Moron Motorists #3

[casual_cyclist]

Circumventing the word censor is not OK.

Oops. Sorry. I didn't know there was a word censor. My bad

I like <language> better but I didn't think of that at the time.

[cp123]

I was going under CW bridge in Canberra (north side of the lake towards the Regatta Point side) to loop back and up onto the road last night - approx 6.15. Heard the mother of all SCREEEEEEEEECCCCHES directly above me and then THUUUUUNNNNK tinkle tinkle. Wow - another canberra tailgater I assume. Went up and onto the bridge on the eastern side (southbound) and it must've been on the northbound side because i couldn't see much.

Am I awful to think suckos!?

[wellington_street]

All I wanted was a quick trip to the video shop to drop back some discs. Cycling at night, well lit up, in a bicycle lane , I spot a smashed bottle and swerve to avoid the broken glass. Well, the passenger of the vehicle behind me went nuts. "You have your own lane so why don't you use it you <language>" he screamed at me as the driver sped off. I screamed back "because it's full of glass you <language>" I screamed back.

I am usually pretty calm when cycling in traffic but that got me fired up! Incidentally, there was plenty of room for the driver to overtake me. He just couldn't drive for ....

Did you look before swerving? If not, and the car was right next to you or immediately behind you, I can understand why they were a bit agitated. You would be too if the roles were reversed and the car swerved out of its lane in front of you to avoid an obstacle that you can't see.

[g-boaf]

I was going under CW bridge in Canberra (north side of the lake towards the Regatta Point side) to loop back and up onto the road last night - approx 6.15. Heard the mother of all SCREEEEEEEEECCCCHES directly above me and then THUUUUUNNNNK tinkle tinkle. Wow - another canberra tailgater I assume. Went up and onto the bridge on the eastern side (southbound) and it must've been on the northbound side because i couldn't see much.

Am I awful to think suckos!?

Yes, you are awful!

I've been getting to work in the traffic in a car these last few weeks because I'm not very mobile, and the amount of crazy people not leaving enough room is insane! And then the ones who cut off your braking room, never minding the poor truck behind you who is also not leaving enough distance. It's maddening. Next week I'm switching back to the train - for peace and sanity.

[Summernight]

Finally worked out how to upload to Youtube (although the video quality compared to the file on my computer is terrible):

This was the incident on the 6th.

[KonaCommuter]

I was going under CW bridge in Canberra (north side of the lake towards the Regatta Point side) to loop back and up onto the road last night - approx 6.15. Heard the mother of all SCREEEEEEEEECCCCHES directly above me and then THUUUUUNNNNK tinkle tinkle. Wow - another canberra tailgater I assume. Went up and onto the bridge on the eastern side (southbound) and it must've been on the northbound side because i couldn't see much.

Am I awful to think suckos!?

Yes, you are awful!

I've been getting to work in the traffic in a car these last few weeks because I'm not very mobile, and the amount of crazy people not leaving enough room is insane! And then the ones who cut off your braking room, never minding the poor truck behind you who is also not leaving enough distance. It's maddening. Next week I'm switching back to the train - for peace and sanity.

It's really frustrating when people pull into the space you've allowed for stopping. I do wonder that should you be involved in running into someone who has done just that if dash cam footage would ensure they wore the costs? (Getting a dashcam for the Missus)

[InTheWoods]

Finally worked out how to upload to Youtube (although the video quality compared to the file on my computer is terrible):

This was the incident on the 6th.

Maybe I'm missing something because I'm not familiar with your roads. But I think you have to take a lot of the blame for that. You should have moved into the next lane behind the car and allowed it to turn. While the car turned left from the wrong lane, you went straight from the wrong lane (and your presence may have been why the car hadn't moved over, maybe), plus you cannot overtake a car on the left if it is indicating left and turning left.

[jules21]

Finally worked out how to upload to Youtube (although the video quality compared to the file on my computer is terrible):

This was the incident on the 6th.

i have bad news - you are both in the wrong there, for different reasons.
1. you required to yield to LH turners when approaching from behind them
2. she shouldn't turn left from anywhere but the left lane

[Mulger bill]

Where was that vid? Looks familiar...

Definitely not how I would have approached that situation.

[jasonc]

Finally worked out how to upload to Youtube (although the video quality compared to the file on my computer is terrible):

This was the incident on the 6th.

i have bad news - you are both in the wrong there, for different reasons.
1. you required to yield to LH turners when approaching from behind them
2. she shouldn't turn left from anywhere but the left lane

most importantly, an incident avoided. but yes, no bike lane there. you went straight ahead in a left turning lane (that legal? unsure) and driver turned left from middle lane (definitely illegal)

[Summernight]

Where was that vid? Looks familiar...

