Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => On The Road => Topic started by: Eccentrica Gallumbits on 23 February, 2010, 10:13:47 pm
-
Walking through the Meadows, on the south side of Melville Drive heading west, didn't really notice a cyclist going past me, then definitely noticed a convoy of 5 or 6 police motorbikers, and really definitely noticed the front one slowing down and gesturing very angrily at the (unlit) cyclist. I was about 20 yards away and had my mp3 player in so couldn't hear exactly what he was saying, but could hear that he was yelling something at her. I assume it was about her having no back light, or that her back light (if she had one) was obscured by her jacket. He didn't stop, or make her stop, and she carried on her way after they'd all gone, but it looked like she was getting quite a telling-off.
-
And so she should, it really annoys me when I see other cyclists with no lights and dark clothing at night. I have a super bright headlight and a very bright rear, I also wear a reflective yellow tabard. If we can make the effort to be seen so can others.
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
I often see the no light cyclist jumping red lights while multi-tasking by making a phone call now I used totell them that they should get some lights, but they were always to busy talking to reply so I gave up.
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
At night you know when there's a car behind you because of the lights, surely it's safer to use headphones at night than in the day?
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
There are opposing views on use or not of mp3 players while riding, I tend not to most of the time but am not against it. In this particular case the debate is not relevant anyway as Kirst noted she was walking.
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
Walking through the Meadows
-
I never said that I was opposed to it, I just was saying that I would not do it and admiring her bravery
-
Hearing is underrated.
What sense works at a distance? Works in all directions simultaneously? Tells you angle, speed, distance and type of vehicle?
I don't need spidey-sense, I have ears.
They tell me "bus coming up, slowing slightly. Car accelerating and swinging wide. HGV braking suddenly ahead." etc.
-
I never said that I was opposed to it, I just was saying that I would not do it and admiring her bravery
I was trying to (gently) point out that Kirst wasn't riding while listening to an mp3 player, she was walking.
-
I love 'discussions' on Internet forums.
"You say you were wearing an mp3 player whilst walking, there are plenty of reasons why I won't listen to an mp3player whilst riding a bicycle..."
"Fancy a meet up for a pint? I wouldn't drink and then operate heavy machinery, it could lead to an accident..."
etc...
*sigh*
-
I think we've done this discussion. My hearing's a bit impaired, so I don't use an MP3. Others might like to, but their hearing may be better than mine even with the earphones in. We're different, and it's OK to disagree. I don't like pedestrians wandering into the road without looking, but they may have done that anyway, even if they were not distracted by music/phone conversation/whatever.
Virtually no motorists can hear what is going on outside, even if they don't use ICE.
Some people do somethings; some others do different.
-
Hearing is underrated.
What sense works at a distance? Works in all directions simultaneously? Tells you angle, speed, distance and type of vehicle?
I don't need spidey-sense, I have ears.
They tell me "bus coming up, slowing slightly. Car accelerating and swinging wide. HGV braking suddenly ahead." etc.
Hearing is not very good directionally, and you're making big assumptions that people listening to music can't also hear over that perfectly well.
Besides which, the above implies that your observation when riding a bicycle is deficient.
-
Hearing is over-rated.
On bicycling, the sense of hearing and headphones (http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm)
d.
Hmmm....don't agree with that at all.
If I were to wear headphones, as odd as it may seem, I'd be most likely to wear them in a busy urban situation where the background din hides a lot of the detail of what is going on, but for the kind of open road cycling I do you'd never catch me being so daft as to wear headphones. My hearing has alerted me to recklessly driven vehicles on a number of occasions and enabled me to take evasive or assertive actions.
-
People who say that hearing is over rated have never learned to use their ears properly.
Like Flatus I can think of many times when it has saved me from getting my card punched by a moton.
-
I like hearing.
Didn't like it not one bit, no, not at all, never, when I was on the Honda and had an ear infection which impaired my hearing.
Couldn't tell when I was about to be overtaken.
My mate (Bad) Keith's advice of "Make sure nobody overtakes you" didn't help.
-
I was walking. I was walking. I was walking.
-
I was walking. I was walking. I was walking.
Sorry,
Didn't hear you.
'Had my headphones in :-*
EDIT - I know, I iz bad ::-)
-
Hearing is underrated.
What sense works at a distance? Works in all directions simultaneously? Tells you angle, speed, distance and type of vehicle?
I don't need spidey-sense, I have ears.
They tell me "bus coming up, slowing slightly. Car accelerating and swinging wide. HGV braking suddenly ahead." etc.
Hearing is not very good directionally, and you're making big assumptions that people listening to music can't also hear over that perfectly well.
Besides which, the above implies that your observation when riding a bicycle is deficient.
eh?
Your logic is strange.
-
I was walking. I was walking. I was walking.
Indeed. Some of us can read.
-
I want to know what the polis motorbike convoy was doing.
-
eh?
Your logic is strange.
Not at all - if you need your hearing, then you're failing to look properly. It's the CTUK line.
-
lol
I look properly mate.
I also use my hearing.
I ride on 70mph dual carriageways, frequently with very limited visibility (rain on glasses, oncoming headlights in the dark) and debri on the road. Can't look over shoulder all the time.
-
It seems rather that you yourself don't trust your observation and know it's not good enough, which is why you feel the need to rely on your hearing.
-
I want to know what the polis motorbike convoy was doing.
And, more importantly, were they wearing headphones ? ;)
-
It seems rather that you yourself don't trust your observation and know it's not good enough, which is why you feel the need to rely on your hearing.
So you can see round corners can you? I can't, but I can hear round them and if I hear a car approaching at speed on a corner that I am already half round it let's me know that I might have to hit the curb pronto.
Also, you can see the car behind you but you can't see a car behind that that may be approaching at speed... You can certainly hear it. Engine tone tells you a lot about the attitude of the driver, these are things you can't always see.
Besides, your comment about using ears because you aren't looking well enough is pretty silly. If you have two senses then use them both. Perhaps if you rode a little more intelligently you wouldn't need to keep posting your silly little videos ;D
-
It seems rather that you yourself don't trust your observation and know it's not good enough, which is why you feel the need to rely on your hearing.
Observation is not necessarily restricted to visual (ask any birdwatcher).
-
I'm glad it's "virtual" paper being used. I'd hate to see a forest getting fucked over this.
