[Closed] This should keep us going a while - Recumbent cyclist abuse by Councilor

I occasionally used to get that - someone would pass me (as usual, giving me much more space than they do when I'm on an upright bike) then at the next traffic lights comment that they "didn't see me".

FWIW, in 4 years of commuting into Glasgow, I found the recumbent a lot safer than an upright bike - drivers gave me a lot more space, no-one ever pulled out on me, and the one accident I had (taxi did a u-turn on Byres Rd without looking) I was fine whereas I'd have been over the taxi if I'd been on an upright bike.

I think he rides/commutes from Derby via Swarkestone bidge.

Bear in mind that bridge is brarely wide enough to get 2 cars past each other (it's not in a lot of places) yet is the main road between south derbyshire and Derby and has ~4ft walls at the road side (no pavement) so zero visibility of anything smaller than a ~4ft round the corners* it's a mirracle he's not already dead.

*bridge is missleading, it's a causeway.

Why would a 4 foot wall at the side of the road stop you seeing a recumbent on the road in front of you? 😕

Ah, the post has been edited to add 'round corners'. In any case, a lotus elise is less than 4 feet tall.

Just googled pics - if you can't see a recumbent bike in front of you on that, you shouldn't be on the road. Seriously, how do drivers who can't see recumbents manage to avoid potholes, kerbs etc?

Why would a 4 foot wall at the side of the road stop you seeing a recumbent on the road in front of you?

It's got corners, rises, dips. Barely aweek goes by without someone stuffing a car through the wall. And the walls are visible. Bear in mind stretview is taken from 12ft up in the air, for example look at the stanton end of the bridge looking from just on the bridge back to the village. You can see round the left hand corner, the silver focus can see round the corner, but there's no way you'd see a recumbant on or just past the apex.

Trust me on this one, I've come accross him many times (and not hit him) you can't see him on the bridge untill you're almost ontop of him.

It's got corners, rises, dips. Barely aweek goes by without someone stuffing a car through the wall. And the walls are visible.

Trust me on this one, I've come accross him many times (and not hit him) you can't see him on the bridge untill you're almost ontop of him.

Everything you've written there is the fault of the driver.

If people are regularly hitting a big stone wall, then it won't matter what kind of bike you're on.

Everything you've written there is the fault of the driver.

Exactly.

So riding something that bad drivers can't see isn't helping is it? You could drive a car accross at the speed limit thinking it's clear, you can clearly see cars, motorbikes, push bikes, lost walkers etc. You can't see something that's 2-3ft off the ground. And 90% of car drivers probably don't knowwhat a recumabnt bike is to look out for one!

[i]So riding something that bad drivers can't see isn't helping is it? [/i]

Gotta agree, no point been dead right...

He ought to look into some form of pendant, or more pendants.

Funny one of these past through here two days ago, towing a trailer and to his credit, the dude had a wippy ariel with a flag on it, but it was soo low to the ground. I was driving the other way and he pulled out of a side turning in front of this dustcart, the driver of which was focussed on what was going on behind him, he came so close to being wiped out, no way the dust cart driver could have seen him from his driving position and I remember thinking at the time how dangerous they looked.

Got nothing against them myself, can't say I'd be seen dead on/in one but it's easy to see why folk worry about them. They are way off the normal peripheral vision radar, bad enough school runners in 4x4's and normal bikes, if recumbents ever proliferated I'm sure we'd see an increase in the cycle accident rate, which by virtue of the growing number of roadies must be increasing anyway.

You could say all that about upright bikes too, though - some car drivers, especially first thing in the morning when they're half asleep and trying to get to work, don't see bikes. I found being on a recumbent helped - the WTF IS THAT?! reaction made them pay a lot more attention.

Oh, for goodness sake, you make Swarkestone Bridge sound like a black run! The only problem with it is that people drive way too fast over it, and won't give way to oncoming traffic.
I'm so glad I no longer live in such a backward area as South Derbyshire!

It also depends a lot on the type of recumbent. I don't like using a lowracer in traffic much, not because people don't see me, but because if you're below car bonnet level your visibility at junctions is limited.

On most recumbents, you're at eye level with car drivers. Feel more part of traffic, instead of perched above cars with drivers staring at your knees, hoping they've seen you.

Exactly.

So riding something that bad drivers can't see isn't helping is it?

I don't necessarily disagree. But if a bad driver crashes as a result of seeing a recumbent bike, that's the fault of the bad driver, not the bike rider. The danger is from the badly driven cars, but the councilor doesn't want to address that.

Quite a few recumbent cycles round here. Great to "see" them out on the roads especially the paralympic rider. Most have big flags to help others see them, but I do worry for their safety on narrow country lanes. But it is the responsibility of others to keep out of their way IMO.

I used to see a recumbant rider on my old commute. (If it's more aerodynamic then why was he always slower than me? (I'm not fast))

Anyway, he hasn't made the local news as yet.

I used to see a recumbant rider on my old commute. (If it's more aerodynamic then why was he always slower than me? (I'm not fast))

Maybe he was just enjoying a relaxing, low-effort ride to work? 🙂

On building sites there's a danger of falling objects.

Do you:
A) Enforce hard hats and tell people not to drop things.
B) Ban people from having accidents and dropping things.

On the road there's a danger of being hit by cars do you:
A) Make yourself visible.
B) Blame the car driver when they hit you.

Real life isn't black and white, there's shades of gray where you have to take some responsibility for your own actions even when the law says you're in the right.

