Near Misses Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

magicbastarder

'mandatory cycle lane' does not mean mandatory for cyclists, FWIW.
the dutch have a nickname for cycle lanes which are nothing more than a line of paint; they call them murder strips.

Smee_Again

riewomann wrote: »

I love cycling as much as the next person, but the optics of this are terrible. Its a big two fingers to everyone else and reeks of a "my child is the most important thing in the world, so if I have to incenvenience hundreds of people for them to have a spin, then so be it".

Rant over.

Makes a change from the "I and my car are the most importantest person ever, get out of my way" attitude that is so prevalent on Irish roads.

buffalo

riewomann wrote: »

I love cycling as much as the next person, but the optics of this are terrible. Its a big two fingers to everyone else and reeks of a "my child is the most important thing in the world, so if I have to incenvenience hundreds of people for them to have a spin, then so be it".

I think it reeks of "I know this strip of paint won't protect my child from drivers who refuse or don't know how to share the road, so I will".

riewomann

magicbastarder wrote: »

the dutch have a nickname for cycle lanes which are nothing more than a line of paint; they call them murder strips.

Right a bit sensationalist then.

Cycling in both the cycle lane and then in the traffic lane has the further issue of when another cyclist (capable of cycling without a chaperone) needs to overtake, they have to overtake the two of them and go right over close to the approcahing traffic.

I'm assuming the reason they are "protecting" their child is both concern their little angel might make a mistake and weave out of the cycle lane, and to make them very visible to the traffic behind. I can see this problem getting worse and worse, there are already motorists who treat cyclists with contempt and this kind of behaviour will only serve to increase this.

Probably the wrong forum to bring this up in.

After being out of the city since March last year the standard of cycling seems to have gotten far worse in the city. As usual it's probably only 1% of cyclists but they are the most visible (like the minority of reckless motorists).

Seth Brundle

riewomann wrote: »

I've being noticing where a parent and child are cycling, the child will be in the cycle lane as normal and the parent cycling parallel to them in the traffic lane.

The parent obviously recognises that cycle lanes aren't safe and offer no protection to the occupants.
Maybe both of them should occupy the driving lane, taking Primary Position as recommended by the RSA.

riewomann wrote: »

I appreciate their will to protect their child, although by cycling in the traffic lane they are holding up traffic. Even where it is a mandatory cycle lane.

A person on a bike is part of traffic according to the law. They are not really holding up drivers, no more than drivers hold up cyclists in town and city centres.

riewomann wrote: »

This type of behaviour will only create further animosity amongst some motorists for cyclists. Surely if your child is ready to cycle then let them cycle, or if not take them off the primary routes where traffic is whizzing by.

If a motorist takes offence at a parent protecting their child then there is something seriously wrong with that person! In terms of the primary routes, there may be no alternative for them.
The roads are for everyone, not just impatient drivers.

riewomann wrote: »

I love cycling as much as the next person, but the optics of this are terrible. Its a big two fingers to everyone else and reeks of a "my child is the most important thing in the world, so if I have to incenvenience hundreds of people for them to have a spin, then so be it".

I agree. It highlights the entitled attitude out there amongst some road users that they are more important than a vulnerable person travelling more slowly.
It might be best for everyone if their driving privilege was revoked.

Dowee

riewomann wrote: »

I've being noticing where a parent and child are cycling, the child will be in the cycle lane as normal and the parent cycling parallel to them in the traffic lane.

I appreciate their will to protect their child, although by cycling in the traffic lane they are holding up traffic. Even where it is a mandatory cycle lane.

This type of behaviour will only create further animosity amongst some motorists for cyclists. Surely if your child is ready to cycle then let them cycle, or if not take them off the primary routes where traffic is whizzing by.

I love cycling as much as the next person, but the optics of this are terrible. Its a big two fingers to everyone else and reeks of a "my child is the most important thing in the world, so if I have to incenvenience hundreds of people for them to have a spin, then so be it".

Rant over.

So many things wrong with this.

1. Cycling two abreast: Perfectly Legal.
2. Cycling in manner to protect a less experience, vulnerable road user from impatient idiots in cars who will do everything and anything to get in front: Good and sensible parenting, most likely as a result of a number of previous bad experiences with poor drivers.
3. Mandatory cycle lane: This means cars can't drive or park in it. Not that people on bikes must use it. The legal requirement for people on bikes to use them was removed years ago because many are unsafe and not fit for purpose.
4. Inconveniencing 100's of people: Really? There were approx 50 - 100 cars behind this parent and child?
5. Having a spin: Cycling is also a means of transport. It is not all about "having a spin". I regularly cycle to places (sports training, the shops etc) with my kids.
6. "the optics of this are terrible": It's not about optics, it's about sharing the road with more vulnerable road users. Sadly, in my experience people in cars are extremely impatient and are more than happy to endanger people on bikes just to get to the next red light 2 seconds faster and frankly that seems like exactly what the situation was here.

