Helmet Cameras

Did anyone see this piece of footage on Breakfast News?

 

It looked a pretty close shave for the cyclist, but I can't help thinking that the incident might have been avoided if the cyclist had yielded a bit more to the van. I know that the cyclist was completely in the right and that the van cut him up whilst turning left, but I can't help feeling that the cyclist may have been trying to, perhaps, stand his ground, or prove a point a little too enthusiastically. It's not worth killing yourself over. I don't know, maybe I am looking at it from the wrong point of view.

 

On a more positive note, the worthless piece of useless bullying filth that was driving the van had to pay £450 and had his licence endorsed with 5 points.

I saw this on lunchtime news and have to agree...LIFE before EGO everytime....

 

the near miss with the tanker would have probably been enough for me to stop riding for a while:eek:

The same thought crossed my mind, the driver's rage was stoked initially by being screamed at by the rider at which point his sense of proportion was lost. Having spent many years riding in London, I learnt to never underestimate the ignorance of others, and if it had been me seeing the bend coming up, I think I'd have been on the brakes well before the van turned in.

 

On saying that I've also had cause to scream at many motorists in my time, so who really knows how we'd react in such a situation? Riding, particularly in cities is for me a delicate balance between defence and assertiveness.

 

The worst the driver risked was a dented panel, where as it could have cost the rider his life, something many motorists fail to appreciate in my experience. With any luck they both will learn something from the incident.

Edited February 1, 201115 yr by Straylight

Yes, interesting article, thing is, it's hard not to get very angry at them, as a cyclist even a minor knock from a car can mean death, drivers just don't seem to realise this.

 

The guy did go too far, I suspect he was banging on the side of the van. Either way, the van drivers reaction was probably due to him being quite a small chap. Typical bully behaviour. They've tried it with me, but when they realise the size of me they tend to jump back in their car sharpish.

 

Funnily enough they wouldn't say boo to me in the first place in my motorbike kit on a big 1200cc bike. These fools must completely believe the "wimpy cyclist" and "tough biker" stereotypes, without realising the same person can be both.

 

These days I tend to just shake my head in disbelief at some of the things I see. That's easier said than done sometimes with the very near misses that get the adrenaline pumping.

 

The article did make me seriously consider a helmet camera, but I need one that's rechargeable at work, will cover my 30 minute commute and can be "taped over" each day, while of course being high enough quality to discern numberplates and not costing a fortune.

camara

 

Hi

 

look on eBay item number 260730534486 about £100 delivered and you can clean up i recon you could earn £5,000 week in city centers

 

All you need is injury layers direct

 

 

Frank

Yes, exactly the same reaction as the majority from me when saw this at midday. The cyclist appeared to be looking for trouble and did our cause no good at all.

 

I didn't think the van too close, I often have them as close or closer in my heavily trafficked area. The report that the van driver was convicted was misleading, I don't doubt that was for the assault, not for any supposed driving incident.

 

As for the tanker incident, difficult to judge but it appeared the cyclist joined from the right without looking and making allowance for a large vehicle which is very difficult to stop quickly. Even if that was a roundabout which wasn't clear, allowance should be made for a heavy vehicle that is already commited to a course of action. Cyclists really must take more responsibilty in looking out for others, and that includes using a rear view mirror or looking round properly, not just arrogantly expecting others to be able to stop or avoid instantly as so many seem to.

 

It's bit like "sail before steam". In theory and marine law that might be true, but a supertanker at full speed takes literally miles to stop or manouvre and therefore cannot stop for or avoid a small sail boat.

.

Edited February 1, 201115 yr by flecc

Head gear

 

I think all cyclests E powered on not shold wher a helmet with a

amber strobe on top Be seen

 

Then the paramedic cyclist can have Green

 

And the police can have Blue

 

Frank

A friend of mine who knows about such things recommend the Veho Muvi camera, which is £45 from Play.com

Big problem is the Police and authorities are so obsessed with speed that bad driving goes unchecked. You can drive like a complete Tw*t but as long as you go through the speed camera at 29mph you are fine

 

Back when I was younger there were police cars sat in places here and there and driving around and pulling people over for bad driving. Now traffic police are virtually gone. Bring back traffic cops and scrap cameras!

