Moron Motorists #3

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby twizzle » Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:48 pm

Ross wrote:
gobsec wrote:
yes, flashing versus solid beam can be a dilemma. i agree that motorists can find a flashing light difficult to assess for distance, although in my experience most motorists will hesitate as a result, which to me is a good thing. however a solid beam light can easily be missed within a background of lights, whereas a flashing light is quite distinctive.



I think it's more a case of the motorist recognises the flashing light as a cyclist and disregards it as nothing important whereas with a solid light they are unsure whether it is a bicycle or motorbike and because of this they err on the side of caution and don't pull out in front of it in case it is a motorbike.


Beginning of the week - driving home at night and needing to merge out of a slip lane, I have no idea if the light I saw was a bicycle 10M behind me or a HID in the distance. Just a bright spot of light in the dark.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

by BNA » Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:16 am

BNA
 

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby chriscole » Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:16 am

darkelf921 wrote:
chriscole wrote:
darkelf921 wrote:Well, I had a doozy today. Words cannot adequately describe how scared I was when this happened. A bus drove so close to me I had to struggle with the bike so I didn't get sucked in toward the bus.

Here's the video.

http://youtu.be/SSy_OZiOwC4



Eep. Wow. :shock:

While that was definitely scary, and both highly dangerous and illegal on the part of the bus driver (and yes you should report it), at the risk of inciting a lynching, it has to be said.... choosing to ride on a highway... probably not the best decision, don't you think?


I wasn't riding on a highway. I was riding on the wide shoulder. The section you see is where another road joins it. You have to ride around a "medium strip" to continue forward. As the truck turns left and joins the main road, I have to ride into the left lane (of the main road off the shoulder) and then cut through the left lane to get back onto the shoulder. There is a solid line so I have to stay in that lane until the line becomes unbroken before I can move left though.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not taking your comment personally and have thought about it as you have described it. However before the start of this video, on the original video, you see me look over my right shoulder (nothing immediately behind me) and stick my right arm out indicating I am moving to my right.


Fair enough. Not familiar with that chunk of road myself, and the (relatively) brief look afforded by the video made it look somewhat highway-esque and kind of uninviting from a cycling point of view. :)
chriscole
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby LinzOC » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:21 pm

arkle wrote:
jasonc wrote:
arkle wrote:
This is true. The driver slammed on and hit the indicator simultaneously when he found the street he needed to turn down. He made a mistake in this regard. This is normal unpredictable behaviour that we have to expect and prepare for.

Summernight correctly hung back and gave herself enough space and time to brake to avoid a possible left hook and subsequent collision, and her strategy worked perfectly.

What the eff are we whining about?

arkle


exactly. as what is stated above makes the truck driver a moron motorist.


I challenge any motorist on this forum to claim that they have not braked suddenly to turn down a street they were unsure of the location of. It's not moron, it's normal human fallability. Everyone does it. You people talk like you are perfect superhero drivers.

arkle


Exactly. I've done it on the bike for goodness sake.

I'd also hazard a guess that the bike is in the truck's blind spot. Rear LHS? He'd be relying entirely on the mirrors there.
LinzOC
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:51 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:07 pm

AKO wrote:Never made a mistake on the road?


I don't try to shrug off errors as "normal human fallibility". Doing so is what gets us into this lethargic state of affairs that normalises vehicular homicide.

As I said I don't drive and change directions without ensuring the way is clear. So this approach hasn't got me unstuck.
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby LinzOC » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:45 pm

human909 wrote:
AKO wrote:Never made a mistake on the road?


I don't try to shrug off errors as "normal human fallibility". Doing so is what gets us into this lethargic state of affairs that normalises vehicular homicide.

As I said I don't drive and change directions without ensuring the way is clear. So this approach hasn't got me unstuck.


Too simplistic I think.

Aircraft accident investigation considers errors and violations among other items when trying to determine a cause(s). An error is a mistake, often caused in turn by something else (fatigue, distraction, stress etc) where as a violation is a deliberate going against the regulations. An example of the former is forgetting to put the oil cap on your car because you are in a rush; an example of the latter is doing 140 kmph in a 60 zone. The former doesn't usually get punished (although retraining may occur), the latter almost always sees a separate investigation - often criminal.

Unfortunately a number of accidents are caused by errors. Your comments above indicate violations - of which there are plenty in this thread. In this particular case (of the left turning truck) I'd argue it was an error based on stress in trying to find a street. It's not normalising vehicular homicide; it's recognising that accidents are not simple one cause events (unless of course it is an attempt at vehicular homicide - in which case we are looking at a violation).
LinzOC
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:51 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby A_P » Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:27 pm

LinzOC wrote:
Exactly. I've done it on the bike for goodness sake.

