Drivers on the phones: its getting scary!!

Eamonnator

Gavlor wrote: »

I’m club cyclist so don’t rip in to me but what’s not the deal with the amount of cyclists with earphones in?? Surely as irresponsible and dangerous as idiot drivers on their phones?

I think a more appropriate comparison would be the driver of a car listening to his radio

AndrewJRenko

ED E wrote: »

They still hear just as much as motorists.

They hear MORE than motorists with the windows up and no audio playing.

07Lapierre

Gavlor wrote: »

I’m club cyclist so don’t rip in to me but what’s not the deal with the amount of cyclists with earphones in?? Surely as irresponsible and dangerous as idiot drivers on their phones?

Your a club cyclist? So when your out on a club spin with your club mates, do you talk to each other? Have you ever had difficulty hearing what they are saying? Sometimes I find it hard to hear what others are saying because of traffic, wind noise, etc.

When I'm out cycling on my own, I hear cars approaching me from behind all the time. A car coming towards me that is going to pass me with 1.5 meters of space sounds exactly the same as a car that's going to pass with a few mm's to spare.

As others have said, in ear type earbuds allow a lot of ambient noise into your ears, so even if your listening to AC/DC's "Highway to Hell" at full volume, you'll still hear cars approaching you.

SchrodingersCat

Gavlor wrote: »

I’m club cyclist so don’t rip in to me but what’s not the deal with the amount of cyclists with earphones in?? Surely as irresponsible and dangerous as idiot drivers on their phones?

It's dangerous, but I would disagree and say that they are not as dangerous. If you are driving in a closed windowed vehicle, you cannot hear the traffic either. If you are a motorcyclist wearing a full helmet, you cannot hear the traffic aswell. Similarly with a pedestrian wearing headphones. However, if you are on a call, you have to engage with the caller which is a bigger distraction than passively listening to music/radio.

eeguy

Eamonnator wrote: »

I think a more appropriate comparison would be the driver of a car listening to his radio

I suppose the levels on concentration to drive a car are lower than cycling. You just sit down and push the accelerator, which (should) give more time for observation and mirrors, which cyclists dont have.
I'd be wary of cylcing listening to music, especially as I'm more vunerable on the road.

buffalo

eeguy wrote: »

I suppose the levels on concentration to drive a car are lower than cycling. You just sit down and push the accelerator, which (should) give more time for observation and mirrors, which cyclists dont have.

This is the funniest thing I've read all day! :pac::pac::pac:

magicbastarder

it's only half eight!

CramCycle

eeguy wrote: »

I suppose the levels on concentration to drive a car are lower than cycling.

I cannot tell if you are being serious or not, I really hope you are truly just a hilariously sly and witty individual because the other option is unfortunate.

Pinch Flat

Following the road safety authority Facebook page, joe “road tax” public is having conniptions about cyclists using the roads legally ie cycling two abreast. It’s to do with the latest MPDL publicity.

The gas thing is they’re happy to document this on their camera phones and post it on the page. Drivers illegally taking photos of cyclists using the roads legally. The worlds gone mad joe.

Kaisr Sose

eeguy wrote: »

I suppose the levels on concentration to drive a car are lower than cycling. You just sit down and push the accelerator, which (should) give more time for observation and mirrors, which cyclists dont have.
I'd be wary of cylcing listening to music, especially as I'm more vunerable on the road.

This driving thing is so easy, no need to worry about balancing or falling off, just sit back, relax, pour a coffee and enjoy the view

doozerie

eeguy wrote:

I suppose the levels on concentration to drive a car are lower than cycling. You just sit down and push the accelerator, which (should) give more time for observation and mirrors, which cyclists dont have. 

Airline pilots are extreme cases of that. They are surrounded by numerous instruments which actively monitor various aspects of the plane and its surroundings for them. In fact, auto-pilot means the planes can even fly themselves at times. No rear-view mirror though, the reckless hoors.

