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

Birdie Num Num · 24-03-2017 12:28pm

Tombo2001 wrote: »

You've singled out the cyclist you saw on the phone.

1. What is the ratio of cyclists on the phone to motorists on the phone. 1:100? 1:1000? Its not at all comparable.

2. I note you survived your collision with the cyclist. Would you have survived if it was a car?

I have many friends and relations who are cyclists. I have concern for loved ones who cycle to work, walk to school. I am not a cyclist, I merely gave an example of an incident I had in recent weeks. I could give you other examples I have had in the last year of near misses I have had with cars and other vehicles whilst running, walking or driving. My point was about phone usage.

Birdie Num Num · 24-03-2017 12:33pm

Incidentally my post was in response to the opening post in this forum which I notice you actually posted.

mp31 · 24-03-2017 12:38pm

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

The guards *may* seize the camera and storage if it's considered serious enough. My suggestion would be a quick call to traffic watch who will forward it on to the local station for a word with the driver.

Utter nonsense. Based on my experience :-
a) The guards will not seize anything
b) Traffic Watch do not forward your call onto the local station for a 'word with the driver'.

Instead:

1. Ring Traffic Watch on 1890 205 805. Someone will take the details of the incident and your contact number. They will also ask you for the location of the incident in order to assign the case to the appropriate Garda station.

2. You will then get a follow up call from a Garda based at that station to discuss the incident. They will ask you if you want to make a statement. If you agree to make a statement then you can go to them or they will come out to you.

3. Making the statement involves the Garda writing a short narrative of the incident with your help and then reading it back to you before you sign the statement form. This takes 15-20 mins.

4. The Garda will usually keep you informed on the progress of the case but you can also ring him/her up if you so wish.

You have a decent camera so my advice is to report every close pass. It takes a bit of your time but in the long run it can only make life safer for all cyclists.

Tombo2001 · 24-03-2017 12:40pm

What is considered a decent camera? I'd like to get one.

Its clear from this thread that there is no point in reporting a new miss unless there is camera footage.

Incidentally, on the one occasion I did report a near miss; it wasn't to the gardai, it was to the owner of the company whose van drove into the bike lane alongside me. In that case I got a really good engaged response from the owner.

Alanstrainor · 24-03-2017 12:50pm

Tombo2001 wrote: »

What is considered a decent camera? I'd like to get one.

Its clear from this thread that there is no point in reporting a new miss unless there is camera footage.

Incidentally, on the one occasion I did report a near miss; it wasn't to the gardai, it was to the owner of the company whose van drove into the bike lane alongside me. In that case I got a really good engaged response from the owner.

I have had a contour roam2 on my helmet for years, only in the last week have I moved it to my handlebars. The benefits of it being on handlebars is that it has a clear view ahead, the draw back is that drivers no longer see the camera. This camera is old now, but it is quite good. If you're looking for a handlebar mounted camera, a Xiaomi Yi is a great option.

My main issue with it's positioning on my helmet is that it ended up pointing too low, so it would not clearly pick up on close passes and the likes. Since moving I have much better footage, but I lose that deterrent factor.

Indricotherium · 24-03-2017 12:52pm

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I have had a contour roam2 on my helmet for years, only in the last week have I moved it to my handlebars. The benefits of it being on handlebars is that it has a clear view ahead, the draw back is that drivers no longer see the camera. This camera is old now, but it is quite good. If you're looking for a handlebar mounted camera, a Xiaomi Yi is a great option.

My main issue with it's positioning on my helmet is that it ended up pointing too low, so it would not clearly pick up on close passes and the likes. Since moving I have much better footage, but I lose that deterrent factor.

Throw a barrel shaped light on your helmet for the same effect.

shootermacg · 24-03-2017 12:56pm

The Mobius is a good cheap low profile cycle camera, but not water proof. You can buy a waterproof case for them though.

mrcheez · 24-03-2017 1:07pm

I have a camera in my sunglasses. You wouldn't even know it was there, but it has the advantage of easy on/off at the push of a button, plus I can recharge it easily without the cumbersome process of opening a waterproof case or detaching anything.

Got it in Lidl, but I'm sure you can get similar on Amazon/Ebay

http://offers.kd2.org/en/ie/lidl/pGsm/

If you want something for a deterrent you can get a cheapo camera on Amazon and just leave it attached to the rear of your bike under the saddle, but having to remember to charge it all the time just becomes tiresome.

