Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Does this not mean that only contraflow and cycle tracks in pedestrianised areas are mandatory? I understand this to mean that if you are in a pedestrianised area, you have to use the track, but roads are not pedestrianised.

"only use of contraflow cycle track and of any cycle track in pedestrianised area is mandatory"

Kaisr Sose

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

A bus with a double deck or a bus with standing passengers is legally limited to 65km/h which is below the speed many cyclists would experience close passes on ordinary roads.

That's interesting. I have seen these types of busses exceeding that frequently. Never seen a bus stopped for speeding.

Tombo2001

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

That's interesting. I have seen these types of busses exceeding that frequently. Never seen a bus stopped for speeding.

Its hard to know though - a double decker at 60km hr, or a truck, will appear to be going very very fast.

Its difficult to judge unless you are in a car beside it at the same speed.

looie

Chuchote wrote: »

None, as I understand it. By definition, isn't a bus lane also a cycle lane?

It's time for cyclists to start using helmetcams as the norm. They're not dear, and they may save lives.

I don't wear a helmet but like the idea of having a camera. Is there one out there that I could just attach to my handlebar?

D3PO

looie wrote: »

Chuchote wrote: »

None, as I understand it. By definition, isn't a bus lane also a cycle lane?

It's time for cyclists to start using helmetcams as the norm. They're not dear, and they may save lives.

I don't wear a helmet but like the idea of having a camera. Is there one out there that I could just attach to my handlebar?

Yep get a camera that attached to a go pro mount and attach it to your handlebars. most cameras will take this kind of mount.

Id also add you really should invest in a helmet. You cant put a price on your life and a helmet could very well save it at some point.

Wishbone Ash

looie wrote: »

I don't wear a helmet but like the idea of having a camera. Is there one out there that I could just attach to my handlebar?

Most are inter-changeable AFAIK. The advantage of one on a helmet is that it's filming where you are looking.

mp31

D3PO wrote: »

decided to cycle into work for the first time this morning. A$$hole bus driver of a 46A did his utmost to kill me passing me while beeping and shutting the door on me to the point my pedal clipped the bus. I could easily have been dragged under the wheels.

Ring Dublin Bus to make a complaint even if you don't have your own video footage. Tell them the route, the bus number, the time of the incident and they will be able to locate the driver and hopefully the video footage from the on-board video cameras. Get them to ring you back with a case number and make a call to Traffic Watch with that case number to report the incident to the Garda.

Kaisr Sose

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Its hard to know though - a double decker at 60km hr, or a truck, will appear to be going very very fast.

Its difficult to judge unless you are in a car beside it at the same speed.

I have a pretty good perception / judge of speed. Also, when you see these vehicles going at the same or high speed then other traffic either the other traffic is going slow for no reason (not my experience) or they are going faster than they should be.

tomasrojo

D3PO wrote: »

Id also add you really should invest in a helmet. You cant put a price on your life and a helmet could very well save it at some point.

We do have a thread that teases out (and bickers tediously) over this issue:

As Ben Goldacre said: "I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that."

tomasrojo

Charli Loose Snowball wrote: »

Does this not mean that only contraflow and cycle tracks in pedestrianised areas are mandatory? I understand this to mean that if you are in a pedestrianised area, you have to use the track, but roads are not pedestrianised.

"only use of contraflow cycle track and of any cycle track in pedestrianised area is mandatory"

This is beyond any reasonable doubt what Varadkar intended when he wrote the new statutory instrument: no cycle tracks are mandatory for cyclists to use, apart from cycle tracks that go through pedestrian zones, and cycle tracks situated in contraflow bus lanes.

cython

tomasrojo wrote: »

This is beyond any reasonable doubt what Varadkar intended when he wrote the new statutory instrument: no cycle tracks are mandatory for cyclists to use, apart from cycle tracks that go through pedestrian zones, and cycle tracks situated in contraflow bus lanes.