(hearing debate yet again?)
-
(hearing debate yet again?)
And ironically it's rarely ever a debate. The usual people don't listen to others arguments and just repeatedly restate their own opinion over and over again.
Meh.
If I were Kirst I'd copy out the interesting replies to her original post, remove the entire thread and restart it.
-
I want to know what the polis motorbike convoy was doing.
Going out for Alex Salmond's pies?
-
(hearing debate yet again?)
And ironically it's rarely ever a debate. The usual people don't listen to others arguments and just repeatedly restate their own opinion over and over again.
Meh.
If I were Kirst I'd copy out the interesting replies to her original post, remove the entire thread and restart it.
It'd be a pretty damn short thread. :-0)
-
And ironically it's rarely ever a debate. The usual people don't listen to others arguments and just repeatedly restate their own opinion over and over again.
That's the very essence of YACF. ;D
If I were Kirst I'd copy out the interesting replies to her original post, remove the entire thread and restart it.
Talkin' of which...
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
-
So you can see round corners can you? I can't, but I can hear round them and if I hear a car approaching at speed on a corner that I am already half round it let's me know that I might have to hit the curb pronto.
What will you do about silent vehicles - electic cars and bicycles? What you're really saying here is that you're willing to compromise your safety by going too fast and not looking properly around a corner you can't see around.
Also, you can see the car behind you but you can't see a car behind that that may be approaching at speed... You can certainly hear it. Engine tone tells you a lot about the attitude of the driver, these are things you can't always see.
Besides, your comment about using ears because you aren't looking well enough is pretty silly. If you have two senses then use them both.
Yes you can see the cars behind, if you're looking properly. You can tell their speed of approach too. You don't need your sense of hearing to ride well and safely, it's an urban myth that needs to be stopped in its tracks.
You make a good point hearing the attitudes of drivers from their car's engine note, but it is only a secondary assist at best. For the most part it makes no difference to the way we ride, though it might stop me overtaking that driver if it meant him passing me again soon. I mean really, what are we going to do with an aggressive driver? Stop and jump in the ditch/hedge?
Perhaps if you rode a little more intelligently you wouldn't need to keep posting your silly little videos ;D
I thought this sort of nastiness was frowned on on yacf?
-
What will you do about silent vehicles - electic cars and bicycles? What you're really saying here is that you're willing to compromise your safety by going too fast and not looking properly around a corner you can't see around.
We aren't talking about silent vehicles are we? And no, I'm not saying that... I'm talking about vehicles approaching from behind
Yes you can see the cars behind, if you're looking properly. You can tell their speed of approach too.
No, you cannot if the line of sight is blocked by another vehicle.
You don't need your sense of hearing to ride well and safely, it's an urban myth that needs to be stopped in its tracks.
You've already said as much, and I am saying I disagree... but you are making a really stupid point here. You are trying to say that your safety on the road will not be affected by impeding your second most important sense. What next? Are you going to suggest that hearing actually makes you less safe?
You make a good point hearing the attitudes of drivers from their car's engine note, but it is only a secondary assist at best.
In some situations you need every assist you can get to stay safe.
Perhaps if you rode a little more intelligently you wouldn't need to keep posting your silly little videos ;D
I thought this sort of nastiness was frowned on on yacf? Paaaaaarp
You've got thicker skin than that. Don't pretend to be offended when you are not. Besides a bit of leg pulling there is a bit of a serious point here. You are always full of opinions about how people should ride, and yet it is you who seems to have more than your fair share of conflicts with motorists.
Perhaps you need to rethink your approach to cycling on public roads.
-
I'm glad it's "virtual" paper being used. I'd hate to see a forest getting fucked over this.
(hearing debate yet again?)
Speak up lad, I can't hear you with these headphones in!
-
I'm lost, who's walking in the road and worried about vehicles coming up behind them?
-
Good stuff @ coppers in the OP.
Re MP3 players and cycling, my thoughts here (http://ladyjulian.livejournal.com/tag/cycle%20commuting#post-ladyjulian-25130).
-
I'm lost, who's walking in the road and worried about vehicles coming up behind them?
Are you trying to suggest we shouldn't wander off topic?
-
It's quite dangerous to wander off topic if you're wearing an MP3 player.
-
I'm lost, who's walking in the road and worried about vehicles coming up behind them?
Are you trying to suggest we shouldn't wander off topic?
Maybe, but it seems to be all the rage so I'm joining in too.
Topics are free. If you want to restart the headphones debate then it might be easier if you started a new thread.
-
OK, so if your approach is so correct, then why is CTUK not teaching the essential nature of hearing on their cycle training? Why is hearing not an essential part of what is taught in National Standards and bikeability across the UK to schoolkids on the roads?
Here's my challenge to you and the other pro-hearing riders. One or more of you must be close enough to London that we can meet up for a filming session. Let's film your ride, and have an online debate about it.
You've got thicker skin than that. Don't pretend to be offended when you are not. Besides a bit of leg pulling there is a bit of a serious point here. You are always full of opinions about how people should ride, and yet it is you who seems to have more than your fair share of conflicts with motorists.
Perhaps you need to rethink your approach to cycling on public roads.
Aaaahahahahaha - really. More than my fair share of conflicts. I think not.
-
You've got thicker skin than that.
You know what they say - the thicker the skin, the better the custard. ;)
-
Maybe, but it seems to be all the rage so I'm joining in too.
Topics are free. If you want to restart the headphones debate then it might be easier if you started a new thread.
Well, you make a fair point, but that's unnecessary effort. You can carry on trying to drag the topic back to the OP, and we'll keep discussing riding and hearing. I won't complain if a mod splits the topic. Fair enough?
-
More than my fair share of conflicts. I think not.
???
But I always look forward to your latest regular offering. :P
-
Can't we just agree that it's down to personal choice and circumstances?
I have poor eyesight, poor peripheral vision, so I primarily use my eyesight, and also pay attention to my hearing. Most of my riding is done on fast open roads. FWIW, I've had one car-bike interaction in more than 20 000miles of riding - that was getting doored when I was undertaking.
YMMV
-
OK, so if your approach is so correct, then why is CTUK not teaching the essential nature of hearing on their cycle training? Why is hearing not an essential part of what is taught in National Standards and bikeability across the UK to schoolkids on the roads?