Danbo! · 24-03-2017 1:34pm

mrcheez wrote: »

I have a camera in my sunglasses.

My inner 12 year old thinks that's the coolest thing ever

What's the quality like?

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I have had a contour roam2 on my helmet for years

+1 for the Roam - price/quality/size/shape are all great as a helmet cam.

Used the roam for 2.5 years and it was great. A little heavy on the helmet, but battery life was 3+ hours and it's easy on/off switch was amazing. No faffing about taking it off mount or taking helmet off to double check it.

I recently "upgraded" to the Drift Stealth 2. It's smaller and lighter than the roam, but I found it awful. Very unreliable, extremely noisy image quality in even slightly dull light. Shame, as it's a nice form factor.

Ended up returning the Stealth and biting the bullet, bought a go pro hero 5 session. It's pricey, but the quality and stabilisation is insanely good. When it's mounted on the bars, it doesnt move an inch, but when I review the footage you can see the handlebar hoods moving all around and in and out of the image, all thanks to the stabilisation. Battery life is poor though, just over an hour, but it's enough to get me in and out of town, then charge overnight.

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Only in the last week have I moved it to my handlebars.

How you finding that? I've a mount on my helmet and one on handlebars and I interchange. I prefer it on the bars because it makes me look less mental, but it seems limited if you've got anything going on behind or to the side of you. I may mount the old roam under the saddle as a secondary cam.

Alanstrainor wrote: »

My main issue with it's positioning on my helmet is that it ended up pointing too low, so it would not clearly pick up on close passes and the likes

I got a rotating mount with the roam so you can adjust the up/down direction

xper · 24-03-2017 2:19pm

endacl wrote: »

Don't be cycling with an umbrella!

You think you're joking but I have actually seen it done more than once!

I recall one spectacular example of a guy belting along the Blackrock bypass (pre-upgrade) in the pours of rain with a large black umbrella somehow shoved into his jacket/rucksack. It did mean he had both hands on the handle bars but he had zero peripheral or rear vision. God knows what a good gust of wind or just a passing bus might have down to him.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

If by 'undertake' you mean pass on the left, then I'm puzzled. I would almost always pass another cyclist on the left there as it's much safer. Passing a cyclist on the right can be difficult if they are meandering over all the lane and they may swerve sending the passing cyclist over the kerb and under a bus.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

No!

The cycle track is on the right side of the footpath. I'd prefer to encroach into the pedestrian area on the left (if safe to do so) to pass another cyclist rather than taking my chances along the edge of a kerb and a busy bus lane.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I'm referring to an off road segregated cycle track. I'd never pass on the left on an on-road cycle track.

Its quite simple; in this country we drive and cycle on the left and overtaking of traffic in the same lane is done by manoeuvring to the right. End of. Don't go making up your own special cases. Your behaviour is unexpected and the unexpected is dangerous.

If you come up behind another slower cyclist in a traffic lane, cycle lane or cycle track and for whatever reason you feel it is unsafe to overtake on the right, then you do not overtake. Slow down and wait until it is safe to do so instead. If they are meandering or you other wise need their co-operation to get past then call out your intention or you use your bell at an appropriate moment and distance (don't startle them).

There are ample examples cited in this thread and elsewhere of car drivers overtaking cyclists inappropriately due to impatience and a lack of regard for their fellow traveller. Essentially, you are taking the same attitude when overtaking another cyclist on the left. You are not considering the other cyclist at all when you say you feel passing on the left is safer. Do you really think it is safer for a cyclist to have another bike appear suddenly on their left shoulder? The natural reaction is to veer right while paying attention to the back-left while not having anticipated having to do this. In the Irish cycling environment with badly parked cars, street signs, pedestrians and what have you scattered at random in cycle lanes, never mind the proximity of other moving traffic to the right (even on the latest segregated tracks, the segregation is just a short kerb), that ain't good.

mrcheez · 24-03-2017 2:52pm

Danbo! wrote: »

My inner 12 year old thinks that's the coolest thing ever What's the quality like?

Pretty superb. You can see all the details you need like license plate, or driver's face etc.

Won't be quite up to GoPro levels.. probably more like 720p resolution. 30fps.

Plus it doubles as a pretty excellent spy camera

CramCycle · 24-03-2017 3:08pm

mrcheez wrote: »

Good luck, though I think close calls are taken less seriously than actual impact which is regarded as "assault".

