semislickstick
Guru
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Not mine...
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxEquA2dVoU
....and discuss.
(or is it the drain covers fault as the insurance company are trying to claim)
Who's at fault....Lorry driver, cyclist or the cycle lane designer?
- Thread starter semislickstick
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Not mine...
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxEquA2dVoU
....and discuss.
(or is it the drain covers fault as the insurance company are trying to claim)
Not a great piece of cycling (shouldn't have filtered down the lhs of the lorry), on a cycle lane that appears too narrow and is littered with drains and leaves - Poorly designed and maintained.
Hard to tell what really happened in the incident, but with the cyclist being fairly close to the lorry at all times after he filtered past it, it's possible that he was in the drivers blind spot.
Hard to tell what really happened in the incident, but with the cyclist being fairly close to the lorry at all times after he filtered past it, it's possible that he was in the drivers blind spot.
This ^^^, A mix of very poor cycling. And very poor lorry driving. Undertaking a lorry, very silly move. And not taking primary when in front which gave the lorry driver the chance to try his luck.
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
that doesn't look like a good lane in the early part
and with benefit of perfect riding hindsight and not wanting to be accused of victim blaming
how far in front of the lorry were they?
why didn't they use the off road lane thats shown at 1:28 ?
undertaking - called that for one reason IMHO
and with benefit of perfect riding hindsight and not wanting to be accused of victim blaming
how far in front of the lorry were they?
why didn't they use the off road lane thats shown at 1:28 ?
undertaking - called that for one reason IMHO
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
i know. thats why it was edited as i read and hit send as realised i had answered if it was
martint235
Dog on a bike
- Location
- Welling
Watched the actual incident several times. My thoughts are:
1. Why undertake the truck when the rider has no clear vision of the situation in front of the truck?
2. Why ride in a cycle lane that is so covered in slippy sh**e?
3. As above, the cyclist never really cleared the truck as you can see from the location of the 4x4 so possibly in the blind spot. Poor cycling. I think you'd need to be right up behind the 4x4 to guarantee you're in the truck driver's sight.
4. Rather than take primary (could be bad if the driver can't see you), why not duck into the bus stop when the cyclist hears the truck about to overtake?
1. Why undertake the truck when the rider has no clear vision of the situation in front of the truck?
2. Why ride in a cycle lane that is so covered in slippy sh**e?
3. As above, the cyclist never really cleared the truck as you can see from the location of the 4x4 so possibly in the blind spot. Poor cycling. I think you'd need to be right up behind the 4x4 to guarantee you're in the truck driver's sight.
4. Rather than take primary (could be bad if the driver can't see you), why not duck into the bus stop when the cyclist hears the truck about to overtake?
Hawk
Veteran
- Location
- Glasgow Southside
Undertaking (in whatever lane) at that speed because you "don't want to slow to traffic speed" on your way to work, as the uploader explains, is downright stupid. Yes, the cycle lane is a big problem but it's not something we can control every time we go out on the road - we can control our speed and direction and speeding past a lorry with a 5cm gap is just suicidal.
I don't think he will have even have cleared the front of the lorry with his back wheel - I reckon he is definitely in the blindspot the whole time... If he had attempted to go to primary he'd have gone under the lorry in this case, no doubt
I don't think he will have even have cleared the front of the lorry with his back wheel - I reckon he is definitely in the blindspot the whole time... If he had attempted to go to primary he'd have gone under the lorry in this case, no doubt
Hawk
Veteran
- Location
- Glasgow Southside
One more thought - the cycle lane actually turns off the road and on to the pavement at 1:27 and then turns in to a shared use path BEHIND the bus stop (where the collision was). So effectively he was in a left turn lane and then decided to continue straight on where the 3 lanes (cycle-vehicle-vehicle) became 2 (vehicle-vehicle). I suspect he will lose his day in court
Ian Cooper
Expat Yorkshireman
- Location
- Silver Spring, MD, USA
I'd say all three play a role. One thing is certain, the truck driver could not claim he had no room. Looks like plenty of room to the right to give the cyclist enough room. In the lorry driver's defence, I can only speculate that the cyclist never got far enough ahead of the lorry to get out of the driver's blind spot.
In terms of the 'bike lane' - so called - it's simply not a bike lane. Whoever inspected or agreed to that gutter lane death trap should be shot.
The cyclist wasn't exactly behaving too safely either. He should have been much farther into the main traffic lane. He should never have used that 'suicide lane', and I think he was crazy for filtering on the left. But none of those things are illegal and none of them can be used to find fault - at least not in any legal sense.
Personally, if I wrote the law and got to make up my own laws and sentences, I'd give the lorry driver a month in jail and ban him from driving for a year; I'd give the person or persons who decided to make that gutter into a bike lane six months in jail for endangering numerous cyclists' lives (prior sentence of shooting commuted because I'm not really a monster), and I'd fine the cyclist a month's pay for suicidal cycling.
Oh, and the idiots who made the gutter into a bike lane would have to paint over every inch of it during rush hour. Let's see how they like using it in traffic.
In terms of the 'bike lane' - so called - it's simply not a bike lane. Whoever inspected or agreed to that gutter lane death trap should be shot.
The cyclist wasn't exactly behaving too safely either. He should have been much farther into the main traffic lane. He should never have used that 'suicide lane', and I think he was crazy for filtering on the left. But none of those things are illegal and none of them can be used to find fault - at least not in any legal sense.
Personally, if I wrote the law and got to make up my own laws and sentences, I'd give the lorry driver a month in jail and ban him from driving for a year; I'd give the person or persons who decided to make that gutter into a bike lane six months in jail for endangering numerous cyclists' lives (prior sentence of shooting commuted because I'm not really a monster), and I'd fine the cyclist a month's pay for suicidal cycling.
Oh, and the idiots who made the gutter into a bike lane would have to paint over every inch of it during rush hour. Let's see how they like using it in traffic.
MrJamie
Oaf on a Bike
I think its one of those videos where you can both be in the right legally and still be putting yourself in danger unnecessarily, ie. he's got every right to use the cycle lane and lay blame on motorists who run him off the road, but its a dangerous looking facility and I wouldnt be going anywhere near that lorry.
The cycle lane is tiny, theres double lines painted down it and drains which probably make braking more exciting and it looks like it might be damp. Nothing against roadies, but isnt a gutter path like that very dangerous particularly with skinny road tyres?
The cycle lane is tiny, theres double lines painted down it and drains which probably make braking more exciting and it looks like it might be damp. Nothing against roadies, but isnt a gutter path like that very dangerous particularly with skinny road tyres?
Ian Cooper
Expat Yorkshireman
- Location
- Silver Spring, MD, USA
Cyclists are not required to use bike lanes. A bike lane that turns left is not a 'left turn only lane'. The cyclist had every right to merge onto the road, which he did.
Hawk
Veteran
- Location
- Glasgow Southside
Comparable situation - three lanes of vehicle traffic, left lane turns in to a side road. Someone from left lane decides to continue straight on instead and a collision occurs with vehicle in middle lane. Who is to blame?
The vehicle in the left lane had every right to use the road and the middle lane, but didn't. So it can't then expect other motorists to accommodate its disregard of the road markings?
- Status