What is taught to schoolkids is not neccessarily appropriate to my kind of riding. I'd counter your point by asking you why I almost never see audax riders with headphones? (except at night, including me). They are after all the people who do big miles in a variety of situations, not just a few miles of cruddy London commuting.
Here's my challenge to you and the other pro-hearing riders. One or more of you must be close enough to London that we can meet up for a filming session. Let's film your ride, and have an online debate about it.
I'm more than happy to join you for a ride, but you'll have to come here (why would anybody choose to ride anywhere near London?), and you'll have to promise not to start any silly squabbles with drivers ;)
Aaaahahahahaha - really. More than my fair share of conflicts. I think not.
Your youtube channel says a big yes ;D
-
Can deaf people legally ride bicycles?
-
Can deaf people legally ride bicycles?
Yes - and blind people.
We had a blind rider complete the Friday Night Ride to the Coast last year...
...and nobody on the ride realised. Not even the sainted Simon 'of the Knee Bandage' Legg.
Mind you, we had a bit of a battle with CTC National Office over that - but the CTC insurers agreed with us.
-
Can deaf people legally ride bicycles?
Yes. Absolutely.
-
Can deaf people legally ride bicycles?
Yes, and it doesn't prevent them from driving either.
-
Amputees are allowed to drive, but I don't see anyone lopping their limbs off voluntarily.
-
I kinda knew the answer anyway ;)
*Puts on mp3 player*
-
Why do drivers not need their hearing, and can perfectly legally drive with the windows up and in soundproofed vehicles? Why do almost all cars come with sound systems? Most drivers are effectively deaf because of these factors. Most cyclists are too when their speed is up given the amount of wind noise in your ears.
National standards is taught to lots of adult cyclists too, so your point about relevance and kids riding is simply wrong.
My youtube channel would be fairly representative of anyone's riding on similar roads, I think. Perhaps the only difference is you don't carry a video camera, and you probably ignore a lot of bad driving incidents instead of commenting like I do. I'll take your response to the video challenge as a no then. Bit like tstegers, if anyone remembers him. ;)
p.s. perhaps you could bold that paarp in your previous quote of what I wrote to make it obvious that I didn't write that.
-
Why do drivers not need their hearing, and can perfectly legally drive with the windows up and in soundproofed vehicles? Why do almost all cars come with sound systems? Most drivers are effectively deaf because of these factors.
Perhaps that partly explains why there are so many crap drivers on the road?
Most cyclists are too when their speed is up given the amount of wind noise in your ears.
Either I'm not as fast as you or my ears are slightly differently set on my head but, although I get some wind noise, it's never enough to totally block out my hearing. I can still hear things like cars over it.
-
Why do drivers not need their hearing, and can perfectly legally drive with the windows up and in soundproofed vehicles? Why do almost all cars come with sound systems? Most drivers are effectively deaf because of these factors. Most cyclists are too when their speed is up given the amount of wind noise in your ears.
National standards is taught to lots of adult cyclists too, so your point about relevance and kids riding is simply wrong.
My youtube channel would be fairly representative of anyone's riding on similar roads, I think. Perhaps the only difference is you don't carry a video camera, and you probably ignore a lot of bad driving incidents instead of commenting like I do. I'll take your response to the video challenge as a no then. Bit like tstegers, if anyone remembers him. ;)
p.s. perhaps you could bold that paarp in your previous quote of what I wrote to make it obvious that I didn't write that.
Where is the link to your youtube channel?
-
YouTube
- CyclingMikey's Channel
(http://www.youtube.com/user/CyclingMikey)
No causing arguments with drivers, Flatus? Is that just a hint that you're slightly quieter and more shy IRL than the warrior you are on here?
-
YouTube
- CyclingMikey's Channel
(http://www.youtube.com/user/CyclingMikey)
No causing arguments with drivers, Flatus? Is that just a hint that you're slightly quieter and more shy IRL than the warrior you are on here?
Think i am already subscribed to you, thanks for the link
-
Wendy, riding and driving are very different experiences and what is relevant for one is not necessarily for the other.
Oh come on, how can you justify drivers not hearing and insist that cyclists should rely on their hearing with this? At least be a little more rigorous and specific. Perhaps you're really saying that it's OK for drivers not to hear and thus to crash into stuff because they are protected in a metal cage?
-
I think the point is that hearing can complement vision; if you can't hear your surroundings then you either compensate by looking more (to which there are limits because you can only view a limited arc at any one time), or compromise your overall awareness. Maybe not very much and it may not really matter, depending on the circumstances - but the fact that hearing is not very directional means that your ears can pick up cues for things that are out of your range of vision, wherever you happen to be looking at the time.
None of which affects one's right to choose to listen to music on the move.
-
Different people use their hearing to different extents whilst cycling.
Those who are reliant on hearing probably should not use headphones.
Some people can observe the road behind easily by looking backwards. Some cannot; some use mirrors, some do not. No matter how much I practiced, looking backwards often induced a wobble.
I was lucky having very little in the way of traumatic interaction with motor traffic. Maybe I got some things right...
-
Different people use their hearing to different extents whilst cycling.
Those who are reliant on hearing probably should not use headphones.
Some people can observe the road behind easily by looking backwards. Some cannot; some use mirrors, some do not. No matter how much I practiced, looking backwards often induced a wobble.
I was lucky having very little in the way of traumatic interaction with motor traffic. Maybe I got some things right...
That's actually a very good point. Perhaps drivers don't need hearing so much because it's very easy for them to look behind with their mirrors?
-
There will always be blind spots when mirrors are used. Never forget.
-
Very true - I actually just deleted a comment in my last post about not needing to turn so much to check blindspots in cars because I couldn't think of a good way to say what I meant. You need to turn much more to look behind on a bike, which automatically covers the blind spots too.
-
I'd counter your point by asking you why I almost never see audax riders with headphones? (except at night, including me). They are after all the people who do big miles in a variety of situations, not just a few miles of cruddy London commuting.
I know of several well known mileaters, 20,000 miles per year and upwards, who are often plugged into headphones. On an event, if they're like me, they'll probably prefer to find a friend to talk to for a change.
There are also some very well known mileaters who don't use headphones, ever.
I consider my MP3 and digital radio to be almost essential. But I also enjoy cycling in silence too.