My understanding is that the SI refers to contraflow cycle tracks, not cycle tracks in contraflow bus lanes. Bicycles are already allowed into contraflow bus lanes, but the provision in this act refers to contraflow cycle tracks on a normal one-way street, so that at least bicycles travelling against traffic in them are under an onus to do so in a controlled manner. Slightly ironic that you prefaced it with "beyond any reasonable doubt", as an aside

tomasrojo

cython wrote: »

My understanding is that the SI refers to contraflow cycle tracks, not cycle tracks in contraflow bus lanes. Bicycles are already allowed into contraflow bus lanes, but the provision in this act refers to contraflow cycle tracks on a normal one-way street, so that at least bicycles travelling against traffic in them are under an onus to do so in a controlled manner. Slightly ironic that you prefaced it with "beyond any reasonable doubt", as an aside

Yes, you're right. My mistake. Writing off the top of my head.

The "beyond reasonable doubt" is a reference to the notion that the current SI by accident or by intent makes tracks obligatory to use in all circumstances. It is beyond reasonable doubt that the minister intended his SI to make them not mandatory to use, with two exceptions, and if the text says differently, it is because of ambiguity of language, which can be resolved by referring to the, in this instance, perfectly clear intentions of the then minister.

Roland27

tomasrojo wrote: »

Yes, you're right. My mistake. Writing off the top of my head.

The "beyond reasonable doubt" is a reference to the notion that the current SI by accident or by intent makes tracks obligatory to use in all circumstances. It is beyond reasonable doubt that the minister intended his SI to make them not mandatory to use, with two exceptions, and if the text says differently, it is because of ambiguity of language, which can be resolved by referring to the, in this instance, perfectly clear intentions of the then minister.

tomasrojo / cython: thats very helpful, was very unclear on use of cycle tracks, thanks very much.

cython

tomasrojo wrote: »

Yes, you're right. My mistake. Writing off the top of my head.

The "beyond reasonable doubt" is a reference to the notion that the current SI by accident or by intent makes tracks obligatory to use in all circumstances. It is beyond reasonable doubt that the minister intended his SI to make them not mandatory to use, with two exceptions, and if the text says differently, it is because of ambiguity of language, which can be resolved by referring to the, in this instance, perfectly clear intentions of the then minister.

Ah yeah, I completely knew what you were getting at with the "beyond reasonable doubt" qualifier, but couldn't resist the smart ass opportunity when it sat up like that :pac:

tomasrojo

Roland27 wrote: »

tomasrojo / cython: thats very helpful, was very unclear on use of cycle tracks, thanks very much.

No problem. Irishcycle.com has a lot of coverage of this story (think he broke the story about the Department of Transport claim that Varadkar had never rescinded obligatory use), and he doesn't make basic factual errors the way I just did!

tomasrojo

cython wrote: »

Ah yeah, I completely knew what you were getting at with the "beyond reasonable doubt" qualifier, but couldn't resist the smart ass opportunity when it sat up like that :pac:

As a holder of a smart-ass licence myself, I know they can be revoked for passing up sitters like that.

WAPAIC

I'd love to organise a day of "action" where a large number of cyclists around the country fix some sort of camera to their head/helmet/bike and actually report everything that happened that day. Don't go looking for it, don't be a plonker, just report something if it happens, however small.

Corca Baiscinn

D3PO, Robert Foster, Cram, and maybe someone else, (just taking last 24 hours of this thread) the scenarios you are describing are shocking in the extreme. The Min for Justice, Min for Transport, Garda, Dub Bus Management and Unions all need to make it clear that it is NEVER ok for a bus-driver to take the law into his/her own hands, act as an enforcer, endanger a cyclist etc etc etc. How to get them to do that though, whether jointly or separately? By all means complain to Dub Bus, Traffic Watch, etc but would any of you be willing to go public and have your story covered by one of the more sympathetic journalists who cycles, ie Cathal Mc Coille, Matt Cooper, Ronan somebody from IT? Alternatively, or also, could you lobby your TD from FG or Indep to set up a meeting with Shane Ross or F Fitzgerald? Posting on Boards elicits a lot of sympathy and fellow-feeling from other "there but for the grace of God" cyclists but I don't think anything is going to change until we kick up an almighty fuss and get media attention. D3PO was it you who said you could so easily have gone under the wheel of the bus and been the next cycling statistic? Cram, you are so right re basic human decency being at stake here, never mind legality. Saw an interesting post today from Phl Skelton on those lines, that respect is due to us because of our humanity and doesn't have to be "earned" by good behaviour. Def looks like the "mandatory" use needs testing/amending asap too.

