Drip drip drip

[CD]

Yet another in the media anti bike drip drip campaign

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6655021.stm

[General Gman]

TBH, there's nothing wrong with the way those bikes were being ridden apart from the last undertake.That's the way I proceed along the M4 every morning, along with just about every other biker.

[alpaholic]

That last undertake might have been the clincher, apart from that I suspect we've all worked our way through dual carriageway traffic in a similar fashion at some point.

Question: How many of the lane hogging b******s got done?

Tough call though, when the Nation's resources are such that a helicopter can be summonsed to track a couple of progressive bikers.

I can't help feeling that such resources could be put to better use.

Amazingly innocent copper, the one who stated "It was dreadful and, of all the years I've been policing, it's the worst motorcycle driving I have ever seen,". He needs to get out more!

[Pooh(c)]

Yeah.. but what a pair of *knobs*

" I don't think what we were doing was dangerous " when they were being interviewed. OK then what if tin can man decided to change lane and does not check nearside mirror as he doesn't expect to see a bike coming up at +60/70 miles an hour. Whammo - dead biker.

Look at poor Miscy and Denise and they were in a tin can.

It's that attitude that urinates people off . They were acting like a pair of hooligans ( we've all done it some time ) and got caught ( Not Miscy & Denise ;D). Put your hands up boys and take your medicine.

It's one thing to filter but not at 70 / 80 plus

[General Gman]

Just cos you can't get through the gaps on your old barge......

[alpaholic]

pooh said:

" I don't think what we were doing was dangerous " when they were being interviewed. OK then what if tin can man decided to change lane and does not check nearside mirror as he doesn't expect to see a bike coming up at +60/70 miles an hour. Whammo - dead biker.

...but that's the case with any overtake of any vehicle by any vehicle. If you overtake the other guy may not see you and may do something stupid.

A driver's just as likely to forget to check his offside mirror as his nearside.

Academic 'cos there was avoidance room on all the overtakes except the last one.

[Deleted]

Don't see that much wrong but since we are all bikers and have probably all had moments of madness that's probably the point. Cars are plainly hogging the outside lane against the Highway code.
Stupid to publicly admit you'd do it again though, that's the crime.

[Pooh(c)]

I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion..

We could argue the merits of this all day... but

You have an obligation to other road users as well as yourself. What may be physicall possible on a bike does not necessarily make it safe. In the UK, undertaking ( with certain exceptions ) is illegal and as a result average Joe tin can man does not expect you to be there which equals danger.

Ask yourself this questions. When I'm in my car do I ALWAYS check my nearside mirror for bikes approaching at 70+. Bet you don't.

[beeblemaster]

pooh said:

Ask yourself this questions. When I'm in my car do I ALWAYS check my nearside mirror for bikes approaching at 70+. Bet you don't.

Nor would you check for them coming up on the hard shoulder.

Lunacy.

[alpaholic]

pooh said:

In the UK, undertaking ( with certain exceptions ) is illegal

AFAIK undertaking in the UK is not illegal. Can you cite your source that says it is?

As you say everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this is fact.

[HRHpenfold]

i have bin known to be impatient and undertake, people just wont pull over, its allways a risk though, even have to undertake a car in the outside lane the other day and the stretch of motorway was empty otherwise(M6 at shap to those southerners who think motorways are where you park ;D)

cant see the footage as im on dial up

[Deleted]

I freely admit I'd consider an undertake if the *tw*t* in the outside lane was doing 50 or so. I might ensure he knows I'm there first though and give myself plenty of room.

[beeblemaster]

I think undertaking someone because they're hogging the outside or middle lane is a bit different than the footage shown here..

-- and I do undertake the hoggers, and give them a sign to say shift over to the left, but it doesn't make any difference they still sit there...

[m40man]

pooh said:

... average Joe tin can man does not expect you to be there .

I find this fact in all probability perfectly true, but quite irrelevant.

If I undertook such a maneuver I wouldn't expect anyone else to be looking out for me. I will do that, thank you. You can ride like this and still adopt a defensive attitude. There varen't mutually exclusive.

What might make everyone more content, however, would be that when an overtaking event has been successfully concluded the overtaking vehicle returns to another lane to permit others to overtake them if so desired.

[m40man]

beeblemaster said:

I think undertaking someone because they're hogging the outside or middle lane is a bit different than the footage shown here..
quote]

Please help me to understand the difference.

[m40man]

pooh said:

Look at poor Miscy and Denise and they were in a tin can.

It's that attitude that urinates people off . They were acting like a pair of hooligans

M&D were hit by a head-on on a minor road?? I don't see the relevance.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here: "It's that attitude that urinates people off".

.............. what urinates someone else off, because you can do it & they can't, does not equal danger.

It's similar to the guy who slinks his way to the front of a queue at the shops - We hate him for it. At least we have some reason at the shop - it means we'll wait longer. No such justification here though.

[HRHpenfold]

Im sure me filtering over double white lines last sunday, would have provoked a simmilar response from the police, but the cars were not moving, so i was just passing parked vehicles, i know the police would have disagreed ;D

[welshy]

I have to agree with Pooh on this one. Whether it's illegal or not doesn't really matter if you or someone else gets killed. When I'm in my tin can I allways check my offside mirror before overtaking. Once I am past the vehicle I am far more lapse on checking my nearside mirror before pulling in. When I do check it, it is normally a quick glance to make sure I am past the vehicle and I do not do double check for speeding motorcyclists undertaking me. Perhaps I should but I think it is common sense to expect that many many people don't.