The roads are for people, not for cars. When on the roads you will sometimes meet slower moving vehicles / people. Suck it up and act accordingly. If you get delayed for 30 seconds behind a parent and child on a bike it isn't the end of the world.

Rant over too!

07Lapierre

riewomann wrote: »

"my child is the most important thing in the world, so if I have to incenvenience hundreds of people for them to have a spin, then so be it".

Rant over.

That's exactly what i think to my self when i'm closed passed by an Audi Q7 travelling at 100kph, with a "Baby on Board" sticker on the back window!

magicbastarder

riewomann wrote: »

Probably the wrong forum to bring this up in.

probably the wrong thread anyway, there's no mention of a near miss here.
back on topic please folks; this has the clear potential of just being a lot of back and forth generating heat and not much light

i'll be deleting any continuation of this without further comment/warning.

Seth Brundle

(nothing to do with me)

https://twitter.com/KevSheedy/status/1392869875022970889

Mundo7976

https://maps.app.goo.gl/gg8jN4Lc6M1ZQTEL7

There a brand spanking new, cant miss it, red tarred cycle lane on this road. Yesterday a woman turned left without as much as a glance to her right. Thankfully the approaching teen on his bike could read what was happening and managed to get around behind her. Fcuking ridiculous how no-one is paying attention to the bike lanes around Ashbourne, it would make you fearful.

RobertFoster

The ones on the main street are great! (for collecting a takeaway, nipping to the ATM, delivering to businesses...)

The J Stands for Jay

Dowee wrote: »

So many things wrong with this.

1. Cycling two abreast: Perfectly Legal.

Anyone complaining about cycling 2 abreast is saying that they believe cyclists should cycle in the gutter so they can be passed without a proper overtaking manouver. I also fail to understand how they think 2 cyclists in single file is easier to overtake than 2 abreast.

Seth Brundle

Lost for words...

https://twitter.com/MacL0ve/status/1393476274224603138?s=19

magicbastarder

thankfully a garda saw it.

Reality_Check1

Had a very pleasant interaction yesterday on my spin that I thought I would share. There is about 2km of road beside my house from the local town that really unpleasant to cycle on - lots of turns and is narrow enough - if someone decides to pass you its nearly always dangerous. I hate cycling on it and do so only out of necessity.

As I was just starting into it I notice a heavy lorry behind me. ****ing great I thought and I was tensing up for the inevitable close pass but.....it never came. He was happy to sit behind me at 30ish km an hour and gave me plenty of space. I nearly didn't know what to do with this Anyway after about a km or so I pulled into a drive way to let him pass and he gave me a happy beep and on he went. Cant say some of the cars behind him felt the same but can't win them all!

Wildly Boaring

Well I had a nice 2 hour spin Clogherhead direction but then came home through drogheda.

Christ.

A woman threw open passanger door of car in my face.

Another genius changed into my lane without indicating and caused me to slam on.

And finally I got green light an as myself and car behind took off 2 broke the red light.

Maybe I'm not remembering what it was like pre-covid but to me the traffic around town seems to be worse now than pre-covid the tailback on Donore Rd yesterday and at John's shop on the Platin Rd were unreal. Don't recall them being as bad as that. Donore Rd usually backs up on the way in for evening rush but it was backed up in both directions from about 2pm yesterday.

Great on the bike though you sail passed the whole mess then you get a bus driver trying to get out of the station at the bottom trying to bully his way out as I approach and ends up blocking the lane and the footpath for a woman with small kids and a buggy. She wasn't shy about telling him to reverse, although she used slightly stronger language

TallGlass2

Good camera system for the push bike?

Eamonnator

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe I'm not remembering what it was like pre-covid but to me the traffic around town seems to be worse now than pre-covid the tailback on Donore Rd yesterday and at John's shop on the Platin Rd were unreal. Don't recall them being as bad as that. Donore Rd usually backs up on the way in for evening rush but it was backed up in both directions from about 2pm yesterday.

