Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

site_owner

and a taxi man trying to run me off the road and give me a piece of his mind out his window at malahide.
according to strava i averaged 43kph from portmarnock to malahide and he was barely behind me at all before he started closing in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWZkD6bM2I4

sorry for the terrible video editing

Fighting Tao

site_owner wrote: »

close pass Dublin bus today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M2BhWjyLSw

And his reply would be “I wasn’t across the line”. It’s amazing that so many drivers think that painted lines are force fields that protect cyclists.

Boilermaker

site_owner wrote: »

and a taxi man trying to run me off the road and give me a piece of his mind out his window at malahide.

Why did you fail to use the dedicated cycle lane?

Rechuchote

Boilermaker wrote: »

Why did you fail to use the dedicated cycle lane?

Eh? From the film, the cyclist is in the cycle lane - though it's a bit of a foolish question anyway, as all cycle lanes are optional for cyclist use (luckily, because a lot of them are so badly damaged from heavy cars driving in them).

Fighting Tao

Boilermaker wrote: »

Why did you fail to use the dedicated cycle lane?

I presume that you haven’t used it yourself.

Boilermaker

Rechuchote wrote: »

Eh? From the film, the cyclist is in the cycle lane - though it's a bit of a foolish question anyway, as all cycle lanes are optional for cyclist use (luckily, because a lot of them are so badly damaged from heavy cars driving in them).

Your response was foolish, read the section I quoted, it's from the post with the taxi driver.

Fighting Tao

Boilermaker wrote: »

You're response was foolish, read the section I quoted, it's from the post with the taxi driver.

You’ll last long here.

Rechuchote

Boilermaker wrote: »

You're response was foolish, read the section I quoted, it's from the post with the taxi driver.

But in the film with the taxi driver there is no cycle lane at the point the driver passes.

Fighting Tao

Rechuchote wrote: »

But in the film with the taxi driver there is no cycle lane at the point the driver passes.

There is actually one that I used once and I will never again. It has a number of problems of I remember:
1. It loses the right of way and that is not good when moving at 40kph
2. It goes off in a different direction and so if you don’t know it you’d think you’re going the wrong way
3. It has a kerb to get back onto the road
4. Coming back onto the road is nearly at a 90 degree angle too.

I’d never use it again.

cython

Boilermaker wrote: »

Why did you fail to use the dedicated cycle lane?

Do you think its safe for someone averaging 43kph to use a shared-use off road path (it's split between peds and cyclists)? Or reasonable that they have to yield to traffic coming from side roads as would have been required when the white crossover vehicle pulled out as they passed the junction.

Flawed question (by use of the term dedicated) is flawed.

Rechuchote

cython wrote: »

Do you think its safe for someone averaging 43kph to use a shared-use off road path (it's split between peds and cyclists)?

Interesting point - the continual fobbing-off of both pedestrians and cyclists with "shared use" paths is something that really has to stop.

Build decent infra and don't be pretending that streaks of paint in the city and paths shared between mammies with buggies and people training for races in the country and suburbs are accurate!

site_owner

Boilermaker wrote: »

Why did you fail to use the dedicated cycle lane?

Didn't fail to do anything .

I legally chose not to use a shared use path for a multitude of reasons.

Learn the rules of the road before getting back into your taxi or whatever it is you use to sit in traffic

Boilermaker

site_owner wrote: »

Didn't fail to do anything .

I legally chose not to use a shared use path for a multitude of reasons.

Learn the rules of the road before getting back into your taxi or whatever it is you use to sit in traffic

That's a very defensive answer, I was just wondering what your rationale for not using the lane was.

Look up "first amendment audits" on YouTube, "patriots" going out of their way to wind people up. I was wondering if you were one of those.

AndrewJRenko

Boilermaker wrote: »

Why did you fail to use the dedicated cycle lane?

'fail' seems to imply that there is some requirement or obligation or expectation to use the 'dedicated cycle lane'. There is no requirement or obligation or expectation to use the 'dedicated cycle lane, any more than there is a requirement for motorists to use the 'dedicated motorway'.

Boilermaker

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

'fail' seems to imply that there is some requirement or obligation or expectation to use the 'dedicated cycle lane'. There is no requirement or obligation or expectation to use the 'dedicated cycle lane, any more than there is a requirement for motorists to use the 'dedicated motorway'.

Do you expect pedestrians to use the footpath if it's provided?

brianomc

Boilermaker wrote: »

Do you expect pedestrians to use the footpath if it's provided?

Nope, I just overtake them safely, without telling them what to do and get on with my day.

brianomc

Had my closest pass for a good while this morning, travelling inbound along the Chapelizod Road, which is a pretty goddamn wide road as has been mentioned before.

Some guy wanted me to sit in his passenger seat he was so close. He then checked his rearview mirror as he went by, he didn't hit me so he will probably deem that a safe overtake. Needless to say I hadn't switched my camera on at that stage.

