I'm sure someone else has already posted this...

[summerdays]

We know that your views differ on this - but this paper explains to the Police WHY they have chosen that road position, and to expect to see cyclists there. One of the points about primary and secondary (as opposed to the gutter) is that the cyclist is in the normal place that the car driver is looking.

 

[jimboalee]

We know that your views differ on this - but this paper explains to the Police WHY they have chosen that road position, and to expect to see cyclists there. One of the points about primary and secondary (as opposed to the gutter) is that the cyclist is in the normal place that the car driver is looking.

The 'crunch' word in your sentance is "normal".

Over the years, the police, EPUs and I as a motorcar test driver with MOD training KNOW motorist don't ALWAYS look in the 'normal' direction.

We all know how wide a motorcar is, but there are 'rear end shunts' EVERYDAY by drivers who weren't concentrating.

I, alike all cyclists, don't wish the absent minded driver to 'rear end shunt' a fellow cyclist.

 

[summerdays]

I would like to think that there weren't that many absent minded police drivers - who this document is targeted at - on the roads.

If we aren't where they normally look what chance do we have of been spotted lurking instead - even less.

 

[irc]

t Most motorists are fairly observant, but there are some who look in shop windows or at a short skirt. When this happens, the car will more than likely roll past the cyclist who is cycling two feet away from the kerb, but straight into the back of the cyclist who is in the middle of the car's width.

It depends. If the lane is narrow say less than 12 feet wide then a 7 foot wide car in the center of the lane only has 2ft6 space either side. A driver who isn't looking will still hit the cyclists riding 2 feet from the kerb.

IMO riding 2 feet (or preferably a bit further) from the kerb is appropriate for wide lanes where the driver can overtake by moving to the center line. For narrow lanes where the driver needs to use part of another lane to overtake riding in the center sends a message to drivers that they need to do a proper overtake.

There are very few roads that are so wide that a cyclist is safe from a driver who isn't looking ahead.

A better defence from drivers who aren't looking is using a rearview mirror.

 

[BentMikey]

Jimbo does present his case well, but his argument is deeply flawed. The far bigger risk comes not from drivers who aren't looking where they are going, but from drivers at junctions who often don't see cyclists in the gutter (i.e. where they are not looking). Also from drivers squeezing past when they shouldn't be trying to overtake.

 

[jimboalee]

Jimbo does present his case well, but his argument is deeply flawed. The far bigger risk comes not from drivers who aren't looking where they are going, but from drivers at junctions who often don't see cyclists in the gutter (i.e. where they are not looking). Also from drivers squeezing past when they shouldn't be trying to overtake.

NO. The most common collision at junctions and especially traffic islands, is caused by motorists driving forward while still looking to their Right. Research labs call them "Front to rear slow speed shunts". 'Slow speed because 75% of them are at less than 20 mph.

When the cyclist rides onto the traffic island or across the junction not as fast as the motorist estimated in primary, Crash, bang, wollop.
When the cyclist keeps to the left, zoom, zoom.

Fortunately, most car manufacturers are developing 'crash avoidance' systems where the brakes are applied automatically when sensors detect an object ahead.

 

[irc]

The most common collision at junctions and especially traffic islands, is caused by motorists driving forward while still looking to their Right.

An interesting statistic. Where's it from?

 

[siadwell]

Looking for some data that may throw some light on the most common types of accidents, I found the following at http://www.ukots.org/data.html.

It is, I believe, compiled from STATS19 reports filed by the police for road collisions involving injury.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions...

Table A1.8: Number of accidents by collision type

 

[brokenbetty]

When I ride in primary I consider myself to be doing it for the drivers' benefit as much as my own:

• they don't need to worry about how much space to leave me
• they don't need to worry where I have got to
• they don't need to worry about whether it's safe to overtake or not

and because I'm doing it for the drivers' benefit as well, I move out of primary as soon as it's safe to do so and give clear signals before moving out and before pulling back

Basically I never want to put a driver in the position of having to guess where I am or what I'm about to do.

 

[Cab]

NO. The most common collision at junctions and especially traffic islands, is caused by motorists driving forward while still looking to their Right.

And you suggest that the way for a cyclist to be safer is to be towards the left of their field of view, where they can't be seen at all?

 

[Cab]

From the policeman's point of view, a cyclist riding two foot from the kerb has LESS chance of being hit than a cyclist riding in the centre of the carriageway. [/FONT]

Show where, in any police publication or any study on cyclist accidents, this is shown.

 

[jimboalee]

Seems Nottingham drivers and West Mids are similar, while Thames Valley drivers can't steer.

 

[jimboalee]

And you suggest that the way for a cyclist to be safer is to be towards the left of their field of view, where they can't be seen at all?

Cab, you really are aggressive.

You can ride however you like. I am sharing with the readership my experience and dealings with Police and Parameds I have spoken with.

I am only hoping my postings go someway to enlighten the readership as to the MANY ways a cyclist can be hit by a car.

Again, you can ride wherever you like but my choice is to keep left. Don't keep saying I'm WRONG, because if I really was wrong, I dare say I'd be six foot under by now.

I cannot understand this comment. I can only suppose motorists in Cambridge paint their left windows with thick black paint.

Incidentally on that theme, The human eye is more sensitive to bright flashing in it's peripheral vision, so if you have a flashing LED rear lamp that has a sideways LED, it is more likely to be noticed than a constant lamp right in the centre of viewing field….

 

[Origamist]

Incidentally on that theme, The human eye is more sensitive to bright flashing in it's peripheral vision, so if you have a flashing LED rear lamp that has a sideways LED, it is more likely to be noticed than a constant lamp right in the centre of viewing field….

Sort of, Jim. Rods are important in our peripheral vision (not cones) and are good at detecting motion, but they're crap at detecting red - I think it's part of the phenomenon known as scotopic vision.

 

[jimboalee]

Sort of, Jim. Rods predominate in our peripheral vision (not cones) and are good at detecting motion, but they're crap at detecting red - I think it's part of the phenomenon known as scotopic vision.

Brilliant Origamist, Brilliant.

Put a BLUE flashing lamp on the bike facing Right and they'll definitely notice it!!