Cyclist on M4

glic71rods46t0

Was travelling eastbound on the M4 this evening and came upon a cyclist in the hard shoulder cycling while all sorts of traffic was passing him at 120kph:eek:
Question is: would you ring the cops on this guy (for his own safety) or just ignore?

L1011

Ring Trafficwatch. He'll be killed if he keeps at it.

Loveless

peasant

s3xgl5i7zok0em wrote: »

Question is: would you ring the cops on this guy (for his own safety) or just ignore?

Trick question ...is your phone hands free?

L1011

peasant wrote: »

Trick question ...is your phone hands free?

Both mine are

glic71rods46t0

peasant wrote: »

Trick question ...is your phone hands free?

blue tooth headset ..voice activated dialling

Yakuza

I'm fairly sure I've read on these boards (and elsewhere) it's not an offence to use a mobile to contact the police / emergency services even if you're driving.

Edit, yep, here's one link:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65812086&postcount=5

2nd Edit to appease the pedants on tonight.

Stark

Trafficwatch aren't the emergency services though.

L1011

Stark wrote: »

Trafficwatch aren't the emergency services though.

I've no idea who operates the phones now, but they're basically the Guards.

STForSale

I see this almost every day on the M4.
Does anyone know if cyclists are allowed on the free flow interchanges,
another thing I see everyday.

gurramok

Is it worse than cycling on the N4?

folan

theres a 40kph difference, so that might help. though im not sure if most drivers realise that on the N4.
And bike paths on the N4

ive never seen a cyclist on the M4, but theyre either super brave or a bit of an idiot.

gurramok

folan wrote: »

theres a 40kph difference, so that might help. though im not sure if most drivers realise that on the N4.
And bike paths on the N4

ive never seen a cyclist on the M4, but theyre either super brave or a bit of an idiot.

The M4 is a safer road physically than the at times narrow and bendy N4 so yes a cyclist is taking it risky on both roads and 'thinks' the M4 is a better risk despite the 120kph speeds of cars. Its just a sad state of affairs for cyclists with the old poor quality roads like the N4.

Andrew33

Ring emergency services and report him, he should be prosecuted like any other road user for breaking the law. Apart from the risk to his own life, he is presenting a distraction to motorists travelling at 120kph where even a couple of seconds distraction could make the difference between life and death. Over dramatic? I don't think so. Why do so many cyclists think traffic laws don't apply to them? I had a cyclist (properly dressed, so obviously a serious cyclist) squeeze up the inside of me this morning while I was driving at 40kph on a narrow road! Have they no sense of self preservation?

Cuddlesworth

Andrew33 wrote: »

I had a cyclist (properly dressed, so obviously a serious cyclist) squeeze up the inside of me this morning while I was driving at 40kph on a narrow road! Have they no sense of self preservation?

I question the validity of that situation.

Andrew33

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I question the validity of that situation.

Explain your statement.

The Rook

Andrew33 wrote: »

Explain your statement.

40kph ... a cyclist overtaking you ...seriously?!!

Rovi

40 km/h = 24.9 mph.
Well within the capabilities of most but the most lethargic of cyclists, and probably not far off 'normal cruising speed' for a "serious cyclist".

The Rook

When you put it like that it makes sense!

So then what's the problem with an average speed cyclist (as has been determined!) overtaking someone if the gap is there(which it obviously was)?

metalgear2k2

The Rook wrote: »

When you put it like that it makes sense!

So then what's the problem with an average speed cyclist (as has been determined!) overtaking someone if the gap is there(which it obviously was)?

Overtaking on the left, against the law if im not mistaken.

Stark

Andrew33 wrote:

Apart from the risk to his own life, he is presenting a distraction to motorists travelling at 120kph where even a couple of seconds distraction could make the difference between life and death. Over dramatic? I don't think so.

You shouldn't be driving if a moment's distraction on a motorway means the difference between life and death for you.

red menace

Stark wrote: »

You shouldn't be driving if a moment's distraction on a motorway means the difference between life and death for you.

How do you think any accidents happen?

Glance down at the phone for a second, change radio station, or look across at a guy on a bike on a hard shoulder, look back up after a second to realise someone has pulled out in front of you or slammed on the brakes.

120 KM/H = 33.33 m/s .

Your car is travelling at 108 feet per second.

Not giving yourself much time/distance to react.

Of course you shouldn't be distracted but things happen all the time and do you not think one less distraction source on the motor way is a good thing?

Andrew33

Stark wrote: »

You shouldn't be driving if a moment's distraction on a motorway means the difference between life and death for you.

That is an incredibly stupid statement, do you drive? how far does a car travel in 2 seconds at 120kph? almost 70 metres, add reaction time on top and you could be in a collision before you even got your foot on the brake.
I'm a good enough driver to cope with a moments distraction but not everybody out there is as good as me.

Andrew33

The Rook wrote: »

When you put it like that it makes sense!

So then what's the problem with an average speed cyclist (as has been determined!) overtaking someone if the gap is there(which it obviously was)?