An yes there is an offload cycle lane, but I dislike punctures so I'll stick to the road thanks. That and I hate the junction where traffic exits the park near Island Bridge, vehicles shoot out the gate to stop at the edge of the road, which means they cross the cycle lane. If you're motoring along they wont see you until it's too late.

magicbastarder

Boilermaker wrote: »

Do you expect pedestrians to use the footpath if it's provided?

interesting that you mention this. if a footpath is provided, a pedestrian is legally required to use it.
if there is a cycle lane or cycle path provided, a cyclist is *not* legally required to use it, unless it's a cycle lane running contraflow up a one way street, or through a pedestrianised area.

also, it's probably rare that a footpath will place a pedestrian in greater danger if they use it; it's depressingly common for cycle infrastructure to be designed by people who don't like cyclists.

rodneyTrotter.

site_owner wrote: »

and a taxi man trying to run me off the road and give me a piece of his mind out his window at malahide.
according to strava i averaged 43kph from portmarnock to malahide and he was barely behind me at all before he started closing in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWZkD6bM2I4

sorry for the terrible video editing

Don’t be afraid to report him if needed , I had an incident recently on the back roads near there . Reported to traffic watch . Didn’t hear back for 3 weeks until Malahide station rang me out of the blue . I had video footage of someone dangerously overtaking me then pulling in nearly squashing me against a wall when a car in the opposite side nearly hit her . Usual story over took me on a blind bend .
The guard in Malahide was a gent . He even called up to her house . I didn’t want to take it further as I was unhurt but asked the officer to tell her how dangerous it was and how close she came to creaming me .

As for that stretch of cycle path near where you had the encounter on . It’s ridiculous and not fit for purpose . I’ve alsi had abuse for not using it by a taxi man there . Probably the same bloke!

Boilermaker

magicbastarder wrote: »

interesting that you mention this. if a footpath is provided, a pedestrian is legally required to use it.

I suspected that was the case but have you the law that states it handy?

magicbastarder

i looked for it, closest i could get so far was the ROTR; "If there is a footpath, you must use it"; must is highlighted.

magicbastarder

wanted to find it because i'm stubborn; 46 (4) - http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1997/si/182/made/en/print

(4) Subject to sub-article (5), save when crossing the roadway, a pedestrian shall use a footway if one is provided, and if one is not provided, shall keep as near as possible to the right edge of the roadway.

i'd not realised that walking facing oncoming traffic was in the law, and not just a common sense thing.

Rechuchote

brianomc wrote: »

I hate the junction where traffic exits the park near Island Bridge, vehicles shoot out the gate to stop at the edge of the road, which means they cross the cycle lane. If you're motoring along they wont see you until it's too late.

A man was killed on his bicycle just there - there was a ghost bike, I think?

brianomc

Rechuchote wrote: »

A man was killed on his bicycle just there - there was a ghost bike, I think?

Yeah, it's still there. I pass it daily, passing by the day after his death and the first few days of the ghost bike being installed really sent a chill down my spine.

Rechuchote

You'd kind of think a ghost bike would be a hint to the planners: "Hey, what about taking a look at this piece of infrastructure and designing it better?" But no, not there, and not at the awful humpback Emmet Bridge in Harold's Cross, which really should be razed to canal level along with its vision-blocking hill and replaced with something flat and wide where you can see the way (but with the ability to raise for the very occasional boat that passes there).

tomasrojo

magicbastarder wrote: »

wanted to find it because i'm stubborn; 46 (4) - http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1997/si/182/made/en/print

i'd not realised that walking facing oncoming traffic was in the law, and not just a common sense thing.

I'll happily break this law if the road is veering to the right. Walking blind into blind oncoming traffic is a bad idea.

Type 17

Rechuchote wrote: »

You'd kind of think a ghost bike would be a hint to the planners: "Hey, what about taking a look at this piece of infrastructure and designing it better?"...

You're obviously too young to realise just how pathetic Irish infrastructure planning was/is - in the second half of the 20th century, whenever people were dying like flies at a particular piece of poor infrastructure, it never occurred to local authorities to actually fix/redesign it - instead, they put up a sign to warn people that their nearby piece of infrastructure, that they were in charge of maintaining, was p1ss-poor, and was costing lives...:mad:

eeeee

Mod Note: Warning for Boilermaker, please familiarise yourself with the forum charter before posting again, in particular Rule 8.
Any questions PM me do not respond in thread.

site_owner

tomasrojo wrote: »

I'll happily break this law if the road is veering to the right. Walking blind into blind oncoming traffic is a bad idea.

Same with humpback bridges. This law doesn't seem to be very sensible.

Alanstrainor

site_owner wrote: »

and a taxi man trying to run me off the road and give me a piece of his mind out his window at malahide.
according to strava i averaged 43kph from portmarnock to malahide and he was barely behind me at all before he started closing in


sorry for the terrible video editing

Yeah feck that. That cycle lane is a complete joke, covered in ****e, your lose right away at the GAA club on ahead and it spits you back onto the road after about 600M.

I've had the taxi wanting to have a word in the same way recently. I blare my Hornit until they go away. It's effective.