Please read my post above yours.

Best regards

Chris