Depends on the gardai, it does not have to have contact to be an assault, but you would need witnesses, or else it is your word vs theirs.

mp31 wrote: »

Utter nonsense. Based on my experience :-
a) The guards will not seize anything
b) Traffic Watch do not forward your call onto the local station for a 'word with the driver'.

Instead:

1. Ring Traffic Watch on 1890 205 805. Someone will take the details of the incident and your contact number. They will also ask you for the location of the incident in order to assign the case to the appropriate Garda station.

2. You will then get a follow up call from a Garda based at that station to discuss the incident. They will ask you if you want to make a statement. If you agree to make a statement then you can go to them or they will come out to you.

3. Making the statement involves the Garda writing a short narrative of the incident with your help and then reading it back to you before you sign the statement form. This takes 15-20 mins.

4. The Garda will usually keep you informed on the progress of the case but you can also ring him/her up if you so wish.

You have a decent camera so my advice is to report every close pass. It takes a bit of your time but in the long run it can only make life safer for all cyclists.

Most garda will do the friendly call out as an option when talking about the statement and asking about a day in court. It is of course, very unofficial.

jamesbil · 24-03-2017 3:20pm

Hi , I've been hanging out in the cycling forum for a few weeks since buying a new bike and getting back on the saddle, just rural leisure, nothing compared to you city commuter guys.
just an observation but I've been reading this and a few threads about helmets and high viz. With so many near misses and so many eejits on the roads, combined with poor road lighting and shady, gloomy areas, why do some have a problem with wearing something that makes you stand out or keep you a little safer?
I get that it would be ideal not to have to, but a high viz and a flashy light must surely decrease the chances of a near miss enough to be worth it?
I generally go out late afternoon with viz and flashy rear and my lad always says "but it's daylight", evenue so, the amount of times a car in the middle of a small road has swerved suddenly back to their side..
of course being visible doesn't change the idiot driver factor.
I know most of you do wear appropriate gear, it's just an observation and a question..

Weepsie · 24-03-2017 3:24pm

jamesbil wrote: »

Hi , I've been hanging out in the cycling forum for a few weeks since buying a new bike and getting back on the saddle, just rural leisure, nothing compared to you city commuter guys.
just an observation but I've been reading this and a few threads about helmets and high viz. With so many near misses and so many eejits on the roads, combined with poor road lighting and shady, gloomy areas, why do some have a problem with wearing something that makes you stand out or keep you a little safer?
I get that it would be ideal not to have to, but a high viz and a flashy light must surely decrease the chances of a near miss enough to be worth it?
I generally go out late afternoon with viz and flashy rear and my lad always says "but it's daylight", evenue so, the amount of times a car in the middle of a small road has swerved suddenly back to their side..
of course being visible doesn't change the idiot driver factor.
I know most of you do wear appropriate gear, it's just an observation and a question..

Because all the hi viz in the world doesn't make a difference when people are not paying attention. That is the cause of loads of these accidents. I've been hit in broad daylight, on a clear day. So have friends and colleagues. Hi Viz wasn't the issue any of those times. It was inattentiveness or carelessness by the drivers that hit them.

Tombo2001 · 24-03-2017 3:25pm

jamesbil wrote: »

Hi , I've been hanging out in the cycling forum for a few weeks since buying a new bike and getting back on the saddle, just rural leisure, nothing compared to you city commuter guys.
just an observation but I've been reading this and a few threads about helmets and high viz. With so many near misses and so many eejits on the roads, combined with poor road lighting and shady, gloomy areas, why do some have a problem with wearing something that makes you stand out or keep you a little safer?
I get that it would be ideal not to have to, but a high viz and a flashy light must surely decrease the chances of a near miss enough to be worth it?
I generally go out late afternoon with viz and flashy rear and my lad always says "but it's daylight", evenue so, the amount of times a car in the middle of a small road has swerved suddenly back to their side..
of course being visible doesn't change the idiot driver factor.
I know most of you do wear appropriate gear, it's just an observation and a question..

Firstly, I would say most people have lights and high vis. obviously some don't.

Second, studies have shown that cars give more room to cyclists that are not wearing helmets or high viz gear.

That is to say the safety benefits of having a helmet or the greater visibility of a high viz is somewhat offset by the fact that drivers behave more recklessly, on average, around these cyclists.

