Roundabout SMIDSY

[Wendy]

Last night on the way home:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/I8C-D6JOezI&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/I8C-D6JOezI&rel=1</a>

A huge blat on the airzound got a great result!  Bear in mind I'm doing 35 in the first part of this video, and about 28 approaching the roundabout.  I could have stopped easily given I was on the 'bent, but I really enjoyed the shitting himself manouevre of the driver as a result of the airzound.

[Julian]

[Dave]

"185
When reaching the roundabout you should:

give priority to traffic approaching from your right, unless directed otherwise by signs, road markings or traffic lights"

Oh dear. Fail.

[Jakob]

Hmm, you both hit the roundabout at the same time, so not sure that he was so wrong.

[Dave]

Hmm, you both hit the roundabout at the same time, so not sure that he was so wrong.

Yeahbut. Car driver should have given way to the traffic approaching from his right. Granted the HC is a 'should' not a 'must' for this one, but I'd say the driver was 'wrong' in this one.

[nuttycyclist]

With the width of the exit road, the arrival of both parties at the junction the same time, and the fact you were on a bike... that looks much more to me as though the driver thought there was no need to stop and wait (and then have to overtake you) as they'd get round the junction ahead.

But yes, they misread your speed and so made a mistake.  (Although I'd have personally been expecting it and am not certain that I'd have maintained a 28mph cruise around the junction...  From the video it looks as though it's just over a brow of a hill and there's something approaching from your right, I have a similar junction on my way home and often the vehicle approaching on my right has a speed that's hard to guesstimate and so I slow down to prevent me doing to them what the 'SMIDSY' did to you))

[Jakob]

Hmm, you both hit the roundabout at the same time, so not sure that he was so wrong.

Yeahbut. Car driver should have given way to the traffic approaching from his right.

My interpretation of that, is that it refers to traffic that has already entered the roundabout. Otherwise a mini-roundabout like that is nothing more than a T-cross. Had Mike clearly reached and entered the roundabout prior to the car, I would have agreed. In this case, I think Mike should have given way and instead of just bombing it straight across.

[Wendy]

Would they have done that if I'd been a bus?  Clearly not.

Nutty, I could go a lot faster than that and still stop safely, this is a 'bent remember.  As it was I only breathed on the brakes enough to hold back and leave my options open, and to blat the driver with the AirZound.  There's no possibility for traffic coming from the right as it's a roundabout with only 3 exits, btw.

[Greenbank]

Just out of interest: What front light(s) do you have, and on constant or flashing?

Ah, seen elsewhere. Fenix P3D on medium-low power. Fair enough!

[Dave]

My interpretation of that, is that it refers to traffic that has already entered the roundabout. Otherwise a mini-roundabout like that is nothing more than a T-cross. Had Mike clearly reached and entered the roundabout prior to the car, I would have agreed. In this case, I think Mike should have given way and just bombed it straight across.

I can see what you mean. It depends on how you interpret "when reaching the roundabout", I think. A three exit T-shaped mini-RAB is basically a T-cross though, isn't it? It just happens to be one with a big white splodge in the middle that you have to ride/drive round.

Having watched the vid again, if it was me, I'd have done more what Nutty was suggesting and slowed down a lot before hitting the RAB.

[rower40]

From the video, it's clearly dark.  As there isn't any evidence of tarmac bubbling ahead of the camera , I would claim that BentMickey isn't carrying enough light.  So while SMIDSY by the motorist is still inexcusable, in this instance he might claim SMICSY "Sorry Mate I COULDN'T See You".

I favour the "too much rather than too little" approach to lighting.  Especially at the speeds quoted.  For a visual equivalent of the Airzound, I use Cateye Stadium or Doubleshot - sometimes both.  Blind(ed) drivers tend to slow down.  A single very bright light could well be a car with only one headlight working.

The Airzound made him stop.  If he was deaf (not a disability that prevents one driving), it'd've been SMICHY.  "Sorry Mate I couldn't hear you."

[Wendy]

I would claim that BentMickey isn't carrying enough light.

Fenix P3D, so that would be completely wrong.  DKUATB.  And it's BentMikey.

And I'll say it again for Dave, it's a 'bent.  It's low and so I can brake so hard that my cheeks get stretched by G-force.  I've easily stopped before from similar speeds at this same location, and still had braking to spare.

[Wendy]

Here's the RAB on satellite view - it's a bit more than an MRAB.  The oncoming car in the video was in the straight ahead lane, not in the right turn lane.  I was travelling North to South.

[clarion]

I think Mikey's being unfairly criticised here.  I would have slowed down a lot more myself approaching the roundabout, to ensure there wasn't something coming from my right.

However, the car slows down, 'observes', then decides to pull out in front of another vehicle.  That's wrong.

[Hot Flatus]

I maybe wrong but I seem to remember something about not crossing broken white lines at over 20mph.