Great on the bike though you sail passed the whole mess then you get a bus driver trying to get out of the station at the bottom trying to bully his way out as I approach and ends up blocking the lane and the footpath for a woman with small kids and a buggy. She wasn't shy about telling him to reverse, although she used slightly stronger language

I notice the Dublin Road is crazy at 3.30/4.00pm, backed up nearly to The Black Bull, bad at lunch time as well.

Eamonnator

Eamonnator wrote: »

I notice the Dublin Road is crazy at 3.30/4.00pm, backed up nearly to The Black Bull, bad at lunch time as well.

Herself is usually heading home along there in the evenings or mid afternoon and reckons it's busier there too.

AndrewJRenko

TallGlass2 wrote: »

Good camera system for the push bike?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=114345374

Few older threads around too

riewomann

McGaggs wrote: »

Anyone complaining about cycling 2 abreast is saying that they believe cyclists should cycle in the gutter so they can be passed without a proper overtaking manouver. I also fail to understand how they think 2 cyclists in single file is easier to overtake than 2 abreast.

Where there is a cycle lane, one can pass a cyclist safely despite oncoming traffic as no lane change is necessary. ie cyclist in cycle lane does not affect traffic in regular lane.

Where there is a cyclist in the cycle lane and another cyclist cycling in the traffic lane, one then cannot proceed unness the oncoming traffic lane is clear as you essentially have a cyclist using the regular lane who needs to be overtaken.

I take your point that if it was a regular traffic lane it wouldn't make much difference if it was one or two abreast as the oncoming lane would need to be clear either way (it does make a small difference in time taken to complete the overtake).

I know it is complicated, but it may help to read the post you are commenting on.

07Lapierre

riewomann wrote: »

Where there is a cycle lane, one can pass a cyclist safely despite oncoming traffic as no lane change is necessary. ie cyclist in cycle lane does not affect traffic in regular lane.

Where there is a cyclist in the cycle lane and another cyclist cycling in the traffic lane, one then cannot proceed unless the oncoming traffic lane is clear as you essentially have a cyclist using the regular lane who needs to be overtaken.

How wide is this "Regular Lane"? it must be very, very narrow? I've often overtaken two cyclists cycling two abreast without having to enter the oncoming lane?

Smee_Again

riewomann wrote: »

Where there is a cycle lane, one can pass a cyclist safely despite oncoming traffic as no lane change is necessary. ie cyclist in cycle lane does not affect traffic in regular lane.

This is not the case more often than it is, but sadly many motorists, you included, seem to think that as long as there is a painted line between them and the cyclist it’s safe to pass.

Seth Brundle

riewomann wrote: »

Where there is a cycle lane, one can pass a cyclist safely despite oncoming traffic as no lane change is necessary. ie cyclist in cycle lane does not affect traffic in regular lane.

Where there is a cyclist in the cycle lane and another cyclist cycling in the traffic lane, one then cannot proceed unness the oncoming traffic lane is clear as you essentially have a cyclist using the regular lane who needs to be overtaken.

I take your point that if it was a regular traffic lane it wouldn't make much difference if it was one or two abreast as the oncoming lane would need to be clear either way (it does make a small difference in time taken to complete the overtake).

I know it is complicated, but it may help to read the post you are commenting on.

Since when do people not need to know the Rules of the Road in order to pass the test?

riewomann

Smee_Again wrote: »

This is not the case more often than it is, but sadly many motorists, you included, seem to think that as long as there is a painted line between them and the cyclist it’s safe to pass.

Congratulations on fulfilling the entitled cyclist stereotype in a record no of characters.

Seth Brundle

riewomann wrote: »

Congratulations on fulfilling the entitled cyclist stereotype in a record no of characters.

Congratulation on fulfulling the ill-informed self-entitled driver stereotype in a not so-record number of posts :rolleyes:

riewomann

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Congratulation on fulfulling the ill-informed self-entitled driver stereotype in a not so-record number of posts :rolleyes:

Thank you.

I am also a cyclist and so am more informed and knowledgeable than others.

Please edit your post accordingly.

Wildly Boaring

riewomann wrote: »

I am also a cyclist

Seems to form part of the homicidal driver's briefcase these days.

Seth Brundle

riewomann wrote: »

Thank you.

You're welcome

riewomann wrote: »

I am also a cyclist and so am more informed and knowledgeable than others.

Funny thing is, I don't believe you. You seem to think a parent cycling in a position that will protect their child is not a good idea because drivers might get held up. You now come out with some nonsense about overtaking which is all wrong.
I'm not seeing the informed and knowledgeable bit in your posts to be honest!

riewomann wrote: »

Please edit your post accordingly.

No! You're not my mother!