Inconsidererate, aggressive, but not necessarily dangerous. Report?

pendragon_arther

Babbawah wrote: »

The stable yard I use occasionally is almost unique in that it is a profitable venture in its own right and does not rely on Pippa's or Penelope's benefactor chucking huge amounts of cash in to fund it's existence.

One of its major cash sources is horse drawn wedding and funeral carriages.

The yard has 6 full time grooms and many more volunteers, work experience and work to part fund the stabling costs, most of whom seem to live there 24/7.

Where I live you cannot complete a journey by road without coming across at least one of 'em on horseback.

Carriage horses involved in wedding and funerals have to do a lot of roadwork because of the nature of the job.

Most folk where I live are very courteous when coming across them . . . but there has still been the odd incident.

Myself, well the missus is good friends with Janet who owns the yard, so I always slow down or stop. The missus thinks I'm being courteous . . .

I'm not. I have this 'thing' about healthy young girls in jodhpurs, especially Janet !

This, I think is where our moaning and whinging psyclists are going wrong.

Most psyclists are into the lycra because of a sexual fantasy, and there is a good reason why there isn't many wimmin invited on these rides !

Hi fellow perv. There's nothing quite like the sight of an attractive female bottom thumping up and down on a saddle.

silverwhistle

Bollotom wrote: »

Jesus! The oncoming motorist must have got a shock. Clown in the car overtaking the cyclist is a moron who obviously doesn't give a flying !!!! for cyclists or cars. I'm a driver, cyclist and I also drive trains. Beat that

If you drive trains you may well meet Modsandmockers at a level crossing somewhere. I hope it's not too distressing as you give him a practical physics lesson..

(You'd have to read one of his other threads if that doesn't mean anything to you!:D).

silverwhistle

MacMickster wrote: »

Me trolling? I believed that these fora were places for healthy debate between those with differing viewpoints. Apparently I was mistaken and this particular sub-forum is merely intended for a small bunch of lycra louts to agree with each other. My mistake clearly..

Clearly! These fora are for calling cyclists 'lycra louts', 'psyclists' and other lazy, cliched insults, or even for pointlessly stupid contributions such as from 'Blackpool_Saver'. They are also for demonstrating a lack of understanding of cyclists' rational behaviour (primary position etc.) which is not reciprocated, given that virtually all cyclists also drive.

Tilt

brat wrote: »

We looked at most of this already Tilt. Tobster's distance is about 1 metre from the kerb, which is the best distance out to avoid kerbside crap and to allow a little nearside wiggle room. There is no cycle path or shared path, and Tobster's speed would be above that recommended for a shared path anyway.

Sorry, I didn't realise you were there.

Tobster86

Well, some humorously interesting if twisted justifications from the anti-cycling brigade. You guys should have been defence lawyers at the Nuremberg trials!

Clarifications:
-Secondary position, as is actually really clear from the footage. The camera is mounted about 5cm offset left from the centre of the handlebars; confirmed in the shed full of !!!! photo.
-Just over 20mph is about spot on; it's a 20 year old Raleigh ten-speed on skinny city hybrid slicks, coming down a slight incline from a bridge.
-I didn't realise this wasn't clear in the video, but it was absolutely certainly the silver BMW that was using the horn. Anyone that's not a complete numpty can clearly tell it's use is entirely aggressive; a warning of presence would have been something like a couple of short pips before the largely impatient overtake.
-40mph speed limit, within the Worcester ring road, approaching a 30 that the BMW clearly does not slow down for. It's been 40mph since the previous roundabout at the ring road.
-I saw the BMW in my actually very good rear view mirror (I strongly recommend this particular unit as there are mostly awful ones out there, but this one is clear, sturdy and excellent) and watched him come right from the bridge behind; highly likely speeding but made to slow down a little by my presence.
-I wasn't listening to music and don't while cycling. The prospect of not having a full sense of hearing whilst trying to share the road with the idiot in the video (and apparently a few on this forum) is terrifying.
-Single male driver, and yes he did gesticulate afterwards (not clear in video). Rest assured this was promptly returned.
-I don't own any lycra, I think it outrages public decency!
-When I'm not cycling I drive a BMW 540i. It has 295bhp, and I bought it primarily for that reason. Just thought I'd throw that in there.

Interesting thread. The reason I started it was to get people's opinion on whether impatient rudeness like this should be reported as, completely honestly, it didn't feel as unsafe as the video might seem. Yes, the overtake wasn't exactly text book in terms of space, but could have been far worse.

The anti-cyclist brigade on this forum are convincing me that I should report it though. I have the opportunity to do my part to save the rest of us from having to share the roads with such morons, so feel duty bound to do so.

Tilt

frisbeej wrote: »

Nope, when asked whether "the" car should have overtaken or should "it" have waited, you then introduced the factor of how long they had already been waiting.

And? So why presume that I should hand my driving licence back to the DVLA by me assuming why the BMW overtook the cyclist when he did? I merely provided a motive for him doing so which dosn't mean I would of done the same!

Tobster86

Tilt wrote:

I would of

x 50.

I'm sure you would.

Tilt

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Does it appear to you the cyclist is riding in the damp track left on the road from the nearside wheel of the vehicles?. This is about three feet from the kerb.

In the absence of any part of the bike in the footage, it's hard to relate to where the camera is attached thus difficult to asses the position of the bike in the road.

Norman_Castle wrote: »

As a semi pro camera man do you consider a moving cyclist or cycle a stable camera mount or do you think some movement may be noticeable?.

If I am understanding your question correctly, you are asking where the best fixed position for a video camera would be on a bike? Well for a start, I would suggest that a bike should have at least 2 cameras; one rear facing (attached to the bike itself rather than the rider) and one attached facing forward. In both cases the camera should capture part of the bike to show the it's actual position on the road.

Helmet mounted cameras are all very well as a back up view but may not always demonstrate the movement of the bike for obvious reasons.

Tilt

Tobster86 wrote: »

x 50.

I'm sure you would.

You assume incorrectly. For a start I have no idea what view the BMW driver had before the overtake plus I have no accurate notion to your position on the road, only your word.

Tobster86

Tilt wrote: »

Helmet mounted cameras are all very well as a back up view but may not always demonstrate the movement of the bike for obvious reasons.

Actually, for obvious reasons (like being mounted to a biological gyroscope), they're an excellent position.

I don't wear a helmet though (...here we go...).