I'd also hazard a guess that the bike is in the truck's blind spot. Rear LHS? He'd be relying entirely on the mirrors there.

Summernight would have been in prime position to be seen in the mirrors.
The mirror is clearly visible in the footage for about 17 seconds before the truck turned.
Anywhere forward of the rear wheels is blind spot in my mind
Image
User avatar
A_P
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:07 am
Location: Gold Coast

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby queequeg » Sun Jul 07, 2013 8:56 pm

LinzOC wrote:
human909 wrote:
AKO wrote:Never made a mistake on the road?


I don't try to shrug off errors as "normal human fallibility". Doing so is what gets us into this lethargic state of affairs that normalises vehicular homicide.

As I said I don't drive and change directions without ensuring the way is clear. So this approach hasn't got me unstuck.


Too simplistic I think.

Aircraft accident investigation considers errors and violations among other items when trying to determine a cause(s). An error is a mistake, often caused in turn by something else (fatigue, distraction, stress etc) where as a violation is a deliberate going against the regulations. An example of the former is forgetting to put the oil cap on your car because you are in a rush; an example of the latter is doing 140 kmph in a 60 zone. The former doesn't usually get punished (although retraining may occur), the latter almost always sees a separate investigation - often criminal.

Unfortunately a number of accidents are caused by errors. Your comments above indicate violations - of which there are plenty in this thread. In this particular case (of the left turning truck) I'd argue it was an error based on stress in trying to find a street. It's not normalising vehicular homicide; it's recognising that accidents are not simple one cause events (unless of course it is an attempt at vehicular homicide - in which case we are looking at a violation).


How Timely:-
http://m.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incid ... 2pjm8.html

Looks like the plane landed short in perfect weather. Will be keeping an eye on this one as there have been some earlier incidents with icing in the fuel system during the landing approach, and from memory there was a 777 crash at Heathrow in 2008 which had some similarities. ( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_ ... _Flight_38 )
'11 Lynskey Cooper CX, '00 Hillbrick Steel Racing (Total Rebuild '10), '09 Electra Townie Original 21D
User avatar
queequeg
 
Posts: 2536
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:09 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:00 pm

LinzOC wrote:Too simplistic I think.

Aircraft accident investigation considers errors and violations among other items when trying to determine a cause(s). An error is a mistake, often caused in turn by something else (fatigue, distraction, stress etc) where as a violation is a deliberate going against the regulations. An example of the former is forgetting to put the oil cap on your car because you are in a rush; an example of the latter is doing 140 kmph in a 60 zone. The former doesn't usually get punished (although retraining may occur), the latter almost always sees a separate investigation - often criminal.


I don't think your clarification is any less simplistic. Many 'errors' or minor mistakes are arise when the personal consequences are minor and the level of care and consideration is low. Being careless is just as much a violation. Going 140kph in a 60 zone is no more deliberate than not being careful. Your differentiation between criminal and non criminal is the big problem. Normalising accidents creates an environment that is less safe.

I wouldn't describe my self as a "careful" person who never makes mistakes. However put me in charge of a dangerous vehicle or put me on the side of a 100m cliff face and suddenly I'm a damn site more careful!
human909
 
Posts: 4192
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby InTheWoods » Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:05 pm

queequeg wrote:How Timely:-
http://m.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incid ... 2pjm8.html

Looks like the plane landed short in perfect weather. Will be keeping an eye on this one as there have been some earlier incidents with icing in the fuel system during the landing approach, and from memory there was a 777 crash at Heathrow in 2008 which had some similarities. ( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_ ... _Flight_38 )


Going OT but can't help myself. Its not going to be ice in the fuel system - much warmer flight ... and ... the BA plane used Rolls Royce engines which are completely different to the Pratt&Whitney engines on the Asiana flight, including a completely different FOHE :) Its almost certainly going to be the pilots flying the plane into the ground - ILS at San Francisco was not operating.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby queequeg » Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:19 pm

InTheWoods wrote:
queequeg wrote:How Timely:-
http://m.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incid ... 2pjm8.html

Looks like the plane landed short in perfect weather. Will be keeping an eye on this one as there have been some earlier incidents with icing in the fuel system during the landing approach, and from memory there was a 777 crash at Heathrow in 2008 which had some similarities. ( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_ ... _Flight_38 )


Going OT but can't help myself. Its not going to be ice in the fuel system - much warmer flight ... and ... the BA plane used Rolls Royce engines which are completely different to the Pratt&Whitney engines on the Asiana flight, including a completely different FOHE :) Its almost certainly going to be the pilots flying the plane into the ground - ILS at San Francisco was not operating.


