I will knock you out ! BBCs Jeremy Vine films woman driver`s shocking road rage

prowla

chiefnoodle wrote: »

If you look at the clip you'll see there's a long stretch with no parked cars, just ahead of where the camera cuts. Had he gone to the side then she could've overtaken easily. Are you seriously telling me that in such a situation its not common courtesy to go to the side of the road to let the car pass, just because the cyclists journey is equally important

I think the tooting & beeping happened before that, where there were cars along the sides of the road, but then yes he should have (and probably did) pull over there, as she was in front of him just up the road.

chiefnoodle

custardy wrote: »

Common sense would tell a car drive in those roads they wont gain any time with aggressive driving.
demonstrated by her sitting at a junction as the cyclist catches up.

Who says she wouldn't have caught the lights if he hadn't held her up.
I'm not defending her behaviour, I'm just saying...

chiefnoodle

sacsquacco wrote: »

You give away the fact that you have never ridden a bike much lately . If you had actually sat on a bike and had a peddle along the road, any road, you would see all the damage and drain grates and pot holes which exist very close to the kerbs.The roads are in the worst condition very close to the left hand kerbs plus we have the danger of hitting a peddle on the kerb itself which could throw us into the path of a car behind.That is why we must give the kerbs a bit of a wide birth, just as we have to do with a car door suddenly opening, so we have to pass by a metre or so to avoid possibly becoming another cycling death/injury.
" Vines behaviour "..Its "Jeremy " thank you ! the guy who everyone loved on Strictly Come Dancing because of his good manners and ever smiling demeanour even though he was an appalling dancer.
It sounds like you are the token apologist for the motorist on this thread.( Its usually Jonny100) .Jeremy had done nothing wrong whatsoever to justify her behaviour with her imaginary gun ! He was minding his own business travelling faster than she could have managed and hopefully we will see a sizeable fine for this lying woman who also fiddled her road tax as well. The Magistrate will give her a fine to think twice and calm down the next time someone annoys her on the public road.

Its true I don't cycle much (or drive) and these points hadn't occurred to me, thanks for making them in a calm way.

So what do you suggest practically? You can have some very long, narrow, and busy, roads. If there's a cyclist there that means long delays for all the cars.

I would've thought cycling on the side just while the cars overtake, and then moving out to the middle of the lane when they're past, would be the ideal solution. I mean are the potholes so bad that 30 seconds of navigating round them isn't doable.

I don't know Jeremy Vine personally so can't comment, but I'm not sure you can get the measure of a person by watching how they choose to act on a TV show.

I've made clear several times I'm not defending the motorist and I fully agree she should get a big fine etc etc. My mum used to tell me it takes two to make an argument, and the motorist definitely did 99% of the work here. I was just wondering if someone who works as a journalist might be pleased to generate lots of publicity, so wasn't too worried about contributing his 1%. That's all.

Keep_pedalling

chiefnoodle wrote: »

Its true I don't cycle much (or drive) and these points hadn't occurred to me, thanks for making them in a calm way.

So what do you suggest practically? You can have some very long, narrow, and busy, roads. If there's a cyclist there that means long delays for all the cars.

I would've thought cycling on the side just while the cars overtake, and then moving out to the middle of the lane when they're past, would be the ideal solution. I mean are the potholes so bad that 30 seconds of navigating round them isn't doable.

I don't know Jeremy Vine personally so can't comment, but I'm not sure you can get the measure of a person by watching how they choose to act on a TV show.

I've made clear several times I'm not defending the motorist and I fully agree she should get a big fine etc etc. My mum used to tell me it takes two to make an argument, and the motorist definitely did 99% of the work here. I was just wondering if someone who works as a journalist might be pleased to generate lots of publicity, so wasn't too worried about contributing his 1%. That's all.

On a narrow lane like that I would keep prime position, until I reach a point where I could safely move over, and that would be a section without cars parked at the side of the road. I don't want cars overtaking with just a few inches to spare, especially if I have to avoid pot holes.

