Near Miss of the Day 290: "You were trying to kill me" (includes swearing)

BadgerBeaver wrote:

Does it make sense to move to the primary road position for pinch points like this?

 

Yes, every time. Even if I do a shoulder check and there is nothing in my vision, I still ride primary. You never know who is speeding up to get in front, turning onto the cariageway etc.

I feel that it if I do this every time, it is a reminder to myself and an automatic reaction. Also I always start off from an ASL, traffic lights etc in primary. Road positioning is very important and if a driver has a problem and swears blue murder at me for "being in the middle of the road" I just ignore them as I know that they are completly wrong and totally ignorant.

liam92 wrote:

yet more evidence that painted lines do absolutely nothing to protect cyclists. Totally stupid design having such a narrow lane in the first place and hardly a surprise that there is a conflict with traffic when the lane just suddenly ends. Obviously the van driver should have anticipated this but would probably have been avoided altogether if the cyclist was either A. in a primary position in the lane of traffic or B. fully segregated on a purpose built cycle track. 

Or the best option for people on bikes no motors on the existing infra, removing motor traffic from strategic parts of the network means no building, no narrow bits, no deferring to exits/'motor' roads and continuous/direct. Segregated even in the best country in the world for cycling fails in a couple of those aspects, I don't want segregated here because it will never dissaude motorists, just always be piecemeal crap that is neither fish nor fowl.

But talking about the painted lanes, it's even more anger inducing when they narrow the painted bit even further when the road narrows or there's a pinch point. 

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

liam92 wrote:

yet more evidence that painted lines do absolutely nothing to protect cyclists. Totally stupid design having such a narrow lane in the first place and hardly a surprise that there is a conflict with traffic when the lane just suddenly ends. Obviously the van driver should have anticipated this but would probably have been avoided altogether if the cyclist was either A. in a primary position in the lane of traffic or B. fully segregated on a purpose built cycle track. 

Or the best option for people on bikes no motors on the existing infra, removing motor traffic from strategic parts of the network means no building, no narrow bits, no deferring to exits/'motor' roads and continuous/direct. Segregated even in the best country in the world for cycling fails in a couple of those aspects, I don't want segregated here because it will never dissaude motorists, just always be piecemeal crap that is neither fish nor fowl.

But talking about the painted lanes, it's even more anger inducing when they narrow the painted bit even further when the road narrows or there's a pinch point. 

I agree re not building cycling infrastructure. I would suggest the prioritisation of more bus lanes that are 24/7 restricted to buses and cycles alongside 20mph limits. Bus routes are normally the most direct and used routes and the complete removal of other traffic from these lanes would make them a comfortably safe place to ride with the ability to join and leave the bus lane/route at any point and not be forced onto odd diversions around junctions.

carlosdsanchez wrote:

I hate that type of cycle lane, it's barely 0.5m wide and actively encourages drivers to close pass you.

Yup - the white lanes might actually be narrower than your handlebars, but so long as the motorist doesn't cross the white line they think its all good.

brooksby wrote:

Yup - the white lanes might actually be narrower than your handlebars, but so long as the motorist doesn't cross the white line they think its all good.

And I've seen videos where police have declined to prosecute, using the theory that it's not a close pass as it's a different lane. Depressing