Yet planes are often manned by two pilots, the pilots are not allowed to be drunk on the job, they are probably not allowed to watch YouTube while “flying” or spend hours at a time in the cockpit fully engaged in playing “Pin the I-am-an-arrogant-dick sign on Michael O’Leary”. Mid-flight naps of both pilots would probably be frowned upon too.

It’s as if there is a very real and serious burden of responsibility on the people in charge of big lumps of metal, whether they be in the sky or on the roads. It’s health & safety gone mad, Ted.

…or maybe your post just neatly summarises the kind of complacency society chooses to adopt when it comes to driving, the kind of illogical thinking/risk assessment that leads to things like people being afraid of dying in a plane crash while happily climbing into a car every day without even a thought to the actual statistical risks of both. You decide.

Macy0161

SchrodingersCat wrote: »

It's dangerous, but I would disagree and say that they are not as dangerous.

Dangerous to whom is also important, if you deem both dangerous*. Distracted driving is as or more dangerous to others as it is to yourself. If you take headphones as dangerous while cycling, who is the person putting in harms way?

*I personally don't accept it's dangerous. Less than optimal if you've both ears covered, but not dangerous. I used to cycle with one ear bud in (on the inside), and I don't believe it had any impact on my or others safety. Should the deaf be banned from cycling? What about into a strong headwind/ fast descent, where wind noise comes into play? I just think headphones is just another false equivalence thing.

TheChizler

(Correct me if I'm wrong eeguy, but) I think they're saying there's less concentration taken up by staying balanced/braking without falling off and it's less likely that another vehicle is going to try to occupy the same space as you when you're in an enclosed vehicle. Not saying you need to observe your surroundings less at all. Though when on a bike I do reserve additional concentration for watching out for people who would be more reckless around me than other cars.

Effects

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

This driving thing is so easy, no need to worry about balancing or falling off, just sit back, relax, pour a coffee and enjoy the view

If you get an automatic car then you've got an extra foot and hand so you can prepare a sandwich while you drive.

CramCycle

TheChizler wrote: »

(Correct me if I'm wrong eeguy, but) I think they're saying there's less concentration taken up by staying balanced/braking without falling off and it's less likely that another vehicle is going to try to occupy the same space as you when you're in an enclosed vehicle. Not saying you need to observe your surroundings less at all. Though when on a bike I do reserve additional concentration for watching out for people who would be more reckless around me than other cars.

These are all things that once learned require no real high level concentration, and certainly not enough to take your high level concentration off the road. In fact it would be less concentration than that needed to change gears, read the road at higher speeds, look around A pillars, do lifesavers, cover blindspots and so on.

Just because you are driving forward doesn't mean you shouldn't be looking all around you, all of the time.

eeguy

CramCycle wrote: »

I cannot tell if you are being serious or not, I really hope you are truly just a hilariously sly and witty individual because the other option is unfortunate.

Urgh, what I'm trying to say is you've far more mental capacity to be aware of your surroundings when you're driving a car.

You're less worried about patches of water on the road, rubbish, pothoes, pedestrians putting one foot off the footpath etc etc etc. So IMO it's irresponsible to listen to music when cycling as you need your hearing to build a picture of what's around you, which you don't need in a car since you have mirrors and more time to be aware of your surroundings.

07Lapierre

eeguy wrote: »

Urgh, what I'm trying to say is you've far more mental capacity to be aware of your surroundings when you're driving a car.

You're less worried about patches of water on the road, rubbish, pothoes, pedestrians putting one foot off the footpath etc etc etc. So IMO it's irresponsible to listen to music when cycling as you need your hearing to build a picture of what's around you, which you don't need in a car since you have mirrors and more time to be aware of your surroundings.

You can SEE Water on the Road, you can SEE potholes, you can SEE pedestrians.
Is it also irresponsible to cycle into a headwind? (very hard to hear anything but wind) What about cycling when its raining?( all you can hear is Tyre roar from passing vehicles)

Have you ever actually cycled while listening to music?

CramCycle

eeguy wrote: »

Urgh, what I'm trying to say is you've far more mental capacity to be aware of your surroundings when you're driving a car. .

