Another blind one

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

I'm afraid I have to disagree, the roundabout was clear when she entered it, it was not clear when you did; I think it is obvious who is in the wrong.

This is - putting it as politely as I can - utter bollocks.

An illustration - car approaching from the right at 30 mph. It hasn't yet entered the roundabout. Perhaps it's a few feet from the dotted line. Clearly it's okay to enter the roundabout in front of it, as "the roundabout is clear when I enter it."

Yeah. That'll work.

 

[BentMikey]

I don't think anyone is saying she should have pulled out, but once she was in front of Mr P's give way line, and with plenty of time for him to react, the onus was on him to give way and not to ride at her vehicle.

 

[campbellab]

Onus on him was to avoid a collision (not to give way) if he could help it. He did, he obviously could have taken more evasive action but didn't need to. Slamming on the brakes would have been more likely to cause himself an accident as well..?

 

[4F]

In this 19 second clip there are only 3 cars and yet you still manage to have a near incident with one of them. Is there a Specsavers in Brum ?

I would hazard a guess there must be one in that shopping centre that you try and cycle in

 

[Inertia]

I don't think anyone is saying she should have pulled out, but once she was in front of Mr P's give way line, and with plenty of time for him to react, the onus was on him to give way and not to ride at her vehicle.

I think, and dont want to put words into peoples mouths, that you didnt help with comments about charging across, and at people. I didnt see any of that in the video, he carried on with enough speed to not slow himself down uneccesarily but avoiding a collision.

 

[Bird Brain]

The video is no big deal,what is the problem with actually predicting what
this motorist may do instead of making a big deal when they actually do it?

 

[potsy]

If that's the worst thing that happens on the commute then you're doing ok Paul

I hate those mini RABS with a passion, I have one I go over everyday and I reckon at least twice a week I'll have a driver do what yours did. Have now learnt to take the lane fully to make myself more visible and slow down enough so I can stop easily if the worst happens.
With all exits/entrances to the RAB being so close together it makes for some 'interesting' decisions by drivers and cyclists alike, sometimes no-one gives way, other times everyone waits for everybody else

Main thing is you anticipated it happening and live to ride another day

 

[cameramanjim]

[QUOTE 1267915"]
Why should I have slowed more?

My speed didn't put anyone risk, and hopefully she might have recognised that cyclists aren't all riding at walking pace, for consideration next time she tries to judge speed and distance.
[/quote]

I can´t believe anyone would take issue with what User is saying. He had every right to go across the roundabout. The motorist clearly wouldn´t have driven across his path like that if he had been driving a car. Whether or not any of you might have slowed down just in case she would do that is irrelevant. It may be sensible/safe cycling to slow down but the fact that User didn´t doesn´t make the motorist right.

 

[Jezston]

In this 19 second clip there are only 3 cars and yet you still manage to have a near incident with one of them. Is there a Specsavers in Brum ?

I would hazard a guess there must be one in that shopping centre that you try and cycle in

* slow hand clap *

 

[atbman]

Sorry Mr P but she was nearer to the roundabout than you were and had a perfect right to enter it, since you had not arrived at it.

the "approaching from your right" refers only to vehicles already on the roundabout, or are you claiming that anyone, no matter how far away, but on your right, has right of way?

 

[GFamily]

God, there are some argumentative buggers here!

The driver was clearly in the wrong in pulling onto the RAB into the path of MrP. MrP was paying attention and nothing untoward happened.

Honestly though; does anyone here really need to have video evidence of such a minor event?

Wouldn't it be lovely if we had an honour charge system of say £1 paid for each video posted here?

At the end of the year, the money to go to a suitable bicycle based charity.
http://www.presentaid.org/for-dad/bicycle/invt/bicycle/

(not sure why a bicycle for Malawi should be "for Dad", but there you go!)

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Sorry Mr P but she was nearer to the roundabout than you were and had a perfect right to enter it, since you had not arrived at it.

Again, yet more bollocks.

Priority onto a roundabout is not decided by how near, respectively, vehicles are to it.

If this was the case, then Person A, pulling out onto a roundabout immediately in front of Person B, who is approaching from the right at 30 mph (who just happened to be "further away" from the roundabout at the moment Person A decided to move onto the roundabout) would not be at fault for the resulting collision, because Person A was "nearer to the roundabout" than Person B.

I'm amazed this needs stating, but here we go again -

The principle is give way to traffic approaching from the right.

Not how close you are, relatively, to the roundabout.


Not who can get onto the roundabout first.




This is how collisions are avoided.

 

[Mark_Robson]

I always make a point of trying to make eye contact with motorists in situations like this and if I can't make eye contact then I assume that they haven't seen me and ride defensively.
I'd much rather slow down on a RAB or junction than get taken out by a car.

 

[DrSquirrel]

Again, yet more bollocks.

Priority onto a roundabout is not decided by how near, respectively, vehicles are to it.

If this was the case, then Person A, pulling out onto a roundabout immediately in front of Person B, who is approaching from the right at 30 mph (who just happened to be "further away" from the roundabout at the moment Person A decided to move onto the roundabout) would not be at fault for the resulting collision, because Person A was "nearer to the roundabout" than Person B.

I'm amazed this needs stating, but here we go again -

The principle is give way to traffic approaching from the right.

Not how close you are, relatively, to the roundabout.


Not who can get onto the roundabout first.




This is how collisions are avoided.

Someone shouldn't assume they can cross a RAB at 30mph just because they are approaching at that speed.

Wouldn't this allow people to come onto the RAB as fast as they wish regardless of what is waiting, approaching or even starting to enter from the left? careless driving?

 

[Inertia]

Someone shouldn't assume they can cross a RAB at 30mph just because they are approaching at that speed.

Wouldn't this allow people to come onto the RAB as fast as they wish regardless of what is waiting, approaching or even starting to enter from the left? careless driving?

No, but it means they can enter a roundabout and expect that the person entering on their left will give them priority but you don't assume it because any sensible driver knows that everyone else is an idiot unless proven otherwise   


[edit] in theory that is correct though, but people make mistakes (misjudge speed etc.) so you should be careful [edit]