- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Near Miss of the Day 769: Punishment pass
A punishment pass features in today's video in our Near Miss of the Day series, and the question, as ever, is why on earth would someone behind the wheel of an SUV put someone else ar risk like that?
The footage was shot by road.cc reader Kionne, who told us: “I found myself on a heavily chipped sealed road which I had no choice but to continue on, chips were very deep and I’d already nearly crashed because of them.
“I decided to ride where the loose chips were least deep and as I could keep well above the temporary 20mph speed limit I didn’t think I’d be impeding any motorists but that didn’t satisfy this man.
“West Mercia sent him a warning letter, not sure if that was for speeding, improper use of the horn, close passing a cyclist or overtaking on a newly chip sealed road which I think may be prohibited?
“On the same ride I had a very dangerous close pass, for many reasons the motorist is in the process of being prosecuted. A registration check revealed the below,” he added.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 - Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info [at] road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won't show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- S.E. 3 sec ago
I'm thinking CX tyres...
- kingleo 11 min 12 sec ago
Crossing the road is the big danger for pedestrians, not the cycle path.
- Hirsute 1 hour 29 min ago
More of an oblique reference to a cyclist being taken out when in the cycle lane in the same scenario. Of course the cyclist pretty much gets the...
- Jaijai 1 hour 40 min ago
How many have you seen posted on Social media with cars ? The police don't handle this well in any way .Wether it's cars or bikes. This is a not to...
- slc 3 hours 6 min ago
Lavable neigbourhoods? Could be handy on bins day
- chrisonabike 4 hours 22 min ago
Wait - have those wafers been upgraded to chocolate wafers now (or maybe those pink ones?) Or is it all the sugar in the communion wine?
- Scribe Cycling 5 hours 6 min ago
Hi username983, thank you for the comment, and it's great to hear you rate the wheels. The new models have a slightly different design which come...
- wtjs 5 hours 27 min ago
I'm pleased to say I didn't 'do' Latin, but I was also pleased to learn the origin of 'laconic'
- Surreyrider 5 hours 32 min ago
Looks like Specialized dusted off their blueprint for the Tarmac circa 2012-14 to 'create' the Aethos.
- Tom_77 5 hours 38 min ago
Was looking for things to do in Winchester and came across this - Adrenaline Comedy Bike Tour Experience at B3335...
Add new comment
38 comments
The 20mph is advisory - no speed "Limit" was broken.
If Kionne thought it the right speed then why was he going so fast - I expect he has a live readout. Two wheels are far more susceptible to loose chipings than 4 - loose chippings was a major contributor to my only hospitalisation in over 50yrs of cycling. Kionne should have probably reined in his own exertion. There's a bit of double standards in this NMOTD.
Depends on the wheels.
(Aside but I hate "advisory" stuff in the UK. If it's really important make it mandatory. If it's not or it can be left to people's judgement - problematic for some people all of the time and all some of the time - just say what the issue is e.g. "loose chippings" and leave it at that. And an advisory cycle lane is no cycle lane!)
But I wasn't riding on loose chippings on that part of the road, that was the whole point of me riding out there! I don't ride that far out for the fun of it.
You need to come to Worcestershire to fully appreciate how bad a job they do with surface dressing, I don't know why the left was so deep and why the right was nicely bedded in, it just was.
One of my tricks on such roads is to very obviously hold my hand out to shield my face from chips as cars pass in either direction at speed. It may not affect the specific car, but my logic is it might make other cars think about why there is a 20mph limit.
A registration check revealed the below,” he added....
I can't wait for the next exciting episode, what did it reveal?
This actually related to a separate close pass where the vehicle in question was SORN and MOT expired in Jan 2013! Video to follow...
Such utterly crass, inconsiderate, dangerous speeding driving should get more than a warning letter; points on licence and a large fine at least. Since the cyclist was doing more than the 20mph speed limit, the car was clearly doing much more than that, probably between 30-40mph, and there was considerable likelihood of throwing up some gravel into the cyclist's face and eyes. It was also deliberate, otherwise why sound the horn?
On second thoughts, a large fine and a 12-month ban.
Really? The cyclist was in the middle of the road (why?) and the driver had to pull right over to the rhs to pass him. Granted the driver shouldnt have sounded his horn but that cyclist was not riding considerately. Riding in the middle of the road is not safe and just enrages drivers unnecessarily and you dont seem to have recognises that fact.
A large fine and a 12 month ban, what planet are you on.
Suggestion... 1..Take a Bikeability course. 2.. Read the Highway Code. 3... Learn the difference between Road and Lane. Then you'll be able to comment based on correct road procedure and not your opinion and you won't look so silly.
'Riding in the middle of the road is not safe and just enrages drivers unnecessarily'
Why do you deem the emotional state of drivers to be on cyclists?
If you get into a car and get so 'enraged' over the presence of another road user legally using the public highway in a way you otherwise don't personally agree with, that's on you and you only. Tough shit.
I tend to stick to the advisory limit in a car as I'm aware of the extra risk involved with loose chippings.
No doubt the driver would have been 'enraged' with me but somehow I suspect the outcome would have been different.
Should pull into other lane anyway to pass
Did you read the cyclist state the road had a temporary 20mph limit? The overtake literally happens at a sign stating that speed limit. There is a reason speed limit is dropped to that when the road is chip sealed.
so why does the speed graphic on the video show 26-27mph ?