Why obviously? there was not enough room for him to pass safely without me moving out to the crown of the road, at one point his right hand was barely an inch from my left mirror, my original point remains firm, in the event of an accident (which would have been caused by him) it would be him who comes off the worst. Self preservation?

guil

i'd definatey report them, could of easily got dragged off the bike by a truck passing
only last week i saw 2 ejits walkin against traffic on the m7 southbound just past naas

guil

Andrew33 wrote: »

Why obviously? there was not enough room for him to pass safely without me moving out to the crown of the road, at one point his right hand was barely an inch from my left mirror, my original point remains firm, in the event of an accident (which would have been caused by him) it would be him who comes off the worst. Self preservation?

and ur the one who would get all the blame aswell, some people dont have any cop on

Gregor Samsa

s3xgl5i7zok0em wrote: »

Was travelling eastbound on the M4 this evening and came upon a cyclist in the hard shoulder cycling while all sorts of traffic was passing him at 120kph:eek:
Question is: would you ring the cops on this guy (for his own safety) or just ignore?

I saw a cyclist in February on the M18 (Ennis bypass), 6.30 in the evening (pitch dark) with no lights - but they were wearing one of those RSA high vis vests. I assume the idiot in question assumed that since it said RSA on it, that it was a cloak of invincibility.

I see cyclists every second day on that road - you'd be blue in the face calling the cops every time you saw one.

The worst thing I saw was a woman walking down the slip road onto the motorway at Shannon the other week, carrying two bags of shopping. The next exit is Newmarket, about 5 kilometers away.

The Rook

metalgear2k2 wrote: »

Overtaking on the left, against the law if im not mistaken.

You are mistaken - Cyclists must drive on the left of the left hand side of the road, not the right. For them to overtake they have to do it on the left hand side of the road, and "undertake" a car if they are passing them out.

metalgear2k2

The Rook wrote: »

You are mistaken - Cyclists must drive on the left of the left hand side of the road, not the right. For them to overtake they have to do it on the left hand side of the road, and "undertake" a car if they are passing them out.

I dont think many people know that and is probably why it spooked the driver.

The Rook

Andrew33 wrote: »

Why obviously? there was not enough room for him to pass safely without me moving out to the crown of the road, at one point his right hand was barely an inch from my left mirror, my original point remains firm, in the event of an accident (which would have been caused by him) it would be him who comes off the worst. Self preservation?

So while travelling at 40km/h you were able to determine the distance between a cyclist and your wing mirror ("an inch"), while at the same time moving out to the crown of the road ... I call shenanigans.

I agree though, in the event of an accident he / she would have come off much worse. All road users need to look out for and accomodate each other.

guil

yeah but common sense should tell somone not to fly up the inside of a car doin any sort of speed

Stark

Andrew33 wrote: »

That is an incredibly stupid statement, do you drive? how far does a car travel in 2 seconds at 120kph? almost 70 metres, add reaction time on top and you could be in a collision before you even got your foot on the brake.
I'm a good enough driver to cope with a moments distraction but not everybody out there is as good as me.

Well then, keep your eyes on the road and stop staring at the cyclist. And collision with what exactly, do you normally drive 70 metres from the car in front while travelling at 120km/hr?

red menace wrote: »

How do you think any accidents happen?

Glance down at the phone for a second, change radio station, or look across at a guy on a bike on a hard shoulder, look back up after a second to realise someone has pulled out in front of you or slammed on the brakes.

120 KM/H = 33.33 m/s .

Your car is travelling at 108 feet per second.

Not giving yourself much time/distance to react.

Of course you shouldn't be distracted but things happen all the time and do you not think one less distraction source on the motor way is a good thing?

Again, keep your eyes on the road and not on your mobile or your radio and you'll be fine. If you're too busy texting, then you shouldn't be on the motorway.

You should not be craning your head 90 degrees to look at a guy on a bicycle in the hard shoulder. I see lots of stuff going on in the hard shoulder on a typical motorway drive. I don't spend five seconds with my eyes off the road in front to gawk at it. Traffic doesn't just pull out of empty space on a motorway, you should be aware that you're coming up to a merge and be paying extra attention. Likewise, if you see someone parked ahead, start preparing in advance for them to pull out in front of you. A bit of anticipation and you won't find yourself smashing into the back of someone when you go to blink

Andrew33 wrote:

I'm a good enough driver to cope with a moments distraction but not everybody out there is as good as me

If someone is clung to the bumper of a car in front of them or so oblivious to upcoming merges that they can't blink without crashing, then they shouldn't be on the road, end of story. Covering 33m/s isn't a problem if you leave enough distance between you and traffic ahead so you have time to react

I agree the cyclist shouldn't be on the motorway, but neither should the person who is so unable to drive that the mere sight of something unusual ahead will cause them to crash and kill someone. What happens if a car breaks down in the emergency lane?

glic71rods46t0

I think that some cyclists go on the motorway for no other reason than they're not supposed to!

seamus

I wouldn't say it's insanely dangerous, but the risks aren't really worth it. The speed disparity is so great that if anyone swerves into the hard shoulder for whatever reason or just aren't paying attention, you're a goner. While you might be more likely to be actually struck by a car on city streets, you're less likely to die.

However in the case of roads where the go from N to M without any major junction or whatever (thinking of N4 and N11), I can see how it would be appealing to use the motorway for a couple of KM to your exit rather than take a 10KM detour through backroads to get to your destination.

Wind is your biggest factor though - both the blowy stuff and from passing trucks. You can feel it on a motorbike when you're travelling past them. God knows the impact from a truck passing you, going 60-80km/h faster than you are.

As for what you'd do, really up to you. If he's doing it, he's thought about the risks. Being caught and warned by the Gardai today won't stop him from doing it tomorrow.