The only full deterrent to ensure that cars give the full appropriate amount of room when overtaking is to be wearing full police gear on a police bicycle. Sounds like a joke, but its a matter of fact.

mrcheez · 24-03-2017 3:39pm

jamesbil wrote: »

Hi , I've been hanging out in the cycling forum for a few weeks since buying a new bike and getting back on the saddle, just rural leisure, nothing compared to you city commuter guys.
just an observation but I've been reading this and a few threads about helmets and high viz. With so many near misses and so many eejits on the roads, combined with poor road lighting and shady, gloomy areas, why do some have a problem with wearing something that makes you stand out or keep you a little safer?
I get that it would be ideal not to have to, but a high viz and a flashy light must surely decrease the chances of a near miss enough to be worth it?
I generally go out late afternoon with viz and flashy rear and my lad always says "but it's daylight", evenue so, the amount of times a car in the middle of a small road has swerved suddenly back to their side..
of course being visible doesn't change the idiot driver factor.
I know most of you do wear appropriate gear, it's just an observation and a question..

Rear-lights are far better than high-vis in my opinion because High-vis is dependent on the viewer having sufficient lighting to make the high-vis stand out.

So for other traffic like joggers or other cyclists, lights are far more appropriate than high-vis, since the power from the average set of bike lights isn't sufficient to make high-vis reflective gear jump out to the viewer.

Of course you may also get the odd idiot driver without his lights on, again this is where lights are far more appropriate.

As for helmets, I always wear one primarily for comfort (keeps hair from frizzing up, prevents brow sweat/rainwater getting into eyes, allows head to keep cool/warm better than a baseball cap), but also for safety - particularly after I was doored once and did a full body flip landing on my head. Helmet took the brunt of the fall and I didn't suffer any concussion.

Can't really argue with that at all, but if some don't like helmets it's a free country.

Alanstrainor · 24-03-2017 3:40pm

jamesbil wrote: »

Hi , I've been hanging out in the cycling forum for a few weeks since buying a new bike and getting back on the saddle, just rural leisure, nothing compared to you city commuter guys.
just an observation but I've been reading this and a few threads about helmets and high viz. With so many near misses and so many eejits on the roads, combined with poor road lighting and shady, gloomy areas, why do some have a problem with wearing something that makes you stand out or keep you a little safer?
I get that it would be ideal not to have to, but a high viz and a flashy light must surely decrease the chances of a near miss enough to be worth it?
I generally go out late afternoon with viz and flashy rear and my lad always says "but it's daylight", evenue so, the amount of times a car in the middle of a small road has swerved suddenly back to their side..
of course being visible doesn't change the idiot driver factor.
I know most of you do wear appropriate gear, it's just an observation and a question..

Most passes I deal with are not to do with people not seeing me. They are to do with people who do see me, and decide to chance their arm in passing where there is no room to do so. I have 2 lights front, and 2 lights rear. I do have some highvis gear, but I don't always wear it, and I definitely don't agree with RSA's fetish for highvis clothing.

This about sums it up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE0YZ-y6hKA

ED E · 24-03-2017 3:41pm

Why is it always those who are paid to drive that are worst at it...

mrcheez · 24-03-2017 3:45pm

ED E wrote: »

Why is it always those who are paid to drive that are worst at it...

Boredom? Frustration with queuing?

Macy0161 · 24-03-2017 3:47pm

jamesbil wrote: »

I know most of you do wear appropriate gear, it's just an observation and a question..

Hiviz and lights don't matter when people aren't really looking or aren't really caring. That's the actual problem. The hi viz thing is just people looking for excuses.

There is actual theory, which the name escapes me, on this. I do something good, it's because of something I did. I do something bad, it's because of something you did. Bad behaviour by people driving is pushed onto someone else - the cyclist not wearing hi viz, the gatso "shooting fish in a barrel" etc.

CramCycle · 24-03-2017 3:47pm

MOD VOICE: There is a thread for helmet discussion, and one for hi vis discussion. Please do not bring them into this thread as all you will ever need to know, as well as all you will ever need to forget, is contained in those two megathreads.

ED E · 24-03-2017 3:47pm

Lack of mental acuity more like. The union of mensa members and taxi drivers would be rather small.

EDIT: Simulposted with CramCycle. Will return to topic.

Tombo2001 · 24-03-2017 4:20pm

ED E wrote: »

Lack of mental acuity more like. The union of mensa members and taxi drivers would be rather small.