punisher5112

I would also like to add it ain't always the person in the vehicle.

I've been driving and had many many near misses of cyclists going on a rampage or just putting themselves into dangerous situations.

I've had them hold onto rear of vehicle at speed and while going around a bend or full turn go up the inside/outside where they could easily go under the rear wheels or even be pinned by the body of the large vehicles I would be driving.


Share the road and try and stay as safe as possible.

Earlier had an incident with a 4x4 towing a trailer with no lights jam on to try cause a collision, driver ended up wanting a fight words exchanged and few digs thrown..

Was well able for him and after he cooled down and all apologetic we continued on he was actually quite upset he had flown off the handle and changed his tune. Now have a new friend;-)

Corca Baiscinn

punisher5112 wrote: »

I would also like to add it ain't always the person in the vehicle.

I've been driving and had many many near misses of cyclists going on a rampage or just putting themselves into dangerous situations.

I've had them hold onto rear of vehicle at speed and while going around a bend or full turn go up the inside/outside where they could easily go under the rear wheels or even be pinned by the body of the large vehicles I would be driving.

Share the road and try and stay as safe as possible.

Right now, this thread is discussing serious punishment/intimidation attempts by drivers of large powerful vehicles on cyclists, so could we stick to that? Of course some cyclists are dicks as are some motorists, motor-cyclists, pedestrians etc but what cyclist X does/did when you were driving has no bearing on what happened to cyclists A, B and C in Fairview or on the N11.

Chuchote

Could we have a special thead for all "This cyclist did that" interpolations, the way there's one for all the people who want to fight about helmets?

punisher5112

I'm just giving a point that's all.

Last week was going past a cyclist safely when at next side road on the right car comes out as cyclist is at that point. I was amazed he stayed upright as he had to go off the road onto stones and rough grass. Stopped at roundabout see was he OK and he was very pissed off understandably.

Annie get your Run

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Cram, you are so right re basic human decency being at stake here, never mind legality. Saw an interesting post today from Phl Skelton on those lines, that respect is due to us because of our humanity and doesn't have to be "earned" by good behaviour. Def looks like the "mandatory" use needs testing/amending asap too.

Just on this, had a ridiculously close pass this evening. The car was so close I almost felt it skim me as she passed and naturally the bike wobbled with the draft. Of course she got stuck at the junction which was about 100m ahead, I cycled up beside her and said she had passed me far too closely and that I was a human being too, her response? What's that got to do with anything....!! There was no talking to her, as far as she was concerned she had done nothing wrong - I have to say I went off almost in tears with pure frustration - why do motorists have such little regard for their fellow road users? :mad: As far as I'm concerned we get no support from the government, RSA, Garda or local councils who have a duty of care to protect everyone. Things were good for about 5 mins after the publicity on the RPDL but they've actually gotten worse now. There's no chance I"m giving up the bike and I've been thinking about getting a camera for a wile now, I probably need to to just go and do that. I would never treat anyone else the way I'm treated daily on the road - I know it's not every motorist and there are plenty of great ones out there (I can't help feeling those ones are also cyclists...) but it's every.single.day.

