In the news

Well, the object in question was atop a bicycle. So, it figures.

I think it’s probably cause they expected to see a car, but not a grey U shape object with green paint on the roof.

Looking at the photo of a clear day, no car parked make it look like drivers can just drive close to the kerb while speeding up.

I think it’s probably cause they expected to see a car, but not a grey U shape object with green paint on the roof.

That may be so, perhaps it could use some high viz and a helmet, but drivers too often drive for what they expect should happen and not what is actually happening. If you drive into a stationary obect, it's 99.99% your fault. It's been there for a year and a half, ffs. So it's not even a new feature.

Driver’s fault, slammed straight into a large immobile object, so would’ve needed to be going too fast or not paying attention or both.

The neighbours complain about nearby low traffic schemes bringing more cars to their street, making it more dangerous. The tremendous irony of their acceptance that having more cars on a road is more dangerous…

Perhaps bike lockers should have reflectors or other night time aids.

Perhaps bike lockers should have reflectors or other night time aids.

Skips have to have flashing lights on when left roadside iirc.

100% spot on, I was trying to see the other way on why it not spotted by the speeding motorist.

Perhaps bike lockers should have reflectors or other night time aids.

Not at all intended as any sort of justification, but it would make sense for them to have* reflectors given that cars have them too.

*assuming they don't already - which I can well imagine they do

Skips have to have flashing lights on when left roadside iirc.

1 Attachment

Not at all intended as any sort of justification, but it would make sense for them to have* reflectors given that cars have them too.

1 Attachment

they were not paying any attention or going much faster than they should have.

A terrifyingly large percentage of all drivers all the time

I've come back to this several times today. It's just fucking insane. It looks like she hit it square on too (unless the car was moved out of the road, but the damage makes it look like a full, square on impact).

I think it’s probably cause they expected to see a car, but not a grey U shape object with green paint on the roof.

If they expected there to be a car there, why drive over that area? The whole point of being aware when you are driving is that there could be something you don't expect.

Now all the campaigners will be saying "I told you so!". FFS.

I wonder if they were undertaking someone turning right onto Champion Grove. I don't see any other reason to be driving along the curb there.

First time I've looked at the story about the driver directing their car into something massive and where other parked cars usually are.

And of course it's a white Mercedes hatchback leasemobile.

It's a nonsense anti cycling story of course, whats the answer, are they going to stop all black colour cars from parking as well?

Interestingly I have noticed some bike hangers around Forest Hill/Sydenham area with comedy sized warning triangles on them.

Yeah, I mean I'm not saying reflectors are magic forcefields. Just that it seems pretty logical for stuff in between parking bays to have reflectors like all the other things parked in parking bays.

Again, just to be 100% on this I don't think that drivers should randomly drive into things on the side of the road... or any other part of the road for that matter.

The "version of events" is clearly a steaming pile of bullshit.

Perhaps bike lockers should have reflectors or other night time aids.

Just to confirm, cycle hangers most definitely have reflectors on them. Theyre white ones dotted around the edges.

Knew it.

Thanks. I feel vindicated now.

a white Mercedes hatchback leasemobile.

Love this

The US has got a bit of cheek complaining about the Russian pilot clipping their drone. He risked his life with an incredible bit of flying. Bending a propeller blade without both aircraft exploding in flames...it's amazing.

Incredible or not it was risky af for the pilot for almost zero gain.

Also, Russia directly attacked a US military asset. That's the kind of shit that starts wars.

Ex-RAF acquaintance of mine reckons he made a cobblers of it and got a bit lucky. But he does say some of those Russian pilots are seriously good to even attempt that at low speed.

Disclaimer- I know nothing about flying planes.

I do agree about the hypocrisy of the US. But attacking something in international airspace is the kind of thing that lands everyone deep in the shit.

I agree, I'm sure he didn't mean to ram it. That would be suicidal

Suicidal flying > disobeying orders

(Probably)

That's the kind of shit that starts wars in films