EDIT: Simulposted with CramCycle. Will return to topic.

Interesting to see the comments from the bus driver on this thread - on the one hand talking about the importance for utmost respect on the road, and on the other hand seeing what he says about cyclists, and the context in which he says it.

http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-cyclist-death-road-crash-3304050-Mar2017/#comments

Tombo2001 · 24-03-2017 4:24pm

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Most passes I deal with are not to do with people not seeing me. They are to do with people who do see me, and decide to chance their arm in passing where there is no room to do so. I have 2 lights front, and 2 lights rear. I do have some highvis gear, but I don't always wear it, and I definitely don't agree with RSA's fetish for highvis clothing.

This about sums it up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE0YZ-y6hKA

I wonder if it came down to his car bonnet or you, which he'd have chosen.

More disturbingly, I'd have a pretty strong view that if he did hit you there - f- all would happen to him. You could be killed, and he mightn't even lose his licence, never mind go to jail.

We had a case near our house in cabra where a guy killed a teenager - at green pedestrian light, high on drugs, speeding, no tax or insurance, hit and run - zero jail time for it.

Caveat - he was already doing time for something else, judge gave him 6 months to run concurrently.

mrcheez · 24-03-2017 4:38pm

It's amazing the effect a gob of spit can have in such situations where a car is threatening to narrowly overtake.

Cyclist to the bonnet is a worthwhile risk, but the threat of getting phlegm on the windscreen and they've no problem giving a wider margin.

Regular spitting should be encouraged on narrow roads :P

Danbo! · 24-03-2017 4:52pm

mrcheez wrote: »

It's amazing the effect a gob of spit can have in such situations where a car is threatening to narrowly overtake.

Cyclist to the bonnet is a worthwhile risk, but the threat of getting phlegm on the windscreen and they've no problem giving a wider margin.

Regular spitting should be encouraged on narrow roads :P

As much as I hate close overtakes and **** driving, don't do this. I've seen arguments break out between cyclists and motorists and as soon as someone spits, no matter who was in the wrong, it's argument over in my opinion. It's such scumbag behaviour. Even if you do try it, surely it's going to aggravate the driver more

mrcheez · 24-03-2017 5:27pm

Danbo! wrote: »

As much as I hate close overtakes and **** driving, don't do this. I've seen arguments break out between cyclists and motorists and as soon as someone spits, no matter who was in the wrong, it's argument over in my opinion. It's such scumbag behaviour. Even if you do try it, surely it's going to aggravate the driver more

I wasn't suggesting spitting on the car, I meant spitting when the area is clear, but also visible to cars behind.

It works.. being viewed as a scumbag is a small price to pay if it means they give you a wider berth when overtaking.

mp31 · 24-03-2017 5:28pm

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Most passes I deal with are not to do with people not seeing me. They are to do with people who do see me, and decide to chance their arm in passing where there is no room to do so. I have 2 lights front, and 2 lights rear. I do have some highvis gear, but I don't always wear it, and I definitely don't agree with RSA's fetish for highvis clothing.

This about sums it up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE0YZ-y6hKA

Please report this to the Gardai (if you haven't done so already)

axer · 24-03-2017 7:10pm

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Most passes I deal with are not to do with people not seeing me. They are to do with people who do see me, and decide to chance their arm in passing where there is no room to do so. I have 2 lights front, and 2 lights rear. I do have some highvis gear, but I don't always wear it, and I definitely don't agree with RSA's fetish for highvis clothing.

This about sums it up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE0YZ-y6hKA

Crazy dangerous pass. It is very easy to identify taxi driver from the Driver Check app and the driver's face can be seen in a frame at the 4 second mark. A pass like that requires more than just a warning but a conviction for dangerous driving. I'd say the driver didn't even pass a thought at how dangerous it was after the fact.

Chiparus · 24-03-2017 7:15pm

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

I've been getting more close passes lately - don't know if it's just a statistical blip or evidence of a more extensive change. I did have some numpty clip me with a mirror at the top of Howth on Sunday last. I stayed upright but got a good fright.

He was an older man. He pulled in down the road and appeared to be quite a bit shocked. I let one or two wtf's out of me and kept going. Otherwise I would just got into a shouting match with a seventy year old - no point.

i admire your control,............... I would have asked for his insurance details.

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

Comments