When cyclists attack

SteveSc said:
I commute 4 days a week and most of my filtering is on the outside of traffic. You are much less likely to be caught by a passenger opening a car door suddenly or a car pulling over, more drivers also tend to watch their wing mirrors on the outside as that is where motorbikes/mopeds would normally be. It's perfectly safe to be on the outside as long as you read the traffic and take account of when you will need to pull in.
Click to expand...
Offside mirrors are usually set to view overtaking traffic, traffic that will be a lot further to the side, unless you are in the habit of riding on the opposite carriageway, you are likely to be in a blind spot and drivers are unlikely to notice you on the offside.
 
Mattyd said:
overtaking on the right is safer as its the driver side and they are more likely to see you. Also, on the right is usually an mostly empty road not a tight gap that's usually found on the left between cars.



From experience those who overtake on the right are usually the fit and confident ones. I wouldn't be so sure that he can't keep up with most city traffic. But that's beside the point.
Click to expand...
If the gap is tight, simple answer is stay behind where the gap is bigger and don't be a knob trying to filter to the front.
It wasn't city traffic though was it? He had no hope of keeping up with the traffic, it was only because the OP was driving slower than he could that the cyclist was keeping up. For a cyclist to be on the right, my assumption would be they were intending to turn right and not indicating with their arm out at that point in time.
 
nilagin said:
Offside mirrors are usually set to view overtaking traffic, traffic that will be a lot further to the side, unless you are in the habit of riding on the opposite carriageway, you are likely to be in a blind spot and drivers are unlikely to notice you on the offside.
Click to expand...
They should be adjusted so you can see a the very edge of you own car in the corner!
http://www.drivingtesttips.biz/mirror-adjustment.html
 
Last edited:
Thought this appropriate :D

USJxDxc.png
 
nilagin said:
If the gap is tight, simple answer is stay behind where the gap is bigger and don't be a knob trying to filter to the front.
Click to expand...

Or..go round the right where there is space to overtake/filter :)

That's the point of filtering. To find the gaps to advance your journey.

While cyclists and motorbike riders are taught it it's not going anywhere. And is the expected thing todo as a result of that.


nilagin said:
don't be a knob trying to filter to the front..
Click to expand...

Being a knob and breaking the HWC are two different things. I'm personally not bothered about cyclists filtering.

nilagin said:
For a cyclist to be on the right, my assumption would be they were intending to turn right and not indicating with their arm out at that point in time.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't assume anything :)
 
Mattyd said:
Or..go round the right where there is space to overtake/filter :)

That's the point of filtering. To find the gaps to advance your journey.

While cyclists and motorbike riders are taught it it's not going anywhere. And is the expected thing todo as a result of that.




Being a knob and breaking the HWC are two different things. I'm personally not bothered about cyclists filtering.



I wouldn't assume anything :)
Click to expand...

At a set of traffic lights such as in the video, there is no need for a cyclist to filter on the outside. They will just leave themselves hung out to dry in the middle of the road and being a slow moving nuisance when they attempt to get back over to the left.

Cyclists aren't taught anything as anyone can ride a bike on the road without any formal training or any kind of test, they don't even have to read and get tested on the highway code.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
Offside mirrors are usually set to view overtaking traffic, traffic that will be a lot further to the side, unless you are in the habit of riding on the opposite carriageway, you are likely to be in a blind spot and drivers are unlikely to notice you on the offside.
Click to expand...

All vehicles have blind spots but vehicles/bikes/motorbikes don't just magically appear in them. If you are in slow moving traffic then you should be able to spot a cyclist coming down the outside. However, when I filter I tend to make the assumption that the vehicle I'm about to pass probably hasn't seen me (probably busy doing something important like looking at their phone) and only pass if I feel it's safe to do so.

The situation in the video is different as the traffic is moving at a reasonable speed and although we don't see when the bike actually came alongside, if it had been me I would probably have dropped my speed and slotted in behind the lorry. That doesn't totally excuse the lorry driver as he also had the opportunity to slow down and let the bike in safely.
 
nilagin said:
That will just create a blind spot where overtaking cars, motorbikes etc. will be which is the traffic much more likely to be overtaking rather than a cyclist.
Click to expand...

