View Full Version : A wee rant about Wick Cycle Club
k1rst1n27
07-May-10, 13:28
Was driving back from Wick last night at about 8ish, unfortunatly for me there was yet another bike race taking place...so i was patient and waited behind bikers until the road was clear but some really un-considerate biker decided not to wear a hi-vis and also decided to undertake my car when it was really not safe to do so and rather than go into the left decided to stay in the middle of the road!
So number 010 from Wick bike club, incase you were wondering, the message out of the window was "WEAR A HI-VIZ YOU IDIOT!!!"
Seen the same problem a week or 2 ago on the time trials cyclists were having between the inverness turn off and Thurso, was starting to get dark and there were a couple without any lights or hi visibility clothing, madness!!
Im a cyclist myself so have nothing against cyclists when they are sensible. No sense in having no lights on when its getting dark.
Was driving back from Wick last night at about 8ish, unfortunatly for me there was yet another bike race taking place...so i was patient and waited behind bikers until the road was clear but some really un-considerate biker decided not to wear a hi-vis and also decided to undertake my car when it was really not safe to do so and rather than go into the left decided to stay in the middle of the road!
So number 010 from Wick bike club, incase you were wondering, the message out of the window was "WEAR A HI-VIZ YOU IDIOT!!!"
such a pain to our busy life style to be held up by these un-considerate non hi-viz bikers. don't know how we managed for the last 30+ years with these mad men and ladies taking up an hour of the counties Thursday night for 6 month of the year.
Invisible
07-May-10, 20:04
such a pain to our busy life style to be held up by these un-considerate non hi-viz bikers. don't know how we managed for the last 30+ years with these mad men and ladies taking up an hour of the counties Thursday night for 6 month of the year.
I canna tell if thats sarcasm or a general grievance
the way fuel prices are going I think we'll all be riding bikes then no doubt the goverment will tax us for using them and insist on insurance and mot's then push bike licences ect, ect ,ect
I can't believe any cyclist doesn't know that if they get hit by a car they're going to get hurt. Riding after dusk with no lights and no hi-viz is an accident waiting to happen - they must have a death wish.
Personally if I see a cyclist I give them a wide berth, if a see a club run I stay well back and if possible choose an alternate route I've got better things to do with my time than mix it with a bunch of bampots!
nightspirit
07-May-10, 20:33
As far as i am aware cyclist have to obe the lighting up time the same as cars so if they have no lights on after this time and are on a public road they are commiting an offence under the road traffic act !!
As far as i am aware cyclist have to obe the lighting up time the same as cars so if they have no lights on after this time and are on a public road they are commiting an offence under the road traffic act !!
. . . . . but that's not going to save their life if they don't want to be seen!
DonsFanRA04
07-May-10, 22:48
It is rather unfortunate that you witness warning sign posts on the route that the RACE(in capitals) is in progress so would instantly recognise there was cyclists on that stretch of road racing against time but come online to rant about it makes it sound like road rage esp shouting out your window but never mind.
Also the fact that warning signs should make you aware of the hazard so slowing down wouldn’t be that bad an idea! Wasn’t a dark an evening during the race times so the cyclists should be visible from a fair distance without high viz.
The Highway Code does not state cyclists require to tuck into the left hand side of the road. Cyclists are recommended to keep a minimum of 1 meter from the verge/curb for the rider’s safety.
The Highway Code does not state cyclists require to tuck into the left hand side of the road. Cyclists are recommended to keep a minimum of 1 meter from the verge/curb for the rider’s safety.
"Cyclists are recommended to keep a minimum of 1 meter(sic) from the verge/curb for the rider’s safety"
Could you please tell me exactly where in 'The Highway Code - Rules for Cyclists' does it state this :confused
DonsFanRA04
08-May-10, 00:19
"Cyclists are recommended to keep a minimum of 1 meter(sic) from the verge/curb for the rider’s safety"
Could you please tell me exactly where in 'The Highway Code - Rules for Cyclists' does it state this :confused
I stated that (The Highway Code does not state cyclists require to tuck into the left hand side of the road.) Sentance which was ended then the next line as you quote which has nothing about being in the highway code within the sentance!
That information is from the Insitute of Advanced Motorists that they insist on this approach to avoid road-edge dangers and to be in the direct view of drivers from both directions.
I've got better things to do with my time than mix it with a bunch of bampots!
And yet, here you are! [lol]
Amy-Winehouse
08-May-10, 08:13
As there are no cycling lanes in Caithness, this means the big bad cyclists have to come on to the roads, isnt that terrible ?:eek:
As for the O.P I can see your point, it can be unnerving for that to happen but thankfully most cyclists have more sense but remember there are a lot of terrible drivers in Caithness as well- you know the saying- `if you can drive in Wick youcan drive anywhere in the world` That is true.