-
Either I'm not as fast as you or my ears are slightly differently set on my head but, although I get some wind noise, it's never enough to totally block out my hearing. I can still hear things like cars over it.
My hearing gets notably impaired without headphones at over 15mph with no wind. Over 20mph my hearing isn't too good and over 30mph it's about as bad as having my MP3 player on full volume or maybe even worse. When I'm fit and not tired, I generally ride at 20mph except for uphill and a slight downhill will usually get me up to 30 without effort, so my hearing is generally poor anyway.
With a strong headwind my hearing is hardly any worse than with an MP3 at full volume. I've even swithched off my radio while riding into a headwind. Even at full volume I couldn't hear it because of the noise of the wind rattling around my lugholes.
I can still hear cars if I have my MP3 at full volume, but not as well as I would without.
I'm not fit enough to impair my hearing at the moment but my nice, warm hat that keeps my earholes nice and cosy does that job now.
-
If I were Kirst I'd copy out the interesting replies to her original post, remove the entire thread and restart it.
I'll be damned if I'm going to all that trouble. Instead I'll just hunt down everyone who a) thinks I was cycling or b)has chosen to turn this into a debate about hearing vs vision and cut their fingers off so they can't do it again.
-
;D ;D
-
If I were Kirst I'd copy out the interesting replies to her original post, remove the entire thread and restart it.
I'll be damned if I'm going to all that trouble. Instead I'll just hunt down everyone who a) thinks I was cycling or b)has chosen to turn this into a debate about hearing vs vision and cut their fingers off so they can't do it again.
You were walking?!?! :o
Bloody heretic pedestrian! >:(
:P ;D
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v379/Flossiesdoll/Random%20stuff/smilie-fishslapper-moon.gif)
-
I'll be damned if I'm going to all that trouble. Instead I'll just hunt down everyone who a) thinks I was cycling or b)has chosen to turn this into a debate about hearing vs vision and cut their fingers off so they can't do it again.
:-[ Sorry Kirst!
But your topic did generate a very interesting debate that I've enjoyed a lot.
-
So Flatus, since you can't make it down to Lundene, get someone else you ride with to film you with a number of traffic interactions and post it up. Refusal or failure to do so will result in cries of "Chiiiiiicken!". ;D :P
-
Why on earth would I want to go to London to ride? You come here, you'd like it.... you'd be like a battery chicken let out of his hutch for the first time...
;)
-
Someone else in your area, slowcoach, or is that CHICKEN!
-
I forgot to ask why?
-
Get a room you two...
...any more testosterone on the forum and I'll start getting horny.
-
Don't bother mate, you'll never live up to Chuffy's. ;D
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
Yes. But you can't see it beneath his big feathered headdress.
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
Yeah, so Sioux me. ;D
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
How?
-
you ride at night with your mp3 on your brave.
Sometimes I go Running Bear (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9V-9dSPb_A). :o
-
Same as running bare?
-
Same as running bare?
Here you go.
(http://i578.photobucket.com/albums/ss226/SgtBikeo/lowspitfire.jpg)
WHOOOOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHH!
-
Same as running bare?
Here you go.
(http://i578.photobucket.com/albums/ss226/SgtBikeo/lowspitfire.jpg)
WHOOOOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHH!
Hahaha.
Prolly my all time fave viral footage ;D ;D ;D
Where's the link?
-
Here you are (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvDDDKnNhuE). :D
-
The trouble with this thread is too many chiefs, not enough indians.
-
*remembers* an even more scary one - turbo Dak that I knew was coming.
-
*remembers* an even more scary one - turbo Dak that I knew was coming.
You heard its injun?
-
I saw the prop disc, and although I knew it was higher than my head, it didn't look like it. Everyone else on the runway dropped swearing also. Bush runway.
-
;D
A daisy cutter.
-
These jokes aren't apache on Ezwaldo's.
-
Saw someone getting a telling-off tonight
Ah, the Trail of Tears.
-
Gave him a mohawk
-
I have the impression, perhaps wrongly, that this sort of lack of awareness is all too common amongst cyclists who believe hearing is essential:
YouTube
- This cyclist gets a fright!
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDf_10PLAn0)
-
Speak up Wendy, I can't hear you.
-
p.s. I should add that I'm not aiming that comment at anyone on here, it was purely general. We all have faults in our riding, but I wouldn't expect any of us to have as poor observation as that fellow displayed in that clip (IMO).
Must admit the microphone on my VIO sounds a bit dodgy at the moment. Maybe it's damaged? I have a friend who uses a separate Olympus stereo dictaphone for better sound quality, it's pretty amazing.
-
Must confess I thought he was going to ride into the back of the car.
(PS, if you look, the car start signalling only after the cyclist has started to undertake. Still a brainless move though.)
-
That was quite a close approach by you Wendy (about the width of the 'U' in the "BUS" road marking). Not to mention boxing him in at the point when the lane becomes a left filter. No wonder he was surprised.
Still, I'm sure most of London can sleep soundly knowing that there are brave citizens out there dispensing wisdom and advice to all those who need it.
-
Must confess I thought he was going to ride into the back of the car.
(PS, if you look, the car start signalling only after the cyclist has started to undertake. Still a brainless move though.)
I just looked on the original, the car was indicating some time before he got to it, perhaps it's not as visible on the youtube version?
-
That was quite a close approach by you Wendy (about the width of the 'U' in the "BUS" road marking). Not to mention boxing him in at the point when the lane becomes a left filter. No wonder he was surprised.
Still, I'm sure most of London can sleep soundly knowing that there are brave citizens out there dispensing wisdom and advice to all those who need it.
Why the unpleasantness? That perception is all in your mind and not IRL, I'm sorry to say. Do you jump red lights, and is that why you don't like my calling him on it?
There's no boxing in as I held back enough that he could go where he wanted to - my front wheel never overlapped his rear. He was only surprised because he didn't look behind him and had assumed there was nobody behind him. Don't blame me for that failure.
-
There's no boxing in as I held back enough that he could go where he wanted to - my front wheel never overlapped his rear.
Really?
(http://www.soi.city.ac.uk/~jwo/acf/tellingOff.jpg)
The point I was trying to make was that it can be illuminating to be on the receiving end of someone else's judgments about one's behaviour once in a while.
