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

average_runner

CramCycle wrote: »

Does it really matter, a pedestrian was on the road, by the sounds of it the cyclist could stop, Lifting the pedestrian out of it achieves nothing. Say careful there if they were in the wrong was as far as it should have went.

regrettably there are a small number of people who will not notice everyone else doing the right thing, and paint every cyclist in their mind with the same brush. You'll never change their minds, don't try.

And if that was a car on the road and it hit the pedestrian, the car insurance company would pay up straight away, happen to a former worker of ours.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's a bit different to your original statement: "cyclists got their green to go across the bridge"

Even if the pedestrian crosses on a red, the cylists/motorists or scooter has to stop. Silly pedestrian and plenty out there

Tombo2001

average_runner wrote: »

Even if the pedestrian crosses on a red, the cylists/motorists or scooter has to stop. Silly pedestrian and plenty out there

I was at this junction yesterday.

A few points to make -

This probably isn't an excuse but its worth taking into account.

The 'cyclist' light.

If you are in Stockholm, there are 5000 of these. People are used to them.

In Dublin - there are probably less than 20. People, including cyclists, are not used to using them.

At this particular junction - the cyclist light on the far side of the road is quite far away, and the light is very small. There are often people in front of it. Its easy not to notice it.

Steoller

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Good to see it finally progressing, but isn't there a time limit for such offences - shorter than six months afaik.

I'm not sure what the statute of limitations is, but perhaps by following me to have a go after the fact, makes this more than just a dangerous driving complaint. As I say, I don't know. We'll see how the process goes.

gmacww

Not a near miss but here is an angle we often don't talk about. Certainly not on here.

Every morning cycling the N81 into work a truck (40ft) comes up behind me. Many do but this one in particular is memorable. He first passed me about 6 months or so ago. He waits patiently behind, not right up me but a good distance. As soon as I can see the road clear and there is enough for him to over take I wave him on by and always he beeps twice on his way pass and I wave. Always a very pleasant interaction. That was 6 or so months back.

Now I don't know if drivers talk to each other over radios but in the past few months I've seen more and more truck drivers doing this to me. On the N81 all the regular trucks that I meet always provide lots of room and beep as they pass. Thank you folks you've no idea how appreciated it is.

On another note yesterday on the way home a revelation hit me. I was going up the N81 in absolute monsoon conditions. Many times I had to signal out into the lane to indicate I was moving out to avoid massive gatherings of water on the side. Not a single even remotely close pass all the way home. It seems the shocking weather put every driver on top form. Was great.

CramCycle

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Maybe cyclists aren't our biggest problem at that bridge;

https://streamable.com/zmzvt

I can't figure out which point your trying to make, as I can't see the lights change, is it that there is too big a delay between the lights changing?

Salary Negotiator

gmacww wrote: »

Not a near miss but here is an angle we often don't talk about. Certainly not on here.

Every morning cycling the N81 into work a truck (40ft) comes up behind me. Many do but this one in particular is memorable. He first passed me about 6 months or so ago. He waits patiently behind, not right up me but a good distance. As soon as I can see the road clear and there is enough for him to over take I wave him on by and always he beeps twice on his way pass and I wave. Always a very pleasant interaction. That was 6 or so months back.

Now I don't know if drivers talk to each other over radios but in the past few months I've seen more and more truck drivers doing this to me. On the N81 all the regular trucks that I meet always provide lots of room and beep as they pass. Thank you folks you've no idea how appreciated it is.

On another note yesterday on the way home a revelation hit me. I was going up the N81 in absolute monsoon conditions. Many times I had to signal out into the lane to indicate I was moving out to avoid massive gatherings of water on the side. Not a single even remotely close pass all the way home. It seems the shocking weather put every driver on top form. Was great.

I think good behaviour breeds good behviour, I've noticed that if I'm driving and I indicate around a cyclist the vehicle behind will too and this is on roads where people often don't (though I can't say whether the vehicle behind would have done so anyway).

I also think that when the weather is poor, drivers are more aware of cyclists/pedestrians etc because the poor conditions shunt them out of autopilot so they are thinking more about what they do.