A bit more patience given to the cyclists wouldnt be a bad thing , but off topic a bit- I was driving to Tesco yesterday morning about 9am & there was a female on the other side of the road form the path ? walking to Tesco . I think she got abuse from a couple of drivers - I dont understand why she was doing that when theres a path on the other side of the road, were you that woman? If yes, why ?? just out of curiosity
It is rather unfortunate that you witness warning sign posts on the route that the RACE(in capitals) is in progress so would instantly recognise there was cyclists on that stretch of road racing against time but come online to rant about it makes it sound like road rage esp shouting out your window but never mind.
Also the fact that warning signs should make you aware of the hazard so slowing down wouldn’t be that bad an idea! Wasn’t a dark an evening during the race times so the cyclists should be visible from a fair distance without high viz.
The Highway Code does not state cyclists require to tuck into the left hand side of the road. Cyclists are recommended to keep a minimum of 1 meter from the verge/curb for the rider’s safety.
I thought racing was illegal on the public highway unless the road is closed, so do cyclists have a speacial exemtion??
I stated that (The Highway Code does not state cyclists require to tuck into the left hand side of the road.) Sentance which was ended then the next line as you quote which has nothing about being in the highway code within the sentance!
That information is from the Insitute of Advanced Motorists that they insist on this approach to avoid road-edge dangers and to be in the direct view of drivers from both directions.
Ok, your sentence construction was misleading..
I'm not against cyclists - I just don't faff about in groups. Did the LEJOG under auspicious of AudaxUK (Mrs Beks and I) and not once during that distance did we cycle side by side..
Within the past couple of days have come across on the A836 (Route No1) two long distance cyclists peddling side by side in the middle of the road, very slowly up and around a blind bend on Drumhollistan** - not sure if the reached any further east.
There have been occasions I've pulled alongside a small group of cyclists who have been '1 meter' from the road end in line astern to congratulate them on their common sense. Of course the law allows cycling side by side - but it's a stupid person who does not take into consideration the obvious danger.
This week I've come up behind a cycling group on Drumhollistan; some three or four across; Purpose? to have a chat? all this does is up the anti with vehicle drivers by their inconsiderate cycling and **
looked at K1rst1n27 + bish667 posting which was referred to in your #9: "Wasn’t a dark an evening during the race times so the cyclists should be visible from a fair distance without high viz." seems; The following rule covers that: Highway Code Rules for cyclists 59; "Light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light"
**66: "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"
DonsFanRA04
08-May-10, 10:55
haha you really need to get a grip as now using other examples not even related to the wick club! Its an organised event with the police informed of the dates so if you suggest closing the road then im sure the club would jump at that offer.
Cyclists are allowed to be in the same lane 2 abreast which is safer for the cyclists to prevent overtaking on blind bends as you describe! Your not going to overtake a tractor etc there so dont overtake cyclists there! Thats not very difficult to do is it? Would you not rather being behind untill clear of the bend being able to pass safely or to risk several lifes and be inpatient?
I was just wondering. I ride a bike no long distance just easier than getting the car out if just going on short distances.
But if people are racing then they are not really concentrating on the road conditions or traffic as they will be more concerned on getting a quicker time or getting past the person in front so they will be riding without due care and attention.
Doe's their insurance take in road racing as this would have to take in those considerations that if they are involved in an accident that would be the first thing a lawer would bring into the arqument, that the fact was that the cyclist was more concerned racing and possibly not concentrating or fully aware on traffic conditions
For safety I always cycle two abreast (unless I am on my own :Razz). Crazy car drivers never give you any room otherwise. The secret for the car drivers is to be patient and treat cyclists like any other hazard, like horses for instance.
Everyone has a right to use the road safely.
DonsFanRA04
08-May-10, 11:58
All the riders doing the time trials are covered with the clubs insurance for the thursday night meetings in wick and thurso's tuesday nights meetings.
fifa king
08-May-10, 12:09
its always been the same, cyclists are a pain in the ass on the road they hog the road as if they own it.sooner they get banned off it the beter for all.get yourselfs an excerise bike if you want to pedal.;)
dragonfly
08-May-10, 13:48
I can't beleive you never noticed a cyclist taking part in the time trial - they wear the most garish get ups - I know this as I am married to one of them and am embarassed to hang his kit out on the line after washing it!
