Page 163 of 485

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:45 pm
by jules21
andrew - i look at guys like that and am thankful they're on a bike!

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 1:37 pm
by outnabike
Aushiker wrote:

Andrew
Well done to miss him. He over estimated his ability to pass that rider uphill.The rider he was passing didn't seem to be on the left far enough either, right at the beginning of his manoeuvre.
And you have a bit of down hill as well, he must have had a worried look for a second or two.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 5:59 pm
by Mulger bill
jules21 wrote:andrew - i look at guys like that and am thankful they're on a bike!
Didn't you (almost) meet his brother in a back street a week or so back?

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:02 pm
by redned
Mr White Hat is well-placed in the lane. He has a WT moment when he realises Mr no-helmet-head-phones is coming past into on-coming traffic. Looks like he stayed out on the right after passing the previous bike. Hopefully no child in the trailer and didn't side-swipe Mr White Hat.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:30 am
by bychosis
Me, this morning.

Riding to work along the Warners Bay foreshore share path. Two peds in front (on left as they should be). Rounded the first, went to round the second and saw a cyclist coming the other way (partially concealed by the pedestrian). To the oncoming cyclist I apologise for misjudging the gap and causing you to brake. I should have given way.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:53 pm
by AKO
Nearly smeared a cyclist across the bonnet of my car this afternoon. Following a white van along a road that I'm not comfortable riding on. I had moved to the far left of the lane to avoid a yooj pothole when I see the van veer hard right then I see what he was avoiding. A cyclist "claiming the lane". I swerve hard right to avoid the cyclist and cop a mouthful of abuse. He didn't deviate his line one inch. I realise there are situations where claiming the lane is required for safety, but not a good idea when salmoning. :roll:

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:26 pm
by il padrone
AKO wrote:I realise there are situations where claiming the lane is required for safety, but not a good idea when salmoning. :roll:
This cyclist was claiming the lane while riding the wrong way in traffic ???

I'm amazed you even had a chance to avoid him!

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:41 pm
by jasonc
il padrone wrote:
AKO wrote:I realise there are situations where claiming the lane is required for safety, but not a good idea when salmoning. :roll:
This cyclist was claiming the lane while riding the wrong way in traffic ???

I'm amazed you even had a chance to avoid him!
that is just scary. i think that's when I wouldn't go around. it's where I'd stop

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:57 pm
by AKO
Yep, had about a nano second to react. My speed of 60ks combined with an estimated 40ks for him (long gradual down hill run combined with a STRONG tailwind). And then to be abused like it was my fault. :o

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:07 pm
by InTheWoods
AKO wrote:Yep, had about a nano second to react. My speed of 60ks combined with an estimated 40ks for him (long gradual down hill run combined with a STRONG tailwind). And then to be abused like it was my fault. :o
Was there a bend or anything that he could have misjudged at speed and ended up crossing the centre line? Crazy!!

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:09 pm
by il padrone
Insane!! :shock: :roll:

Guy must have been on drugs...... or somehow intellectually not right :?

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:18 pm
by trailgumby
il padrone wrote:Insane!! :shock: :roll:

Guy must have been on drugs...... or somehow intellectually not right :?
Temporary citizen

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:23 pm
by trailgumby
InTheWoods wrote:
jasonc wrote:
InTheWoods wrote: Me this morning. Two slower cyclists in bike lane in front of me, enter road lane to overtake, get not really even entirely past the first and the light in front goes red. The other rider didn't make room (not that they are required to) so I had to hang in the road lane and wait for her to go past before dropping back into the bike lane. Probably should have put in more of an effort beforehand but don't normally get that light so thought I'd casually make my way past.
that's not silly. noone cut off, no one held up. no laws broken
It probably looked silly, I think the fact they weren't letting me in indicated annoyance.
That is actually illegal. If someone is overtaking on a single lane each way dual carriageway and they need to jump back onto the correct side of the road, you're not allowed to shut 'em out. If it's you doing the overtake, you're not allowed to cause a collision by just barging in but they do need to make room for you.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:03 am
by Summernight
AKO: Wow... That van driver also needs a medal, the same as you, for missing that idiot salmon cyclist.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:34 am
by AKO
InTheWoods wrote:
AKO wrote:Yep, had about a nano second to react. My speed of 60ks combined with an estimated 40ks for him (long gradual down hill run combined with a STRONG tailwind). And then to be abused like it was my fault. :o
Was there a bend or anything that he could have misjudged at speed and ended up crossing the centre line? Crazy!!
not at all. T intersection 2 kilometres up the road. Apart from that just a straight hilly stretch of road. This morning dropping the kids off to school I realised what may have happened. As mentioned the road was quite narrow but widens considerably about 50 metres past yesterday's incident. A salmon cyclist would have ample room to practice his craft until the road narrows, pushing him into the oncoming traffic. Having said that, he had a clear line of sight for maybe 200 metres or more till the road narrowed for him.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:40 am
by hannos
Crazy pedestrian yesterday...
Driving home along Roberts Rd at Greenacre, southbound. 3 lanes of heavy traffic. There's a pedestrian walking along IN the gutter when there's ample room to walk off the road. Just hoping he got off the road before a semi came along...

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:14 pm
by redned
trailgumby wrote:That is actually illegal. If someone is overtaking on a single lane each way dual carriageway and they need to jump back onto the correct side of the road, you're not allowed to shut 'em out. If it's you doing the overtake, you're not allowed to cause a collision by just barging in but they do need to make room for you.
Without arguing against the wisdom of avoiding an accident, you are wrong, at least in WA.

