Blue Mini HS03 FXF

[Bicycle]

I love to see a healthy discussion. I wonder if I am alone in the following:

Until I started to peep at these Cyclist Forum tings, I'd never heard of 'primary' other than with reference to my children's education.

I did my Cycling Proficiency at the age of about 8 in the early seventies and since then I've had no training on bicycles.

I have licences for all sorts of vehicles and still ride a bicycle quite a lot.

I believe that almost all car drivers (other than those in the cycling fraternity) would be as clueless as I was about the meaning of the primary position.

Likewise, almost all car drivers would be inclined on occasion to be slightly irked that a bicycle was slowing them down by 'hogging the road'.

I'm not saying they'd be right, but the thought does occur that they might feel miffed.

I do not nencessarily see it as a cardinal sin for a car driver not to know that a cyclist will at times take the primary road position.

I drive around bicycles and horses a lot. Some riders (bike and beast) are smart, clever, considerate and some are not.

The MINI driver in the clip is by no means driving with thought and consideration, but by what magical means were they meant to understand why a cyclist would choose to ride along away from the edge of the road at a choke point?

I do not mean to offend, but not all motorists are members of the cycling fraternity.

 

[benb]

It's really quite a stunning viewpoint, BRSU. Sometimes I lose all faith in humanity lukesdad.

FIFY!

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

The MINI driver in the clip is by no means driving with thought and consideration, but by what magical means were they meant to understand why a cyclist would choose to ride along away from the edge of the road at a choke point?

The issue is not that they were unaware of the cyclist's need to "claim the lane" (take primary position) at this point. It is that once the driver had overtaken the first cyclist, they were more interested in showing anger towards that cyclist than in discharging their responsibility to take care around the second cyclist and chld when in charge of nearly a tonne and a half of lethal machinery, and that their getting round the corner a couple of seconds earlier took precedence over the safety of a cyclist and child. This kind of irresponsible attitude is truly a sickness that afflicts our roads.

Having said that, the fact that such a large number of drivers are completely oblivious to needs of other road users whom they are likely to encounter quite frequently during their driving is a shocking indictment of the level of training and competence that is considered sufficient to allow someone a licence to take such a dangerous machine into a public place.

 

[boydj]

Nothing mystical about it. You posted a video. I commented on it if you dont like the views you get, dont post a vid. and you re right there is no more you can learn !

You seem to be in a minority by a long way in advocating that cyclists should stay in the gutter keep to the left and allow cars to squeeze past at pinch points. Why so confrontational?

The mini driver clearly has an attitude problem in being more intent on gesticulating than in carrying out a potentially dangerous manoeuvre.

 

[Crackle]

It's ironic, if the other cyclist had been in primary the mini would have more than likely not overtaken them and instead waited behind, then there would be no video or thread.

At the junction the other cyclist was overtaken, I was often left hooked by impatient drivers until I improved my road position.

What's ironic is that if you hadn't been in the position you were, the driver would not have been pissed with you and diverted their attention to gesticulating at you rather than the road in front. Of course that doesn't excuse poor driving but I find the subtleties of good road use elude some people and you seem to be one of them.

I question whether you need to be in primary at that pinch point in that situation at that moment. I go through many of them and how I take each one varies. It varies because the situation is always different. To merely take a line that works for you shows a lack of dynamic judgement and a disregard for other road users even more breathtaking than the poor judgement of the mini driver.

The very fact that you carry two cameras indicates to me you are a cyclist looking for controversy. If you put as much thought into your cycling as you did into your videos you might well do a better job of making the roads safer for cyclists instead of wearying the world with situations you have had a part in making.

Of course I'd be surprised if you acknowledge any of that or if I'm not overwhelmed by objections to my views but I tire of this kind of mock shock horror which seems to be the raison d'etre of some posters in this forum.

 

[Clandy]

What's ironic is that if you hadn't been in the position you were, the driver would not have been pissed with you and diverted their attention to gesticulating at you rather than the road in front. Of course that doesn't excuse poor driving but I find the subtleties of good road use elude some people and you seem to be one of them.

I question whether you need to be in primary at that pinch point in that situation at that moment. I go through many of them and how I take each one varies. It varies because the situation is always different. To merely take a line that works for you shows a lack of dynamic judgement and a disregard for other road users even more breathtaking than the poor judgement of the mini driver.

The very fact that you carry two cameras indicates to me you are a cyclist looking for controversy. If you put as much thought into your cycling as you did into your videos you might well do a better job of making the roads safer for cyclists instead of wearying the world with situations you have had a part in making.

Of course I'd be surprised if you acknowledge any of that or if I'm not overwhelmed by objections to my views but I tire of this kind of mock shock horror which seems to be the raison d'etre of some posters in this forum.