Seriously tho there are large signs up advising of race in progress to inform road users of the fact
I can't beleive you never noticed a cyclist taking part in the time trial - they wear the most garish get ups - I know this as I am married to one of them and am embarassed to hang his kit out on the line after washing it!
Seriously tho there are large signs up advising of race in progress to inform road users of the fact
Please see #1: 'but some really un-considerate biker decided not to wear a hi-vis'
DonsFanRA04
haha you really need to get a grip as now using other examples not even related to the wick club! Its an organised event with the police informed of the dates so if you suggest closing the road then im sure the club would jump at that offer.
Cyclists are allowed to be in the same lane 2 abreast which is safer for the cyclists to prevent overtaking on blind bends as you describe! Your not going to overtake a tractor etc there so dont overtake cyclists there! Thats not very difficult to do is it? Would you not rather being behind untill clear of the bend being able to pass safely or to risk several lifes and be inpatient?
"haha you really need to get a grip as now using other examples not even related to the wick club!" Eh? I've not mentioned the Wick club.. I was posting about the prats I encounter on the A836 Melvich to Reay. (ha ha)
"Cyclists are allowed to be in the same lane 2 abreast which is safer for the cyclists to prevent overtaking on blind bends as you describe!"
Doh - that statement is one of the dumbest utterances I've heard for a long time. The point is (which you seemed to have missed) is if two heavily leaden cyclist, taking up half a road, are going up hill - maybe doing 12 mph, cycling around a blind bend, then it is reasonable for them to expect that a vehicle - any vehicle - will not take that bend at 12 mph. It's darn hard cold fact.
Do you in all honesty, expect vehicle drivers on a 60 mph road, to slow down to 12 mph at every bend - just in case there are some dumb asses straddled across it? If these cyclist are in line abreast it is simply a matter of braking and pulling out briefly instead of blue-smoke braking and some prat spread across a windscreen - common since dictates this.
This obtuse statement about overtaking upon a blind bend beggars belief. Tractors? ones I know going over drumhollistan would be up my arse! [Davy]
'everyone has the right to use the road safely' is a very good maxim, but I'm afraid that your dictate of riding two abreast to forestall overtaking on blind bends borders on the inane..
Not sure if you actually drive?
PS you missed this?: *66: "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"
Of course the law allows cycling side by side - but it's a stupid person who does not take into consideration the obvious danger.
Yes you're obviously right but you won't hear many side-by-side cyclists agreeing with you because they don't or won't consider the effect drivers' frustration has on their safety.
There's a similar situation wherein cyclists stay out in the middle of the road when cycling past longish gaps in long lines of parked cars. They claim it's safer that way but this argument also ignores drivers' frustrations.
I think they're wrong in both cases but you often can't argue with them. My version obviously has some relevance because I know how frustrated I get when stuck behind cyclists who do this deliberately!
I can't beleive you never noticed a cyclist taking part in the time trial - they wear the most garish get ups - I know this as I am married to one of them and am embarassed to hang his kit out on the line after washing it!
They do wear some really gay looking kit even worse when they get off the bike and start walking around, would'nt look out of place on pineapple studio's [lol]
"Cyclists are allowed to be in the same lane 2 abreast which is safer for the cyclists to prevent overtaking on blind bends as you describe!"
Doh - that statement is one of the dumbest utterances I've heard for a long time. The point is (which you seemed to have missed) is if two heavily leaden cyclist, taking up half a road, are going up hill - maybe doing 12 mph, cycling around a blind bend, then it is reasonable for them to expect that a vehicle - any vehicle - will not take that bend at 12 mph. It's darn hard cold fact.
Do you in all honesty, expect vehicle drivers on a 60 mph road, to slow down to 12 mph at every bend - just in case there are some dumb asses straddled across it? If these cyclist are in line abreast it is simply a matter of braking and pulling out briefly instead of blue-smoke braking and some prat spread across a windscreen - common since dictates this.
This obtuse statement about overtaking upon a blind bend beggars belief.
I was pressing the same point but I think I was a tad more diplomatic. ;)
DonsFanRA04
08-May-10, 21:03
"haha you really need to get a grip as now using other examples not even related to the wick club!" Eh? I've not mentioned the Wick club.. I was posting about the prats I encounter on the A836 Melvich to Reay. (ha ha)
"Cyclists are allowed to be in the same lane 2 abreast which is safer for the cyclists to prevent overtaking on blind bends as you describe!"
Doh - that statement is one of the dumbest utterances I've heard for a long time. The point is (which you seemed to have missed) is if two heavily leaden cyclist, taking up half a road, are going up hill - maybe doing 12 mph, cycling around a blind bend, then it is reasonable for them to expect that a vehicle - any vehicle - will not take that bend at 12 mph. It's darn hard cold fact.