True (no time to check what engines it had fitted), but you have to seriously question a pilot who can crash a perfectly good plane into a runway in perfect weather (unless they are too reliant on "Autoland"). Moron Motorists, Moron Pilots :-)
'11 Lynskey Cooper CX, '00 Hillbrick Steel Racing (Total Rebuild '10), '09 Electra Townie Original 21D
User avatar
queequeg
 
Posts: 2536
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:09 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby K2 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:03 am

queequeg wrote:True (no time to check what engines it had fitted), but you have to seriously question a pilot who can crash a perfectly good plane into a runway in perfect weather (unless they are too reliant on "Autoland"). Moron Motorists, Moron Pilots :-)


Oh, I wish you hadn't gone there. It's going to be attempting to overtake a cyclist on the edge of the runway now, innit?
User avatar
K2
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu May 19, 2011 5:35 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Summernight » Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:16 pm

K2 wrote:Oh, I wish you hadn't gone there. It's going to be attempting to overtake a cyclist on the edge of the runway now, innit?


I'm up for trying that as they don't go fast when turning and I've seen all the movies and TV shows where a car can drive right up to them, no problems. 8) I probably could fit underneath the thing anyway, as long as I wasn't sucked into the engines or run over by the wheels... Now, where are the plane's rear-vision mirrors... Oh wait... :P



For what it is worth in relation to my video, Greatapoc is on the money - I considered the truck driver worthy of an MM mention here because of the late indicating and turning without looking closely.

At this same intersection about 30 minutes later on the same day I was a pedestrian walking across this exact side street (I had put the bike away) and a van and tradie ute right-turned without giving way to the pedestrians crossing the side street and both did so at speed. They were MMs too. They probably need a refresher in the road rules regarding giving-way to pedestrians but just goes to show you cannot walk/ride/drive in a daze as idiots are everywhere.

(Good point on the left-hook terminology, Queequeg. And that would have been some sight seeing the Tarago being squished...)
User avatar
Summernight
 
Posts: 1392
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby trailgumby » Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:06 pm

InTheWoods wrote:Going OT but can't help myself. Its not going to be ice in the fuel system - much warmer flight ... and ... the BA plane used Rolls Royce engines which are completely different to the Pratt&Whitney engines on the Asiana flight, including a completely different FOHE :) Its almost certainly going to be the pilots flying the plane into the ground - ILS at San Francisco was not operating.

At 12,000 metres, the temperature near the ground is not going to be all that relevant. If there was ice in the tanks, it's entirely possible it will not have thawed by final approach regardless of local ground level temps.

Not making any conclusions as to cause, just sayin'.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 9899
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby zero » Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:08 pm

Back to motorists.
Got right hooked today. I think that driver managed 6 or 7 traffic rule breaches in this video, depending on how a judge might interpret pass stopline at red. As per usual covering the brakes makes its seem undramatic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFEmrv4nraU
zero
 
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby find_bruce » Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:17 pm

zero wrote:Back to motorists.
Got right hooked today. I think that driver managed 6 or 7 traffic rule breaches in this video, depending on how a judge might interpret pass stopline at red. As per usual covering the brakes makes its seem undramatic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFEmrv4nraU

It appears you expected the driver might be a moron & weren't disappointed. I am unfamiliar with that intersection - was it a case of the driver being in the wrong lane & then rules & traffic be dammed I am getting to where I want to go ?
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3132
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby zero » Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:12 pm

find_bruce wrote:
zero wrote:Back to motorists.
Got right hooked today. I think that driver managed 6 or 7 traffic rule breaches in this video, depending on how a judge might interpret pass stopline at red. As per usual covering the brakes makes its seem undramatic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFEmrv4nraU

It appears you expected the driver might be a moron & weren't disappointed. I am unfamiliar with that intersection - was it a case of the driver being in the wrong lane & then rules & traffic be dammed I am getting to where I want to go ?


He actually started in the right lane, cut off the driver in the left lane without indicating (see the hard stop).
zero
 
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Lukeyboy » Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:56 pm

trailgumby wrote:
InTheWoods wrote:Going OT but can't help myself. Its not going to be ice in the fuel system - much warmer flight ... and ... the BA plane used Rolls Royce engines which are completely different to the Pratt&Whitney engines on the Asiana flight, including a completely different FOHE :) Its almost certainly going to be the pilots flying the plane into the ground - ILS at San Francisco was not operating.

At 12,000 metres, the temperature near the ground is not going to be all that relevant. If there was ice in the tanks, it's entirely possible it will not have thawed by final approach regardless of local ground level temps.

Not making any conclusions as to cause, just sayin'.