I was taught to glance over my shoulder to check any blind spot and that was reinforced during motorcycle lessons where it's called a lifesaver - not just your own but other road users as well!
 
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4...VKJLrMJdIsZtl-7r0l8g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

here is the road layout prior to the first set of lights.

I appreciate all the comments as they form a wide viewpoint, thanks.

ETA
So after the lights change, the red car moves off and the van pulls in front of me without any issues. As I pass the junction I notice the suicyclist in my mirror and assume he is turning right due to his position in the road (overtaking the line of traffic behind me) when it becomes obvious that he is going straight on, I shrug my hands in despair of his stupidity and he shakes his head at me. He is about halfway alongside me by the time you hear me shout on the video.
 
Last edited:
phil8139 said:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4...VKJLrMJdIsZtl-7r0l8g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

here is the road layout prior to the first set of lights.

I appreciate all the comments as they form a wide viewpoint, thanks.

ETA
So after the lights change, the red car moves off and the van pulls in front of me without any issues. As I pass the junction I notice the suicyclist in my mirror and assume he is turning right due to his position in the road (overtaking the line of traffic behind me) when it becomes obvious that he is going straight on, I shrug my hands in despair of his stupidity and he shakes his head at me. He is about halfway alongside me by the time you hear me shout on the video.
Click to expand...
Im left wondering why you didnt set off from the lights at the same or similar speed as the red car and the white van, it seems like you purposley chose to dawdle along at the same speed as the cyclist for some reason
 
phil8139 said:
This may help your wondering ;)
Click to expand...
Just like i said, you intentionaly chose to dawdle to goad/verbally abuse him, now whilst i agree the cyclist is an idiot you alo got your deserved come uppance via a few slaps round the chops

Phil, you were both out of order regardless of who started it, somewhere a toolbox is missing a couple of tools.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Just like i said, you intentionaly chose to dawdle to goad/verbally abuse him, now whilst i agree the cyclist is an idiot you alo got your deserved come uppance via a few slaps round the chops

Phil, you were both out of order regardless of who started it, somewhere a toolbox is missing a couple of tools.
Click to expand...

Probably the best he deserved. If the cyclist persists in such manoeuvres, in such situations, he is much more likely to end up as road kill.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Just like i said, you intentionaly chose to dawdle to goad/verbally abuse him, now whilst i agree the cyclist is an idiot you alo got your deserved come uppance via a few slaps round the chops

Phil, you were both out of order regardless of who started it, somewhere a toolbox is missing a couple of tools.
Click to expand...

Maybe you missed the part of me being in a 44 ton truck, (15 tons empty at the time). It wasn't a racing start but with my autobox set on economy it likes to build up speed rather than jettison away from the lights. My boy racer days are long behind me along with being a prick behind the wheel. Easy days bring easy money.
 
Not so much acceleration as a gentle increase in velocity over a period of time!
 
Thing is, even if the driver of the artic had slowed to let a cyclist overtake (which in itself is a daft suggestion imo) he would then be faced with a slower moving obstruction further down the road & possibly not able to overtake the cyclist & further holding up the free movement of traffic behind.

Problem is these days, many cyclists wear cameras & are quick to complain at anything they deem unsafe, including cars overtaking them at a safe distance (deemed to be about a cars width) so what chance would an artic have of overtaking a cyclist doing 15 - 20 mph?

The cyclist shouldn't have even been where he was, let alone complain about it!
 
OldCarlos said:
Thing is, even if the driver of the artic had slowed to let a cyclist overtake (which in itself is a daft suggestion imo) he would then be faced with a slower moving obstruction further down the road & possibly not able to overtake the cyclist & further holding up the free movement of traffic behind....
Click to expand...

Surely overtaking a cyclist safely is something HGV drivers are taught - my workplace is on an industrial estate so I often get overtaken by HGVs and they tend to overtake more safely than cars by waiting till there is a safe gap (cars will often just try and squeeze past forcing oncoming vehicles to slow down) - I'd imagine patience is a big part of driving an HGV
 
boliston said:
Surely overtaking a cyclist safely is something HGV drivers are taught - my workplace is on an industrial estate so I often get overtaken by HGVs and they tend to overtake more safely than cars by waiting till there is a safe gap (cars will often just try and squeeze past forcing oncoming vehicles to slow down) - I'd imagine patience is a big part of driving an HGV
Click to expand...