-
It's also illuminating how camera angles don't always show well just how close, or not, things are. Knowing my camera, I don't think there was overlap, and I feel I left plenty of space to the side. I recall purposefully holding back as I didn't feel very trusting of his riding.
Again, why the nastiness? You could easily have told me the above without any of the axe-to-grind.
-
I think what jwo is gently pointing out to you is that the higher the monkey climbs the tree, the more it shows it's arse
;D ;D ;D
-
Either I'm not as fast as you or my ears are slightly differently set on my head but, although I get some wind noise, it's never enough to totally block out my hearing. I can still hear things like cars over it.
I have just been for a ride & used a magic hat for the first time in a long time.The wind noise generated by the helmet was so high that I didn't hear any of the vehicles which overtook me as they approached from behind,including HGV's.
-
I've thought about this a couple of times - I really didn't expect him to get a fright and would have preferred to avoid that. Perhaps all I'd do differently in future is wait before saying anything until we were past the parked car across the junction so that we'd be in a better and safer location. I'm not quite sure how I'd have avoided giving him a fright though. Maybe a bit of card and a clothes peg on a seatstay? ;D
Oh, and I think that's tosh about my being "too close" to him, that's normal space that cyclists commonly give each other. Just take a look at this, and many other commuting videos on youtube:
YouTube
- Cycle Superhighway Route 7 05/03/10
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGpgE-a_sfE)
-
It's normal for cars to overtake cyclists too close, but posting a YouTube video of it doesn't make it ok.
It would seem that Wendy thinks the 'Give Cyclists Room' campaign applies to everyone, except him. ::-)
-
I slapped the roof of a car that squeezed past me on the commute this morning, whilst I was overtaking another cyclist and there was a parked car on the other side fo the residential road....
...and it made her drop her mobile phone... >:(
I can't understand why she was upset - but she'll have the chance to explain her annoyance to the police as I've reported her. :demon:
-
It would seem that Wendy thinks the 'Give Cyclists Room' campaign applies to everyone, except him. ::-)
Flatus, stop being controversial for once. I gave him plenty of room, as much room as many others on here would be happy with, and as much room as we've often given each other in real life. (Well, out of those I've ridden with).
LOL @ Reg's post, nice one!
-
p.s. I was gonna say stop being a vvankhead, but then I realised you did that already. ;D
-
Controversial?
Hardly. Just pointing out thoughtless and inconsiderate behaviour by a road user, in the hope that they might improve their road use skills.
I thought you approved of that kind of thing?
-
No, you are being controversial - you're deliberately and misleadingly suggesting that was too close, when it wasn't by any standards. That's quite unlike what the blue rider himself did, which is jump a number of red lights (not shown on the video), not look behind himself, and undertake a left turning car. It's pretty obvious I gave him far more room than he himself wanted and needed - just watch how close he goes to the left turning car.
-
It's normal for cars to overtake cyclists too close, but posting a YouTube video of it doesn't make it ok.
It would seem that Wendy thinks the 'Give Cyclists Room' campaign applies to everyone, except him. ::-)
How much room did Wendy give him?
-
How much room did Wendy give him?
Oh, I thought Wendy and Flatus had got a room? ;D
-
Wendy, riding and driving are very different experiences and what is relevant for one is not necessarily for the other.
Oh come on, how can you justify drivers not hearing and insist that cyclists should rely on their hearing with this? At least be a little more rigorous and specific. Perhaps you're really saying that it's OK for drivers not to hear and thus to crash into stuff because they are protected in a metal cage?
Because cyclist are the slower , harder to see and squishier of the two and need to be more alert/defensive?
And who cares what CTUK (whatever that is) teaches. Leave the dogma behind and use a bit of common sense.
-
Not Wendy's forte, I'm afraid :-\
-
Actually, I have some different footage of me passing another cyclist too closely some years ago. I didn't realise at the time, but some criticism on that one made me change the way I pass people.
@Jakob, there's no dogma, only common sense. If you're not looking, then you don't know what's going on. If it had been you or me in the cyclist gets a fright video, we'd be mortified at not having looked behind and being unintentionally surprised like that. The dogma (and nonsense) comes when people insist how important hearing is when cycling.
-
Thing is, though, Wendy, it isn't like you are an experienced cyclist, is it.
If you ever rode anything other than your London commute you'd see things differently. You really should stop pontificating about how cyclists should ride, when it is based on your own rather unvaried and insubstantial experience.
-
Oh, you two stop it. You sound like an old married couple. ::-)
;D
-
He's on the ropes, Reg. He's on the ropes...
Curious that he's ressurected a thread that died a fortnight ago.
-
Just to improve matters.
I think recumbents are a piss poor choice for commuting in rush hour traffic.
:thumbsup:
-
The thing is Flatus, if you keep on a windup all the time, then people will never take you seriously. A bit like when you were spouting all that bawlicks about hiviz and helmets. :D
So, yes, I'm responding to you here because others might take you seriously. OTOH I'm fully aware that you're not being even slightly realistic, and never were on this topic nor most of the time you post.
-
Windup?
I don't see much (any?) support for you on this thread. Keep digging, if you must, but your diversionary tactics are failing.
Others taking you seriously now know that your 'advice' and opinions are based on feck all experience.
-
You mean a real rider like teethgrinder, not some poser like you? ;)
-
Poser?
Care to repost that photo of you skating past the Albert Monument? ;)
-
Actually, I have some different footage of me passing another cyclist too closely some years ago. I didn't realise at the time, but some criticism on that one made me change the way I pass people.
@Jakob, there's no dogma, only common sense. If you're not looking, then you don't know what's going on. If it had been you or me in the cyclist gets a fright video, we'd be mortified at not having looked behind and being unintentionally surprised like that. The dogma (and nonsense) comes when people insist how important hearing is when cycling.
So, you hear a car revving up behind you and take a look behind. Without that audio cue, would you check behind you?.
-
Curious that he's ressurected a thread that died a fortnight ago.
My threads never die, they just stop for a bit of a sit-down.
-
I have the impression, perhaps wrongly, that this sort of lack of awareness is all too common amongst cyclists who believe hearing is essential:
YouTube
- This cyclist gets a fright!
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDf_10PLAn0)
I would have been too embarrassed to put that one up. You almost got that guy badly hurt!.
-
Poser?
