Cyclist Plays Chicken With Lorry

[Tcr4x4]

A. the HGV doesn't need to slow that much
B. If you are taught to slow for such an obstacle, would it not be wise to not pass another vehicle just before it?

A)You are told in HGV lessons to pass through such obstacles under 15mph. Doesn't matter if it needs to or not, that's what's taught, and any decent driver would continue this after passing the test.

B) probably not the best decision he has ever made, but its what he did. The cyclist shouldn't have trie pd to over take again, it was obvious the lorry would soon pick up speed after the obstacle, so why bother trying to get past?

 

[Joffey]

Cyclist was a nobber

 

[gaz]

A)You are told in HGV lessons to pass through such obstacles under 15mph. Doesn't matter if it needs to or not, that's what's taught, and any decent driver would continue this after passing the test.

B) probably not the best decision he has ever made, but its what he did. The cyclist shouldn't have trie pd to over take again, it was obvious the lorry would soon pick up speed after the obstacle, so why bother trying to get past?

B. Is it clear that he is going to pick up speed again? The HGV has it's brakes on for 7 seconds and makes no apparent attempt to speed up for a further 7 seconds.

Here is how another HGV takes the same pinch point on the same road (all be it in the other direction). Note, zero braking.

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R404HWkgTnU

 

[Tcr4x4]

Different drivers drive differently, you can't compare how one driver goes through an obstacle to another..

The cyclist was wrong to try and overtake after the lorry had slowed.
The lorry was wrong to overtake then slow before the obstacle.

The cyclist has more to loose, so should avoid such stupid manouvers.

 

[gaz]

Different drivers drive differently, you can't compare how one driver goes through an obstacle to another..

The cyclist was wrong to try and overtake after the lorry had slowed.
The lorry was wrong to overtake then slow before the obstacle.

The cyclist has more to loose, so should avoid such stupid manouvers.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you on those points :P

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Sorry, but I'm not trying to be controversial...but why shouldn't the cyclist have overtaken a slower vehicle? The driver was an peanut and could have killed the cyclist.

Would it have been a different scenario if it had been a motorcyclist?

How did the cyclist know the wagon wasn't in a queue? Or stopping for a delivery? Perhaps he should have waited for 10 minutes first?

 

[Hip Priest]

How did the cyclist know the wagon wasn't in a queue?

Because he could see the road was clear before the lorry passed him.

Or stopping for a delivery?

He would've indicated.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Oh yeah coz he's a great driver ins't he?

 

[martint235]

Cyclist is a nobber. The beep was just a warning that the truck was passing, good job as it was a double length one. Cyclist had no reason to pass. Idiot, and he didn't have enough speed

Yup I thought it was a good overtake. Beep to let you know there's something different (I hate trailers). Cyclist behaves like a prat.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Yup I thought it was a good overtake. Beep to let you know there's something different (I hate trailers). Cyclist behaves like a prat.

Why? He had enough speed to overtake the slower vehicle, if I was on my scooter I'd have done exactly the same manoeuvre.

The only thing that made it dangerous was the wagon not checking his mirrors before speeding up...you know as per basic driving skills and as per Highway Code.

 

[ColinJ]

I suppose it is possible that the cyclist was in a blindspot for the driver's mirrors, but if he knew the cyclist was trying to overtake him and accelerated anyway, then he certainly was a prat.

 

[Tcr4x4]

By the same token, why shouldn't the lorry have passed the cyclist the first time, after all the cyclist was travelling slower than the lorry?. Answer.....

Because it was stupid, uneccesary and dangerous.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should..

Sorry, but I'm not trying to be controversial...but why shouldn't the cyclist have overtaken a slower vehicle? The driver was an peanut and could have killed the cyclist.

Would it have been a different scenario if it had been a motorcyclist?

How did the cyclist know the wagon wasn't in a queue? Or stopping for a delivery? Perhaps he should have waited for 10 minutes first?

 

[Hip Priest]

Oh yeah coz he's a great driver ins't he?

How would the cyclist have known at that point whether he was a good driver or not?

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

I suppose it is possible that the cyclist was in a blindspot for the driver's mirrors, but if he knew the cyclist was trying to overtake him and accelerated anyway, then he certainly was a prat.

But he honked suggesting he knew he was there.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Guys....before getting all macho and aggressive...as per forum etiquette, answer this.

What did the cyclist do different to what scooter rider would do? He over took and didn't under take. It was a legit manoeuvre.