Suicidal cyclist on the Dronfield Bypass, LIGHT UP !

[Squiggs]

Self preservation is a powerful motivator for cyclists despite what a lot of daft people think and when most journeys include a couple of tonnes of vehicle being driven directly at you or inches away from your unprotected person you'll understand why we draw a clear line in the sand.

 

 

That's about the size of it.

 

The thing is that whilst many cyclists will do this anyway, too often excuses are made trying to put the onus on the cyclist for not taking all the responsibility (I mean like the examples of "shouldn't be on that road anyway, it's too busy for bikes" - as opposed to "yes, it's a busy road and this thread should be a reminder to be aware of not only other cars but cyclists too")

[Shazbat]

Not a dual carriageway, but I was driving down Woodbourn Road last week, just at the junction with (I think) Parkway Avenue (the road with Makro on it) and this cyclist on the other side of the road, appeared; dark clothing, nothing reflective, no light on his bike - until I went past him and in my rear-view mirror I could see a white light flashing on the back. As far as I'm aware, showing white lights to the rear of a bike is the same as it is far a car? Illegal? Streetlights are no substitute and they really don't help themselves.

[Squiggs]

Walking to the pub tonight this Ford KA flew past almost invisible. No lights at all.

 

Next road a black Golf went past simlilarly unlit.

 

As far as I'm aware cars should be illuminated at night and streetlights are no substitute. Drivers really don't help themselves, or others whom they might plough into having not seen them.

[garrence]

This is the Dronfield bypass with the warning signs to beware of deer?

 

Deer don't have lights. When deer are by the road, they do suddenly decide to leap in front of a car (just ask the people in the Highlands).

 

So anyone driving the road will be alert for deer or debris in the road - if they are paying due car and attention.

 

Yet the OP failed to notice a bicycle with what sounds like lighting conforming to the British Standard (a red light with filament bulb).

 

What chance would a deer have? Can the OP really claim to have been paying due care and attention?

 

Or is the opening post a way of saying "I'm not always paying attention, I think it's up to you to force yourself into my attention." ?

[Mr_Squirrel]

Walking to the pub tonight this Ford KA flew past almost invisible. No lights at all.

 

Next road a black Golf went past simlilarly unlit.

 

As far as I'm aware cars should be illuminated at night and streetlights are no substitute. Drivers really don't help themselves, or others whom they might plough into having not seen them.

 

 

Did you enjoy your drinky-poos?

 

And more importantly, did you note down the cars registration number and report them to the police?

[Mr_Squirrel]

This is the Dronfield bypass with the warning signs to beware of deer?

 

Deer don't have lights. When deer are by the road, they do suddenly decide to leap in front of a car (just ask the people in the Highlands).

 

So anyone driving the road will be alert for deer or debris in the road - if they are paying due car and attention.

 

Yet the OP failed to notice a bicycle with what sounds like lighting conforming to the British Standard (a red light with filament bulb).

 

What chance would a deer have? Can the OP really claim to have been paying due care and attention?

 

Or is the opening post a way of saying "I'm not always paying attention, I think it's up to you to force yourself into my attention." ?

 

Wildlife are completely different to human beings and have no relevance within this conversation. Wildlife do not have the luxury of cognitive thinking process like humans do and have little comprehension of road safety awareness.

The humans driving the car and riding the bicycle are intelligent enough to make their own choices regarding their own and others safety, the deer is not and neither are hedgehogs, squirrels, bats, pheasants or other wildlife in general. To imply that a motorist would be at fault for hitting a deer that leaps out into the road is ridiculous and im sure any motorist in that situation would take evasive action (as they would a cyclist) but the fact remains that a human can make a choice on road safety, an animal cannot.

[Joe9T]

I know that but when did you ever hear of anybody being prosecuted for driving WITH due care?

 

The term 'due care' is a popular abbreviation for the full term of the offence.

.

 

You can't be 'done' for driving WITH due care, cos u ain't done anything wrong.

 

It's driving WITHOUT due care, if your gonna be done for that. DUE CARE means you have been driving carefully!

 

Why would you EVER be done for driving 'WITH' DUE CARE????

 

DUE CARE is not a popular abbreviation of driving WITHOUT DUE CARE!!!

Edited November 17, 2010 by Joe9T

[Justin Smith]

I went down the same section of bypass last night, in the dark, obviously.

 

It was unfortunate, just bad luck, but also very dangerous, that the cyclist was already on the bypass crossing the slip road at the top, at just the moment I was coming up the slip road at 60mph plus. You have to do that kind of speed when you join a fast dual carriageway, in fact it`s actually dangerous to join a motorway (or similar) at low speed.

 

The other point that occured to me, is, on this unlit road, everyone is doing 70mph plus on dipped headlights (due to traffic on the other side of the road) !

 

Any cyclist on that road at night, particularly in dark clothing with one poxy little light on the back, want`s a brain transplant.......

[InTheUK]

To respond to the poster asking why a cyclist would want to ride down Dronfield bypass in the first place. I HAVE ridden this road, at night, in the dark, on a couple of occasions. I've also ridden the alternative route through Dronfield on many occasions.

 

The answer is: there's no rational reason for riding the bypass. It's not any quicker, it does not offer (overall) a flatter route - in fact it's a monotonous climb out of Chesterfield, and not steep enough in the other direction to be of any particular interest. However bored I might get of the Dronfield route, I don't think I'll be temped back onto the bypass any time soon.

 

One thing I would say though is that the bypass has a hard shoulder, so as long as the cyclist rides along that they are out of the way of passing vehicles and in that fairly narrow context, safer than they would be on a normal road from inattentive drivers.

 

Regardless of the nature of the road, as a cyclist I believe all of us should ensure we are well lit at night - good lights first and reflectives second. As a car driver I've been disappointed to see a few bikes at night with zero concessions to visibility. Plus of course a few cars similarly unlit. (Only disappointed though, stopped being astonished years ago :-))

[Mr_Squirrel]

To respond to the poster asking why a cyclist would want to ride down Dronfield bypass in the first place. I HAVE ridden this road, at night, in the dark, on a couple of occasions. I've also ridden the alternative route through Dronfield on many occasions.

 

The answer is: there's no rational reason for riding the bypass. It's not any quicker, it does not offer (overall) a flatter route - in fact it's a monotonous climb out of Chesterfield, and not steep enough in the other direction to be of any particular interest. However bored I might get of the Dronfield route, I don't think I'll be temped back onto the bypass any time soon.

 

One thing I would say though is that the bypass has a hard shoulder, so as long as the cyclist rides along that they are out of the way of passing vehicles and in that fairly narrow context, safer than they would be on a normal road from inattentive drivers.

 

Regardless of the nature of the road, as a cyclist I believe all of us should ensure we are well lit at night - good lights first and reflectives second. As a car driver I've been disappointed to see a few bikes at night with zero concessions to visibility. Plus of course a few cars similarly unlit. (Only disappointed though, stopped being astonished years ago :-))

 

Well said that man