The Dangers of Road Debris

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by 661-Pete »

From the description under the Youtube posting:
Anthony reportedly escaped with only cuts and bruises and was up and back on the bike the next day.

Lucky guy! I presume it wasn't the same bike.... :shock:
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by 661-Pete »

Incidentally, this still from the earlier video shows the precise moment the metal bar becomes trapped in front of his feet and is about to lodge itself between front wheel and down tube:
still from video 03-01-2014.jpg
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by irc »

beardy wrote:Finally despite having lived in Australia for a few years, I dont know if cyclists are allowed/supposed to ride in or out of that shoulder.


The video in this link shows a cycle logo in the lane early on so the answer is yes. It also describes it as a freeway so assuming that is the same as elsewhere like the USA they had to use the shoulder not the lane.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015 ... ght-camera

A quote from another link -

Fellow Byron Bay Cycle Club member Adam Taylor was riding in front of Condon when the accident happened. He said the area's roads were often littered with debris.

"The roads are really bad around Byron Bay and there is debris on the road," Taylor said.


http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/this-is-going ... 2hbbu.html

Known problem in that area then?
Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by Tonyf33 »

Looking at it again..they are even more stupid than i thought, the roads were so quiet, the so called cycle lane narrows to little more than a gutter lane..what the hell where they thinking, and still, how the hell did they not see large chunks of 'stuff' in the lane and shoulder check and move out..As I said..newbs, all the gear & no idea.. :roll:
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by beardy »

The guy who crashed has thirty years experience according to the report.
I suppose to some on this forum that makes him a "newb" but more experienced than myself on cycles.

Also a fair degree of hindsight is required to know that the overtaking car would be so reasonable as to stay in the outside lane. I would have been allowing for him to come into the inside lane, regardless of what I signalled or did.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by 661-Pete »

Shall we call it 'human error'? Even after a lifetime of experience people can make mistakes, and if the person at the front of the pack gets it wrong, who can blame the others for following his line? At anyrate I'm not prepared to castigate this unfortunate bloke who's just had a near-death experience and seen his fine bike written-off.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by Si »

beardy wrote:
Si wrote:
beardy wrote:
Off hand only because I thought it totally obvious what the difference was. Obviously not so I shall explain. If there was more space between your friend and the car in front would it have given him more time to see and avoid the wheel? Answer: NO. If the rider had been further back from the vehicle in front (i.e. the camera cycle) would he have had more time to see and avoid the debris? Answer: YES. Therefore, if subjected to logical consideration, your example is irrelevant.


It is relevant because it shows that the debris moves and can even move far enough to cross a reservation and get you. Being close to the vehicle it comes off does not necessarily mean it will hit you, I have seen stuff bounce over the first cars and hit those further away. Also it shows that having a distance between the other vehicle, or even going in the other direction, will not guarantee your safety either.
I too believe this is totally obvious but I dont dismiss your arguments in an off hand way (out of politeness and a respect of the forum ethos).



The fact that debris can hit you from the other side of the road is not relevant to this case as i have already demonstrated. You might just as well state that if the crashed rider was wearing a bullet proof jacket then he would not be safe from being shot in the head - this is a perfectly true deduction but is totally irrelevant.

The bottom line is:
1. there was debris on the road (not falling off the vehicle in front)
2. the crashed rider rode through it.
- the question is: did he (a) choose to ride through it, or (b) did he ride through it because he saw it so late that he had no choice?
If (a) then it's pretty bad riding (same may be said for camera bike). If (b) then why did he see it so late? Perchance that it was because he was so close to the lead rider that his view was partially blocked. Of course, if you believe that riding at speed, on a road that you don't know to be clear, with reduced vision is as safe as riding at speed, on a road that you don't know to be clear, without reduced vision then you would probably agree that the crashed rider had not increased his risk by his actions, but I would hope that logic will win the day.

As for him not being in a 'tricky' situation.....do you not class being in a situation where you go flying over the bars to be a tad tricky?

And finally, regarding group riding. I would agree that in the vast majority of cases that nothing will go wrong, this is especially so if the group know what it is doing (if I'd been at the front I would have been looking up the road, would have issued a warning of debris nice and early, would then have told the group to slow and space out, would have slowed myself - but not so hard that the rider behind ran into me, and would have given the debris plenty of space). However, as has been said up thread....just because something might be rare that does not mean that the risk is not being increased or that one should not try to mitigate against it.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by Vorpal »

Tonyf33 wrote:Looking at it again..they are even more stupid than i thought, the roads were so quiet, the so called cycle lane narrows to little more than a gutter lane..what the hell where they thinking, and still, how the hell did they not see large chunks of 'stuff' in the lane and shoulder check and move out..As I said..newbs, all the gear & no idea.. :roll:

Except that if it is a bicycle lane (it's not obvious to me that it is), they are legally obligated to use it, according to Australian law...
The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.

from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/c ... /s247.html
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
axel_knutt
Posts: 2881
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:20pm

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by axel_knutt »

Here's a thread gloating about a motorist getting nicked for tailgating, and this is a thread justifying it, if a motorist said "It's not my fault, it all happened too quickly" he'd get told to slow down or leave more room. Cyclists don't generally get nicked for slipstreaming, so that leaves them free to make their own decision: do they want the benefit of a slipstream, or do they want to reduce the risk of this happening. If a motorist said he wanted the benefit of a slipstream he'd be told to save it for the race track, but cyclists enjoy more freedom because they're only generally a danger to themselves and not other road users. (Although I wouldn't have wanted that bike through my windscreen.)