I also can't see that would cause long delays either, a few seconds perhaps, especially as many of these streets now have 20 mph limits, and a lot of cyclists are approaching that speed anyway.

hugheskevi

You can have some very long, narrow, and busy, roads. If there's a cyclist there that means long delays for all the cars.

You make it sound like a single carriageway rural A road rather than central London in the middle of the day. There will not be long delays for cars. They will get to the back of the same queue they would have reached anyway about 5 seconds or so later than they would otherwise have reached that same position.

I would've thought cycling on the side just while the cars overtake, and then moving out to the middle of the lane when they're past, would be the ideal solution.

In these situations the gaps between parked cars are small (central London is not known for a surplus of parking places), so if the cyclist moves left to let a car accelerate past they will quickly encounter the next parked car and get into conflict situations with following traffic similar to this YouTube clip, showing a car not allowing the cyclist to move right to get past the parked car.

Do you agree that cyclists will be making much more rapid progress than the cars in central London? This TfL report finds that average traffic speed in central London is 14kph (8.7 mph). Your comments imply that the cars are moving a lot faster than cyclists, which simply isn't the case. If the cyclist did move aside to let all the cars past they would simply be filtering past them all, usually within less than a minute as the cars become stuck in the next queue of traffic. What is the point in that?

prowla

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

On a narrow lane like that I would keep prime position, until I reach a point where I could safely move over, and that would be a section without cars parked at the side of the road. I don't want cars overtaking with just a few inches to spare, especially if I have to avoid pot holes.

I also can't see that would cause long delays either, a few seconds perhaps, especially as many of these streets now have 20 mph limits, and a lot of cyclists are approaching that speed anyway.

Oh gawd - that "prime position" rubbish!

The fact is that there was a fair portion of the road where there was no safe place to overtake; we don't need all that alternative rules of the road for the cyclist malarky to see that.

interstellaflyer

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

I also can't see that would cause long delays either, a few seconds perhaps, especially as many of these streets now have 20 mph limits, and a lot of cyclists are approaching that speed anyway.

That was my thought as well, many urban rat runs are now 20mph limits, certainly here in Oxford where every road that goes close to the city center or round the main Universities, plus most residential side streets are 20mph limits, whilst I hate driving in Oxford sometimes I have the misfortune of having to do deliveries and I find the in these 20mph limits, most cyclists are not far off that. As for cyclists holding motorists up in busy cities, complete tosh, there may be points where the motorist may have to go slower than they would like but the cyclist will always be faster overall.

Norman_Castle

prowla wrote: »

Oh gawd - that "prime position" rubbish!

The fact is that there was a fair portion of the road where there was no safe place to overtake; we don't need all that alternative rules of the road for the cyclist malarky to see that.

Primary position describes road users positioning themselves to prevent inappropriate lane use. I use it while driving. One example is when entering two local islands. Both have wide single lane entrances but only enough room for one vehicle on the island. At these islands its common for vehicles to treat the single lane as a double lane unless they are blocked. Large vehicle drivers often will use it.
Its not an alternate rule for cyclists.

Sicard

Am I the only one who finds her strangely attractive?



Should have gone to Specsavers...

Keep_pedalling

prowla wrote: »

Oh gawd - that "prime position" rubbish!

The fact is that there was a fair portion of the road where there was no safe place to overtake; we don't need all that alternative rules of the road for the cyclist malarky to see that.

What alternative rules of the road?

From rule 66 of the Highway Code.

look well ahead for obstructions in the road, such as drains, pot-holes and parked vehicles so that you do not have to swerve suddenly to avoid them. Leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened or pedestrians stepping into your path

Nothing about always having to religiously stick to the left regardless of conditions, and under those conditions if a cyclist wants to avoid an idiot trying a close pass or opening a door on them they should they should take control of the lane.

I would not ride an A road or country lane in the same manor, but on narrow town streets it is the safest thing to do and perfectly within the rules of the road.