Corca Baiscinn

https://www.facebook.com/stayinaliveat1.5/posts/1416976815032997:0

This is the Phil Skelton post re Respect I referred to earlier, from his FB page
You've often heard it in regard to cyclists..
We won't respect cyclists because THEY run red lights..THEY don't pay 'road tax'...THEY aren't insured etc...
Let's take a look 👀
You can walk out into the street, see hundreds of people whom you’ve never met before in your life, and you can respect them. You can let them do what they’re doing, wear what they’re wearing, say what they’re saying. It’s perfectly normal and natural and – by and large – everyone does this. It’s basic respect that we all have for each other by default.
Yet, somehow, many people seem to have a philosophical problem with extending this to the idea of driving in such a way as to simply ensure that these people stay alive.
EARNED BY WHOM?
Bicycle riders across the globe do not have a secret meeting place where THEY all decide to behave exactly the same. The notion of collective responsibility is just nuts..
If they’d never met, how can the driver have determined whether a particular cyclist had or had not “earned†sufficient respect.
If the idea of earning respect is ludicrous, the idea that it should be earned by others on a victim’s behalf is sheer lunacy.
If a teenager was stabbed to death in the street, would people comment to the effect that some other teenagers are rude and noisy, and teenagers need to earn respect?
If a woman was violently raped, would people comment to the effect that some other women are flirty and wear too few clothes, and women need to earn respect?
If a driver was fatally injured in a road rage attack, would people comment to the effect that some other drivers regularly exceed the speed limit, jump red lights, use mobile phones, tailgate, read the newspaper, fail to ensure their tyres are legal, are distracted by satnavs or park illegally, and drivers need to earn respect?
I suspect not..
Yet on many occasions, the death of a teenager, a woman or a driver who happens to be on a bicycle at the time can be hideously rationalised by some as unimportant, on the basis that some other people jump lights. Not even them – as if that might justify killing or injuring – but people who have nothing to do with them.
HOW HARD IS IT NOT TO KILL SOMEONE?
When behind the wheel of the car, contrary to what many would believe, people do know deep down what their vehicle can do when things go wrong. Consciously or not, they know it can easily kill: we all have the same basic instinct for the physics of life-threateningly fast and heavy objects and we’ve all been taught as children that you don’t step in front of a car because it will kill you. But, for whatever reason, people blank this out when they get behind the wheel. They don’t make the very easy and simple choice of bringing it to the front of their mind.
All it really takes to make people safe is to decide never to kill someone.
All it takes is to think about how you would feel if you did. To think about how you would feel if someone else killed your son, or your wife, or anyone for whom you cared deeply. All it takes is to think about that whenever you turn the ignition key.
Yes, for reasons I’ve yet to fathom, many people are reluctant to adopt this frame of mind. How hard is it to simply decide that the most important aspect of driving is not to kill?
RESPECT IS A CHOICE
Respect is not earned. Respect can – should – be voluntarily given, not least because those who need it may not have the opportunity to earn it. To respect people is a choice. In most aspects of life people choose to do so unquestioningly. Yet not on the road.
To use this excuse to diminish the value of lives lost on the road is cheap and morally bankrupt, and is a cover for a baffling reluctance to make just one decision: that not killing someone is the most important thing you will do today.
The most basic respect of all is surely to respect someone’s mere existence.
If you feel that such a fundamental level of respect needs to be earned, then you are a deeply dangerous human being.

looie

Annie get your Run wrote: »

why do motorists have such little regard for their fellow road users?

Don't necessarily disagree with you (had a car today paying no attention to the fact that a cycle lane existed, not fun) but at the same time the amount of cyclists breaking the lights was equally frustrating. Basically all road users just need to use some common sense and it would make a world of difference.

Danbo!

Annie get your Run wrote: »

...I have to say I went off almost in tears with pure frustration - why do motorists have such little regard for their fellow road users? :mad: ...

I know the feeling. I'm generally very calm and if I do end up talking to a driver I do my best to keep my cool and explain my point of view, but the last few weeks I've gotten very tense.