Correct.

I'm talking about the driver & cyclist in the thread on a main road, where the artic could have had difficulty safely overtaking the cyclist 50 yds further on.
The cyclist in question (same as the white van) were in a lane signed with an arrow road marking for a right turn. He shouldn't have even been there!

I'll bet the cyclist is one of those that thinks no one should overtake him & all traffic should give him the right of way at all times.
 
OldCarlos said:
Thing is, even if the driver of the artic had slowed to let a cyclist overtake (which in itself is a daft suggestion imo) he would then be faced with a slower moving obstruction further down the road & possibly not able to overtake the cyclist & further holding up the free movement of traffic behind.

Problem is these days, many cyclists wear cameras & are quick to complain at anything they deem unsafe, including cars overtaking them at a safe distance (deemed to be about a cars width) so what chance would an artic have of overtaking a cyclist doing 15 - 20 mph?

The cyclist shouldn't have even been where he was, let alone complain about it!
Click to expand...

The driver obviously considered the cyclist to be in a dangerous place, while it may have caused him an issue further up the road he could have made that discision rather than leave the cyclist in a dangerous place. Yes he could have been angry about it and may have had every right to be but how would he have felt if the cyclist had been seriously injured, would it have been worth it to prove that he was right.

People make mistakes on the road, some people are just inconsiderate (the cyclist in this situation could be either) but we have to make allowances for each other as fellow road users.
 
SteveSc said:
The driver obviously considered the cyclist to be in a dangerous place, while it may have caused him an issue further up the road he could have made that discision rather than leave the cyclist in a dangerous place. Yes he could have been angry about it and may have had every right to be but how would he have felt if the cyclist had been seriously injured, would it have been worth it to prove that he was right.

People make mistakes on the road, some people are just inconsiderate (the cyclist in this situation could be either) but we have to make allowances for each other as fellow road users.
Click to expand...

The wagon driver didn't leave the cyclist in a dangerous place. (why was the cyclist insistent on overtaking an artic ffs?)

I'd hazard a guess that the cyclist is local & probably does the same thing on a regular basis. ;)
 
boliston said:
Surely overtaking a cyclist safely is something HGV drivers are taught - my workplace is on an industrial estate so I often get overtaken by HGVs and they tend to overtake more safely than cars by waiting till there is a safe gap (cars will often just try and squeeze past forcing oncoming vehicles to slow down) - I'd imagine patience is a big part of driving an HGV
Click to expand...


Except that the cyclist in this scenario is the one on the outside, stupidly IMO, trying to outpace the traffic which are power assisted.
As a cyclist you have to realise your limitations, and I say this as someone who has trained and raced thens of thousands of miles on bikes, and had no confrontations with drivers - except when one Arab driver of a Mercedes thought it funny to nudge me from behind twice in his S Class in the middle of Lewisham in rush hour, I did have very strong words with him, and a taxi driver waded in on my side as well.
I used to pace behind buses and coaches, but never try to overtake them until they stopped at bus stops.
I remember club runs, where a couple of riders were very "anti car", and used to delight in holding up traffic deliberately, when they could have done the same as the rest of us and ridden in single file.
 
OldCarlos said:
The wagon driver didn't leave the cyclist in a dangerous place. (why was the cyclist insistent on overtaking an artic ffs?)

I'd hazard a guess that the cyclist is local & probably does the same thing on a regular basis. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree that the cyclist shouldn't have been alongside the truck but he was, once he was there and the driver realised he wasn't going to drop in behind he had a choice. Carry on at the same speed/accelerating or to slow and let the cyclist past. He chose to carry on and so the cyclist was in danger for longer.

Did he need to slow, no. Could he have made allowances for a stupid manuevoure, yes.

You said earlier about holding up the free movement of traffic if he had slowed to let the cyclist past, well the decisions that he made didn't work out so well in this case. How long do you think traffic in both directions were stopped due to the incident that happened?

OldCarlos said:
I'd hazard a guess that the cyclist is local & probably does the same thing on a regular basis. ;)
Click to expand...