Do you in all honesty, expect vehicle drivers on a 60 mph road, to slow down to 12 mph at every bend - just in case there are some dumb asses straddled across it? If these cyclist are in line abreast it is simply a matter of braking and pulling out briefly instead of blue-smoke braking and some prat spread across a windscreen - common since dictates this.
This obtuse statement about overtaking upon a blind bend beggars belief. Tractors? ones I know going over drumhollistan would be up my arse! [Davy]
'everyone has the right to use the road safely' is a very good maxim, but I'm afraid that your dictate of riding two abreast to forestall overtaking on blind bends borders on the inane..
Not sure if you actually drive?
PS you missed this?: *66: "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"
I drive so i understand the frustration being stuck behind something but i would rather get somewhere without putting my life or any others life on the line to be inpatient. You sound like you need a refresher over hazard perception. Blind corners = Solid white lines = no overtaking!!
Also if you overtake and another was coming in the other direction ... by the sound of things you would happily take away a life or two to be 'right in your mind'... how would you explain that to the familys and court room?
ROAD RAGE IS A KILLER ... cant keep yourself calm under slowing down for 30 seconds then maybe you shouldnt drive!
I drive so i understand the frustration being stuck behind something but i would rather get somewhere without putting my life or any others life on the line to be inpatient. You sound like you need a refresher over hazard perception. Blind corners = Solid white lines = no overtaking!!
Also if you overtake and another was coming in the other direction ... by the sound of things you would happily take away a life or two to be 'right in your mind'... how would you explain that to the familys and court room?
ROAD RAGE IS A KILLER ... cant keep yourself calm under slowing down for 30 seconds then maybe you shouldnt drive!
"Sound like I need a refresher over hazard perception" Hmm I think 11 years driving big red things called Fire Engines through the West Mids, gives a lifetime of 'hazard perception"..
I am unsure whether you are intentionally obtuse, but not even morons overtake on 'blind corners'.. My point is to reiterate (sigh again) that when driving around a blind bend on Drumholliston, it is better that heavily-laden cyclist going uphill should, well, not be all across the road, it might be a wee bit safer if they kept a little itsy bitsy into the left side. This is NOT to allow over-taking on the corner, but for their own safety..Now, do you want me to go through that again? tut tut this is tiring..
Right ROAD RAGE IS A KILLER (see I can type BIG too!!!) Hmm can't keep myself calm for 30 seconds - look I'm only thinking of the dipsticks who are just around that bend sauntering along at 12 mph side by side happily chatting to each other..
to save em being splattered on some logging lorries bumper.. and bikes under lorries aint very nice (says he, having levered out bits of body from grills and sometimes, they 'wrap' around the truck wheels you know - bit nasty that one is)
I drive so i understand the frustration being stuck behind something but i would rather get somewhere without putting my life or any others life on the line to be inpatient. You sound like you need a refresher over hazard perception. Blind corners = Solid white lines = no overtaking!!
Also if you overtake and another was coming in the other direction ... by the sound of things you would happily take away a life or two to be 'right in your mind'... how would you explain that to the familys and court room?
ROAD RAGE IS A KILLER ... cant keep yourself calm under slowing down for 30 seconds then maybe you shouldnt drive!
A solid white line does not mean you cant overtake, a solid white line means you should not cross over it, although there are exceptions to the rule
DonsFanRA04
08-May-10, 22:22
In UK
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070202
Rule 129
You MUST NOT cross or straddle double white lines in normal driving. Exceptions are: if it is safe to do so and you need to enter premises adjoining the carriageway or a side road. In addition, it is permissible to cross the line as necessary and provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle. Or to overtake a horse, pedal cycle or road maintenance vehicle, only if they are not travelling at speeds greater than 16 km/h (10 mph). You can also cross double white lines when ordered to do so by a policeman in uniform.
sorry but if you've pulled people out of wrecks you should know best about the dangers! 10mph is the law! what next are you going to pull out?
Can overtake if you know its clear... but on a blind you dont so thats not a option... oops was i right haha!