I appreciate that is your opinion but you are driving a vehicle of lcomparatively large mass (to others on the road) at fast speeds (compared to pedestrians and cyclists) therefore equalling far greater force. If you think you have more mental capacity to be aware of your surroundings than I counter you are wrong as you have alot more to be aware of and it is far harder to be aware of them due to many of the factors in my previous post.

If you really believe that it does not take greater focus and concentration to drive than it does to cycle, then I would suggest you sit back and assess your awareness of your surroundings if you are a driver.

You're less worried about patches of water on the road, rubbish, pothoes, pedestrians putting one foot off the footpath etc etc etc. So IMO it's irresponsible to listen to music when cycling as you need your hearing to build a picture of what's around you, which you don't need in a car since you have mirrors and more time to be aware of your surroundings.

Potholes could be hiding craters that will rip the wheel out of your hands, as for rubbish and potholes you approach them typically at far lower speeds in a bicycle so while more dangerous, I find I have more time to be aware of them. Finally, pedestrian stepping out, this really is something you need to be looking out for in a car, happens daily in Dublin, and other towns/cities. Suppose the best way to look at it would be to look at the accident statistics and see how many cyclists have killed pedestrians through the cyclists fault versus how many pedestrians have been killed by motorists who were deemed to be at fault. I think you will find the numbers heavily skewed in one direction.

CramCycle

07Lapierre wrote: »

You can SEE Water on the Road, you can SEE potholes, you can SEE pedestrians.
Is it also irresponsible to cycle into a headwind? (very hard to hear anything but wind) What about cycling when its raining?( all you can hear is Tyre roar from passing vehicles)

Have you ever actually cycled while listening to music?

I rarely use headphones but find it far easier in a headwind to listen with headphones in as they drown out the wind compared to other ambient noise, just my opinion though.

eeguy

07Lapierre wrote: »

You can SEE Water on the Road, you can SEE potholes, you can SEE pedestrians.
Is it also irresponsible to cycle into a headwind? (very hard to hear anything but wind) What about cycling when its raining?( all you can hear is Tyre roar from passing vehicles)

Have you ever actually cycled while listening to music?

I have a few times, and I stopped because it was lowering my awareness of my surroundings and I couldn't hear cars coming behind me.

CramCycle wrote: »

I appreciate that is your opinion but you are driving a vehicle of lcomparatively large mass (to others on the road) at fast speeds (compared to pedestrians and cyclists) therefore equalling far greater force. If you think you have more mental capacity to be aware of your surroundings than I counter you are wrong as you have alot more to be aware of and it is far harder to be aware of them due to many of the factors in my previous post.
If you really believe that it does not take greater focus and concentration to drive than it does to cycle, then I would suggest you sit back and assess your awareness of your surroundings if you are a driver.

Looking around A pillars and covering bling spots are easier than turning your head to look behind you with the wind and rain in your eyes while negotiating rush hour traffic.

Potholes could be hiding craters that will rip the wheel out of your hands,

Many of these around? I've never seen one. Far rarer than slippy LUAS tracks, slippy rubbish, slippy manhole covers, flooded drains, car parked in cycle lanes etc etc. All hazards that cyclists deal with regularly. You may have a few extra seconds to deal with them, but it's still a hazard that throws many riders.

Finally, pedestrian stepping out, this really is something you need to be looking out for in a car, happens daily in Dublin, and other towns/cities. Suppose the best way to look at it would be to look at the accident statistics and see how many cyclists have killed pedestrians through the cyclists fault versus how many pedestrians have been killed by motorists who were deemed to be at fault. I think you will find the numbers heavily skewed in one direction.

Of course it does, but pedestrians have an easier time seeing a car than a bike. Hence why they run ads to encourage people to be more aware of cyclists. Happens regularly during rush hour that someone walks onto the road to avoid a busy footpath or some obstacle. I'm well aware the consequences are fatal if a car hits, but I've had dozens of people I've had to shout at for walking out in front of my bike, much rarer when I'm driving.