He may well be local, do you know the road? There are a few sections of road that I use where cars/lorries/busses will pass me only to hit traffic a few hundred metres up the road, The queues are always there. If I passed a lorry/bus in that situation they wouldn't see me again on their journey so why should I not pass it.

Please note, I'm not saying that the cyclist should have been in that position but once he was the driver then had a choice to make.
 
I know the road :)

it has happened to me in the same spot but did not end up like in the video.
 
I think that a lot of the problems with both cyclists and (car) drivers is down to attitude and ignorance.
Cyclists often don't drive, many of them seem to think that the rules that govern licensed drivers don't apply to them, and there is often a built-in assumption that whenever a cyclist comes off worst, it's the fault of the licensed driver.
A very long time ago, when I started out, it was on a bike, not because I wanted to ride a bike but because I couldn't afford anything else. Then a moped, then a motorbike, and I ended up driving old bangers that didn't stop, steer or go, and I had to learn how to maintain and repair them myself. And, as a 21 year old student, I got a part time job night trunking lorries, no training or HGV license back then. The only thing that I now drive is a car, but my experience of driving different types of vehicles does help me to understand the difficulties of the people who are driving something very different...

Today, most car drivers learn to drive in a tiny new car crammed with technology, they have no idea how it works, no idea what its cornering and braking limitations are, and because of their ignorance they have no idea when it comes to other vehicles either.

I've seen several comments in this thread about what the truck driver should or could have done, and can only assume that these comments are from people who have no idea what it's actually like to drive a lorry and have no idea how difficult it can be to see a suicidal cyclist (or car driver) that takes it upon themselves to be in a stupid place. Survival instinct should inform the decisions of people who are going to come off worse if there is any contact, but perhaps it's ignorance due to lack of experience, or an attitude problem, but for whatever reason, a lot of cyclists and car drivers behave very aggressively and very stupidly
 
SteveSc said:
I agree that the cyclist shouldn't have been alongside the truck but he was, once he was there and the driver realised he wasn't going to drop in behind he had a choice. Carry on at the same speed/accelerating or to slow and let the cyclist past
Click to expand...

The cyclist (who shouldn't have been there) only needed to pull in behind the wagon. I actually think it safer for the driver to carry on, not slow down to let a slower obstacle go past.


SteveSc said:
How long do you think traffic in both directions were stopped due to the incident that happened?
Click to expand...

Again, not the drivers fault.
If the cyclist hadn't been there....................
If the cyclist (who was in the wrong) hadn't made such a fuss, or hadn't hit the wagon.............


SteveSc said:
Please note, I'm not saying that the cyclist should have been in that position but once he was the driver then had a choice to make.
Click to expand...

Correct & as I posted above, the correct decision.
 
That video is just two people acting like knobs to be honest.

On a related note. I used to be a competitive road cyclist and not only did I have to take a test before I was allowed to compete I was also licensed and insured. Is that not a thing any more?
 
norters said:
That video is just two people acting like knobs to be honest.

On a related note. I used to be a competitive road cyclist and not only did I have to take a test before I was allowed to compete I was also licensed and insured. Is that not a thing any more?
Click to expand...


Really? What test was that, and why is it that I never had to take any test, when I competed in Kent League road racing and time trials all over South East England?
 
SteveSc said:
I agree that the cyclist shouldn't have been alongside the truck but he was, once he was there and the driver realised he wasn't going to drop in behind he had a choice. Carry on at the same speed/accelerating or to slow and let the cyclist past. He chose to carry on and so the cyclist was in danger for longer.

Did he need to slow, no. Could he have made allowances for a stupid manuevoure, yes.
Click to expand...
Fairly sure the video is enough evidence that the driver did in fact drive slowly and stop (the fact he was berating the cyclist was neither here nor there) instead of riding on, the cyclist decided to then stop in front and take out his ineptitude on the truck.
 
andy700 said:
Really? What test was that, and why is it that I never had to take any test, when I competed in Kent League road racing and time trials all over South East England?
Click to expand...