The accident where the poor girl was killed in templeogue and Friday's accident in Harolds cross are on my commute, and with these in mind I've been seeing some awful behaviour. Had a skip truck come into the bus lane inbound towards Emmet bridge this morning, no indication, no mirror checks. Just before he reaches the traffic jam, he realises the right lane is actually clear to go straight so darts out of the bus lane, again no indication, and must have been doing 55-60km/h over the bridge. In a bloody skip truck in rush hour traffic.

I was absolutely seething. It wasn't a close call but with his quick jerky driving any cyclist anywhere near him would have been taken out, it just wasnt possible in the timeframe for him to possibly check mirrors or blind spots. I really wanted to have a go at him given Friday's incident but I didnt want to get near him even stopped.

I f**king love commuting on the bike but I've found it very stressful recently.

punisher5112

Red mist sets in in a lot of cases.
Some would have terrible spaciail awareness.
Some do it as a punishment of sorts.
Some believe the road is there's and screw anyone that is in the way or could hold them up an extra few seconds.

Madness what goes on to be honest.

Teach it in school at a young age or things will never change.

Corca Baiscinn

He has also shared this post from PSNI who seem to be about to emulate WMP in having plain clothes police on bikes watching out for close passes but also for errant cyclists. Border Poll anyone!


PSNI CraigavonLike Page
Yesterday at 13:00 ·
Afternoon folks,

Cyclists. Never a topic that gets much attention on social media...yeah right!

Over the next while, you'll hopefully start to see "See the cyclist" logos appearing. This is an initiative started this week by our colleagues in Belfast but it sounds like a cracking good idea so we're already looking at how we can implement it down here.

This operation involves plain clothes officers and video evidence! Whilst that may sound fairly sneaky, it's actually pretty low tech, and very simple.

We're going to have officers out in plain clothes on bikes with cameras attached. They will be cycling around, posing as normal cyclists, but keeping an eye out for the 'close pass' when drivers don't give a safe space when overtaking cyclists, or when they force cyclists off a road. They'll also be looking out for any offences other cyclists commit. Running red lights, cycling on the footpath, cycling more than 2 abreast etc

Basically, if you take a chance and don't treat a cyclist with the respect and safety that you should, you could be on camera! We'll have uniformed colleagues nearby in support that will be called in to deal with any motorists or cyclists who are witnessed committing offences.

This operation, wherever it is in place, will have 2 phases. The first is education. Unless it's really dangerous, we won't be prosecuting people straight away. We'll be talking to as many drivers as possible and getting the message out there. That will soon be replaced with the second phase, prosecutions, tickets etc if it continues.

The roads are for everyone. There is no doubt that in the cyclist v motorist debate there are good and bad on both sides. This is about making our roads safer, sharing that road to zero, and lowering the number of casualties we have every year.

So what can you do? Well, it is called 'See The Cyclist'. We want cyclists to have lights fitted day and night, always being prepared for poor visibility. High viz clothing makes what is a small object a lot more visible. We also want cyclists to fit cameras. If you witness or are victim of any dangerous drivers, you can bring that footage to us.

Equally, drivers, it's about looking out for cyclists. Give them as much room as you would a car, remembering that they have as much right to be on the road as you do. If you have a dash cam or witness offences, you can do likewise and report it to us.

So beware. Next time you scrape by a bike with no consideration, it could be us!

M

#KeepingPeopleSafe

#ShareTheRoadToZero

#SeeTheCyclist

Fighting Tao

I love the replies that Craigavon PSNI give to people being idiots replying to their post as highlighted by Corca Baiscinn above. https://www.facebook.com/PSNI.Craigavon/photos/a.390441237658321.78651.380466805322431/1268144083221361/?type=3&theater

Annie get your Run

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I love the replies that Craigavon PSNI give to people being idiots replying to their post as highlighted by Corca Basicinn above. https://www.facebook.com/PSNI.Craigavon/photos/a.390441237658321.78651.380466805322431/1268144083221361/?type=3&theater

Lol, that's cheered me up am going to send that to RSA DOT and AGS tomorrow. For all the good it'll do!

Excellent article above too, certainly sums up how I feel most days.