Had my first crash this morning

fletch · 16-07-2009 08:02AM #1

Coming up Camden Street, cycling parallel to a car (can't remember make/model), when all of a sudden the car decides to turn left down a small alley. I clip the front wing/bumper, bike flicks up into the air, somehow I manage to land on both tyres, bit of a wiggle and I stop, shaken, cut ankle but alive.

I look behind and the lady has stopped, she asks if I'm okay, other than a cut ankle, I'm fine so I wave to say I'm okay and I'm on my way again. Gears are a bit of a mess but that should be easy to sort and the saddle isn't sitting right.
Big wake up call though!

kenmc · 16-07-2009 08:07AM

Wow, you were steeped.
Although the way I read it, you make it seem like your fault ("I clipped the front wing/bumper" rather than "she clipped me with...")
Anyway, there's a cycle land and/or bus lane there, so it sounds like she's totally at fault if she turned left into you. I still would have taken her details in case there's damage to the bike that you didn't see - e.g. if the rear hanger got bent or something and needs replacing.
Glad you're still upright though.

Lumen · 16-07-2009 08:09AM

Fletch, earlier.

seamus · 16-07-2009 08:10AM

fletch wrote: »

I look behind and the lady has stopped, she asks if I'm okay, other than a cut ankle, I'm fine so I wave to say I'm okay and I'm on my way again.

Urgh. Good to hear you're alright. It's hard to think straight when your mind suddenly went OHFÚCKOHFÚCKOHFÚCKOHFÚCKOHFÚCKOHFÚCKOHFÚCKOHFÚCK, but it's always good to get someone's details - she may have damaged your mech or your derailleur hanger. Not a ridiculously expensive fix (unless you're running XTR or Dura-Ace), but a cost nonetheless.

I'm always wary of cycling parallel to cars. I try to make a point or either getting in front of them (into the driver's vision) or dropping behind them (where I'm in control). Not always possible though.

At least you managed to learn a lesson without hitting the deck. I wish I could say the same

fletch · 16-07-2009 08:16AM

kenmc wrote: »

Wow, you were steeped.
Although the way I read it, you make it seem like your fault ("I clipped the front wing/bumper" rather than "she clipped me with...")
Anyway, there's a cycle land and/or bus lane there, so it sounds like she's totally at fault if she turned left into you. I still would have taken her details in case there's damage to the bike that you didn't see - e.g. if the rear hanger got bent or something and needs replacing.
Glad you're still upright though.

I was pretty lucky alright....I kinda put the blame 50:50 but yeh I suppose I was on the bicycle lane and she should have seen me from the lights at Cuffe Street junction. Hopefully nothing is damaged now. In hindsight, yeh I probably should have got her details but I was running on adrenaline after it and not really thinking.

cgf · 16-07-2009 08:22AM

Actually saw that from a bus. Usually cycle to work but we have a work gig tonite so on the bus this morning..

I didn't catch the lead up as I was dozing away but from what I saw ye were very lucky - some fairly decent bike handling skills to stay upright as she gave ye a fair old clip but in fairness to her she stopped dead upon impact otherwise you may not have been so lucky.

I saw her lower her window and check if you were all right but the bus pulled off then so didn't see whether ye came back waving your fists

Good to hear you are ok.

Edit: The car looked like a Primera - it was silver coloured and the start of the reg was 04 D 50 for definite - the remainder was something like 432 but not 100% on the trailing digits but was a 5 digit number. I would say it was somebody on their regular route to work so if you loiter around the vicinity any morning you should be able to catchup with her, if needs be.

kenmc · 16-07-2009 08:22AM

Don't see how the blame could be 50:50. If it was a dual carriageway and she turned left into a car on the inside lane it would be 100% her fault. Same thing here.

Caroline_ie · 16-07-2009 08:23AM

Sorry to hear - that's some bike handling skills you have to land on your wheels

Cup of tea and a piece of cake ill make you better

blorg · 16-07-2009 08:25AM

Drivers have to make sure the cycle track is clear before executing a left turn across it. If a driver suddenly pulls into your path in front of you and you do not stop immediately it will indeed be the cyclist making the impact with the object that is now suddenly in front of them... doesn't mean it is the cyclist's fault. Having said that it is prudent to expect this behaviour, I always try to wary of any car beside me coming up to a left junction and will slow and be ready to stop if necessary.

fletch · 16-07-2009 08:27AM

blorg wrote: »

Drivers have to make sure the cycle track is clear before executing a left turn across it. If a driver suddenly pulls into your path in front of a cyclist and they do not stop immediately it will indeed be the cyclist making the impact with the object that is now suddenly in front of them... doesn't mean it is the cyclist's fault. Having said that it is prudent to expect this behaviour, I always try to wary of any car beside me coming up to a left junction and will slow and be ready to stop if necessary.