 

No respect for other people. I ride a motorbike and car /van drivers treat you like crap and almost try and pull out in front of you it seems - jealousy because of your ability to overtake and filter through traffic jams easily.

Yes, exactly the same reaction as the majority from me when saw this at midday. The cyclist appeared to be looking for trouble and did our cause no good at all.

 

I didn't think the van too close, I often have them as close or closer in my heavily trafficked area. The report that the van driver was convicted was misleading, I don't doubt that was for the assault, not for any supposed driving incident.

 

As for the tanker incident, difficult to judge but it appeared the cyclist joined from the right without looking and making allowance for a large vehicle which is very difficult to stop quickly. Even if that was a roundabout which wasn't clear, allowance should be made for a heavy vehicle that is already commited to a course of action. Cyclists really must take more responsibilty in looking out for others, and that includes using a rear view mirror or looking round properly, not just arrogantly expecting others to be able to stop or avoid instantly as so many seem to.

 

It's bit like "sail before steam". In theory and marine law that might be true, but a supertanker at full speed takes literally miles to stop or manouvre and therefore cannot stop for or avoid a small sail boat.

.

 

 

I agree that the cyclist was making a point by holding his road position - I have been in this situation on many occasions and you have no choice but to scrub off your hard earned speed. However the van driver was in the wrong and clearly too close (read, I think, highway code rule 136). I understand in the real world these things happen but he was driving without due care and attention AND it was a pointless overtake - the traffic was grinding to a halt with heavy traffic up the road anyway. This is typical of London traffic so just who was making the point?

 

So of the two people making a point I side with the cyclist who probably has already had 10 drivers making the same point (that slow cyclist shouldn't be on the road holding up superior powered vehicles). You only need to go to the comments page after any article on cycling to see the level of ignorance about cycling. Many drivers believe that they are nothing more than pedestrians on the road and have similar rights i.e. you are in my way and are holding me up - oh except when it come to lights etc then they must be considered as a vehicle. It is all a bit hypocritical really.

 

As for the tanker - yes it was a roundabout and you give way to the right regardless of whether you are driving a tanker or bicycle. If you drive something that takes longer to stop, you leave more room (and yes I have an HGV3 licence somewhere in my attic). He just didn't see the cyclist full stop - should he have been prosecuted? Sure thing.

We'll have to agree to differ Hal, I find that attitude just a little intolerant.

 

The way I see it is that we do not compete for road space, we share it, and that implies some give and take, making allowance for others, something so often lacking in cyclists.

 

I'm particularly unhappy with the way that most cyclists on busy roads have no regard for what is going on behind them and just expect everybody to make any allowance they selfishly need. All other vehicles are required to have rear view mirrors, and as about the slowest vehicles out there and therefore the most overtaken, of all vehicles, bikes should have at least one.

 

Whether cyclist speed is hard won is completely irrelevant, we are free to choose what vehicle we use and others should not bear the cost of our choices, they are our costs. If courtesy and road safety means it's advisable to lose speed in a certain circumstance, we should accept that as the cost of our choice of vehicle. With electric assist there is even less excuse for refusing to make advisable allowances.

 

I'm also ex HGV and I know that many drivers are far from perfect, but it doesn't help when cyclists join in with bad behaviour and intolerance, it just makes life worse for all. In my view the cyclist yelling in the latter examples was just out looking for trouble.

.

Having watched the video again, the van appears to be past the cyclist with his left hand indicator on. Next, the cyclist almost chases after the van to get along side him to make his point.

 

Theres no doubt that the overtake by the van driver was pointless and dangerous, but as already mentioned by several others, it isn't the best example of good cycling either.

 

I'm afraid that all yelling and shouting will get you is a good punch on the nose. As demonstrated in the video.

We'll have to agree to differ Hal, I find that attitude just a little intolerant.

 

The way I see it is that we do not compete for road space, we share it, and that implies some give and take, making allowance for others, something so often lacking in cyclists.