Their safety is their choice... not yours unless your willing to put them at risk to keep yourself happy! Curse them all you please but dont put their lifes on the line... would you want to be in court knowing you killed someone because you put their safety in your hands and you screwed it up? Just because you wont die in a car if you hit a push bike shouldn't make you right in taking risks for others...
northener
08-May-10, 22:41
In UK
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070202
Rule 129
You MUST NOT cross or straddle double white lines in normal driving. Exceptions are: if it is safe to do so and you need to enter premises adjoining the carriageway or a side road. In addition, it is permissible to cross the line as necessary and provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle. Or to overtake a horse, pedal cycle or road maintenance vehicle, only if they are not travelling at speeds greater than 16 km/h (10 mph). You can also cross double white lines when ordered to do so by a policeman in uniform.
sorry but if you've pulled people out of wrecks you should know best about the dangers! 10mph is the law! what next are you going to pull out?
Can overtake if you know its clear... but on a blind you dont so thats not a option... oops was i right haha!
Their safety is their choice... not yours unless your willing to put them at risk to keep yourself happy! Curse them all you please but dont put their lifes on the line... would you want to be in court knowing you killed someone because you put their safety in your hands and you screwed it up? Just because you wont die in a car if you hit a push bike shouldn't make you right in taking risks for others...
I'll clarify this.
Series 2A is correct. Overtaking is not the same as crossing the line.
You can cross the solid white line only in the circumstances described in Rule 129. But you can overtake any vehicle in a solid white line stretch - providing that you do not cause any hazard or inconvenience to other road users.
So even if a cyclist was doing 20mph, it would be legal to pass them, providing the solid white line is not crossed.
But you'd need a wide section of road to do it safely in a car. Generally speaking, most carraigeways are not wide enough to permit this without placing the cyclist in danger by passing them too closely.
In UK
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070202
Rule 129
You MUST NOT cross or straddle double white lines in normal driving. Exceptions are: if it is safe to do so and you need to enter premises adjoining the carriageway or a side road. In addition, it is permissible to cross the line as necessary and provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle. Or to overtake a horse, pedal cycle or road maintenance vehicle, only if they are not travelling at speeds greater than 16 km/h (10 mph). You can also cross double white lines when ordered to do so by a policeman in uniform.
sorry but if you've pulled people out of wrecks you should know best about the dangers! 10mph is the law! what next are you going to pull out?
Can overtake if you know its clear... but on a blind you dont so thats not a option... oops was i right haha!
Their safety is their choice... not yours unless your willing to put them at risk to keep yourself happy! Curse them all you please but dont put their lifes on the line... would you want to be in court knowing you killed someone because you put their safety in your hands and you screwed it up? Just because you wont die in a car if you hit a push bike shouldn't make you right in taking risks for others...
Oh my God.. won't I ever get through to you? NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT OVERTAKING ON A BLIND BEND, hopefully (please) you're not typical of cyclists up here? :eek:
One thing that annoys me is that as a horserider I am considerate and pull over to allow faster vehicles to overtake - I consider this to be polite. I also consider this to be eco-friendly as cars to not need to brake from 60 to 10 and then re accellerate imediately afterwards. Unfortunately bikers seem to show no such courtesy. Obviously some have never seen the road signs that say "slow vehicles, please allow faster vehicles to pass to avoid frustration". It is just general common courtesy. We even pulled over into a layby today in the horse lorry to allow the 4 vehicles behind to pass. We didn't even have to slow down to do so :) It's also a nice feeling when you are thanked by a driver - much better than causing an obstruction and becoming hated ;)
One thing that annoys me is that as a horserider I am considerate and pull over to allow faster vehicles to overtake - I consider this to be polite. I also consider this to be eco-friendly as cars to not need to brake from 60 to 10 and then re accellerate imediately afterwards. Unfortunately bikers seem to show no such courtesy. Obviously some have never seen the road signs that say "slow vehicles, please allow faster vehicles to pass to avoid frustration". It is just general common courtesy. We even pulled over into a layby today in the horse lorry to allow the 4 vehicles behind to pass. We didn't even have to slow down to do so :) It's also a nice feeling when you are thanked by a driver - much better than causing an obstruction and becoming hated ;)
I'm really sorry Leanne over your experience with Bikers. The ones I know are particularly careful with horses. The added prob. being Bikes can be a bit noisy. I slow to a crawl well behind the horse, pass very slowly when it is safe and don't start to accellerate until I am very well past.
( I was taught this on a Police riding course I attended 30 odd years ago).
But it is basic common sense. As is most driving really.