I didn't really know that, thats kinda why I didn't blame her 100%. Thanks for all the kind words. That's mad that you saw it cgf!

kenmc · 16-07-2009 08:28AM

Just thinking about it, if her front wing hit him, it means that he was at least level with her passenger window when she began to execute the maneouver.
Shocking lack of observation on her part.

Lumen · 16-07-2009 08:38AM

This is precisely why cycle lanes are a bad idea.

Cyclists are moved "out of harms way", which means drivers don't need to consciously overtake them, and therefore tend to ignore them and focus on the other cars.

It only takes a slip of concentration (e.g. not specifically looking out for a cyclist in your blind spot) and this happens.

seamus · 16-07-2009 08:39AM

kenmc wrote: »

Shocking lack of observation on her part.

Something I've always thought was lacking with most driving schools is that they teach what to do to pass your test, but they don't teach you *why* you do these things. You're told to look in your mirrors and your blindspot before turning, but you're not actually told why you're doing this. As we all know, it's very possible to look in all of your mirrors but not actually be consciously processing the data coming in through your eyes. A tester can check whether your head and your eyes are moving, but unfortunately they can't test whether you actually know why your head and eyes are moving

On the other hand if you do these actions thinking, "Ok, check for bikes and motorbikes", then you'll see them.

WicklowRacer · 16-07-2009 08:53AM

Camden Street/Wexford Street are a nightmare for cycling because of the parking either side, the tight cycle lanes and the numerous side turns.

Ignore the lanes here and ride in the traffic flow. Its safer.

fletch · 16-07-2009 08:56AM

WicklowRacer wrote: »

Camden Street/Wexford Street are a nightmare for cycling because of the parking either side, the tight cycle lanes and the numerous side turns.

Ignore the lanes here and ride in the traffic flow. Its safer.

Don't forget the shocking state of the road surface.

tomasrojo · 16-07-2009 09:12AM

Lumen wrote: »

This is precisely why cycle lanes are a bad idea.

I remember reading that in the Netherlands car are supposed to merge with the cycle lane if they intend to turn at a junction, rather than swing across the cycle lane. Generally, the cycle lanes there are sufficiently wide that they have to be treated as another lane.

I personally think even Dutch cycle lanes are a poor substitute for using the road, but at least you don't see nonsense like a cycle lane that is narrower than the width a bike's handlebars, or a cycle lane that takes part of a standard traffic lane, leaving the remainder more narrow than a car, encouraging hazardous overtaking.

DBCyc · 16-07-2009 09:17AM

That's terrible driving, glad to hear you're okay fletch.

fletch wrote: »

Don't forget the shocking state of the road surface.

Indeed, that's where I have had my only commuting spill to date (touch wood). It was coming down wexford street just outside whelans on a wet day, I swerved to avoid a crack in the road only to steer into another one as there was bus beside me and I couldn't go anywhere else. My foot then slipped off the wet pedal (I now use cleats!), I lost control of the handlebars and ended up in a mess on the kerb, thankfully not under the bus!

No real damage done other than grazing and severe bruising of the elbow, and a damaged ego! All the cool kids outside whelan's thought it was funny!

My lesson was to take it very handy down camden street / wexford street in future as the surface is terrible. Also I have had a few near misses around town when cars have tried to cut in front and turn left like happened to the OP and I would echo blorgs advice above and be wary of any car along side me on the approach to a junction.

stopped_clock · 16-07-2009 10:37AM

A similar thing happened to me a while back - ie crashed into a car turning left across me. I'm fairly sure I was in a cycle lane, but it's a while back so can't be sure. (Across the road from the British embassy FWIW, but can't remember if it was before or after they did up that road.)

What's the story legally if I'm cycling faster than the car in this situation? Am I partially liable because I'm 'overtaking on the left'? Or is it a straightforward case of the car always being wrong because they changed lanes without looking?

At the time I considered myself at least partially responsible (not necessarily legally) because I'd ended up in the driver's blind spot. Lesson learnt etc, but I do think that on-road cycle lanes encourage cyclists to undertake in slow-but-moving traffic when they otherwise would not.

stopped_clock · 16-07-2009 10:41AM

Oh and remember you can check car make and model against reg on www.cartell.ie.

Is it ok to post reg nos in the forum?

seamus · 16-07-2009 10:46AM

stopped_clock wrote: »

What's the story legally if I'm cycling faster than the car in this situation? Am I partially liable because I'm 'overtaking on the left'? Or is it a straightforward case of the car always being wrong because they changed lanes without looking?

If it's a mandatory cycle lane, then you would not be permitted to leave the cycle lane except to overtake a hazard, therefore you would not be liable for overtaking on the left.

If it's a non-mandatory lane then you should always overtake on the right except in the usual threee circumstances.

Of course, you should always overtake on the right in all circumstances, but the people who make the law never consider the possibility that bikes can go faster than 5mph.

petethedrummer · 16-07-2009 10:53AM

fletch wrote: »

In hindsight, yeh I probably should have got her details but I was running on adrenaline after it and not really thinking.