[HRHpenfold]

i fail also to see the relevance regarding miscy, please explain

[beeblemaster]

m40man said:

beeblemaster said:

I think undertaking someone because they're hogging the outside or middle lane is a bit different than the footage shown here..
quote]

Please help me to understand the difference.

Well when I undertake, I do make sure I've given enough time to think about my move, leave enough room, look around and see what other obstacles are around... and then get the maneouvre done quickly.

I don't just nail it like I'm doing a super G on Ski Sunday.

[HRHpenfold]

beeblemaster said:

m40man said:

beeblemaster said:

I think undertaking someone because they're hogging the outside or middle lane is a bit different than the footage shown here..
quote]

Please help me to understand the difference.

Well when I undertake, I do make sure I've given enough time to think about my move, leave enough room, look around and see what other obstacles are around... and then get the maneouvre done quickly.

I don't just nail it like I'm doing a super G on Ski Sunday.

thats how i do it, i do give them chance to move over first

[alpaholic]

fazerian said:

Im sure me filtering over double white lines last sunday, would have provoked a simmilar response from the police, but the cars were not moving, so i was just passing parked vehicles, i know the police would have disagreed ;D

Perfectly legal to cross double whites to overtake stationary traffic.

[alpaholic]

welshy said:

I have to agree with Pooh on this one. Whether it's illegal or not doesn't really matter if you or someone else gets killed.

Pooh thought it did or he wouldn't have mentioned it.

welshy said:

When I'm in my tin can I allways check my offside mirror before overtaking. Once I am past the vehicle I am far more lapse on checking my nearside mirror before pulling in. When I do check it, it is normally a quick glance to make sure I am past the vehicle and I do not do double check for speeding motorcyclists undertaking me. Perhaps I should but I think it is common sense to expect that many many people don't.

Fair enough. ...but some bikers (myself included) never assume they've been seen. I'd be just as careful overtaking as I would undertaking.

[welshy]

You still get some pretty idiotic mad tin can drivers that could easily swerve into the inside lane takink out an undertaking biker. Sometimes tin can drivers can do some pretty erratic things. I know they can also do this when we overtake them on the outside but there is a bigger chance of getting hit when taking them by surprise on the inside.

[swerve9031]

The intertesting quote to me of that article is

Breaking the speed limit is a factor in 4% of motorbike fatalities, and Paul Cheshire, of BikeSafe Cymru, said the main cause was inexperience.

So why is Mr Brunstrom so active with his cameras, surely education is the answer, or improvement of dangerous roads etc.

[Ghoti]

AFAIK, IMHO, IANAS etc...

The act of undertaking is, in itself, not illegal, but can easily form a charge for careless driving as it is against what the highway code suggests. The highway code is not law, but "Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, it itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under Traffic Acts to establish liability." (quote from Highway Code).

A lot of car drivers (and riders) seem to take the view that if they turn their indicator on, that gives them the right to turn right or change lanes without checking their mirrors or looking. Any vehicle moving lanes or turning right is duty bound to check the safety of their maneuver (hence the recent change in the 'Powell v Moody' test case where cars turn right on filtering motorcycles). In the eyes of the Courts, changing lanes is a maneuver, maintaining speed in a lane (ie undertaking a middle lane hogger) is not a maneuver in its own right (but see the first paragraph).

[Pooh(c)]

The reference to Miscy & Denise was about your ability to get hurt in or on a vehicle. In a tin can you have somewhat more protection than you do have on a bike.

Regarding the legality of undertaking.. it is illeagle with 2 exceptions

• when the traffic on a motorway or dual carriadge way is crawling
  
• you are exiting a motorway or dual carriadgeway
  

I spoke to my local Traffic department and if you did it to one of them you would be guaranteed to be done with either a Section 3 ( Careless Driving ) or Section 2 ( Dangerous Driving ) of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

Would you undertake a marked police car at speed or with your child as pillion. Probably not.

The overriding consideration here must be your safety.

We are all here to enjoy ourselves and I have seen some rather nasty sights with people who thought they were invincable on a bike. Do what you feel it right but keep is safe.

[HRHpenfold]

ghoti said:

AFAIK, IMHO, IANAS etc...

The act of undertaking is, in itself, not illegal, but can easily form a charge for careless driving as it is against what the highway code suggests. The highway code is not law, but "Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, it itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under Traffic Acts to establish liability." (quote from Highway Code).

A lot of car drivers (and riders) seem to take the view that if they turn their indicator on, that gives them the right to turn right or change lanes without checking their mirrors or looking. Any vehicle moving lanes or turning right is duty bound to check the safety of their maneuver (hence the recent change in the 'Powell v Moody' test case where cars turn right on filtering motorcycles). In the eyes of the Courts, changing lanes is a maneuver, maintaining speed in a lane (ie undertaking a middle lane hogger) is not a maneuver in its own right (but see the first paragraph).

what the bright soft southerner said

[HRHpenfold]

pooh said:

The reference to Miscy & Denise was about your ability to get hurt in or on a vehicle. In a tin can you have somewhat more protection than you do have on a bike.

Regarding the legality of undertaking.. it is illeagle with 2 exceptions

• when the traffic on a motorway or dual carriadge way is crawling
  
• you are exiting a motorway or dual carriadgeway
  
  
  I spoke to my local Traffic department and if you did it to one of them you would be guaranteed to be done with either a Section 3 ( Careless Driving ) or Section 2 ( Dangerous Driving ) of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
  
  Would you undertake a marked police car at speed. Don't think so.
  

this is incorrect

surely this is just someones interpretation of the law

i can think of other reasons, for instance if directed by a police officer and to avoid an accident

[alpaholic]

ghoti said:

The act of undertaking is, in itself, not illegal

<ding>