Salary Negotiator

CramCycle wrote: »

I can't figure out which point your trying to make, as I can't see the lights change, is it that there is too big a delay between the lights changing?

Not allowed turn left onto the bridge.

Tombo2001

CramCycle wrote: »

I can't figure out which point your trying to make, as I can't see the lights change, is it that there is too big a delay between the lights changing?

There is no left turn.

To be fair - it does feck all harm when someone does a left turn. Its the type of rule breaking I would liken to cyclists breaking lights. Breaking the rules, but not dangerous driving.

(I get the sense I may have written a number of controversial things just there ….)

Tombo2001

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

I think good behaviour breeds good behviour, I've noticed that if I'm driving and I indicate around a cyclist the vehicle behind will too and this is on roads where people often don't (though I can't say whether the vehicle behind would have done so anyway).

I also think that when the weather is poor, drivers are more aware of cyclists/pedestrians etc because the poor conditions shunt them out of autopilot so they are thinking more about what they do.

I'd say the opposite - reduced visibility and people are frazzled by the deadlock.

CramCycle

I think it was the red ped light threw me. You can turn right with thee filter from the far side and that is it. Another flaw of Irish infrastructure. The ped light should go green whenever peds have the right of way and not only if someone has pushed a button. Really f'in stupid

gmacww

Tombo2001 wrote: »

There is no left turn.

To be fair - it does feck all harm when someone does a left turn.

The reason there is no left turn onto that bridge though was not a safety issue it was light sequencing and buildup on guild street. Talking to a traffic planner at a meeting one evening about it he told me during the design phase the sequence of lights at both ends of the bridge would see a large build up on the bridge if traffic can go left. The bridge will be clogged given the south sequence which will mean guild will be a standstill when they get the green light as the bridge will be full. The knock-on affect of this is of course Amien St. It's the reason a lot of cars on the north quays turn up Park Lane.

Tombo2001

gmacww wrote: »

The reason there is no left turn onto that bridge though was not a safety issue it was light sequencing and buildup on guild street. Talking to a traffic planner at a meeting one evening about it he told me during the design phase the sequence of lights at both ends of the bridge would see a large build up on the bridge if traffic can go left. The bridge will be clogged given the south sequence which will mean guild will be a standstill when they get the green light as the bridge will be full. The knock-on affect of this is of course Amien St. It's the reason a lot of cars on the north quays turn up Park Lane.

Fair point.

About five years ago I had to drive from Eastwall to Harcourt Street in evening rush hour. I went via the 3 Arena.

My god trying to get across the river was a nightmare, I was bamboozled.

Which was something I was previously unaware of, and since then have never experienced, thanks to the bike.

To think there are people making this commute every single day.....

blackwhite

gmacww wrote: »

The reason there is no left turn onto that bridge though was not a safety issue it was light sequencing and buildup on guild street. Talking to a traffic planner at a meeting one evening about it he told me during the design phase the sequence of lights at both ends of the bridge would see a large build up on the bridge if traffic can go left. The bridge will be clogged given the south sequence which will mean guild will be a standstill when they get the green light as the bridge will be full. The knock-on affect of this is of course Amien St. It's the reason a lot of cars on the north quays turn up Park Lane.

I worked close by when the bridge was being installed. The company made enquiries about it at the time, and we were informed the reason for no left turn was to prevent people using it to avoid the Eastlink toll - which it was feared would lead to congestion on Macken St and Pearse St/Ringsend Rd.

Same reason that there's no left turn allowed at the junction of Sheriff St upper and Guild St.

blackwhite

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Fair point.

About five years ago I had to drive from Eastwall to Harcourt Street in evening rush hour. I went via the 3 Arena.

My god trying to get across the river was a nightmare, I was bamboozled.

Which was something I was previously unaware of, and since then have never experienced, thanks to the bike.

To think there are people making this commute every single day.....

Only legal way to get from the North Quays between the Convention Centre and the Point onto the Samuel Becket in a car is to either turn in behind PwC, come across the Luas bridge and out onto Guild St (at lights where the yellow box for turning onto Guild St are routinely blocked); or else to go past the bridge and then come back up on Mayor St and turn onto Guild St.