Why are people who don't do something always so keen to save other people from themselves? Let's face it, if this guy gets into a crash he will probably come off worst. Contrast that with the person driving a car too fast (or just driving so that they can't stop within the distance that they can see is clear). They get the benefit, but somebody else takes the risk. That's what would bother me. If somebody wants to do something risky, whether that be jumping out of a balloon from 24 miles up or, heaven forfend, riding a bicycle on the public highway then that's their lookout.

Cheers,

Andy

Cheers,

Andy

or just driving so that they can't stop within the distance that they can see is clear

I don't drive arround expecting the Ghost Busters to pop out of a manhole cover either. Most people have probably never seen a recumbant to know to look out for one.

Let's face it, if this guy gets into a crash he will probably come off worst.

I get upset if I take out a rabbit or duck, I'd be pretty f*****d up if I killed someone.

My point was you can 'see' the bridge is clear of everything you'd expect to see on the bridge.

So why do people keep hitting the big stone walls?

On the road there's a danger of being hit by cars do you:
A) Make yourself visible

Perhaps by riding a vehicle that doesn't look like a normal bike, and so won't be ignored the way normal bikes often are?

Folk tend to forget that when they get behind the wheel of a car they are in sole charge of a 1 ton+ killing machine that will cause serious injury or death to pretty much any living object it hits at low speeds never mind high speeds, so if you do not have a clear view of the road ahead or round a corner etc then you adjust your speed to such a point that you will manage to control your vehicle if there is such an obstruction in the carriageway that causes you to take action.

If you get behind the wheel of a car then it is your sole responsibility to drive with due care and attention for all other road users whether that be pedestrians, sheep,cattle,bikes,dogs,cars etc on the carriageway.

I tend to drive on mostly singletrack galloway roads and the amount of idiots up here in the summer due to being here on holiday that have ended up in the ditches,walls,front of tractors etc is laughable as they have no idea about how to actually drive safely and leave a suitable braking distance especially on such narrow roads with poor surfaces, thank god they've never hit me as i'd be **** royally pissed off and rather angry but i have had to take evasive action on at least half a dozen times over this summer whilst watching the other car slide into the ditch or off the road into trees on full lock - serves them right and one more idiot off the road is always a good thing imho.

the WTF IS THAT?! reaction made them pay a lot more attention

On the road there's a danger of being hit by cars do you:
A) [i]Make reasonable efforts to[/i] make yourself visible.
B) Blame the car driver when they hit you.

Recumbants aren't my bag (but I'm curious) but don't think it's fair to try to ban them or make dignitas comparisons

I'd just like to say that, as a recumbent rider, this sounds a lot like the discussions on car forums that are often complained about - people who probably haven't ridden a recumbent making judgements about how safe they are 🙂

Riding a recumbent might be more dangerous than riding an upright. Riding a bike on the road is more dangerous than being in a car. Being in a Fiesta is more dangerous than being in an armoured SUV. Going mountain biking is more dangerous than riding an exercise bike in a hermetically sealed room with padded walls.

There's danger everywhere. Saying you deserve to die for doing one is no different from saying you deserve to die for any other.

For all we know the (AFAIK unidentified) rider has a medical condition that means he can't ride an upright bike.

What's the most common cause of an accident on a bike? It's the good old SMIDSY. Almost never happens with recumbents - in fact sometimes get the opposite extreme, sometimes drivers pay so much attention to the recumbent that they drive into something else...

This is good, so it's the fault of a bloke cycling down the road 'cos he's too small.
Wonder what the lovely local counciler thinks of small children? "**** em if their too young to vote!"?

My point was you can 'see' the bridge is clear of everything you'd expect to see on the bridge

could happen[/url] 😉
would that be the pedestrians fault or the drivers fault?

but back to the OP, Stanton sounds a right tool

Riding a recumbent might be more dangerous than riding an upright.

Proper statistics are tricky - bikes are pretty safe anyway, recumbents are rare, so recumbent accidents are very rare. However, anecdotally, recumbents are usually safer. Partly because of the WTF effect I mentioned before, partly because if you do hit something you hit it feet first not head first. Every time I've crashed my recumbent (doing something silly) it's been a fall sideways onto my hip. Get gravel rash, but head comes nowhere near the Tarmac. Crashing on an upright inevitably leads to going head first into something, with arms outstretched - broke my wrist doing that.

I much prefer the London fixes thread to ours.

presumably with no footpath there's people walking along the road occasionally? What if one of them had a fall, passed out or whatever and was lying in the road? it could happen
would that be the pedestrians fault or the drivers fault?

You missed the bit about lost walkers, there is a parralel footpath.

And the bit about the walls being ~4ft high, you'd see a walker from the other end of the bridge.

I much prefer the London fixes thread to ours.

Yep, there are times when the swear filter really holds this place back.

On the road there's a danger of being hit by cars do you:
A) Make yourself visible.
B) Blame the car driver when they hit you.

By that logic the answer is clearly

C) Get a car you two-wheeled peasant.

Oh God he is doing wrong things.

Oh God he is doing wrong things.

Riding a recumbent through the city centre late at night, I was shouted at by a couple of blokes on a bench - "Haw, brilliant, you could choke your chicken on that!"

🙂

You missed the bit about lost walkers, there is a parralel footpath.

And the bit about the walls being ~4ft high

"Haw, brilliant, you could choke your chicken on that!"