That is my speed not the motorists, the motorist was traveling at around 40mph
ok Ill reword the question then, why are you riding at 26-27mph when the sign shows the road has a temporary 20mph limit ?
Perhaps because the speed limit is an advisory speed limit not a mandatory one. (The give away is that the indicated speed limit is in a rectangular sign, not a round red bordered sign)
Unless the motorist was going more than the mandatory speed limit for the road then the fact that they were ignoring the advisory speed limit is also a moot point.
Even more of a moot point is the speed of the cyclist as speed limits are only for motorised vehciles, so whether it is a mandatory or advisory speed limit is of no consequence.
Not entirely - it ought to be strong evidence of inconsiderate driving if they're exceeding the advisory limit while passing another road user - particularly a vulnerable one.
It is an aggrevating factor in any inconsiderate driving (which the using the horn in passing was) but in it's own is it inconsiderate driving.... I'm less sure.
In a more extreme example if a driver goes round a corner which has an advisory speed limit of say 30 on a NSL road at 60mph..... is that careless/inconsiderate driving on its own? But if as a result of that action they lose control and crash into another vehicle then it is an aggrevating factor.
If the driver had simply passed the cyclist without sounding the horn would this have even been submitted? The driver was fully onto the other side of the lane. They had limited space to go any further from the cyclist.... or if they did they would probably be driving in the deeper chips in the middle of the opposite lane resulting in being less in control and possibly showering the cyclist in chips.
whats not a moot point is whether its particularly sensible to ride at that pace on a road that the rider already stated theyd nearly lost control and crashed on due to the loose chippings.
Why are you selectively reading the section about the part where they said they nearly crashed due to the deep chips. But conveniently ignoring the next sentence where they said the chips were not deep and they could ride at above the 20mph temporary limit?
The rider obviously did their own assessment of the conditions and found that as they could maintain a good pace in a particular area of the road with limited risk that is what they chose to do.
Any time I have ridden on a recently surface dressed road in general it is perfectly safe to ride at or above the 20mph limit provided you stick to the tracks made by the motor vehicles. The danger comes when you try to move over the central pile of chips which forms between the main motor vehicle contact points, or you ride closer to the edge where there can be random accumulations of chips.
I'm not sure any of the alternatives would have helped the cyclist fare any better. The way I see it the rider had two primary alternatives. They could have maintained the position that they were in but ride slower than the 20mph temporary limit..... the driver would have still have been aggrieved. Or they could have ridden closer to the edge of the road in the deeper chips.... which is more dangerous at any speed due to the limited contact point of the bike. Or not cycle at all. Which of those is a better alternative?
I'm not entirely sure about the OP, but if I had been riding in that position and the car had overtaken me in the manner that they had but without blaring the horn.... I wouldn't have had any issue with it..... given that they were fully onto the other side of the road, giving as much clearance as they could given the riding position.
Everything you've said is spot on, I'm really struggling to understand why people can't see this.
I've avoided this road since and won't go back for at least another month maybe.
To agree with you further, if the motorist hadn't smashed on their horn I probably wouldn't have given it a second thought.
You would have if he'd sprayed your face with gravel. The reason the speed limit is there is to stop the gravel being thrown up and smashing windscreens.
And why are you having such a hard time recognising riding at a speed thats above a signed limit whether you think that applies to cyclists or not, reckless cycling is a thing remember, on a road with a known loose surface that's so bad the rider has to ride the majority of way across to the right in their lane to feel confident riding on it, isnt a particularly smart thing to do ?
But sure, if you want to experience close passes just like the video shows, carry on riding in that manner would be my advice.
So you would be ok in the cyclist riding at 20mph in the area that is safer to do with chips? Or slower but but further over in the more dangerous slippy section?
7 posts in and trolling like a Nigel. Well done sir! Now off you go back under your bridge.
If an individual gets so "enraged" to the point where they put another road user at risk, should they realistically have a license? I'm not certain I would consider someone a safe road user if a minor delay or an overtake "enrages" them.
And in that one comment you clearly demonstrate the ignorance and arrogance of the average thug motorist. You don't get why it was not safe to overtake the cyclist, but actually accuse the cyclist of being at fault for aggravating the motorist who you presumably think is entitled to overtake regardless if it means endangering the cyclist or ignoring the advisory speed limit? Maybe it will take much heavier penalties to re-educate these thugs and make the roads safer.
I watched the video without sound, and without reading the explanation.
My initial thought was 'what the hell is the cyslist doing, and what are they moaning about?'
Now knowing that an excessive use of the horn was used, and the cyclists position was deemed necesary by road conditions, it does make a little more sense, but I still don't see a huge problem here.
The road conditions were deemed reasonable enough to truck on at 26+mph whilst in the ski's, and looking at the video, I actually struggle to see obvious evidence of the offending chippings. I acknowledge the video quality is low.
My thoughts are that if these chips had been down a while, I can understand how the motorist's perception of road conditions might be very different to that of the cyclist's. And I can see that the cyclist's speed, and body position might help cement the drivers perspective, i.e. the road was safe to traverse at above the 20mph speed limit advised.
In that scenario, I can totally get why the motorist might think the cyclist was extracting the urine and let that be known with a blast of their horn.
Doesn't make it right, but I get it.
IMO, the real villain here is the local authority choosing this ludicrous road surfacing method. This is a prime example of the sort of situations which can be created by leaving loose chips on a road, seriously compromising the safety of any two wheel vehicles.
Pages