Definitely not how I would have approached that situation.

Copenhagen lane in Albert Street, East Melbourne.

I can't street view it for you as Google Maps haven't updated that street yet.

I know I have to give way to left hand turn indicating motorists turning left, however she could also have been indicating to park further up the same street (after 6:30PM it is no longer a clearway).

Probably doesn't help, but she did overtake me first. XP

And yes, that bicycle lane is confusing - it is the left hand turning lane at every street corner, but the bicycle lane everywhere else- ie. cyclists are EXPECTED to stay in that lane.

[zero]

Finally worked out how to upload to Youtube (although the video quality compared to the file on my computer is terrible):

This was the incident on the 6th.

i have bad news - you are both in the wrong there, for different reasons.
1. you required to yield to LH turners when approaching from behind them
2. she shouldn't turn left from anywhere but the left lane

Yes and yes, minor mistake by driver, major by rider. Please don't ride into obvious accidents in the future OP.

The reason that the cyclelane ends is to allow riders to merge to an appropriate lane to go straight or turn as required.

As a side note, the implementation of the intermediate intersections is very dangerous. They really should have the cyclelane raised, and the intersections plaza'd to denote the fact that they are cyclelane intersections. They are huge radius corners with parked cars obscuring parallel cyclists, recipe for 40km/hr+ left hooks.

[zero]

Where was that vid? Looks familiar...

Definitely not how I would have approached that situation.

Copenhagen lane in Albert Street, East Melbourne.

I can't street view it for you as Google Maps haven't updated that street yet.

I know I have to give way to left hand turn indicating motorists turning left, however she could also have been indicating to park further up the same street (after 6:30PM it is no longer a clearway).

Probably doesn't help, but she did overtake me first. XP

And yes, that bicycle lane is confusing - it is the left hand turning lane at every street corner, but the bicycle lane everywhere else- ie. cyclists are EXPECTED to stay in that lane.

It was a clean pass in an open lane, as a natural result of different vehicle speeds. its very different imo to someone that is behind you and decides to accelerate past you 10m before an intersection.

merge out from the cyclelane by doing a head check and indicating with your arm, into the straight through lane. Just like driving a car.

[Summernight]

merge out from the cyclelane by doing a head check and indicating with your arm, into the straight through lane. Just like driving a car.

Noted. Shall do. For my own safety at least I'm happy to do so. No other cyclists do so along there as the road construction doesn't cater for it and the cars expect you to stay in that lane as it is a bicycle lane for all but the intersections (most cars merge well with the cyclists to turn left).

I'd be perfectly happy staying in the car lane the WHOLE time, except then I'd get done for not riding in a bicycle lane when there is one right there.

[biker jk]

Where was that vid? Looks familiar...

Definitely not how I would have approached that situation.

Copenhagen lane in Albert Street, East Melbourne.

I can't street view it for you as Google Maps haven't updated that street yet.

I know I have to give way to left hand turn indicating motorists turning left, however she could also have been indicating to park further up the same street (after 6:30PM it is no longer a clearway).

Probably doesn't help, but she did overtake me first. XP

And yes, that bicycle lane is confusing - it is the left hand turning lane at every street corner, but the bicycle lane everywhere else- ie. cyclists are EXPECTED to stay in that lane.

I presume your saw the car indicating left before the intersection so a little bell should have gone off in your head that the driver may turn left on you. That's called risk management. I agree that the bike lane ending is badly designed. It does so very close to the intersection which leaves little time to merge into the correct lane, while the left hand turn sign painted on the road should be repeated where this lane begins.

[Summernight]

I presume your saw the car indicating left before the intersection so a little bell should have gone off in your head that the driver may turn left on you. That's called risk management. I agree that the bike lane ending is badly designed. It does so very close to the intersection which leaves little time to merge into the correct lane, while the left hand turn sign painted on the road should be repeated where this lane begins.

Yes, the bell had gone off and I was already slowing down and had my escape plan in place. I was never going to go over her bonnet.

This lane is considered the best thing since sliced bread in Melbourne road authority planning. That and the Swanston Street one near Melbourne University where they've concreted an island on both sides of the bicycle lane (leaving no place to swerve to if some passenger in a car opened their door on you).

[jules21]

This lane is considered the best thing since sliced bread in Melbourne road authority planning. That and the Swanston Street one near Melbourne University where they've concreted an island on both sides of the bicycle lane (leaving no place to swerve to if some passenger in a car opened their door on you).

they're balls. the people who say they're great have no idea and it's a case of spending some money, painting the road green and declaring themselves friends of cycling. it's nice that they're trying but they're not getting it right.

