Inconsidererate, aggressive, but not necessarily dangerous. Report?

modsandmockers wrote: »

I've watched the video several times, and I can see no wrong.

The car driver saw a chance to overtake a slower road user and did so in perfect safety. The video shows that the cyclist had no up-to-date information about what was about to happen, and the short horn blast was therefore justified. If the bike had been equipped with an effective rear-view mirror, then it would have been reasonable for the car driver to assume that the cyclist was aware of the imminent overtake.

Dearie me. I'm glad you've mostly hung up your car keys, because if you thought THAT was OK, you need to be off the road.
You should give a cyclist as much room as you would a car, so you should be well on to the offside of that road to complete an overtake.
To overtake at that speed at that proximity is inconsiderate. To sound a horn (either as an aggressive statement or as an apology for his carelessness) is inappropriate.

You have a lot to learn, but I sense you're already on the wrong side of the learning curve.

modsandmockers wrote: »

....
The horn is intended to warn other road users of your presence or approach - especially if you have reasonable grounds to believe that they are otherwise unaware.

Blasting a horn that close (ie when you are already overtaking) would be more likely to make a cyclist wobble and increase rather than decrease the risk of an accident.

brat wrote: »

Have a read of this Mods
http://ukcyclelaws.blogspot.co.uk/p/overtaking-cyclists.html

I got as far as the picture and the first of 29 comments...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bnVkYxKPTKM/UHV7RAm02aI/AAAAAAAAAA0/EDAlw8xEgDM/s1600/Overtake.jpg

"i must say as a point on this, as a non driving cyclist, this is how i understand that rule. give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car. that doesn't state the other side of the road, the image is used to emphasise the point only. a car does not leave a full lane between it and another car. it leaves a few feet, a car doors width. if cars left this much space between each other you would not be able to overtake, roads are not 3 lanes wide. if a cyclist is not confident enough being overtake in this way they should not be on the road, the same way a driver not confident in driving should not be on the road."

Tobster - it took several attempts to work out the meaning of your photograph, and eventually I identified the small circle of mirror glass at the end of your handlebar. But your 12 second video gave no indication that you are in the habit of using it, and I would hazard a guess that it doesn’t really give you much useful information about what is happening just behind your right shoulder. Motorists frequently have to choose between sitting on a cyclist’s right shoulder and nipping their way past. Unfortunately, cyclists don’t very often help - the normal behaviour is to pedal like hell, and avoid any kind of eye contact with other road users.

On a driving test, a motorist would very likely be penalised for failing to overtake a cyclist in the scenario which your video shows. You appear to be a confident cyclist, and it would be reasonable to assume that, even though you don’t pay much visual attention to what is happening behind you, you will have been able to hear the motor vehicle’s approach. The blast on the horn should have been no more than a confirmation of what you already knew.

modsandmockers wrote: »

You are a cyclist, right? So therefore it is wrong for a car to overtake a bike on a clear stretch of road. Right?

What are you on about??

Of course a car can overtake a cyclist, but he needs to 'overtake' him, not just drive through his safety space.

A cyclist needs to be able to have some wiggle room. He needs to be able to make small deviations to his course to avoid small hazards like glass/stones/twigs small pot holes that may be in his path. This is one of the reasons why a decent amount of space needs to be given to cyclists.

Another reason is that a high speed close pass physically unsettles a rider. The airflow around the car can cause the cyclist to be pulled off line. I've been involved in the investigation of two fatal accidents where the proximity of the passing vehicle has caused the cyclist to be drawn towards then under the rear wheels.

A further reason is that riders can get a fright by the proximity of a vehicle which can cause them to instinctively veer to the nearside to increase the gap, then find themselves in kerbside detritus and potholes which can cause them to fall off.

All of this risk to the cyclist (and to the motorist's liberty) can be avoided by the motorist realising that the passing manoeuvre is an overtaking manoeuvre, and to recognise that the cyclist, like all other road users, should have plenty of space around him to be and to feel safe.

The car passed the bike with roughly the same clearance as it would have passed another car - there is no need to be on the wrong side of the road in order to pass a cyclist.

That's absulotely not true for this road. A cyclist should be a metre off the kerb. This allows him to be clear of the drains, roadedge break up and kerbside crap. This is where Tobster was, which means that his right arm would be about 1.4 metres into the road. This road has lane width of about 3.5 metres, and the width of the BMW plus nearside mirror is 1.9 metres. To keep within lane (the edge of the BMW wheel was on the centre line) the BMW nearside mirror will have passed Tobsters right arm with approx 0.2 metres (8 inches) to spare. That is unacceptable.

As a point for reference, many other countries require a minimum passing gap of 1.0 metre in town and 1.5 metres elsewhere. That's not law in this country, but it's a good guide, especially as the highway code advice is poorly written.

In the video, you'll notice that Tobster instinctively moves to the nearside as the BMW passes, towards that drain that his earlier road position was designed to avoid - all thanks to the inconsiderate driving of the BMW driver. If this draingate had the usual accompanying pothole, then Tobster could have been in some trouble.

The video gives no information about speed.

Wrong again. The video can provide quite an accurate assessment of speed. Tobster was doing 20mph (+-10%) The BMW was doing 45mph (+-10%) - in a 40mph limit, and would appear to continue at that speed into the 30 limit.

The horn is intended to warn other road users of your presence or approach - especially if you have reasonable grounds to believe that they are otherwise unaware.

That is a hopeless excuse for this horn warning. A horn warning is an entirely inappropriate part of an overtaking manoeuvre. The motorist must plan his overtake and complete it where there is no likelihood that the vehicle being overtaken has any plan other than continuing straight a head at a steady speed. This horn warning was saying "Make way, I'm coming through!"

Mods. If you have stopped driving, good. Please don't start again.