Near Miss of the Day 480: Driver almost hits cyclist on roundabout (includes swearing)

But you didn't need to figure out what they were. You knew something was there, so that was enough info for you to decide ' I need to give way', ' I need to stop'. If am I driving and I see ahead something in the road but have no idea what it is, I slow down so that I can take the appropriate action, I don't carry on at 60, hit a deer and think 'o shit'.

In the situation in the near miss, the driver does not need to specifically know what is on the actual road -  John Deere V20, a ford focus, a cyclist, Red Rum, a tank or the 101st Royal Marine regiment.

I agree absolutely, that's why I stated 'no excuse mind you' the driver was a complete aresehole, but unfortunately many drive like this, on 'instinct' rather than having safety at the front of their minds. They just want to get from A to B as fast as possible and they don't care who gets in their way.

In my opinion, and experience (been cycling for over 50 years) in the real world, a light on the handlebars when on the road is safer,  You have to use psychology when cycling especially at night.

yupiteru wrote:

Two guys came cycling towards me, last winter with very bright head torches on and as they were approaching, I could not figure out what they were untill they were very close. 

The lights in the position they were in and the head movement, did not say 'bike' to my brain and I am a cyclist, so I could understand a non cycling motorist getting confused perhaps - no excuse mind you.

Unless the driver is confused to the point where s/he thinks that the lights are magic pixies or perhaps unseasonal fireflies, they've got to stop. Being confused should make them more ready to stop and check!

It doesn't work like that though does it?  A certain type of driver in these circumstances thinks 'what the fuck is that' and in that split second decides to take a chance, and doesn't decide what the light was, but decides what it was not. 

You have to 'say' bike to the morons brains and not leave it to reason or logic, because many drivers are simply not intelligent like you are. 

It's magic mushroom season around here at this time of year and literally many drivers will be driving under the influence and may indeed see 'magic pixies'.  This is not a joke, please dont have inscribed on your gravestone 'They've got to stop' or 'I had right of way'.

if you want to stay alive you have to always asume that the tossers are going to pull out in front of you!

yupiteru wrote:

if you want to stay alive you have to always asume that the tossers are going to pull out in front of you!

Oo-er, missus!

Lights say nothing. It's your brain's response that counts, and that response should be "hazard".

Exactly.I've come to a full stop in the car before now because of a light and I thought something might have been coming towards me. Turned out to be attached to a house! At the end of the day, if you're not sure of something in front of you, you slow down or stop. Far too many drivers just carry on because of confirmation bias, it's never been anything before so it's never going to be anything.

yupiteru wrote:

Two guys came cycling towards me, last winter with very bright head torches on and as they were approaching, I could not figure out what they were untill they were very close. 

The lights in the position they were in and the head movement, did not say 'bike' to my brain and I am a cyclist, so I could understand a non cycling motorist getting confused perhaps - no excuse mind you.

So, perhaps you, and these kind of typical dangerous motorists you are speaking up for, your 'brains,' abnormally, said it was a UFO, and stubbornly decide not to give it way, expecting it can 'fly' out of your way, from the stories you hear, and as your entiled right of way over anthing your kind don't recognise.

Exactly - I rest my case.

spen wrote:

Curse of the A pillar

Not going by the still image above, showing the driver had an unobstructed view.

All my cars have A-pillars.
Luckily my body has articulated joints.

I agree with not blinding people, but if you're blinded or have difficulty seeing, then maybe pulling out of a junction is going to be dangerous - wait until you can see for chris-sake.

Why would you pull out if blinded?

Also 2 lights helps you judge the distance better due ot the stereoscopic effect on the eye. Harder to judge a single light source.

well because people do do stupid things like that we've plenty of evidence of that and the consequences, a car at a junction is always wanting to pull away first, not wait, so build that into an expectation of whats going to happen, and then work out how to mitigate that risk to you.

and the two lights thing if they are parallel (or near to parallel) across a handlebar,, the issue is people are just used to seeing cars, so the brain translates the lights as a car, but the size of the light is smaller than a car, so the brain translates it as a car thats further away and safe to pull out on, not a cyclist who actually is only feet away, it used to be a known reason for why motorcyclists with dual lights often got hit by cars pulling out of junctions.