[casual_cyclist]

All I wanted was a quick trip to the video shop to drop back some discs. Cycling at night, well lit up, in a bicycle lane , I spot a smashed bottle and swerve to avoid the broken glass. Well, the passenger of the vehicle behind me went nuts. "You have your own lane so why don't you use it you <language>" he screamed at me as the driver sped off. I screamed back "because it's full of glass you <language>" I screamed back.

I am usually pretty calm when cycling in traffic but that got me fired up! Incidentally, there was plenty of room for the driver to overtake me. He just couldn't drive for <language>

Did you look before swerving? If not, and the car was right next to you or immediately behind you, I can understand why they were a bit agitated. You would be too if the roles were reversed and the car swerved out of its lane in front of you to avoid an obstacle that you can't see.

I obviously didn't swerve into the path of the car but no, I didn't look before swerving - there wasn't time I would have been through the glass. As for the roles being reversed, I would not try to pass a car at speed and would have dropped in behind him. If he had swerved in front of me it would not have been an issue and I would not have sworn at him. Cars swerve all the time to avoid obstacles in the road. No biggie.

[il padrone]

Where was that vid? Looks familiar...

Definitely not how I would have approached that situation.

Copenhagen lane in Albert Street, East Melbourne.

I can't street view it for you as Google Maps haven't updated that street yet.

Of course it is. And I haven't ridden along that street yet either, but they sure have made an a$e of those "Copenhagen" lanes . I'd thought they maintained the lane through the intersections, but nooo.....


How the Dutch have been doing this sort of thing for many years now - cyclists get priority over turning motor vehicles

[wellington_street]

Finally worked out how to upload to Youtube (although the video quality compared to the file on my computer is terrible):

This was the incident on the 6th.

Actually guys if you freeze frame at 0:19 there's a sign that says bicycles are excepted from the requirement to turn left from the left lane. This should probably be followed up with text on the road to make it clear but otherwise its OK.

Without seeing where the car came from, perhaps they were off put by you crossing the give way line? or maybe it was just an incompetent driver who made a last second decision to turn left. I'll never understand the mindset of people who do erratic things rather than simply going up to the next block and turning left (or around) safely.

It's a pretty carpy set up though - the bicycle lane should become the left turn lane, not be hidden at the gutter like that. perhaps send the footage to BNV or someone who might be able to use it as evidence of how unsafe these things are?

[wellington_street]

How the Dutch have been doing this sort of thing for many years now - cyclists get priority over turning motor vehicles

This conflict arrangement is essentially what we have now - i.e. turning vehicle must cross the path of the cyclist. Judging by the signals I am assuming it is a right turn, with the requirement to give way to cyclists. Ergo, it's still prone to the same give way issues we have now.

[jules21]

This conflict arrangement is essentially what we have now - i.e. turning vehicle must cross the path of the cyclist. Judging by the signals I am assuming it is a right turn, with the requirement to give way to cyclists. Ergo, it's still prone to the same give way issues we have now.

i think you can see there that there are separate lights, presumably phased to hold turning motorists back while cyclists proceed. but i could be wrong.

[outnabike]

From what I see, a car is making an illegal turn. The bike is in his correct lane and is in danger if he has to go into the right hand lane behind the illegal turning car. The cyclist took a risk but it was not his fault and a quick right hand head check and turn could be pretty much an impossibility any way, depending on stopping distance. It turns out there was time in this instance.

(What if it was bumper to bumper in the right hand lane, and no room for the bike, or the bike had to cut off an oncoming car?)

I reckon the car should indicate left, making sure that no cyclist was there and then turn. The cyclist should slow behind any vehicle in the left turn lane and then follow on. Vehicles are supposed to give way to bicycles, especially when in the wrong. But even then they have to give way.

Should the bike give way to every one? In the interests of self preservation yes, but in this case despite the good outcome the best action would have been to stop the bike and let the errant vehicle make the turn rather than be hit if that motor accelerated.

[il padrone]

This conflict arrangement is essentially what we have now - i.e. turning vehicle must cross the path of the cyclist. Judging by the signals I am assuming it is a right turn, with the requirement to give way to cyclists. Ergo, it's still prone to the same give way issues we have now.

No, not the same at all.

1. The bike lane continues through the intersection, rather than ending before it like along Albert Street.
2. The bike lane is deviated to the right (would be left in Aus) to enable both driver and cyclist to have better line of sight at the crossing.
3. In the Dutch example the driver of the motor vehicle must give way to the cyclist. Not so on Albert Street if the cyclist passes left of the car.

How Dutch intersections are now designed.

[il padrone]

Vehicles are supposed to give way to bicycles, especially when in the wrong. But even then they have to give way.

You're new to Australia I see