I carry two cameras. I do so because having been T-boned by SMIDSY and having had to go through a lengthy insurance claim, I now want to make damned sure I have evidence in the event of another SMIDSY incident. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with 'looking for controversy'.

 

[boydj]

The only horror here is the number of people advocating that the cyclist should have bailed out in favour of the mini at a pinch point with a pot-hole on the left. This logic is on a par with Rory McIlroy's golf over that last couple of hours.

 

[lukesdad]

You seem to be in a minority by a long way in advocating that cyclists should stay in the gutter keep to the left and allow cars to squeeze past at pinch points. Why so confrontational?

The mini driver clearly has an attitude problem in being more intent on gesticulating than in carrying out a potentially dangerous manoeuvre.

As opposed to the majority of forum members who won t post in commuting because of threads like this ?

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

The very fact that you carry two cameras indicates to me you are a cyclist looking for controversy. If you put as much thought into your cycling as you did into your videos you might well do a better job of making the roads safer for cyclists instead of wearying the world with situations you have had a part in making.

I don't know about the OP here, but I carry one video camera, and will probably get another sometime. I have posted the reasons in my blog:

• Learning – I have found it very useful to look back at incidents and see whether I can learn from them. I have also found it very useful to look at other people’s incidents and learn from them. I have also found it useful to get feedback on my own video clips from other experienced cyclists and learn from them. (Actually, it turns out that this has been by far the most valuable aspect.)
• Retribution – yes, it feels good to be able to name and shame drivers who do bad things to me. (And to show some idiotic things cyclists do as well.)
• Evidence – the way our laws work makes it very difficult to claim redress if needed. I have never had to do that, thank goodness, but it would help if needed. (See the lawyer’s comments in this One Show clip.) (This was my original reason for getting a camera.)
• Improving the situation – (admittedly in a very small way) I know of a number of cases of cyclists using video evidence to show the employers of appalling commercial drivers what their staff are doing. This often results in drivers undergoing additional training, often compulsory.
• Behaviour modification – there are people who claim that the presence of a video camera has the effect of improving the behaviour of drivers. I don’t really know whether this is true, but it seems plausible.

I really don't see why you would have a problem with this, or why you would feel a need to attack the OP in this personal manner.

 

[lukesdad]

The only horror here is the number of people advocating that the cyclist should have bailed out in favour of the mini at a pinch point with a pot-hole on the left. This logic is on a par with Rory McIlroy's golf over that last couple of hours.

Bailed out ? Are you some sort of fighter pilot ? The OP has allready stated that he has ridden this road regularly for 3 years. If he lacks the bike handling skills to safely negotiate a hazard he allready knows to be there perhaps a reduction in speed might be in order.

 

[Clandy]

Bailed out ? Are you some sort of fighter pilot ? The OP has allready stated that he has ridden this road regularly for 3 years. If he lacks the bike handling skills to safely negotiate a hazard he allready knows to be there perhaps a reduction in speed might be in order.

Do you even own a bicycle?

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Bailed out ? Are you some sort of fighter pilot ? The OP has allready stated that he has ridden this road regularly for 3 years. If he lacks the bike handling skills to safely negotiate a hazard he allready knows to be there perhaps a reduction in speed might be in order.

Hm. If it didn't say that you are a "senior member" here, I would be concluding that you are just trolling. The cyclist taking the video clearly knows very well how to negotiate safely the multiple hazards at this point in the road, as indicated by his text-book perfect road positioning. (Or perhaps you are just trolling?)

 

[jefmcg]

Nothing daft or hilarious about road safety, and I cant see where anybody has stated the manoeuvre was fine, are you trying to be provocative by any chance ?

Now the incident itself, or so called incident! The lady in question showed no sign of one happening didnt even look at the mini, The OP cycled straight on past her with no sign of concern at the time,or so it seems to me. Its only when he gets home looks at the footage and sees some mileage on here to my mind, that his blood starts to curdle.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I dare say the mini driver would not have attempted that manoeuvre if the cyclist and child was a big 50 ton truck capable of crushing her in seconds. Had she tried it, her ears would still be ringing from the air horn and swearing from the lorry driver.

You'd be surprised how many do just that ...

 

[GFamily]

What's ironic is that if you hadn't been in the position you were, the driver would not have been pissed with you

He was in that position because it prevented a dangerous overtake.

If he hadn't been in that position, the driver WOULD have performed a dangerous and illegal overtake.

The driver did not perform a dangerous and illegal overtake of the OP

The driver did perform an illegal overtake later on.

Why should we pander to incompetent drivers? And why do you excuse them?