Absolutely not - The cyclist's body is about 30 cm further out from the camera's point of view and you have to factor in the side mirror of the car which sticks out more than 10 cm from the car's body as well. The driver drove with the rightside tires on the centre line when he was overtaking. That means he passed the cyclist with approximately 10 cm between the side mirror and the cyclist's body. If there was just a slight gust of wind or anything else why the cyclist would have to veer 10 cm to the right the driver would have hit the cyclist. Contrary to some beliefs giving at least 1.5m of space when overtaking isn't there to annoy drivers, it's to keep cyclists safe from 1.5+ tons of metal box.
Even if he had ridden in the gutter there's not enough space to safely overtake a cyclist when there's oncoming traffic. Contrary to some beliefs giving at least 1.5m of space when overtaking isn't there to annoy drivers, it's to keep cyclists safe from 1.5+ tons of metal box.
How close to the curb would you suggest? In the UK, the recommended MINIMUM is 50cm (just over 18" to those still in the dark ages). The cyclist wasn't much further out than this. Also, as a cyclist, they are just as entitled to take primary position as a motorised vehicle if they feel the situation warrants it. So... to sat "supposed to" make you look like a bit of an idiot.
🤔 Antagonising by just choosing a form of transport which you don't like? Whoa, you're easily triggered, you should get some professional help for that...
Absolutely not - The cyclist's body is about 30 cm further out from the camera's point of view and you have to factor in the side mirror of the car which sticks out more than 10 cm from the car's body as well. The driver drove with the rightside tires on the centre line when he was overtaking. That means he passed the cyclist with approximately 10 cm between the side mirror and the cyclist's body. If there was just a slight gust of wind or anything else why the cyclist would have to veer 10 cm to the right the driver would have hit the cyclist. Contrary to some beliefs giving at least 1.5m of space when overtaking isn't there to annoy drivers, it's to keep cyclists safe from 1.5+ tons of metal box.
Cyclists with 10-30 kg bicycles who will be injured as well if they hit pedestrians risk pedestrian's lifes every day? Yes, there are reckless cyclists which I as a cyclist with 12k+ km per year despise as well, but reckless drivers with 1+ tons of metal box around them are far more dangerous. How many pedestrians are killed by cyclists every year and how many pedestrians are killed by car drivers every year? If you can provide any proof that cyclists are "the worst"/more dangerous than car drivers I'll gladly change my mind.
Wasn't that close. Typical arrogant roadie.
Absolutely not - The cyclist's body is about 30 cm further out from the camera's point of view and you have to factor in the side mirror of the car which sticks out more than 10 cm from the car's body as well. The driver drove with the rightside tires on the centre line when he was overtaking. That means he passed the cyclist with approximately 10 cm between the side mirror and the cyclist's body. If there was just a slight gust of wind or anything else why the cyclist would have to veer 10 cm to the right the driver would have hit the cyclist.
Contrary to some beliefs giving at least 1.5m of space when overtaking isn't there to annoy drivers, it's to keep cyclists safe from 1.5+ tons of metal box.
I hope you don't drive.
@@StevieOnHisBike I hope you don't cycle
you could have ridden closer to the kerb, like you are supposed to
Even if he had ridden in the gutter there's not enough space to safely overtake a cyclist when there's oncoming traffic.
Contrary to some beliefs giving at least 1.5m of space when overtaking isn't there to annoy drivers, it's to keep cyclists safe from 1.5+ tons of metal box.
How close to the curb would you suggest? In the UK, the recommended MINIMUM is 50cm (just over 18" to those still in the dark ages). The cyclist wasn't much further out than this. Also, as a cyclist, they are just as entitled to take primary position as a motorised vehicle if they feel the situation warrants it. So... to sat "supposed to" make you look like a bit of an idiot.
Is it normal in the uk for bikes to not use the sidewalk when its available?
It's illegal to ride on the pavement (sidewalk) here
You really are an antagonist
🤔 Antagonising by just choosing a form of transport which you don't like? Whoa, you're easily triggered, you should get some professional help for that...
Safe overtake
Absolutely not - The cyclist's body is about 30 cm further out from the camera's point of view and you have to factor in the side mirror of the car which sticks out more than 10 cm from the car's body as well. The driver drove with the rightside tires on the centre line when he was overtaking. That means he passed the cyclist with approximately 10 cm between the side mirror and the cyclist's body. If there was just a slight gust of wind or anything else why the cyclist would have to veer 10 cm to the right the driver would have hit the cyclist.
Contrary to some beliefs giving at least 1.5m of space when overtaking isn't there to annoy drivers, it's to keep cyclists safe from 1.5+ tons of metal box.
Is your name Krusty?
#makeWALKINGsafeAgain! bicycle-riders are the worst -they just dont care about pedastrians and risk pedastrians lifes every day!!!
Cyclists with 10-30 kg bicycles who will be injured as well if they hit pedestrians risk pedestrian's lifes every day? Yes, there are reckless cyclists which I as a cyclist with 12k+ km per year despise as well, but reckless drivers with 1+ tons of metal box around them are far more dangerous. How many pedestrians are killed by cyclists every year and how many pedestrians are killed by car drivers every year? If you can provide any proof that cyclists are "the worst"/more dangerous than car drivers I'll gladly change my mind.
Certainly closer than I would have made the pass.