Drivers on the phones: its getting scary!!

TheChizler

buffalo wrote: »

Seems logical that the burden falls on the motorist, no?

It absolutely should and does but unfortunately we can't always trust the motorist to carry out their responsibility. The only person you can control is yourself.

eeguy

buffalo wrote: »

The people who are operating vehicles that are complicated and dangerous enough to require two examinations to qualify you to drive, and are required to have insurance because of the amount of damage/injury/death they can cause?

As opposed to one that a 3 year old can operate?

Seems logical that the burden falls on the motorist, no?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Absolutely yes - the burden of responsibility SHOULD be put on the motorist not to run down any cyclist in front of them, regardless of what they have in or out of their ears.

If you choose not to wear earphones, that's your choice. If you want to impose your choice on others, you'd want to come up with some pretty compelling evidence.

So you've no problem putting the responsibility onto the motorist, even though motorists are the cause of near every pedestrian and cyclist death.
Seems a bit naive. Personally I don't trust a single road user, whether I'm driving or cycling. I take responsibility for my own safety and do my best to give myself the best possible chance to evade some idiot who's not paying attention. So the headphones come out and the hi-vis and helmet go on when I'm on my bike.

I'm not trying to impose anything on anyone, it's purely my opinion, but if I can improve my odds of getting to work in one piece then I'll do it.

CramCycle

eeguy wrote: »

Nope. I'm saying that in the interest of my safety and awareness, given that there's no quick way to see behind you when cycling, I don't wear headphones as they remove my ability to hear cars approaching behind me.

No quick way. Are you joking. Bar some serious neck or back problems, your neck is the obvious one, believe me it is quicker than looking at mirrors, and rocking back and forth to see round pillars and negate blind spots.

Plenty of modern cars are near silent nowadays, if your relying on your ears, you are doing it wrong.

eeguy

CramCycle wrote: »

No quick way. Are you joking. Bar some serious neck or back problems, your neck is the obvious one, believe me it is quicker than looking at mirrors, and rocking back and forth to see round pillars and negate blind spots.

Plenty of modern cars are near silent nowadays, if your relying on your ears, you are doing it wrong.

hah, a glance at the mirror is slower than turning your head and body 180 degrees? Sure... try again.
No modern car is silent. Even electrics have road noise.

tedpan

Right lane and indicating right, turns left. Has a great chat, then drives where he wants.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BelREtSkX30

AndrewJRenko

eeguy wrote: »

So the headphones come out and the hi-vis and helmet go on when I'm on my bike.

I'm not trying to impose anything on anyone, it's purely my opinion, but if I can improve my odds of getting to work in one piece then I'll do it.

That's your choice, but there is no evidence that any of those measures have any positive safety effect. Just for the record, I do pretty much the same as you, but let's not pretend that it has any huge impact.

CramCycle

eeguy wrote: »

hah, a glance at the mirror is slower than turning your head and body 180 degrees? Sure... try again.
No modern car is silent. Even electrics have road noise.

3 mirrors, plus blind spots. It takes me less than two seconds on a bike and that is overestimating the time. In a car it probably takes about 3 seconds (although many drivers don;t bother their hole).

In the two seconds I get nearly 360degrees with no obstruction. In the three seconds I get probably 300degrees and the hope I moved enough to cover all the blind spots.

As for the road buzz you are referring to, that disappears completely on a windy day and guess what. Ireland is windy on occasion.

Your entitled to your opinion about headphones, rarely use them myself but from a common sense point of view, I would have tolerated cyclist and motorists needing the same attention/focus but to say driving requires less is borderline insane.

Admittedly, alot of what good drivers do in cars is almost reflex but still, I just really hope you haven't thought this through because otherwise, well it means you just haven't thought this through.

Pinch Flat

eeguy wrote: »

hah, a glance at the mirror is slower than turning your head and body 180 degrees? Sure... try again.
No modern car is silent. Even electrics have road noise.

You mean a mirror that’s going to be shaking and vibrating all over the place? Cars are damped due to suspension - a mirror does not shake about so is a viable option.

A bike on an R or L road with a coarse dressing surface - a mirror is going to be next to useless. A quick glance behind will do. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it as they say.

I find I bring this into my driving as well - it’s almost instinctive now that I glance over my shoulder before changing lanes on motorways in particular.

eeguy

CramCycle wrote: »

3 mirrors, plus blind spots. It takes me less than two seconds on a bike and that is overestimating the time. In a car it probably takes about 3 seconds (although many drivers don;t bother their hole).

It takes a fraction of a second to check a mirror. You barely move your head. Maybe 1 second to check a blind spot, which you do while checking the mirror :rolleyes:

Eamonnator

Pinch Flat wrote: »

You mean a mirror that’s going to be shaking and vibrating all over the place? Cars are damped due to suspension - a mirror does not shake about so is a viable option.

A bike on an R or L road with a coarse dressing surface - a mirror is going to be next to useless. A quick glance behind will do. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it as they say.

I find I bring this into my driving as well - it’s almost instinctive now that I glance over my shoulder before changing lanes on motorways in particular.

That glance is called the lifesaver.