124. Keeping a safe distance when overtaking
A driver overtaking a vehicle —
(a) shall pass the vehicle at a sufficient distance to avoid a collision with that vehicle or to avoid obstructing the path of that vehicle; and
(b) shall not return to the marked lane or line of traffic where the vehicle is travelling until the driver is a sufficient distance past that vehicle to avoid a collision with that vehicle or to avoid obstructing the path of that vehicle.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:21 pm
by hannos
redned wrote:
trailgumby wrote:That is actually illegal. If someone is overtaking on a single lane each way dual carriageway and they need to jump back onto the correct side of the road, you're not allowed to shut 'em out. If it's you doing the overtake, you're not allowed to cause a collision by just barging in but they do need to make room for you.
Without arguing against the wisdom of avoiding an accident, you are wrong, at least in WA.

124. Keeping a safe distance when overtaking
A driver overtaking a vehicle —
(a) shall pass the vehicle at a sufficient distance to avoid a collision with that vehicle or to avoid obstructing the path of that vehicle; and
(b) shall not return to the marked lane or line of traffic where the vehicle is travelling until the driver is a sufficient distance past that vehicle to avoid a collision with that vehicle or to avoid obstructing the path of that vehicle.

In NSW you are not allowed to accelerate if you're being overtaken:
145 Driver being overtaken not to increase speed

If a driver is overtaking another driver on a two-way road by crossing a dividing line, or crossing to the right of the centre of the road, the other driver must not increase the speed at which the driver is driving until the first driver:

(a) has passed the other driver, and

(b) has returned to the marked lane or line of traffic where the other driver is driving, and

(c) is a sufficient distance in front of the other driver to avoid a collision.

Also, if you are doing the overtaking:
144 Keeping a safe distance when overtaking

A driver overtaking a vehicle:

(a) must pass the vehicle at a sufficient distance to avoid a collision with the vehicle or obstructing the path of the vehicle, and

(b) must not return to the marked lane or line of traffic where the vehicle is travelling until the driver is a sufficient distance past the vehicle to avoid a collision with the vehicle or obstructing the path of the vehicle.

Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
Edit: on reading the posts involved, I don't believe those being overtaken have any duty to 'let you in' as such. It's the overtaker's responsibility to ensure they do it safely and legally (and have enough room to make the move). If you can't make the overtaking move then you must drop back otherwise you'd be obstructing the path of the vehicle being overtaken if you try to barge in.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:26 pm
by il padrone
Yes, TG may be quoting some very good advice that a driving instructor or other such expert in the field has quoted. All often very good advice just not actually a road rule.

Along with things like not overtaking on approach to an intersection, not overtaking on a bridge, not riding two-abreast on double-lines, these are all things that are good guidelines but not actual road rules. All rules that I have at some time believed were the road rule by the way.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:35 pm
by jules21
there are overarching obligations on drivers to take due care. deliberately failing to allow an overtaking vehicle back onto the left side of the road, knowing that your actions are increasing the risk of a (head-on) collision is undoubtedly a serious breach of road safety laws (often not in the road rules, i.e. in the form of careless, dangerous, culpable driving, etc.)

the problem with these laws is that they are not strict liability and are more difficult for the prosecution to prove, putting them in the too-hard basket.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:42 pm
by wellington_street
il padrone wrote:not overtaking on a bridge
This reminds me of something...

...and the award for complete incompetence goes to the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale in southern Perth for this beauty. Sign saying you can't overtake, line markings specifically saying you can. :roll:

To add to the hilarity they have also installed "Single Lane Slow Point" warning signs on both approaches to this bridge since the GSV images were taken. The scene is otherwise unmodified.

If roads authorities can't even get basic stuff like this right, how are drivers meant to? :shock:

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:43 pm
by hannos
This is true Jules but... (/don devil's advocate hat)
Overtaking car starts to brake to drop back. Car being passed starts to brake to let overtaker in.
End result, both cars are still side-by-side and the on-coming vehicle is getting closer...

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:48 pm
by jules21
hannos wrote:This is true Jules but... (/don devil's advocate hat)
Overtaking car starts to brake to drop back. Car being passed starts to brake to let overtaker in.
End result, both cars are still side-by-side and the on-coming vehicle is getting closer...
yeah, this is the problem - drivers are often just as likely to be dangerous when they're trying to be safe. recognition of this is why you can get away with just about anything when behind the wheel - just plead incompetence.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:54 pm
by il padrone
wellington_street wrote:...and the award for complete incompetence goes to the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale in southern Perth for this beauty. Sign saying you can't overtake, line markings specifically saying you can. :roll:

To add to the hilarity they have also installed "Single Lane Slow Point" warning signs on both approaches to this bridge since the GSV images were taken. The scene is otherwise unmodified.

If roads authorities can't even get basic stuff like this right, how are drivers meant to? :shock:
I always think of bridges like this one in this regard

Image

A bad-un, but used to be pretty typical of country back-road bridges. Lots are no longer there (and this pic dates from C1982). The thing is, the fact there are no double-lines doesn't preclude drivers from using some common-sense and staying behind. I know..... "ain't so common" :|, but we expect a certain level of judgement and responsibility at all times from drivers.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:58 pm
by jules21
wellington_street wrote:...and the award for complete incompetence goes to the Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale in southern Perth for this beauty. Sign saying you can't overtake, line markings specifically saying you can. :roll:
no. you must comply with all road rules. the broken line markings do not prohibit overtaking, but the sign does. the markings do not and never will give you explicit permission to overtake.

ideally they'd repaint them as double lines to make things clearer, but there is no contradiction there in law.