Edit. Just realised you mean't push bikes allowing overtaking. Oh well valid point anyway.
northener
09-May-10, 10:04
One thing that annoys me is that as a horserider I am considerate and pull over to allow faster vehicles to overtake - I consider this to be polite. I also consider this to be eco-friendly as cars to not need to brake from 60 to 10 and then re accellerate imediately afterwards. Unfortunately bikers seem to show no such courtesy. Obviously some have never seen the road signs that say "slow vehicles, please allow faster vehicles to pass to avoid frustration". It is just general common courtesy. We even pulled over into a layby today in the horse lorry to allow the 4 vehicles behind to pass. We didn't even have to slow down to do so :) It's also a nice feeling when you are thanked by a driver - much better than causing an obstruction and becoming hated ;)
Like Ducati, I'm sorry to hear about your experiences with some people on motorbikes.
I'd like to say that most of us are very considerate and do give horses plenty of space and slow right down to avouid startling them. Certainly all the bikers I have been out with over the years have been like this.
Unfortunately, there's always the odd prat.
I'd like to say that as far as I'm concerned - they're not bikers or motorcyclists - they're just (insert appropriate expletive here) who have purchased a motorbike. There's a big difference IMO.
they're not bikers or motorcyclists - they're just (insert appropriate expletive here) who have purchased a motorbike. There's a big difference IMO.
Could ( Mannies aged 40/50 going through their middle aged crisis) be inserted here? Northener lol
Could ( Mannies aged 40/50 going through their middle aged crisis) be inserted here? Northener lol
Look I'm age 40 to 50 ahem..
But I've had a bike since I was 16. My mid life crisis was getting a live in dolly burd [lol]
I didn't mean motorbikers - I meant cyclists. Sorry :(
Also the fact that warning signs should make you aware of the hazard so slowing down wouldn’t be that bad an idea! Wasn’t a dark an evening during the race times so the cyclists should be visible from a fair distance without high viz.
Well the night I passed them it wasnt pitch black but it was getting dark.
I have no problem with bikes being on the road, the only issue in question in this topic is that there are cyclists not wearing visible clothing or lights on the bike when its clearly not very light.
Just because there are signs up saying there is a race going on doesnt mean its an excuse to not to be seen.
Hi-vis should be worn by all cyclists and riders on the road - it gives drivers an extra couple of seconds to see you. DAY or NIGHT! If you notice when you drive, hivis wearers are more quickly seen even in good light...
There is an interesting article (P20) in this months Cycling Active (May 20) from the Institute of Advance Motors which states, that cyclists should "..stay near kerb.." on long straight sections, but on approaching junctions to take up a position in the middle of lane.
k1rst1n27
10-May-10, 12:35
The lack of Hi-Vis was only part of the problem, the cyclist performed a completly unsafe manouver - the way they undertook and cut out in front of my car was seriously putting their own safety at risk.
I was being patient and tollerant, as mentioned i was waiting behind several cyclists who all acted appropriatly but it only takes the rediculous antics of one person to cause an accident!...and then the cycle club would likely be up in arms then and it would be the drivers fault!
As for the road rage - it was my passenger who got a gluff and felt the need to advise 010 to wear a hi-vis ;)
I dont have a problem with cyclists, but i do have a problem with people who are completely unconsiderate to other road users, what is it they say..."only a fool breaks the 2 second rule" why should cyclists be any different to other road users who are required to keep a minimum 2 second gap?
Hi-vis should be worn by all cyclists and riders on the road - it gives drivers an extra couple of seconds to see you. DAY or NIGHT! If you notice when you drive, hivis wearers are more quickly seen even in good light...
I would also add pedestrians on unlit roads with no pavements.
I had just passed through Reay one dark snowy winter night heading west when I just caught a flash of a light I slowed down to suddenly come across woman dressed in dark clothing walking with a black lab on the wrong side of the road (her back to me) the flash I saw was the chrome toggle on the dog lead.
If I hadnt have seen that I could have hit her, the dog was on the verge. you would expect people to at least wear some bright clothing it really do's help.
Was driving back from Wick last night at about 8ish, unfortunatly for me there was yet another bike race taking place...so i was patient and waited behind bikers until the road was clear but some really un-considerate biker decided not to wear a hi-vis and also decided to undertake my car when it was really not safe to do so and rather than go into the left decided to stay in the middle of the road!
So number 010 from Wick bike club, incase you were wondering, the message out of the window was "WEAR A HI-VIZ YOU IDIOT!!!"
Was it the the lack of hi viz jacket that annoyed you or the fact you nearly hit him as you could not see him in your passenger side mirrior due to the fact that your passenger was obscuring the mirror and the complete side window with the newspaper they were reading, at least that was number 010's story and the reason for his gesture back.
personal opinion is that if I want to cycle on the road then I will as I pay road tax the same as everyone else. Not sure about two abreast though.
northener
10-May-10, 23:23
"Two abreast":
If you can't see or avoid two cyclists on the road riding side by side then God knows how you'd deal with a broken down car or a toddler in the middle of the road....