Each to his own, but I wouldn't have hit the roundabout at that sort of speed on a bike.

[Cunobelin]

Just out of interest: What front light(s) do you have, and on constant or flashing?

Ah, seen elsewhere. Fenix P3D on medium-low power. Fair enough!

After a "bonus" from the taxman I bough the full Exposure USE Endurance @720 lumens - and people still can't see the bike!


I can't see the problem with the approach speed here. I also ride Bents and either the CAtrike or teh Street Machine could easily stop at this incident if required.  With the Trike I could also have simply kept going left (excluded by  oncoming traffic on the video) or tucked into the previos junction.. I think BM is quite correct, bleed off a little seed,  and assume the driver is competent, but cover the brakes in case they aren't!

[rower40]

Apologies for giving you an extra letter in your name.
Double apologies for suggesting sub-standard illumination.

(Tho' doubtless an insurance company's lawyers  will have a field day with a Fenix, as it's not a BS6102-approved bike light.)

I just posted to coin new acronyms.

[Dave]

I bough the full Exposure USE Endurance @720 lumens - and people still can't see the bike!

I've got one of those. Lovely bit of kit. Tough too, been bounced down the road at least twice and still working perfectly.

When I was commuting in Cambridge with it I got told that it was too bright. By another cyclist I don't think the concept of 'too bright' exists when it comes to bike lighting.

And for BM, I watch your vids from the perspective of the rider of a normal bike; I'm not convinced now there is much (if anything) to criticise about the way you were riding. Crap drivers failing to accurately judge approach speeds happens whether you're on a bike or in a bus (there's a pretty spectacular clip on Youtube, which I can't find now, of a car pulling out in front of a coach causing the coach to brake, skid and flip).

[mattc]

When I was commuting in Cambridge with it I got told that it was too bright. By another cyclist I don't think the concept of 'too bright' exists when it comes to bike lighting.

We've had this debate before, so I know opinions differ, but it is MY opinion that ANY vehicle can have "too bright" lighting. It's only in recent years that the technology has allowed bikes to join this arms race.
(Unless you're on a deserted road - then feel free to crank up the watts).

[Greenbank]

And any light can be badly positioned. There is simply no excuse for any road user dazzling any other road user.

[Wendy]

I think Mikey's being unfairly criticised here.  I would have slowed down a lot more myself approaching the roundabout, to ensure there wasn't something coming from my right.

However, the car slows down, 'observes', then decides to pull out in front of another vehicle.  That's wrong.

As I said before, there's no entrance to the right of that RAB, and no traffic coming up that could possibly turn right in front of me.  There was an oncoming car far back, but there was no chance it could get to the roundabout before me.  I could see the whole of the RAB, and more than enough of the other two entrances to be sure I could stop safely.

[Wendy]

Apologies for giving you an extra letter in your name.
Double apologies for suggesting sub-standard illumination.

(Tho' doubtless an insurance company's lawyers  will have a field day with a Fenix, as it's not a BS6102-approved bike light.)

I just posted to coin new acronyms.

LOL!  No worries, and sorry for my tetchiness yesterday.

[Cunobelin]

Two thoughts.....

Optional lamps and reflectors
10. Additional lighting to the above mentioned obligatory lights is permitted under certain conditions:
It must not dazzle other road users
It must be the correct colour (white to front, red to rear)
If it flashes it must conform to the required flash rate (1-4 equal flashes per second)

11. Optional lights are not required to conform to BS 6102-3 and there is no minimum level of intensity.
So for example, on the rear of the cycle a cyclist may wish to have both a steady red lamp which
conforms to BS 6102-3 and an additional flashing lamp which is not meeting the minimum level of 4
candela.
Department for Transport - Guidance about lights on pedal bicycles

My USE is not my main light, it is an optional or subsidiary light which compliments rather then replaces my "main lighting system"...... a cheap LED

That way I comply completely with the law!


Secondly f positioned properly then dazzling should not be a problem...

[Dave]

And any light can be badly positioned. There is simply no excuse for any road user dazzling any other road user.

Very true, couldn't agree more. The complaint wasn't that he was being dazzled (the light was/is properly positioned), simply that it was too bright.

[arabella]

I favour the "too much rather than too little" approach to lighting.  Especially at the speeds quoted.  For a visual equivalent of the Airzound, I use Cateye Stadium or Doubleshot - sometimes both.  Blind(ed) drivers tend to slow down.  A single very bright light could well be a car with only one headlight working.

off topic: I've nearly been Smidsied because the bike in front was like a Christmas tree and the driver didn't consider that there may have been a second, more conventionally lit, bike behind it.  Luckily I took evasive action.
but I suspect this is getting into the same territory as leaving the correct stopping distance ... where the vehicle in front has more powerful brakes than you and so their braking eats into your stopping distance.