 

I'm particularly unhappy with the way that most cyclists on busy roads have no regard for what is going on behind them and just expect everybody to make any allowance they selfishly need. All other vehicles are required to have rear view mirrors, and as about the slowest vehicles out there and therefore the most overtaken, of all vehicles, bikes should have at least one.

 

Whether cyclist speed is hard won is completely irrelevant, we are free to choose what vehicle we use and others should not bear the cost of our choices, they are our costs. If courtesy and road safety means it's advisable to lose speed in a certain circumstance, we should accept that as the cost of our choice of vehicle. With electric assist there is even less excuse for refusing to make advisable allowances.

 

I'm also ex HGV and I know that many drivers are far from perfect, but it doesn't help when cyclists join in with bad behaviour and intolerance, it just makes life worse for all. In my view the cyclist yelling in the latter examples was just out looking for trouble.

.

 

 

I am confused - are you saying that the highway code is irrelevant and to be ignored? My point is entirely relevant to the highway code - your overtaking manoeuvre is not supposed to cause another vehicle to slow down or change course. In this case the van driver clearly caused both. I am not saying that what the cyclist then does is fine but I strongly suspect that due to the way the camera angles work that the van is nearer than it appears. By the way there are some drivers that think it is fine do these things if you indicate - again not correct.

 

I will give you an example on a main road on the way home near Palmers Green. Cars intermittently parked on the left, not enough room to overtake a bicycle due to oncoming cars. The right choice of course is to move over when you can to let the cars overtake and I have tried this on many occasions but as I believe the definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome, this is no longer my approach. I do not move over as if I did I would never get back out again - somehow drivers seem to 'forget' that it is in fact my right of way (or "where did he come from, these cyclist just come out of nowhere!") and I shouldn't have to ask some sort of permission to ride down the road.

 

I do suspect that your opinion is set by your years as a car/van/lorry driver and if you rode as a commuter rather than doing a bit for leisure you would be a bit more sympathetic to what is quite frankly bullying by one section of the population by another. By the way if you go on a cycling course you will be told to use your road position to hold back the traffic in a way I suspect you would fined horrifying.

Edited February 2, 201115 yr by HarryB

 

By the way if you go on a cycling course you will be told to use your road position to hold back the traffic in a way I suspect you would fined horrifying.

 

I'm frankly staggered at you saying this after your long membership in this forum Hal, I've repeatedly posted about how the correct way is to dominate the traffic where necessary and it's what I normally do. Anfd I have been cycling for 64 years, the last 43 in London Boroughs.

 

But as I pointed out in the "sail before steam" example previously, commonsense takes precedence over laws and official advice which by their nature at time of setting, cannot suit all circumstances.

 

There's a jingle about the international marine regulations about giving way that ends with these lines about the character "Jolly Jack Tar":

 

He was right, dead right, as he sailed along

But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.

.

Edited February 2, 201115 yr by flecc

He was right, dead right, as he sailed along

But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.

 

Or as I was going to put it, treat arsholes the same way as you do potholes. Even though they're annoying and shouldn't be there, they're dangerous so make alowances for them and give them a wide berth.

I'm frankly staggered at you saying this after your long membership in this forum Hal, I've repeatedly posted about how the correct way is to dominate the traffic where necessary and it's what I normally do.

 

 

Of course I know and also know you can take a joke (and provocative posts). As to your ditty all I can say is that I am still here after years of cycling and would never push my right of way when my life is threatened. Would you believe the othere day a lorry drew along side me and turned left - I would have thought after all the publicity that wouldn't happen (and yes I do have a mirror).

 

I assume that most drivers are like goldfish with a memory problem - I suppose to them we just magically disappear when their car/van draws along side us and out of their line of sight- I have taken to saying "still here, still here" in a loud voice but of course that won't work with vans. The constant cutting up does get wearing when it happens time and time again in a journey.