Hi Viz?
Why the hell should everyone wear the bloody things? This is rapidly becoming the standard 'dumbing down' excuse by car drivers who are too lazy or stupid to make allowances for situations that fall outside their own narrowminded idealistic view that everyone on the road should just fall on their backs and spread their legs for some halfwitted monkey piloting a ton of steel.
I'd say that being able to stop within the distance you can see would be a damn sight more sensible in the majority of cases.
And yes, before anyone says it, I know that it would help many pedestrians and slower road users keep safe, but a bit of forward planning and potential hazard awareness would go a long way with many of the feckwits who are driving on the roads.
Yep, if you can't stop in the distance you can see......that includes halfway round a blind bend or the brow of a hill.
but a bit of forward planning and potential hazard awareness would go a long way with many of the feckwits who are cycling on the roads.
lol........
Was it the the lack of hi viz jacket that annoyed you or the fact you nearly hit him as you could not see him in your passenger side mirrior due to the fact that your passenger was obscuring the mirror and the complete side window with the newspaper they were reading, at least that was number 010's story and the reason for his gesture back.
personal opinion is that if I want to cycle on the road then I will as I pay road tax the same as everyone else. Not sure about two abreast though.
Wow another No 10 grasping at straws, and making exuses.
Was it the the lack of hi viz jacket that annoyed you or the fact you nearly hit him as you could not see him in your passenger side mirrior due to the fact that your passenger was obscuring the mirror and the complete side window with the newspaper they were reading, at least that was number 010's story and the reason for his gesture back.
personal opinion is that if I want to cycle on the road then I will as I pay road tax the same as everyone else. Not sure about two abreast though.
Bit of a cop-out that one, hmm cars are BIG heavy things, bicycles are small light things, a vehicle will do all it can to keep away from bicycles, bike riders should do all they can to keep clear of these big dangerous things.. if No10 had been wearing a hiviz - utter stupidity not wearing one - then I'm sure the initial poster would have seen him, as he drove forward.
I find it amusing, that certain members of above club, protest, bloody hell you're cycling on a long straight road, very little traffic - it's not as though they were on the Mancunian Way in Manchester or Kingsway in L'pool or even Digbeth in Brum! where 'hazard perception' - is a constant must
OK enjoy yourself but just think how lucky you are up here, and cycle considerately..
PS "Not sure about two abreast though." uh? you are not sure?
Yours AudaxUK lejog
Hi Viz?
Why the hell should everyone wear the bloody things?
Fully agree with that statement, however when its dark at least some lights on the bike would be helpful to be seen :lol:
Fully agree with that statement, however when its dark at least some lights on the bike would be helpful to be seen :lol:
As I said before - anyone with that sentiment is an idiot who doesn't value their life. Hivis allows you to be seen much sooner than not wearing it - even in daylight. Any driver may have a momentary lapse of concentration (I for one at this time of the year take fits of sneezes) and hivis makes you much more noticable :)
k1rst1n27
12-May-10, 12:34
Wow, 010 must get themselves down to specsavers...first he cant judge distance (by the angle he undertook and shot out in front of my car), and hes now claiming that my passenger had a newspaper? The side mirror was not in any way obstructed, neither was my rear mirror.
Considering the state of potholes at the moment and how narrow the roads are, I would really think that it would be in a cyclists best interest to be as safe as possible - and not live on the wild side dodging between cars and verges without wearing a hi-vis.
My passenger has 'road rage' for yelling put a hi-vis on but Wick Cycle Club think hand gestures are completly acceptable? Thats fine, i'll exercise this theory next time I'm passing a bunch of you again.
Cyclists make me lol - the next debate...are they passionate or extremists?! lol,
northener
12-May-10, 16:19
As I said before - anyone with that sentiment is an idiot who doesn't value their life. Hivis allows you to be seen much sooner than not wearing it - even in daylight. Any driver may have a momentary lapse of concentration (I for one at this time of the year take fits of sneezes) and hivis makes you much more noticable :)
High viz in bad conditions or poor light certainly.
Requiring cyclists to wear hi viz in good conditions? That's a cop out by drivers who can't be arsed to plan ahead and adjust their speed accordingly.
If a 'momentary lapse of concentration' is enough to make you miss seeing a cyclist, then you aren't paying enough attention or are incapable of stopping in the distance you can see to be safe. And that's one of the most basic rules there is for driving.
