Detective OCUK forums! Help me find this registration of this close pass driver.

Burnsy2023 said:
It's closer than it should be. There should be a 1.5m gap between the cyclist and the vehicle
Click to expand...

Isn't that European regulations, for outside of a city? Our highway code just says "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car"

and it looks more like 1m.
Click to expand...

Which is what the European regulations say for overtaking a cyclist in a city
 
Freakbro said:
Isn't that European regulations, for outside of a city? Our highway code just says "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car"

Which is what the European regulations say for overtaking a cyclist in a city
Click to expand...

It's what the police deem to be too close. There was a big press campaign about it not that long ago.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It's what the police deem to be too close. There was a big press campaign about it not that long ago.
Click to expand...

I was just commenting the other day how drivers do seem far more considerate to cyclists nowadays (in general) compared to when I started driving in the 80's. Hell, then it was as long as you don't clip 'em with your wing mirror then all's good :p
 
Didn't appear so close - but you probably had to be there.
I'd reproach the cyclist in front for riding too much in the gutter, giving impression that there is room to overtake, without crossing to other lane,
and, wearing that rucsac(stupid), so he can't look at overtakers/react, and, is top heavy.


darael said:
Out of interest, what cameras are you using?
Click to expand...
Indeed - I was looking for a new camera after seeing the tour defrance on bord shots.
 
I had a van wing mirror pass closer to my face than that, and I was a pedestrian!

Maybe you need a 50mph escooter instead, then you won't be overtaken as much :D
 
It is close. It’s a wide-angle lens and the distances are deceptive when taken at face value (as anyone who has used a go pro will know). For example, the streetlight at the start of the video is actually bent by the wide angle lens.

Consider the location of the OP and that the left-most wheel of the car is more of less in the middle of the lane.... and the width of a standard person moving on a bike.

There is perhap a couple of foot in it at most? Too close for driving by at THAT speed anyway. I think the speed of the vehicle is something people may not be considering in terms of how safe it was to overtake the bike at that distance.
 
jpaul said:
Didn't appear so close - but you probably had to be there.
I'd reproach the cyclist in front for riding too much in the gutter, giving impression that there is room to overtake, without crossing to other lane,
and, wearing that rucsac(stupid), so he can't look at overtakers/react, and, is top heavy.



Indeed - I was looking for a new camera after seeing the tour defrance on bord shots.
Click to expand...
I use a RunCam 5 Orange, but haven't properly tested it in low light yet. Although it does have a low light setting, so I imagine this could help.
 
rIcK said:
The rear does have a 60FPS 1080p mode it just drains battery faster, but clearly its needed. This is the second time I have struggled to make out a licence plate, luckily I just managed to get it last time.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of 120fps 720p/1080p "sport/bike/go-pro" style cameras out there. Sadly most people are kind of stuck with the belief from still cameras that a higher resolution is "better" than a higher framerate i.e. "just get a 4k 30fps camera dude" which is great for still photography but garbage for motion where the highest FPS (or shutter speed in photo terms) you can get is far more important than image size, especially for night images where the shutter will be open for longer anyway, leading to more motion blur.
 
I have to admit we all do not take cyclist safety seriously - In my opinion all bikes should have a roll cage going horizontaly round the bike and at the rear should be a head loop - Then they should have seats with backrests so they can wear full harness seat belts - along with this handlebars that sweep back so that cyclist can sit up in a better position. Then the obvious flashing yellow beacon on top of the helmet and Hi vis jacket - Perhaps in a few years the gov should make this mandatory - and while we are at it how about £100 year bike tax and full insurance.;)
 
DXP55 said:
I have to admit we all do not take cyclist safety seriously - In my opinion all bikes should have a roll cage going horizontaly round the bike and at the rear should be a head loop - Then they should have seats with backrests so they can wear full harness seat belts - along with this handlebars that sweep back so that cyclist can sit up in a better position. Then the obvious flashing yellow beacon on top of the helmet and Hi vis jacket - Perhaps in a few years the gov should make this mandatory - and while we are at it how about £100 year bike tax and full insurance.;)
Click to expand...

With the increase in both cars and bikes on the road it is increasingly a messy situation :( on my way to work recently I got behind a large load lorry (with quite a tail of cars behind me) which was going quite slowly - at a junction a bunch of cyclists arrived a bit before us - most of them waited but one just pulled out - the lorry just went past the cyclist with barely an inch to spare - I honestly thought the cyclist was going to end up a casualty. I'm not even sure who I feel was most in the wrong there :s

I think we need a serious effort to build new cycle lanes and routes, etc. far too often lately I've got behind cyclists multiple times in a journey and it starts to become a pain - especially when you just manage to overtake one and then come to some lights and they catch up and sit in front of you at the lights so you have to find a place to go around them yet again :(
 
I see both sides since I ride (commute) as well as drive sometimes..

In Cheltenham I get plenty of people doing similar to the OP's video and whilst it's 'close' I am OK with it.

The reason I'm OK is that all the stats point to those not being the prominent danger (https://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs...fety/cyclists/cycling-accidents-factsheet.pdf)
The only mention of 'too close' is regarding Large Vehicles (HGVs etc), if you look at what is attributed to most accidents it's mainly people hitting you because you haven't been seen, or have suddenly put yourself in a situation where you aren't expected..

I've had 3 incidents over the last few years
1. Taxi pulling out from a side road who didn't see me (I stopped just before going over his bonnet)
2. Bus passing too close and brushed my backpack (luckily didn't knock me off)
3. Old codger turning left obliviously, turning in so early he actually mounted the inside kerb and he hit me, knocking me off (nothing serious luckily).

As long as the car driver is in control and has seen me then I'm OK to accept he might want to get by quickly without leaving me oodles of room..

Perhaps it's because I also used to commute on a motorbike and would heavily filter, so having cars in close proximity is something I'm used to..
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It's closer than it should be. There should be a 1.5m gap between the cyclist and the vehicle and it looks more like 1m.

With that said, no police action will be taken considering the footage; not even a warning letter. I think you'll have to let this one go.
Click to expand...


iirc, it depends where you are in the UK

i know there was a BIG push on this

Scotland increased to 2m gap didnt they ?

rest of UK i think is 1.5m
 
I can't imagine that was more than 2ft from his arm. probably less. It's slightly easier to infer the distance from the rear camera. A slight wobble or a pothole there and it would not have ended well.

Having experience of passes like that I can't imagine many would be so blasé about it if they were the one on the bike.

Having said that, even with the 'plate the chances of anything being done are very slim.

Highway code is a bit vague on distance but that may be changing soon:

give motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215). As a guide:

─ leave a minimum distance of 1.5 metres at speeds under 30 mph

─ leave a minimum distance of 2.0 metres at speeds over 30 mph

─ for a large vehicle, leave a minimum distance of 2.0 metres in all conditions
Click to expand...

https://www.gov.uk/government/consu...ion-proposals-on-a-review-of-the-highway-code
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom