Cycling on Dual carriageways at night without decent lighting =inviting death

I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !

ash wrote:

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

How do you know he was lazy?

Maybe he was doing it for the same reasons it was put there for, to
by-pass a multitude of potential obstructions, including, but not
exclusively, traffic lights. The same reasons other road users use it,
maybe?

I know a similar place, A610 past Eastwood and Kimberley in Nottingham
and regularly used it on bike, car, truck and other vehicles for
exactly the reasons it was built .. faster, smoother, easier ...
sod-all to do with laziness. Cycling is not a cure for laziness, it
requires some little effort.

--
Paul - xxx

ash wrote:
I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !

people wonder why cyclists are often the victims of hit and runs: the
driver could not see them in time to avoid them.
Most cyclists are the authors of their own misfortunes.

On Jan 9, 11:08*am, ash wrote:
I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !

I had a similar experience some years ago on a 30 mph town road,
driving a car on a foul, dark night with driving rain, where trees on
either side of road reduced effectiveness of street lighting. I was
aware of red lights on the road ahead which were tail lights of
vehicles at traffic lights ahead. However, one light wobbled a wee bit
and I was glad I, as usual, eased off the accelerator when there was
any doubt. Turned out to be a cyclist waiting just ahead of me in the
middle of the road to do right turn. Apart from the wee red light his
dark bike, jacket, hat and backpack were near to perfection in
comouflage. Sometimes the legal minimum in lighting just isn't enough
for safety. Some interest in self-preservation can help.

Toom

On Jan 9, 12:24*pm, "Paul - xxx" wrote:
ash wrote:
The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

How do you know he was lazy?

Maybe he was doing it for the same reasons it was put there for, to
by-pass a multitude of potential obstructions, including, but not
exclusively, traffic lights. *The same reasons other road users use it,
maybe?

I know a similar place, A610 past Eastwood and Kimberley in Nottingham
and regularly used it on bike, car, truck and other vehicles for
exactly the reasons it was built .. faster, smoother, easier ...
sod-all to do with laziness. *Cycling is not a cure for laziness, it
requires some little effort.

--
Paul - xxx

Just because you or I or anyone else has a legal right to do something
doesn't absolve us of our own personal responsibility to not
deliberately put ourselves in danger :- by riding at 10mph in the dark
with ineffective lights on what is effectively a 2 lane motorway.
We keep horses and take them out on the roads occasionally, but always
with High Viz reflective gear during the day, and always avoid the
busier roads. I would never dream of taking an animal onto this road,
as it would put both myself, the animal and other road users in danger
to do this. I see little difference in risk to others by actions like
this or from the bloke on the bike in the dark.

Sometimes, being self righteousness is just not enough to be right. A
bit of common sense goes a long way as well.

ash wrote:
On Jan 9, 12:24 pm, "Paul - xxx" wrote:
ash wrote:
The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between
the roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy
to take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

How do you know he was lazy?

Maybe he was doing it for the same reasons it was put there for, to
by-pass a multitude of potential obstructions, including, but not
exclusively, traffic lights. The same reasons other road users use
it, maybe?

I know a similar place, A610 past Eastwood and Kimberley in
Nottingham and regularly used it on bike, car, truck and other
vehicles for exactly the reasons it was built .. faster, smoother,
easier ... sod-all to do with laziness. Cycling is not a cure for
laziness, it requires some little effort.

--
Paul - xxx

Just because you or I or anyone else has a legal right to do something
doesn't absolve us of our own personal responsibility to not
deliberately put ourselves in danger :- by riding at 10mph in the dark
with ineffective lights on what is effectively a 2 lane motorway.
We keep horses and take them out on the roads occasionally, but always
with High Viz reflective gear during the day, and always avoid the
busier roads. I would never dream of taking an animal onto this road,
as it would put both myself, the animal and other road users in danger
to do this. I see little difference in risk to others by actions like
this or from the bloke on the bike in the dark.

Sometimes, being self righteousness is just not enough to be right. A
bit of common sense goes a long way as well.

many cyclists are dead right.

On 09/01/2011 11:08, ash wrote:
I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !
Not been on the A9 recently have you?

On Jan 9, 8:28*pm, Marc wrote:
On 09/01/2011 11:08, ash wrote:







I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !

* Not been on the A9 recently have you?

About 400 miles from me so unlikely.

On 09/01/2011 21:16, ash wrote:
On Jan 9, 8:28 pm, wrote:
On 09/01/2011 11:08, ash wrote:







I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !

Not been on the A9 recently have you?

About 400 miles from me so unlikely.

I ask because it seems that some of the drivers that use the A9 seem
to share your idea that anything with less 20W of light is "impossible"
to see and yet they don't need to slow down.


http://www.realradio-scotland.co.uk/...eath/rhslpzrv/

Once you realised that the road you were on might have road users ( let
alone trees, branches, horses, cows, concrete blocks, steel girders
etc...) that weren't visible from hundreds of yards, you did slow down,
didn't you?