 

While I am not one for cussing and shouting on the odd occasions I have calmly asked drivers what I had done to upset them and the result is always the same - through all the expletives - you got in my f****ing way, get out of my way you c***t. On one occasion it was because I stopped at a crossing to let a pedestrian cross the road and he had been forced to stop. Obviously I am not surrounding myself with any of Flecc's Karmic Bubble...

 

I assume that most drivers are like goldfish with a memory problem - I suppose to them we just magically disappear when their car/van draws along side us and out of their line of sight-

 

That's surely the point Hal, we do indeed disappear and shouldn't expect others to make allowances for what they can no longer see. After passing us their concentration, such as it is, is on the next set of events facing them, not the history. The only exception I make to that is when they intend a left turn of course, since they are already aware of that as they are passing us. Left turning in those circumstances is clearly inexcusable, but I'm just resigned that it happens and half expect it, so am ready for it happening. Imperfect world full of imperfect people etc.

 

 

Obviously I am not surrounding myself with any of Flecc's Karmic Bubble...

 

Well I make that for myself as follows Hal, whatever my transport is.

 

I am always content to give way if advisable, even to the worst of road louts.

 

I automatically give way to public transport which is serving the community, I'm just serving myself.

 

I make an especial effort to give way for pedestrians no matter how stupidly they behave. That even includes making an "invisible" crossing point for them when the difficulty of their circumstances makes that helpful.

 

I'm always ready to slow down and have a ready smile for others.

 

This does inconvenience and delay at times, but it does also have a calming effect on others and often evokes politeness from them.

 

But the delay is offset when cycling by the ability to filter to the front in traffic, so that, together with the benefits of improved behaviours all round makes my approach worth it to me. I just prefer to live in a pleasant world, even if I have to make it that myself.

.

I looked at the video several times and have come to the conclusion tat the van moved infront of the cyclist just before the corner and then put his LH indicator on as if to cut across. A frightening experience for the cyclist. He shouted as loud as he could because his bell wouldn't have been heard by the van driver. He could've braked and let the van driver go for safety and that would have been the end of the matter, I guess he was watching carefully while proceding and ready to brake if the van driver had cut directly accross. At that point I think you could say that the van driver had a blatant disregard for the cyclists right of way and deserved everything he got. What happened after that didn't make either of them look good, but the van driver must have been too close for the cyclist to kick at it.

Today I was riding back rom the town centre and passed the entrance to a primary school at closing time. The cycle path merges into the school access road (public highway) just before the gate. Where the road starts, so does the pavement, but nobody was using the pavement. All the parents were taking their kids and pushchairs along the road because not many cars go along it, it being a dead-end. I slowly navigated my way round the crowd standing on the road at the gate, sounding my horn appropriately and people moved to make more room, although they looked a little disgruntled A little bit away from the gate a mother had a small child on each arm and was walking along the right side of the road with her back to me taking up about half of it. I slowed down. but chose not to use my horn because I had plenty of room to pass and I was worried from previous experience that people tend to turn into me rather than keep away. At exactly the point of no-return, the little girl on the right let go of her mum and dashed straight accross in front of me. A second nature helped make me ready, but I was only just able to stop in time. It was very close! If I had hit her, I don't believe that I would've been able to defend my case in court. A camera would have shown that I had no chance, so I'm getting one.

As we dont have collision insurance companies to fight in our corner, a camera does indeed seem to be a good solution. I too am leaning towards getting one for my commute.

air bags

 

you can bye air bags for motor cyclists how about for bike rider

 

see this on you tube

 

 

 

Frank

I think many cyclists could usefully take on board some of the aspects of advanced driving from the IAM. Drivers are taught to be observant, to anticipate events, to be courteous, be prepared to give way or stop and to drive defensively all whilst being tolerant of other road users and the mistakes they make! Easy

Edited February 2, 201115 yr by NRG

I've watched that video clip several times now and I think the outcome in court was correct. I'm sure amongst forum members, like me, there's a number of big guys who wouldn't have taken any of the van driver's verbals after what had just occurred.