Whilst I can understand the logic of making it harder for commuters to drive into the city centre - this is also the first part of the City's traffic system that many tourists arriving into Dublin Port will experience - the signage needs to be improved massively

Stark

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I'd say the opposite - reduced visibility and people are frazzled by the deadlock.

Yup. I hate cycling on rainy days, not because of getting wet (I have decent raingear), but because I encounter so much more stupid dangerous **** on those days.

JazzyJ

Not a near miss but encountered a ridiculously enraged driver this afternoon on St. Stephens Green East.

Pulled up to red lights here intending to take the right turn onto Merrion Row.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/muc7fwKtoeH4uf6w9

I moved across the advanced stop box (in which said driver was 3/4 the way in) to the centre of middle lane. Cue lots of revving of the engine and shouting something or other out the window. Took no notice.

Once the lights go green he lays on the horn, and takes off wheel spinning into the right lane past me, and then cuts back across the two lanes to make the left turn past the Shelbourne. Stops at a red lights at that junction of course and is screaming at me that I should be in the bike lane!

I was going to question his heritage but thought the better of it and continued on my way about town encountering plenty of courteous drivers.

AndrewJRenko

Near enough miss for this cyclist pushing through against a u-turning idiot driver;

https://streamable.com/lx7mx

magicbastarder

that cyclist was a bleeding idiot there. it was quite clear what the driver was doing but the cyclist proceeded anyway.

crisco10

magicbastarder wrote: »

that cyclist was a bleeding idiot there. it was quite clear what the driver was doing but the cyclist proceeded anyway.

Hard not to agree. In the spirit of the post a while back, good behaviour breeds good behaviour the cyclist could have slowed a little to allow the car complete it's u turn and stop blocking the road.

AndrewJRenko

crisco10 wrote: »

Hard not to agree. In the spirit of the post a while back, good behaviour breeds good behaviour the cyclist could have slowed a little to allow the car complete it's u turn and stop blocking the road.

That's one option. Or the driver could not have done an illegal u-turn in the first place. Or the driver could have given way to the cyclist and not blocked cycle traffic.

Etc

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's one option. Or the driver could not have done an illegal u-turn in the first place. Or the driver could have given way to the cyclist and not blocked cycle traffic.

Or the cyclist could have not risked his own neck like the one behind...

TheChizler

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's one option. Or the driver could not have done an illegal u-turn in the first place.

What was illegal about it?

AndrewJRenko

Etc wrote: »

Or the cyclist could have not risked his own neck like the one behind...

I think that option was well covered when I said "that's one option'.

Weepsie

TheChizler wrote: »

What was illegal about it?

Yeah this. Unless there was a sign strictly prohibiting it, or a continuous white line, I'm not sure that it was.

Rotr have certain guidelines, but rta only seems to have specifics as to how it applies for a new fixed penalty offence.

AndrewJRenko

TheChizler wrote: »

What was illegal about it?

It wasn't "completely safe" and he didn't give way to all other road users or check carefully for cyclists.

Weepsie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It wasn't "completely safe" and he didn't give way to all other road users or check carefully for cyclists.

Ah here, they were well through the maneuver before any approaching traffic was nearing them.

Rotr are not statute. They're guidelines. Point it out in the RTA

You're looking to be offended here

AndrewJRenko

Weepsie wrote: »

Ah here, they were well through the maneuver before any approaching traffic was nearing them.

You're looking to be offended here

I'm looking for drivers to comply with the Rules of the Road. If they were through the maneuver, how did the cyclist end up in front of them?

Weepsie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm looking for drivers to comply with the Rules of the Road.

They did. In the video you can see them beginning their maneuver from well back. You'd need to have seriously poor observation to not see it. It was at most 1-2 seconds max, the sort of impatience we always complain about.

Well into the maneuver then. Cyclist is the one who was entirely brain-dead there imo

magicbastarder

you can argue about whether the driver wrong all day long, and i'm not going to.
regardless of whether the driver was wrong, what was happening could not have been clearer and more telegraphed to the cyclist unless it had been tattooed on the back of his hands at birth, but he proceeded anyway.