I can recommend a driving instructor if you'd like some refreshers on hazard perception and appropriate speed.;):Razz
northener
12-May-10, 16:22
...Cyclists make me lol - the next debate...are they passionate or extremists?! lol,
They're road users, plain and simple. Good and bad - same as other road users. They have the same right to be on the road as everyone else and should be given time and space - same as everyone else.
We even pulled over into a layby today in the horse lorry to allow the 4 vehicles behind to pass. We didn't even have to slow down to do so :) It's also a nice feeling when you are thanked by a driver - much better than causing an obstruction
I wish I'd been behind you when I was heading north from Inverness at the weekend instead of the horse lorry that was in front! It travelled for mile after mile without pulling over. You couldn't see where the tailback ended, it was huge!
rogermellie
13-May-10, 01:19
been lurking for an age, but this thread goaded me ....
the cyclists in Thurso and Wick deserve a wide berth, and in my experience they're viz'd up and drivers have plenty of warning to be able anticipate them.
give them and the horses plenty of space, keep it in context, what's your hurry ? are you really willing to shave 1 minute off your journey for the sake of ....
http://therecord.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/06/03/mexico_accident_topix_temp.jpg
northener
13-May-10, 08:55
been lurking for an age, but this thread goaded me ....
the cyclists in Thurso and Wick deserve a wide berth, and in my experience they're viz'd up and drivers have plenty of warning to be able anticipate them.
give them and the horses plenty of space, keep it in context, what's your hurry ? are you really willing to shave 1 minute off your journey for the sake of ....
http://therecord.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/06/03/mexico_accident_topix_temp.jpg
[lol]
That's Leanne having a 'momentary lapse of concentration'.
If only they'd been wearing hi-viz......
And welcome, Roger.:Razz
Hi-viz and Viz in the same thread. Blimey.
I was so shocked when I saw this on my dash mounted laptop :cool:, I almost dropped me shaver in me coffee :eek:
northener
13-May-10, 09:05
I was so shocked when I saw this on my dash mounted laptop :cool:, I almost dropped me shaver in me coffee :eek:
You need a wider screen. Then you'd have spotted them earlier.
Anyway, can someone explain to me why, all the way through the Summer, I see End-to-End cyclists being almost forced off the roads by cars trying to pass them when there's a vehicle coming in the opposite direction? Is this another case of those pesky cyclists causing problems for all?
Some cyclists even have the audacity to be two abreast, how dare they?
The worst place for this appears to be the 40mph section approaching Reiss. A long straight road and in daylight....so it's not a visibilty problem, is it?
Kevin Milkins
13-May-10, 09:42
been lurking for an age, but this thread goaded me ....
the cyclists in Thurso and Wick deserve a wide berth, and in my experience they're viz'd up and drivers have plenty of warning to be able anticipate them.
give them and the horses plenty of space, keep it in context, what's your hurry ? are you really willing to shave 1 minute off your journey for the sake of ....
http://therecord.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/06/03/mexico_accident_topix_temp.jpg
Nice one, rogermellie, that's a great first post.:Razz
Are you the man off the telly?
dragonfly
13-May-10, 09:51
better watch out as it Thursday again today................race will be on and my hubby will be one of them...........wearing something a little hi-viz!
I would just also like to add that my son (now 16) used to take part in the time trials but has decided not to this year as for the past few years he has been nearly knocked off his bike by the gusts coming from cars/vans/lorries passing too closely to him and not giving him a wide enough berth - a 14/15 year old weighing no more than 9 stone racing 10 miles against the clock on that pot holed road filled me with terror every tuesday evening during the Time Trial seaon and I was thankful each time he turned up back at home - SAFE
[lol]
That's Leanne having a 'momentary lapse of concentration'.
If only they'd been wearing hi-viz......
And welcome, Roger.:Razz
Hi-viz and Viz in the same thread. Blimey.
The 28-year-old driver was apparently drunk and fell asleep when he crashed in the race, said police investigator Jose Alfredo Rodriguez. A photo taken by an official of the city showed cyclists and equipment launched high into the air by the collision.
Rodriguez said Juan Campos was charged with murder Alejandro Alvarez, 37, of Monterrey. Authorities said the wreck happened 15 minutes in the 34 kilometers (21 miles) race Sunday along a road between Baghdad and Playa Matamoros, across from Brownsville, Texas.
Campos said he is a U.S. citizen living in Brownsville. The USA Consulate could not immediately confirm that.
http://autoworld.wordpress.com/2008/06/03/terrible-accident-car-crashes-into-bike-race-in-mexico/ (http://autoworld.wordpress.com/2008/06/03/terrible-accident-car-crashes-into-bike-race-in-mexico/)
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.