It's worrying that you coudn't slow down enough to stop (or even slow
down enough to drop behind another vehicle) in the distance that you
could see to be clear, and yet you think that that was someone else's fault.

On Jan 9, 9:32*pm, Marc wrote:
On 09/01/2011 21:16, ash wrote:









On Jan 9, 8:28 pm, *wrote:
On 09/01/2011 11:08, ash wrote:

I was driving along a dual carriageway last night in my 4x4 and towing
a trailer with a horse in it and doing approx 50mph in the inside
lane. As I approached the apex of a bridge over a motorway, I saw this
fuzzy white object oscillating a little way out from the kerb in my
lane, then I realised that this fuzzy white object was some small
reflective strips on the jacket of a cyclist, and just below his seat
was a very dim red rear light which was only visible as I actually
passed by him and no rear reflector. He was barely moving (probably
about 10mph) and I had to swerve out in to the outside lane to avoid
hard braking to avoid him (Hard braking or swerving is very much to be
avoided when moving standing 1/2 tonne animals in any form of
transport).

If I had been distracted for any other reason, had another vehicle
been along side me at the time, or had he needed to swerve himself to
avoid a pothole, he would have probably ended up under my wheels. Mine
is not a 40 tonne lorry, but the idiot put himself in such a dangerous
situation, I am amazed that he wasn't taken out by someone else.

The annoying thing is that there is a single carriageway road which
runs adjacent to this dual carriageway and is the old road between the
roundabouts at the ends of the same road - he was just too lazy to
take it as there are a few sets of traffic lights on it.

Riding Dual carriageways (with 70mph limits as this is) without lights
has to be one of the most stupid things I've seen for a while.

It was much closer a call than this idiot cyclist probably
appreciates !

* *Not been on the A9 recently have you?

About 400 miles from me so unlikely.

* I ask because it seems that some of the drivers that use the A9 seem
to share your idea that anything with less 20W of light is "impossible"
to see and yet they don't need to slow down.

http://www.realradio-scotland.co.uk/...istraught-at-a...

Once you realised that the road you were on might have road users ( let
alone trees, branches, horses, cows, concrete blocks, steel girders
etc...) that weren't visible from hundreds of yards, you did slow down,
didn't you?

It's worrying that you coudn't slow down enough to stop (or even slow
down enough to drop behind another vehicle) in the distance that you
could see to be clear, and yet you think that that was someone else's fault.

The road is arrow straight with no trees within 100-150 ft of the road
on either side along its entire length, 4 miles long, connecting a
city to a town, and both to a motorway which runs between them. There
is nowhere that a horse or cow could get onto it either. As for
concrete blocks and steel girders, when was the last time you had to
brake to a standstill to avoid them in the road on a dual
carriageway ? (be honest now)

He had no lights, wearing dark clothing and was on the top of an unlit
motorway bridge as well as being well out in the carriageway forcing
all to swerve into the other lane around him.

I make no bones about the fact if I could not have moved over with
such short notice he would have been under my wheels. I'm glad you
appreciate what a bloody dangerous a position he put himself in. The
same goes for when I am slowing down for junctions or roundabouts and
cocks come past me in their cars and then jump into the sensible
braking distance I've given myself forcing me to brake far harder than
I really want to. The difference is that they have crumple zones, and
cyclists don't.

It is worrying that someone who is effectively invisible riding in the
'primary position' and moving at barely above walking pace on a 70mph
road (which I was nowhere near) would consider it a sensible thing to
do - or even of you to think that a 5 tonne car and trailer setup or
HGV which takes a lot more stopping can pull up on a sixpence.

I would say I had max 150ft when I clocked him to actually passing him
due to his stealth outfit (or about 3 seconds) - I also have HID gas
discharge lights on the car which are very very bright and his
reflective strips looked dirty/old and they barely reflected back. The
stopping distance for a regular car doing 70 mph legally on this road
is 315ft (my legal speed there towing was actually 60mph) Any heavy
vehicle will have a substantially longer braking distance.

These roads are 'bypasses' built to carry lorries and large volumes of
traffic and thus relieving the smaller roads of their burden and
making them much more pleasant and less congested - ideal for
cyclists, horse riders and the people who's houses they run past.
There is a clue in the word 'bypass' !

He was breaking the law by having ineffective lights and you seem to
think that it was OK by use the old chestnut 'stop within the distance
you see to be safe' to justify it. He was a cock who put others (me,
my family and others on the road) in danger for his idiotic actions.

How about condemning his actions as yourself claiming to be some sort
of responsible road user or is that a bit too much to ask ?