Be good if the police had some kind of training course for these incidents. Like the speed awareness course.
I know that's fantasy land though.
Glad you are OK, and hope the police do take some kind of action.
Bike Forum
When BIG things close pass
Advertisement
-
Posted 19 hours ago #
-
DezB - Member
No, I headbutted the **** trailer and called it a poof. Did you read my "what happened was..." post?Yes, but it doesn't answer my question.
What it says is that at the point he started his overtake (or was alongside), YOU were accelerating. He started to overtake based on your relative speed a few seconds before coming along side you (remember, he's higher up and can see further) and as you hit the downslope, you accelerated and thus decreased the relative speeds between you, thus making it harder for him to clear you in the space available. Having been in this situation before with trucks and tractors (they don't anticipate that you'll speed up so dramatically when moving from either a flat or especially a slight rise to a downhill), they can't easily back out of the move once started (again, they think they'll not be able to slow enough to pull in behind you and so will crush you) so the best thing is to back off and brake slightly so that he clears you quicker.
I'll fully admit that it's terrifying, but would also say that whilst it ended up dangerous, I'd doubt it was done maliciously or carelessly and that it could have been mitigated somewhat by backing off.
Posted 3 hours ago # -
Daffy » I'd doubt it was done ... carelessly
By definition it was. I'm sure the HC says something about anticipating when overtaking and as normalised as it might be for a driver not to think ahead that's not exactly an excuse. When going for an overtake you should be sure that won't put you into conflict with other road users.
Posted 3 hours ago # -
I agree, that tractor should not have continued the overtake maneuver once the oncoming traffic was identified ahead, it's not that hard dab of brake and pull back in. It's a tractor probably can only do 20mph.
Posted 2 hours ago # -
No offence Daffy, but you're talking shit. He shouldn't have started the overtaking move. Full stop. No excuses.
I could see the car coming the other way. I was surprised that the actual TRACTOR had started to try to overtake me at that point (you can hear me grumble in the video, (well I can!)), THEN the bloody trailer comes into view and I'm shocked and hit the brakes and move over. At which point the swearing starts.
I've tweeted to Hants police road unit, so will see if I get a reply on there.Posted 2 hours ago # -
I had a jersey with a missing sleeve thanks to a pass like that.
The driver all but shit himself when he realised and spent about half an hour apologising and asking what he could do to make it right. This was in france, so a whole different set of social rules.
i.e. cyclists aren't scum.
I suspect he'd have called the police himself if he'd had access to a phone.
Posted 1 hour ago # -
Daffy - Rule 168?
Basically, don't accelerate if being overtaken, slow down to facilitate the overtake.
The balance here is in determining if the overtake started despite the oncoming traffic. I guess Debz was there, the rest of us can only speculate.
Posted 1 hour ago # -
No offence Daffy, but you're talking shit. He shouldn't have started the overtaking move. Full stop. No excuses.
please don't misunderstand, I agree completely, but you're completely missing the point of what I'm saying.
Yes - the overtake shouldn't have happened, but once you're in the middle of it (i.e. as soon as you're aware of the overtake and the oncoming car, backing off or breaking would've made it MUCH safer for YOU. After all, it's your life in danger and you do have a say in how this plays out. Simply being in the right won't keep you alive when Muppets do stupid things, but getting out of their way can certainly help.
I'm stating this from personal experience of numerous similar events - I.E.
Truck overtaking on a downhill lefthander meaning the trailer is going to take a narrower line to the cab. Backing out is the only option to getting squeezed, so if you see it starting to happen, you've gotta react from a self-preservation point of view rather than keeping the hammer down to prove that an overtake wasn't really necessary.I'm genuinely glad you're okay and am not looking for a fight, but based on what you've posted and upon how I used to react on the bike when commuting, I think we might (at one time) have been of similar mindsets when being pointlessly overtaken by something/someone.
Posted 1 hour ago # -
Far better to abort an overtake than try and push it through. Thats how people end up dead.
Posted 1 hour ago # -
I've tweeted to Hants police road unit, so will see if I get a reply on there.
Are you taking bets?
Posted 57 minutes ago # -
backing off or breaking would've made it MUCH safer for YOU.
It couldn't have been any safer for me than I made it. I'm here, typing this and not squashed under a massive trailer. It's that binary.
Maybe you're not, but there always seems to be someone who comes out with "oh could've done this better than you" on these threads. And yep, there are definitely times when I've taken the risky option. But not this one.
Are you taking bets?
A mysterious 'like' from "Bez"
Posted 45 minutes ago # -
So I can come back in a week or so and check my bet is safe
Posted 36 minutes ago # -
Daffy » Yes - the overtake shouldn't have happened, but once you're in the middle of it (i.e. as soon as you're aware of the overtake and the oncoming car, backing off or breaking would've made it MUCH safer for YOU.
The thing is, if I understand correctly that's what he did do. Meanwhile the comment of yours I previously highlighted (along with a couple of other little bits of your previous post) do seem to be excusing the driver to some extent. According to Debz the situation was apparent before the overtaking move started, though the driver should have backed off when he realised as I presume he did at some point. If as suggested by some it was difficult for him to back off once he'd started, then that's another reason he should never have started overtaking.
It wasn't just a mistake, nor a momentary lapse, it was a conscious decision to take a chance on the overtake. Part of the whole "must overtake cyclists" thing, which seems to be the justification the two caravan towers I mentioned up there - they couldn't give me enough space because staying behind wasn't an option. I'd say those attitudes boil my piss, but that's trivialising it. It does boil my piss that the justice system in this country doesn't seem to consider such things to be dangerous driving because it's not far below the standard of an average driver.
Posted 27 minutes ago # -
According to Debz
Where?
But yeah, spot on. " it was a conscious decision to take a chance on the overtake."
Also, I would've been gone in less than a minute - turning left (if I hadn't chased him). I'm going the back way home tonight. Much more pleasant.Posted 23 minutes ago # -
DezB » Where?
I assumed that was your new online dating alter ego
Posted 13 minutes ago #
Advertisement
Advertisement
Reply
You must log in to post.