Is there a study that supports the view that dual lights cause more accidents? Even if so, how would fast moving motorcylists be a proxy for slow moving cyclists ?

@Awavey.  Nice spot of victim blaming there - what do you do for an encore?

Also whats the point of 2 steady lights comment - he obviously had at least 1 flasher and 1 steady.  (or a bright/dim pulser).

As a I driver - I personally don't pull out unless I can see the way is clear, including when there is a bright light shining at me.  I assume its a vehicle and give way until proven otherwise.

The trouble with comments like yours are if you take them to a logical conclusion we shouldn't ride/commute at night because there are too many variables (too many lights, the wrong kind of light, no Hiviz, too much HiViz) where drivers will knock us off.   See also the recent case where sunlight dapples were used to implicitly critise the wearing of HiViz.

Cyclists should have a reasonable expectation of safety when out on the roads.   Too many allowances made to drivers means they will never learn, we will ride less, and the situation will never change.   Not Good.

its not victim blaming at all, where have I said it was the riders fault ?

all Ive said is an ultra bright head torch light is actually not going to have helped there regardless of how much you think it makes you be seen, because the light blows out key information, like an arm indicating, or that can help a driver calculate your speed & distance correctly, it may make them do all those things incorrectly and that then increases the risk to you they do something stupid, like pull out on you at a roundabout.

Sure youd like to them stop and wait till they are sure, but you havent ridden very long on the road if you expect drivers to behave like that all the time.

and its just this time of year and when the clocks go back theres this arms race of putting more and more and brighter and brighter lights to "be seen" and noone it seems ever stops to think so how does this actually look to people I encounter on the road ? are they seeing me ? am I actually making it harder for them to see me ? which is why I mentioned the thing with two lights, youve got to understand how people interpret sets of lights they see in the dark, to ride safely. As I said Id never ride with an ultra bright head torch on the road, nor dual lights, for those reasons Ive mentioned

I mean its funny, in the daylight everyone always says youve got to make eye contact with drivers, as thats the link that makes them recognise you as a person and stops them commiting to pulling out on you, and yet when its dark all that goes out the window and its ramp up the lumens and no chance of anyone seeing your eyes.

Totally agree.

Glad you're ok rider and bring back that Fly6 - I always ride with mine and do numerous Police complaints.

I take your point about not dazzling, but HP is right, if you can't see, don't move.

From the video it seemed as if the bike light was pointed correctly to illuminate the road (still very visible to the driver) and the head torch was probably moving quite a bit with Jon's observations and general movement unless he's a commuting TT rider.

Following on from "I couldn't see Mr James because of the hi viz against the trees" do we now have "I couldn't see Jon because his light was too bright against the darkness"? Perhaps the alien spaceship from Close Encounters was landing behind him?

be an interesting legal case though wouldnt it, as there are rules on lights and the legally permitted positions they can be placed in

Awavey wrote:

be an interesting legal case though wouldnt it, as there are rules on lights and the legally permitted positions they can be placed in

Only on the bicycle, not on the body.

AFAIK the law mandates the positions of 1 light each for front and back, as long as that is met it says nothing about whether you can also be lit up like a Christmas tree or not.

Not too bright, not too dim, but juuust right.

I have an old volkslicht on my bike - it'll burn your retina if you get it in your eyes. That's why I direct it down to a few metres in front of me. It's not the size of your light, it's what you do with it that counts

There seems to have been an arms race re vehicle lights too. Modern halogen and LEDs can be far brighter than the old standard incandescents. Can we imagine that being used as an excuse?

"of course ultra bright headlights pointing at someones eyes in the dark is going to blow any chance of them actually seeing you as a person in a car, youll just be a gigantic bright light, they wont even see you indicating or anything, and may even wrongly conclude from the size or angle its shining from its a bright light from a lot further away. thats also why using two steady front lights is also a bad idea.

personally Id never drive   on the road with those types of lights,as temporarily blinding people in control of vehicles has always seemed like a really bad idea to me."

Seems to make little sense when the perspective changes....