Care to repost that photo of you skating past the Albert Monument? ;)
Oi, can you layoff poor wendy?
He wasn't posing, anyway, he was flirting with the cameraman.
For the record, I passed someone just as closely last night. And it had nothing to do with the girl at the bus stop that I wasn't looking at, honest.
-
Curious that he's ressurected a thread that died a fortnight ago.
My threads never die, they just stop for a bit of a sit-down.
We need cake ...
-
Poser?
Care to repost that photo of you skating past the Albert Monument? ;)
LOL, I did post that *very* tongue in cheek. ;D
-
I would have been too embarrassed to put that one up. You almost got that guy badly hurt!.
Don't be ridiculous. I didn't do anything to that guy, and I certainly didn't intend for him to get a fright. It's entirely his fault for not looking behind himself regularly, and for riding like an absolute muppet. It's not as though I sneaked up behind him where he couldn't see me, and shouted Boo!
Were you not taught in cycle training/driver training to look behind?
-
I would have been too embarrassed to put that one up. You almost got that guy badly hurt!.
Don't be ridiculous. I didn't do anything to that guy, and I certainly didn't intend for him to get a fright.
You engaged him in conversation and nearly caused him to run into the back of a car and when he saw it, he went on the inside, as he probably didn't have time to notice that it was indicating to turn to the left.
That could have ended quite badly, primarily because you want to be self-righteous and whine about the red light. Your little 'lecture' could easily have ended in a bad accident.
-
Nonsense, I could stop easily and I barely had to breathe on the brakes to wait behind that car. He could have too, but he chose to undertake the car. That sort of riding was quite consistant with what I'd seen from him up till then, so I would have expected him to undertake it anyway. That car had been indicating left since it stopped there, and the only reason it would be in that lane is to go left anyway since it's a left turn only lane.
I'd been behind him since New Cross, some 3 miles earlier, so I'd no idea he didn't know I was there. TBH I genuinely didn't expect him to get such a fright, and would have preferred to avoid giving him one, but that's easy to say with hindsight. I don't think I could have made any normal conversation or other noise without him jumping a mile, and that's because he was so unaware.
I do recall you posting about how you didn't like my use of POB back on C+ IIRC, and your excellent post back then convinced me I was wrong to use that term. Your posts on this topic however are totally out of line an rather unfair, and seem spiteful to me. I seem to recall you were a London RLJer, am I wrong?
-
Some people do live in a world of their own and jump very easily.
One good example is a woman where I work. Several in fact, but one of the more memorable occasions was when I was standing at the top of a flight of stairs. They're a bit narrow, so I wait for people who aren't going my way. She walked in the door into the building, so I waited. Then she climbed the stairs with me standing at the top, watching and waiting. As she steps onto the last stair, she finally sees me and jumps out of her skin.
;D ::-) ;D
-
A down-wrong rider did once give me a start, but he redeemed himself with 10 miles of draft, so I'm not complaining.
(I think it was YACF's Johnny Thin, on the PS200k; I'd recently suffered moton aggro, and there was something about his faired machine that looked/sounded like an overtaking WVM.)
-
Some of us have very heightened startle responses. Often the result of some trauma in the past. I've spilled drinks, made other people jump, etc. before with mine.
I absolutely hate close flypasts, especially if they don't have Campag freewheels or knobbly tyres. Either a 'hello' as they approach, or a lot of room. I am not looking forward to the ubiquitous electric car. And no, I shouldn't have to spend my entire time on the bike swivelling my head round like Linda Blair, thank you.
-
I seem to recall you were a London RLJer, am I wrong?
Nope, not wrong. I would jump the odd red light.
I'd been behind him since New Cross, some 3 miles earlier
Hmmm? Someone at your speed being behind that guy for 3 miles? Even if he's jumping the lights, that seems very unlikely.
Your posts on this topic however are totally out of line an rather unfair
How about some HTFU. You got a complete online video library pointing self-righteous fingers at others, so here's some fingers pointing back.
Anyways: Back to my earlier question:
So, you hear a car revving up behind you and take a look behind. Without that audio cue, would you check behind you?.
-
I don't like cyclists passing me that close. As well as it being startling, I could collect them if I dodged to avoid a pothole or something. The fact that lots of cyclists behave like that doesn't make it right. You should always give other road users plenty of room, no matter what you think of them.
-
Some of us have very heightened startle responses. Often the result of some trauma in the past. I've spilled drinks, made other people jump, etc. before with mine.
I absolutely hate close flypasts, especially if they don't have Campag freewheels of knobbly tyres. Either a 'hello' as they approach, or a lot of room. I am not looking forward to the ubiquitous electric car. And no, I shouldn't have to spend my entire time on the bike swivelling my head round like Linda Blair, thank you.
That does rather support the CTUK line that if a vehicle surprises you, you're not looking back enough. I also have a strong startle response.
How often do good drivers check their mirrors?
-
Hmmm? Someone at your speed being behind that guy for 3 miles? Even if he's jumping the lights, that seems very unlikely.
Yes, I was behind because he jumped loads of lights.
How about some HTFU. You got a complete online video library pointing self-righteous fingers at others, so here's some fingers pointing back.
I wouldn't mind if you were justified. I've accepted criticism in the past when I've made mistakes, and I've learnt from them.
Anyways: Back to my earlier question:
So, you hear a car revving up behind you and take a look behind. Without that audio cue, would you check behind you?.
I would hope to have seen the car long before it revved behind me, and I almost always have done. I know my observation, especially on the upright, isn't as good as it should be, but I try to look both regularly and before critical points.
-
I don't like cyclists passing me that close. As well as it being startling, I could collect them if I dodged to avoid a pothole or something. The fact that lots of cyclists behave like that doesn't make it right. You should always give other road users plenty of room, no matter what you think of them.
Do you think I was too close, Biggsy?
-
I don't like cyclists passing me that close. As well as it being startling, I could collect them if I dodged to avoid a pothole or something. The fact that lots of cyclists behave like that doesn't make it right. You should always give other road users plenty of room, no matter what you think of them.
But how close was it? I can't really tell.
But yes, I agree with what you say about other cyclists passing too close. A fast cyclist passing a slow cyclist makes a very loud and sudden whooshing sound if they get close so I'm always extra wary if I'm on a flyer and get some plodders in my sights.