CramCycle

eeguy wrote: »

It takes a fraction of a second to check a mirror. You barely move your head. Maybe 1 second to check a blind spot, which you do while checking the mirror :rolleyes:

There are three mirrors and in most cars at least four blind spots (actually six but typically moving correctly covers two of the six inadvertently). You need to make nearly the same head movement as a cyclist, as well as focus on each mirror, as well as move your body back and forth to cover them all. A cyclist can do it all in one movement.
Which takes longer? I made up the times to give a comparison. If you still think glancing round on a bike takes longer than glancing round I'm a car, then there is no point talking to you about this because several basic concepts are not getting across from me, and I apologise for that

Pinch Flat

eeguy wrote: »

It takes a fraction of a second to check a mirror. You barely move your head. Maybe 1 second to check a blind spot, which you do while checking the mirror :rolleyes:

Have you used a mirror when cycling and compared it to awareness without one where you’re relying on over shoulder “life saver” glances? Is this personal opinion or something you can back up with some sort of evidence?

eeguy

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Have you used a mirror when cycling and compared it to awareness without one where you’re relying on over shoulder “life saver” glances? Is this personal opinion or something you can back up with some sort of evidence?

What sort of evidence would you like? A timed video of me looking in mirrors?

The last time I saw a mirror on a bicycle was when McDonald's had them in a happy meal. I think it was Batman. And I think they got in trouble cause kids were too busy looking at themselves to cycle straight.

Macy0161

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I find I bring this into my driving as well - it’s almost instinctive now that I glance over my shoulder before changing lanes on motorways in particular.

The over the shoulder blind spot checks were part of my driver training, and I'm pretty sure they were a potential pass/ fail thing when I took my test (albeit in the UK).

eeguy wrote: »

It takes a fraction of a second to check a mirror. You barely move your head. Maybe 1 second to check a blind spot, which you do while checking the mirror :rolleyes:

Checking a blind spot is very easy, although very under utilised by motorists these days - it's just a turn of the head. In fact, it's the exact same movement as a cyclist checking over their shoulder.

But somehow it's safe for a motorist who may have music blaring, but inherently unsafe for a cyclist to rely on it who may have ear phones in (Or be deaf)?

droidus

It takes less than a second to look over your shoulder. Its the primary safety check for every manoeuvre on the bike. You don't even need to turn your head completely, even a slight turn can give you peripheral vision of what's coming up behind.

Rural cyclists may have some use for hearing, but in the city your ears are pretty much useless due to the constant noise of passing traffic. Observation is 100% more effective as a system for avoiding hazards.

Ray Bloody Purchase

droidus wrote: »

It takes less than a second to look over your shoulder. Its the primary safety check for every manoeuvre on the bike. You don't even need to turn your head completely, even a slight turn can give you peripheral vision of what's coming up behind.

I think some cyclists think that once you use a hand signal, you're free to change lanes/turn.

Did anyone ever find themselves saying out loud 'Jesus fcuking Christ' at what other cyclists have done on their bikes? On two different days i've seen the same cyclist change lanes on Westmoreland Street into the path of a bus that has been moving relatively quickly. No look over the shoulder, just stuck the hand out and straight into the path of a bus moving at speed. Some people are only there but for the grace of god. Or have a bloody death wish.

I also saw a guy cycle through red light on Templelogue Bridge yesterday on his phone at very low speed. Not a fcuking care in the world, having a grand old chat.

doozerie

The fixation on headphones while cycling has been done to death. Or so I thought anyway, that dead horse seems to be a magnet for flogging though.

Here is a contentious theory: people who are determined to cycle in a manner which is unsafe (for them or others) will do so whether they are wearing headphone/earphones or not, and whether equipped with 15 ears or just 2. In fact, give them an extra set of eyes in the back of their head and they’d conspire to see feck all with them too, ‘cos there is no remedy for being a thick.

Personally, until my ears develop the magical powers they’d need to foresee dangerous behaviour on the part of those not in my immediate line of sight, and the ability to swat away such sources of danger (Hulk smash style. But with awesome ears), I’ll continue to believe that wearing earphones while cycling will not “be the death of me”. Not wearing a sensible vest, on the other hand…

rubadub

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

just stuck the hand out and straight into the path of a bus moving at speed. Some people are only there but for the grace of god. Or have a bloody death wish.

I do notice this, and most often it is someone who at a glance looks totally safety concious -or thinks they are. They can have lights turned on in the daytime, high viz jacket, additional high viz, helmet, cycling "upright". Like something out of an RSA or garda advert for the "ideal safety concious cyclist", then out comes the arm and a split second later they are darting across in front of a truck or van.

Ray Bloody Purchase

rubadub wrote: »

I do notice this, and most often it is someone who at a glance looks totally safety concious -or thinks they are. They can have lights turned on in the daytime, high viz jacket, additional high viz, helmet, cycling "upright". Like something out of an RSA or garda advert for the "ideal safety concious cyclist", then out comes the arm and a split second later they are darting across in front of a truck or van.

When i was doing my driving test years ago, my instructor told me that to make sure the tester knows you're looking at the mirror, you've to exaggerate your glances.

That always stuck with me, i do the same when i'm on the bike. I'm probably over doing it. I'm just afraid that i'll go down a bloody pothole or run up the arse of a car when i'm doing it now.

07Lapierre

droidus wrote: »

It takes less than a second to look over your shoulder. Its the primary safety check for every manoeuvre on the bike. You don't even need to turn your head completely, even a slight turn can give you peripheral vision of what's coming up behind.

Rural cyclists may have some use for hearing, but in the city your ears are pretty much useless due to the constant noise of passing traffic. Observation is 100% more effective as a system for avoiding hazards.

I think all newbie cyclists should have to wear headphones while cycling. Big noise canceling ones! It would discourage them from using their hearing and encourage them to be more observant!

doozerie

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

That always stuck with me, i do the same when i'm on the bike. I'm probably over doing it. I'm just afraid that i'll go down a bloody pothole or run up the arse of a car when i'm doing it now.

For far too many cars their arse is on the inside.