 

Maybe the cyclist isn't a very physical type and couldn't deal with the aggression he faced; maybe he showed remarkable restraint; maybe, knowing his camera was running, he wanted to collect evidence? Regardless, that piece of film captures what cyclists in urban areas have to endure on a daily basis. For that to change, we need a complete culture change in the UK and the best way to bring about such change, in my view, would be through the creation of a "Highway Patrol" type of police service.

 

Under existing budgetary constraints, police forces need to prioritise crimes and, sad to say, violations of the RTA and associated crime such as threats to kill, ABH, GBH, even murder on occasions, come way down that list of priorities. It offends me every time I'm on a motorway and see those 4wd machines belonging to the Highways Agency, cruising along, their occupants pretending to themselves that they're police officers. For me, they're a complete waste of space and money.

 

Instead of those "cardboard cutouts" with no powers worth talking about, a dedicated police force with powers of arrest and seizure, in numbers unheard of hitherto and certain to anger local Chief Constables, directly employed as civil servants rather than local government employees, would repay the massive investment required in a short space of time. In fact, it would be a real earner for the taxpayer as the fines collected, the vehicles seized and subsequently sold, the £10,000 required to purchase a new licence after a DD conviction on successful completion of an extended test after a lengthy ban and so on.

 

A national police force isn't original or unique as we already have both the British Transport Police and the MOD Police for example. As things stand, our roads are simply not policed and cameras just don't do the job, especially when they have no film! When a driver is removed from his vehicle, the vehicle placed in a guarded compound for 30 days, a fine of £5,000 paid, all for using a mobile phone while driving, then motorists will start showing a little respect for the law.

 

Equally, those other road users, not least cyclists, who offend should face draconian penalties. It's about respect; it's about politeness and manners and consideration for other people. It's so much more than simply the rule of law.

 

I don't expect my view on this to find much favour amongst forum members here, given that quite a number break the law through modifying their bikes, (I don't buy "bending" the law a little) and there seems to exist a tacit acceptance that that's ok. There's a degree, or perhaps a lot, of hypocrisy evident in some recent postings. Now, no-one wants a police state but as education and existing penalties clearly don't work, I welcome any better suggestions.

 

Indalo

Suggestions

 

Significantly raise the bar in terms of driver training, particularly for commercial vehicles. Driving should be a privilege for the capable/competent, not a universal right. I'd include some form of psychological testing in this, to make sure the candidate is emotionally stable enough to handles the stresses placed upon a driver.

 

Mandatory speed limiters for all road vehicles, if the law says a maximum of 70, then why do you need to drive any faster? Couple this with GPS based adaptive speed limiting in all new vehicles. The point being to largely take the whole speed issue out of the hands of law enforcement, freeing up resources to police driving standards.

 

Limit the engine size available to new drivers for a probationary period (say five years?).

 

Tax breaks for cyclists

Edited February 3, 201115 yr by Straylight

Significantly raise the bar in terms of driver training, particularly for commercial vehicles.

 

a younger friend of mine just did his C series license as he is restoring a Bedford TK as unlike older people he doesn't have this category on grandfather rights. Another chap I know runs a mobile business and workshop and has just attended a mandatory VOSA seminar about his "O license" (for commercial vehicles)

 

Certainly the use of vehicles over 3.5t is very highly regulated - there is plenty of driver training and education not just in the UK but also in other EU nations (many of which, contrary to popular misconception are even more restrictive of large vehicles and their usage than the UK!)

 

I suspect what is a major cause of road crashes is simply our ruthlessly competitive society demanding long working hours from everyone - people are trying to get everywhere fast to make the delivery timescale or that business deal and stop caring about who else is on the road until crashes happen.

 

in reality, there aren't that many real psychos on the road as people might fear, but our society currently encourages competitve and aggressive use of the roads, it is this which needs to be addressed.

Edited February 3, 201115 yr by Alex728

Agreed, hence the need for mental testing/training. Anyone with any sense is going to be on their best behaviour for the 30mins it takes to pass a driving test, and you don't need to be a psycho to react inappropriately to stressful situations. I'm not saying that people need the mental strength of fighter pilots, but there should at least be a minimum level of rationale required.