You'll remember next time. Snap the number plate with your camera phone. I did an advanced driving a few years ago and the intructor said always to have a disposable camera in the glove box, so you can take a few snaps if you get into a crash. Will help to prevent false claims and the photos refresh your memory.

Lumen · 16-07-2009 10:56AM

Overtaking regs are usually bollixed by traffic i.e. the "don't undertake" rule for cars doesn't apply if you're in slow moving traffic and your lane happens to be going faster than the one on the right. This creates a grey area in terms of what constitutes slow moving traffic.

When in doubt, take the lane.

kenmc · 16-07-2009 11:01AM

Lumen wrote: »

Overtaking regs are usually bollixed by traffic i.e. the "don't undertake" rule for cars traffic (not just cars; also trucks, busses etc) doesn't apply if you're in slow moving traffic and your lane happens to be going faster than the one on the right. This creates a grey area in terms of what constitutes slow moving traffic.

When in doubt, take the lane.

So that'd be pretty much all bike lanes in the city then you're allowed to undertake cos you're pretty much always faster than the cars.

markpb · 16-07-2009 11:03AM

seamus wrote: »

I'm always wary of cycling parallel to cars. I try to make a point or either getting in front of them (into the driver's vision) or dropping behind them (where I'm in control). Not always possible though.

I learned from experience always to watch the front wheel when I'm parallel to a car - it's the first indication that they're about to do something stupid.

kenmc · 16-07-2009 11:07AM

markpb wrote: »

I learned from experience always to watch the front wheel when I'm parallel to a car - it's the first indication that they're about to do something stupid.

Yeah that and the little tiny indicator which is usually on the left wing above the wheel - although that of course is never a reliable indicator (yeah, pun!) of an impending turn, the wheels are.

Lumen · 16-07-2009 11:07AM

kenmc wrote: »

So that'd be pretty much all bike lanes in the city then you're allowed to undertake cos you're pretty much always faster than the cars.

I guess so. I'm usually too busy cutting up buses and bunnyhopping over the footpads to notice where the cycle lanes are.

lukester · 16-07-2009 11:08AM

Bummer about the crash, had similar happen to me good few years ago on Camden St. I was lucky, realised what she was about to do and stopped sharpish. Still got clipped by her wing mirror. Made me much more cautious in that scenario, obviously.

petethedrummer wrote: »

I did an advanced driving a few years ago and the intructor said always to have a disposable camera in the glove box

Disposable camera? Das ist zooooo noughties, ja?

markpb · 16-07-2009 11:09AM

kenmc wrote: »

Yeah that and the little tiny indicator which is usually on the left wing above the wheel - although that of course is never a reliable indicator (yeah, pun!) of an impending turn, the wheels are.

Indicators... pah! I can't fathom why you'd want to look at them

Incidentally, is now a good time to look for support for my new mandatory car modification that disables the steering wheel while the indicators are off. No indicators, no turning. It also cures the muppetry thing of indicating left and turning right but unfortunately can't stop someone indicating without turning.

kenmc · 16-07-2009 11:10AM

Lumen wrote: »

I guess so. I'm usually too busy cutting up buses and bunnyhopping over the footpads to notice where the cycle lanes are.

Oh I know, we should all get one of those laser cycle lane generator thingys, and then the world is our cycle-lane.
(Danny Macaskill would especially benefit from that, what with the danger of some muppet turning left across a tree.

)

kenmc · 16-07-2009 11:13AM

markpb wrote: »

Indicators... pah! I can't fathom why you'd want to look at them

But but but they're so pretty, blinking away to their own little euro-beat, it's really hypnotic.

Besides - they're useful. If you can see one blinking, then you're definitely going to have to take evasive action. Whereas if it's not blinking, you're only almost definitely going to have to take evasive action.

tomasrojo · 16-07-2009 11:17AM

seamus wrote: »

If it's a mandatory cycle lane, then you would not be permitted to leave the cycle lane except to overtake a hazard, therefore you would not be liable for overtaking on the left.

I think that it's legally very grey. As you all know, about 70% of cyclists killed in Dublin are killed by left-turning large vehicles at junctions. Very many of these have been in cycle lanes at the time. I haven't heard of any case where blame has attached to the large-vehicle driver for cutting across an adjacent "lane". I think that until a case is tried it is legally unclear whether a "cycle track" (to use the legal term) is a real traffic lane, or whether a cyclist using one at a junction is illegally passing on the inside. Of course, if he leaves the lane, the cyclist is disobeying the 1998 regulation that compels him to use cycle tracks where they are provided.

It would seem perverse that they have passed contradictory laws in this fashion, but I suspect that that is exactly what they have done.

Hopefully the mandatory requirement will go shortly, and, less likely, these suicide lanes at junctions will be removed.

Had my first crash this morning

Comments