Leaving enough room for the vehicle in front to brake is not the same as leaving enough room to avoid a stationary object. Once when I was driving on the M6, a car in front of me suddenly swerved and left me staring straight at a six foot shipping crate standing in the middle of the fast lane. I swerved too, but there was no time to check the road was clear, I was just lucky that there was nobody to the left of me.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by snibgo »

I watched some of the TdF on telly last summer. I greatly admire the skills of the riders, being able to ride so close without (often) barging into each other. Even so, with all the benefits of freshly-minted roads and cars leading the way, when one goes down others usually follow.

This is a difference between hammer-down racing and my sedate style of utility riding: a fall on my fragile bones could easily be seriously bad news. Their style wouldn't suit me, and I wouldn't advocate it to anyone. But some people do it; it's a risk of their sport; who am I to argue?

I'm pleased the outcome was fairly minor, and the dangers of debris were captured so graphically.
Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by Tonyf33 »

Vorpal wrote:
Tonyf33 wrote:Looking at it again..they are even more stupid than i thought, the roads were so quiet, the so called cycle lane narrows to little more than a gutter lane..what the hell where they thinking, and still, how the hell did they not see large chunks of 'stuff' in the lane and shoulder check and move out..As I said..newbs, all the gear & no idea.. :roll:

Except that if it is a bicycle lane (it's not obvious to me that it is), they are legally obligated to use it, according to Australian law...
The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.

from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/c ... /s247.html

So if there is an OBVIOUS obstruction ahead of you you just carry on regardless and plough straight into it..yeah whatever, sorry officer I ran right into the back of that parked car/sheep/fallen tree/person/boulder because I'm obligated to stay in my cycle lane..what utter nonsense. You move out and you go around it, if you think that by not doing so is even remotely better than the infintesimal chance of being pulled over by the rozzers then that's just inherrantly stupid AND dangerous as has being shown in the video.

As I said upthread, people like this just won't learn or don't have even a small amount of foresight to understand nor perceive hazards and act accordingly..and I'll say it again, stupid is as stupid does or do you just ride through hazards willy nilly and think that that is an okay way to ride (or even drive) on the highway??

Edit to add, Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear, do we not advocate that for motorists, why are we not advocating this for cyclists too or doesn't that matter anymore?? And as Axel Knutt said above, tailgating or slipstreaming it matters not, it all added up to the crash..

I'm glad they are okay, no-one wants to see people hurt even through their own stupidity and I hope they (all) learn a valuable lesson from what happened but somehow I think they'll be blaming the invisible debris in the road.. :roll:
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by irc »

I'm reminded of a thread on another forum where I was criticised for saying some accidents were the fault of the rider. But in many cases it is true. Though not only the fault of the rider. Even if there is other factors there is often foreseeable precautions that could prevent many accidents. Riding over clearly visible metal poles is in that category. It's a fact of life that roads have debris of various sorts on them. If you don't pay attention to the road surface ahead to avoid it you will crash sooner or later.

The idea of relying on a rider ahead warning me rather than looking for myself is a non starter for me. That said if club riders all accept any small additional risk and as the risk is pretty much only to that group of riders it's up to them.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Vorpal wrote:
Tonyf33 wrote:Looking at it again..they are even more stupid than i thought, the roads were so quiet, the so called cycle lane narrows to little more than a gutter lane..what the hell where they thinking, and still, how the hell did they not see large chunks of 'stuff' in the lane and shoulder check and move out..As I said..newbs, all the gear & no idea.. :roll:

Except that if it is a bicycle lane (it's not obvious to me that it is), they are legally obligated to use it, according to Australian law...
The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.

from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/c ... /s247.html

I'd suggest this footage can be used as evidence for any claim that it may be impractical...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by Vorpal »

[XAP]Bob wrote:I'd suggest this footage can be used as evidence for any claim that it may be impractical...

:lol: :lol:

Yes, one would think so. But people use bike lanes all over the world when they really shouldn't. And car drivers expect them to, even when it isn't practicable.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: The Dangers of Road Debris

Post by Psamathe »

A bit off-topic and as I don't/haven't done group rides, but the Highway Code goes to some length discussing stopping distance - the thing where your reaction time and brake efficiency combine to mean you cannot stop in as short a distance as many drivers think. Assuming lead and following bike have similar brake performance, should the lead bike have to brake hard when travelling at speed, would a close following bike be able to stop without running into the back of it ? (given the reaction time of the rider and that by the time the following rider had applied the brakes, the lead bike will have already slowed significantly and be travelling slower (all making it harder for the trailing bike to stop in time).

I ask only 'cos I really don't know, but you see some groups charging along following each other pretty close. I appreciate that on e.g. TdF, the bike in front will not be "emergency braking (normally anyway).

Ian
Post Reply