-
Some of us have very heightened startle responses. Often the result of some trauma in the past. I've spilled drinks, made other people jump, etc. before with mine.
I absolutely hate close flypasts, especially if they don't have Campag freewheels of knobbly tyres. Either a 'hello' as they approach, or a lot of room. I am not looking forward to the ubiquitous electric car. And no, I shouldn't have to spend my entire time on the bike swivelling my head round like Linda Blair, thank you.
That does rather support the CTUK line that if a vehicle surprises you, you're not looking back enough. I also have a strong startle response.
How often do good drivers check their mirrors?
No it doesn't. I ride according to conditions. You obviously missed the bit about electric cars.
I don't see why I should be looking behind me on country roads and lanes because some <deleted> thinks it is not a problem to give me a close, silent flypast.
-
Do you think I was too close, Biggsy?
It's closer than I like to be passed, and closer than I pass other cyclists.
-
I wouldn't mind if you were justified. I've accepted criticism in the past when I've made mistakes, and I've learnt from them.
So, what were you trying to achieve?. Not only are you very close to him, but you also force him to take his eyes off the road and look behind him? Whats the point with the lecture?
Besides, he's in the bus lane. Why should he have to look behind him?. When he moves around the parked car at the end of the clip, he does indeed look behind him before moving out, so you are being really unfair.
That you refuse to take responsibility for putting him at risk is rather concerning. Is that also a CTUK line?
"Please startle your fellow cyclists so they veer off to the side. This will ensure that you get the lane for yourself and will not be impeded."
-
It's closer than I like to be passed, and closer than I pass other cyclists.
I didn't pass him, by the way, I stayed behind him, leaving him loads of space to do whatever he wanted. If I'd been going past at some speed, I would have been across the line, but the speed differential between us was almost zero.
-
No it doesn't. I ride according to conditions. You obviously missed the bit about electric cars.
I don't see why I should be looking behind me on country roads and lanes because some <deleted> thinks it is not a problem to give me a close, silent flypast.
I look regularly behind even on quiet country lanes as like you I don't like being surprised by overtaking vehicles.
Back to the video, I didn't make a silent flypast of this chap, though I'm sure you didn't intend to imply that.
-
No, I was merely following the thread and contributing to it. :)
-
I didn't pass him, by the way
(Watches video again). Ok, sorry, but you got too close to him, I think.
I don't look behind when I don't intend or expect to deviate from a straight line. I can deal with vehicles getting very near to me, not that I like it or think it's justified.
-
So, what were you trying to achieve?. Not only are you very close to him, but you also force him to take his eyes off the road and look behind him? Whats the point with the lecture?
Besides, he's in the bus lane. Why should he have to look behind him?. When he moves around the parked car at the end of the clip, he does indeed look behind him before moving out, so you are being really unfair.
That you refuse to take responsibility for putting him at risk is rather concerning. Is that also a CTUK line?
"Please startle your fellow cyclists so they veer off to the side. This will ensure that you get the lane for yourself and will not be impeded."
I would normally have said a cheery "Morning" or "on your right" in this case, which would have been at the same conversational volume and would have had exactly the same effect, I think. I'll always announce myself when I come up behind another rider, precisely to avoid this. You keep suggesting/implying I intended to give him a fright, which is b0ll0cks.
It's not my fault he got a fright - if he'd been looking regularly like any competent rider, there would have been no issue. And of course you should check behind yourself in a bus lane, there could be a bus or taxi or any other vehicle approaching. There's even more reason to check before a junction.
By the way, he didn't look behind when he passed the car, he only glanced to the side with almost no head movement. It was the briefest of glances and wouldn't see more than a few meters to the side and behind, 45 degrees at best.
-
Yes, a "morning" or "on your right" is just as startling when coming from a cyclist right behind your wheel that you didn't know was there. No one should have to keep looking behind just to ensure they're not startled by people coming too close, so you shouldn't punish them for it.
-
so you shouldn't punish them for it.
"Quick, there's a POB flagrantly flouting the advice given in Cyclecraft and by CTUK....
....somebody call.....
........ Wendy (http://paizo.com/image/product/catalog/MGP/MGP10000_500.jpeg)"
(lol)
-
Yes, a "morning" or "on your right" is just as startling when coming from a cyclist right behind your wheel that you didn't know was there. No one should have to keep looking behind just to ensure they're not startled by people coming too close, so you shouldn't punish them for it.
Bear in mind the comments about a silent fast flypast above - they, nor I like those either. I feel it's much more polite and safer to announce your presence. You're leaving me with a rock and a hard place scenario - he'd have been startled no matter how he eventually noticed me.
I really don't think I was too close in this instance - there was an entire bus lane for us to occupy, I stayed behind him and well to the side leaving him plenty of room to dodge potholes, and there was almost no speed difference.
And why the punish comment? I did no such thing.
-
OK, back on to the hearing vs looking discussion. Since Flatus doesn't have the courage of his convictions, at least not enough to be filmed, I'll throw out a challenge to those of you who strongly believe hearing is very important. Let's get some traffic footage and look at how you ride the situations presented, and interact with the traffic. I'm happy to meet in London and do some filming, or someone else can film you. Who's up for this?
-
It's punishing to startle when you know the person will be startled. When you know they haven't seen you, you should know they will be startled if you suddenly speak when you're really close.
Startling can be avoided by giving the person loads of room and not saying anything.
-
It's punishing to startle when you know the person will be startled.
See above - I guess you missed where I said I'd no idea this would startle him and no intention of doing so. I didn't realise at the time he hadn't looked back, only after he got a fright and confirmed by watching the video. We'll have to agree to disagree on announcing your presence.
Quite apart from this incident, is it really good practice to expect to ride along and not look behind yourself if you're going in a straight line?
-
p.s. it's inner London on a busy Saturday morning, for goodness sake. How can you not expect other cyclists, electric cars, and other vehicles around and behind you?
-
Quite apart from this incident, is it really good practice to expect to ride along and not look behind yourself if you're going in a straight line?
Depends on the location, doesn't it. And if you have ears.
-
See above - I guess you missed where I said I'd no idea this would startle him and no intention of doing so. I didn't realise at the time he hadn't looked back, only after he got a fright and confirmed by watching the video. We'll have to agree to disagree on announcing your presence.