It was a test organised by my club.
 
phil8139 said:
So after the lights change, the red car moves off and the van pulls in front of me without any issues. As I pass the junction I notice the suicyclist in my mirror and assume he is turning right due to his position in the road (overtaking the line of traffic behind me) when it becomes obvious that he is going straight on, I shrug my hands in despair of his stupidity and he shakes his head at me. He is about halfway alongside me by the time you hear me shout on the video.
Click to expand...

This is when you should have come of the gas and allowed him to get around you, Yes a stupid cyclist!! I agree but your "duty of care" as a professional driver should have acted in sympathy to him. I can tell you IF you had killed him or he would have been killed in this little process and you had been honest at the hearing and said the above you would be in deep water now facing possible criminal negligence while operating a motor vehicle.

This is the point entirely with the car / truck / motorised whatever V the human powered cycle! they are the underdog in almost every scenario other than cyclist on pavement hit pedestrian....and the law sees you as the responsible party, unless its so blatent and you had absolutly no chance of avoiding a cyclist, then you will be held responsible.

I dont agree with the way things are btw but its best not be be blamed for something that will be pinned on you should you not have done everything you could to accomodate the numpty...
 
Last edited:
The white van is a tad cheeky as clearly he is in the wrong lane.
You should have taken your rig out of economy mode, spooled up the turbo and made a swift getaway thus leaving white van man hanging and the cyclist caught in a fracas with the van ;)

Disclaimer - the above is a tongue in cheek comment
 
nilagin said:
Fairly sure the video is enough evidence that the driver did in fact drive slowly and stop (the fact he was berating the cyclist was neither here nor there) instead of riding on, the cyclist decided to then stop in front and take out his ineptitude on the truck.
Click to expand...

The driver slowed to stop behind the white van which had stopped at the lights, no reason he could not have slowed slightly before that.

OldCarlos said:
The cyclist (who shouldn't have been there) only needed to pull in behind the wagon. I actually think it safer for the driver to carry on, not slow down to let a slower obstacle go past.
Click to expand...

Safer for who?

Garry Edwards said:
I've seen several comments in this thread about what the truck driver should or could have done, and can only assume that these comments are from people who have no idea what it's actually like to drive a lorry and have no idea how difficult it can be to see a suicidal cyclist (or car driver) that takes it upon themselves to be in a stupid place. Survival instinct should inform the decisions of people who are going to come off worse if there is any contact, but perhaps it's ignorance due to lack of experience, or an attitude problem, but for whatever reason, a lot of cyclists and car drivers behave very aggressively and very stupidly
Click to expand...

I've not driven a lorry, I have driven cars, vans and minibuses. I'm vary careful around lorries because I can understand how hard it can be for the driver to see me as a cyclist, in this case though the driver does see him and spends a while shouting out the window at him. I totally agree with the bolded section above that both cyclist and drivers can both be at fault.
 
It isn't clear to me whether the driver was in fact able to see him at the time he moved off - my guesss is that he may have been directly below, and totally invisible, until they had both moved off, If you've never driven a lorry then it must be difficult to understand that sometimes, other road users are just totally invisible to the driver.

I've had one blameworthy accident. I was driving a much smaller lorry than this (18 ton I think). I'd taken a wrong turning and decided to reverse into a wide factory gateway to turn around - so far so good - and stopped.
A small car came out of the factory gate and stopped very close behind me, it was completely invisible to me.
When I went into reverse, the driver chose to ignore my reversing lights and reversing beeper and just sat there doing nothing whilst I crushed his car :)
My fault entirely, because he was stationary and I was the one who caused the accident, but when we spoke afterwards he told me that he was very unlucky because he had had 4 accidents in the last 6 months, all caused by lorries... he just couldn't see that he had any responsibility to avoid placing himself in danger - well, he wasn't going to have any more accidents in that particular car
 
phil8139 said:
I shrug my hands in despair of his stupidity and he shakes his head at me. He is about halfway alongside me by the time you hear me shout on the video.
Click to expand...

so next time ignore him - if hes being a pillock that's his choice - so long as you don't run him over it doesn't effect you in any meaningful way , but when you choose to get out of your truck and start getting into a pushing and shoving match you are putting yourself both in danger and in danger of being thought to be in the wrong....


or follow him home and shoot him dead before burning his house down as a lesson to others... that works too but may be thought an overeaction
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top