Eamonnator

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

This driving thing is so easy, no need to worry about balancing or falling off, just sit back, relax, pour a coffee and enjoy the view

and watch videos on UTube on your phone.
It's a doddle

CramCycle

eeguy wrote: »

Looking around A pillars and covering bling spots are easier than turning your head to look behind you with the wind and rain in your eyes while negotiating rush hour traffic.

Really, alot of drivers seem to struggle with this basic and apparently easy skill that requires no deep level concentration. It is almost as if they forget to do it. Whereas on a bike, for me, I don't forget because there is nothing impeding my view, if I struggled to turn my neck, I might either stop or adapt my style of riding but so far it is a non issue, maybe others are different and I am unique in this regard.

Many of these around?

There used to be loads although certainly reduced in recent years. Take a drive around the blessington lakes at the minute, well, actually, don't because it is damn near impossible.

I've never seen one. Far rarer than slippy LUAS tracks, slippy rubbish, slippy manhole covers, flooded drains, car parked in cycle lanes etc etc. All hazards that cyclists deal with regularly. You may have a few extra seconds to deal with them, but it's still a hazard that throws many riders.

But most cyclist see these things well in advance, and earphones certainly have no affect on any of the things you mentioned. Luas track s do not appear from nowhere, they are stationary. If you are concerned about slipping, dismount and walk across. Same with manhole covers, and I have slipped on a few. As for flooded drains, again, nothing to do with earphones and common sense will tell you not to ride over them. Cars parked in cycle lanes, while ****ty, are stationary, observe, indicate, move around them. They shouldn't be there but it is no different than a car overtaking a parked car. You have no extra seconds because you are wearing headphones, in fact every event you have mentioned would in no way be changed by the use of headphones or not as they are all visual cues.

Of course it does, but pedestrians have an easier time seeing a car than a bike. Hence why they run ads to encourage people to be more aware of cyclists. Happens regularly during rush hour that someone walks onto the road to avoid a busy footpath or some obstacle. I'm well aware the consequences are fatal if a car hits, but I've had dozens of people I've had to shout at for walking out in front of my bike, much rarer when I'm driving.

Take the lane or don't ride close to the footpath will sort out alot of that.

07Lapierre

eeguy wrote: »

I have a few times, and I stopped because it was lowering my awareness of my surroundings and I couldn't hear cars coming behind me.

Your not missing much...they all sound the same. Much more pleasant to listen to Music or the radio.

magicbastarder

owners of nissan leafs will be objecting to that.

magicbastarder

or should that be 'nissan leaves'?

AndrewJRenko

eeguy wrote: »

So IMO it's irresponsible to listen to music when cycling as you need your hearing to build a picture of what's around you, which you don't need in a car since you have mirrors and more time to be aware of your surroundings.

Regardless of the hearing/earphone issues, are you really equating the responsibility of a 1-4 tonne vehicle at 20-120 kmph with a 10kg bike going at 10-20 kmph? The level of responsibility for a car driver is just slightly different, which is why we require motorists to pass a test, hold a licence and pay insurance.

eeguy

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Regardless of the hearing/earphone issues, are you really equating the responsibility of a 1-4 tonne vehicle at 20-120 kmph with a 10kg bike going at 10-20 kmph? The level of responsibility for a car driver is just slightly different, which is why we require motorists to pass a test, hold a licence and pay insurance.

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.

Are you saying that cyclists should be less responsible? Should the burden of responsibility be put on the motorist instead of the cyclist?

07Lapierre

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.

What's your obsession with knowing what's going on behind you?

If your cycling along and you hear a car coming towards you...how do you know that car is going to pass you or drive straight into the back of you?

buffalo

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.

Are you saying that cyclists should be less responsible? Should the burden of responsibility be put on the motorist instead of the cyclist?

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

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.

Are you saying that cyclists should be less responsible? Should the burden of responsibility be put on the motorist instead of the cyclist?

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.