Ok, I accept that you didn't deliberately mean to startle, but you should have realised that you might have startled him. You should assume that no one has seen you unless you've seen them seeing you.
It's still startling when someone suddlenly invades your personal space, even if it's likely to happen a few times during a busy urban ride. It's an animal brain thing.
I'm sure I have startled a few cyclists with some imperfect/selfish riding, but I generally try not to by giving them an exaggerated amount of room - more room than they need for me to merely pass safely, or ride near safely. I don't need to announce my presence at all then.
Quite apart from this incident, is it really good practice to expect to ride along and not look behind yourself if you're going in a straight line?
I think it's good practice to mentally relax when you can. You can do that when there's nothing ahead that is likely to make you deviate from your line.
-
I'm happy to meet in London and do some filming, or someone else can film you. Who's up for this?
Frankly, I don't have the time.
I've ridden an average of 8000miles a year commuting for the last 3 years, on fast A roads, county lanes and heavy inner city traffic. About 20% in city rush hour. Many more miles that that in cities, from london to leeds to Perth, Australia.
The only collision or near collision I've had was hitting a door when a stationary car opened a passenger door. One collision in 22years of commuting.
I think that the only evidence is doing it. On that basis, unless you haven't had an accident in your brief experience, you should be coming to me for lessons.
Now can we draw a veil over this rather tedious debate?
Edit; I have no wish to come over superior or patronizing to anyone here, I'm just a tad tired of the debate. YMMV is a very good phrase, we all need to ride our own wheels.
Double Edit;
Now I've said this, it's a bl**dy guarantee someone wipes me out monday morning, isn't it?
-
Awwwww >:(
What about the 'best cyclist in London' competition?
I'm looking forward to the footage...
-
so you shouldn't punish them for it.
"Quick, there's a POB flagrantly flouting the advice given in Cyclecraft and by CTUK....
....somebody call.....
........ Wendy (http://paizo.com/image/product/catalog/MGP/MGP10000_500.jpeg)"
(lol)
Remember when you asked me to point out when you're being a childish bell-end?
It's time.
-
Biggsy, passing wide and quietly is no guarantee of not startling anyone either, in my experience it gives perhaps a similar chance of surprise. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't, just as with calling out your presence. I didn't get in his personal space.
mrcharly, your experience and lack of crashes is more an indication of how safe cycling is, not necessarily that it's OK not to look back as much as you should. And my cycling experience isn't as brief as you say, I don't know where you get that from.
The point remains, if you don't look, sooner or later a monster will come up and surprise you no matter how highly tuned your hearing. I hope it's nothing worse than a surprise, and I hope it doesn't happen to me either when I don't look enough. I'm glad Jaded and a few of you have accepted this is the case.
-
Wendy, you were well out of order to distract his attention just as he approached that junction - you should consider yourself lucky that he didn't ride into the back of that car.
-
Awwwww >:(
What about the 'best cyclist in London' competition?
I'm looking forward to the footage...
LOL! But it's not about that, and I would be further down that list than I am on bikejournal anyway. I have a theory that those cyclists who insist on how important hearing is will not look enough, and that should be obvious on any video. Already several on here have admitted they don't look as well as they probably should.
-
Biggsy, passing wide and quietly is no guarantee of not startling anyone either, in my experience it gives perhaps a similar chance of surprise. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't, just as with calling out your presence. I didn't get in his personal space.
mrcharly, your experience and lack of crashes is more an indication of how safe cycling is, not necessarily that it's OK not to look back as much as you should. And my cycling experience isn't as brief as you say, I don't know where you get that from.
The point remains, if you don't look, sooner or later a monster will come up and surprise you no matter how highly tuned your hearing. I hope it's nothing worse than a surprise, and I hope it doesn't happen to me either when I don't look enough. I'm glad Jaded and a few of you have accepted this is the case.
Yup, tick that off as a win and move on to the next campaign. ;)
-
I am not looking forward to the ubiquitous electric car. And no, I shouldn't have to spend my entire time on the bike swivelling my head round like Linda Blair, thank you.
This is what gives away that you know you don't look enough.
I'm not trying to win anything, btw. I know there are times when I don't look enough either.
-
No, that puts into your head the thought that I don't look enough.
There's a difference between what goes on inside your head and what I do/wish to do.
But I"ll let you win, just so there's no hard feelings. ;)
-
Damn.
That's my expenses put off for another day.
Thanks everyone. :thumbsup:
H
-
You're right, it's hard to tell what you actually do in reality, but your comments do suggest there's reason to look more closely. You've got the video camera, why not get a mate to film you? It'd be nice to see some straight quiet sections, as well as busier urban traffic with a number of junctions and traffic interactions.
I'll be nice about your riding, though you may not want to brave the wolf pack here. ;D
Depends on the location, doesn't it. And if you have ears.
And this doesn't suggest that you compensate for not looking by using your hearing?
p.s. again, there's no winning, and no hard feelings regardless.
-
I can report to the jury that I have seen Jaded looking.
-
Biggsy, passing wide and quietly is no guarantee of not startling anyone either, in my experience it gives perhaps a similar chance of surprise. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't, just as with calling out your presence. I didn't get in his personal space.
I've been mildly surprised when passed wide, but not seriously startled. Certainly, the more space your give a cyclist, the less startling it is for them.
-
so you shouldn't punish them for it.
"Quick, there's a POB flagrantly flouting the advice given in Cyclecraft and by CTUK....
....somebody call.....
........ Wendy (http://paizo.com/image/product/catalog/MGP/MGP10000_500.jpeg)"
(lol)
Remember when you asked me to point out when you're being a childish bell-end?
It's time.
Not really. It was a pertinent remark in a comedy dressing!
-
I can report to the jury that I have seen Jaded looking.
I'm sure he does look, and rides well. But that's not objective, and he may or may not look enough. I'd like to see him and/or many of the other riders that feel hearing is essential so we can see when they look, and compare to when they should look based on the situations around them.
Biggsy, I've made quite a few wide and fast passes with a lane of space between us, and still had riders call out "Oh FCUK!!!" in surprise. They relied on their hearing, and it failed them.
-
Come on, you can't deny that the closer you get to someone, the more likely you are to startle them. So please give people plenty of room when you can.
-
when they should look based on the situations around them.
who determines that then ?