Temps can play a part but there have been steps in preventing that from happening. Apparently it looks like it might be pilot error stalling on approach into the airport :shock:
Last edited by Lukeyboy on Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Lukeyboy
 
Posts: 1843
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby elantra » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:24 am

mick243 wrote:
Summernight wrote:Lunchtime today (doing a small errand). Decided to take the bike instead of walking to cut about 30 minutes off the round trip. Middle of Melbourne CBD. I think I prefer peak hour drivers...



(and yes, I got the O and 0 mixed up. Whoops. :P)



actually, being a heavy vehicle longer than a certain length (7.5M from rusty memory) he's not doing anything wrong, it would be nice if he indicated for longer. if he got into the left lane first, his back wheels would cut over the footpath (and people waiting to cross) on the corner.

If a long-ish vehicle is gunna do wide turn... he/she should Slow right down, Give a long indication, Check left mirror, and Wait for any vehicle in that lane to appear to slow, stop or Clear the intersection
Last edited by elantra on Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Technology gives us much more information but Education is never be able to give us the skill to evaluate it"
User avatar
elantra
 
Posts: 1695
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:01 am
Location: Trying to avoid the Brisbane traffic.

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby oxonabike » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:52 am

So with the recent bad interactions between bicycles and trucks recently, had this scary moment on the commute this morning. The passing manoeuvre started off okay, but professional driver may have overlooked the length of his trailing load. Was bum clenching enough from the front view, so glad it was only the rear camera that watched this unfold.

Image
User avatar
oxonabike
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:47 pm
Location: Cairns, QLD

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Summernight » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:57 am

oxonabike wrote:So with the recent bad interactions between bicycles and trucks recently, had this scary moment on the commute this morning. The passing manoeuvre started off okay, but professional driver may have overlooked the length of his trailing load. Was bum clenching enough from the front view, so glad it was only the rear camera that watched this unfold.



Whoops, driver forgot about that extra 10-15 metres or so of load. Bum-clenching indeed.

Those things are scary. Especially when you see those pictures of what wind can do to the second trailer (putting it off in the gravel on the side of the road while the front section is still in its lane.)
User avatar
Summernight
 
Posts: 1392
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby hannos » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:07 pm

I posted this a few months ago



As it happens, my complaint was summarrily ignored. So I submitted a complaint to the Customer Assistance Unit.
Tomorrow I go in to give a formal statement and it appears the driver (or registered owner) will be receiving a Neg Driving charge.
2010 BMC SLC01
Image
User avatar
hannos
 
Posts: 4007
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:18 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby zero » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:18 pm

hannos wrote:I posted this a few months ago



As it happens, my complaint was summarrily ignored. So I submitted a complaint to the Customer Assistance Unit.
Tomorrow I go in to give a formal statement and it appears the driver (or registered owner) will be receiving a Neg Driving charge.


Its not a 6km/hr over the speed limit summary offence that they can mail a fine out for.
zero
 
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby JohnJoyner » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:19 pm

Summernight wrote:
oxonabike wrote:So with the recent bad interactions between bicycles and trucks recently, had this scary moment on the commute this morning. The passing manoeuvre started off okay, but professional driver may have overlooked the length of his trailing load. Was bum clenching enough from the front view, so glad it was only the rear camera that watched this unfold.



Whoops, driver forgot about that extra 10-15 metres or so of load. Bum-clenching indeed.

Those things are scary. Especially when you see those pictures of what wind can do to the second trailer (putting it off in the gravel on the side of the road while the front section is still in its lane.)

I would've needed a clean pair of knicks after that one....
Image
Focus Cayo 2.0 (2011) | Trek 7.5Fx (2007)
User avatar
JohnJoyner
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 11:07 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby jules21 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:23 pm

it looks like the truck driver attempted to give you room, but then had to pull back into his lane early, squeezing you with his back trailer.
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8376
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: somewhere out in the melbourne rain

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Gerry.M » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:24 pm

oxonabike wrote:So with the recent bad interactions between bicycles and trucks recently, had this scary moment on the commute this morning. The passing manoeuvre started off okay, but professional driver may have overlooked the length of his trailing load. Was bum clenching enough from the front view, so glad it was only the rear camera that watched this unfold.



Just out of curiosity, is the path to your left a shared bike path, and if so why wouldn't you use that instead?

Looks like the sort of road you can't claim the lane on safely and so your stuck in that dodgy little edge strip.
Gerry.M
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:13 am
Location: Melbourne

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CalvinAndHobbes, GeoffInBrisbane, jasonc, MSNbot Media



Support BNA
Click for online shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Cycling Express Cycling Express
Ebay Ebay AU
ProBikeKit ProBikeKit UK
Evans Cycles Evans Cycles UK
JensonUSA Jenson USA
JensonUSA Competitive Cyclist