At least 3 other have been ran over in that time to but survived.
Also like half the deaths have been from truck and half of them from tipper trucks pretty obvious the current design of trucks is unsuitable for mixing with cyclists.
So they either need to be banned from mixing with cyclists or completely redesigned.
So they either need to be banned from mixing with cyclists or completely redesigned.
That's somewhat extreme - I'd think a bit of driver and rider education probably wouldn't go amiss.
Low cab trucks exist.
If tanks were being driven around the city, crushing car drivers, of course something would be done.
That's somewhat extreme - I'd think a bit of driver and rider education probably wouldn't go amiss
That exactly what the CTC have been saying for the last 70 years where has it got us no where. Cycling number have been dropping and dropping and now they've picked up in London 4 people killed in 8 days.
Also the driver stopped and theres no suggestion either him or the cyclist where at fault, add it that people make mistakes. In which case how do u stop this other than redesigning the trucks ?
just to make everyone feel better,
a hit in run in Cheshire.
http://www.cheshire-today.co.uk/22652/cyclist-killed-in-nantwich-hit-and-run/
I appreciate my view may be unpopular, but here goes anyway...
I am a regular long-term cycle commuter. Every day I observe cyclists pull out of side roads without looking, change lanes without looking or indicating, and they ride up the nearside of vehicles [i]when the vehicle is indicating to turn left[/i] (FFS! what has a lorry driver got to do? They indicate, they have audible warning, and yet idiots STILL try to pass on the nearside).
People ride along with earphones in, completely oblivious to what's going on around them, distracted by whatever they are listening to and cut off from their surroundings. Crazy.
They fiddle around with whatever's in their front basket, wear clothes that flap and catch, and shoes that can slip off the pedals. Worse, they ride along in the gutter where they can't be seen. Ye Gods!
Further, every cyclist who jumps a red light simply hardens the attitude of motorists against us. Swerving round pedestrians on crossings doesn't help us either.
It is very very sad when someone gets killed, however, the way some people ride my only surprise is that there are not many more fatalities.
It is true that vehicles have a duty of care towards more vulnerable road users, however, vulnerable road users also have a duty - to behave in a reasonable and responsible manner and to mitigate their damage/losses.
Flame away!
I feel a protest coming on
I appreciate my view may be unpopular, but here goes anyway...I am a regular long-term cycle commuter. Every day I observe cyclists pull out of side roads without looking, change lanes without looking or indicating, and they ride up the nearside of vehicles when the vehicle is indicating to turn left (FFS! what has a lorry driver got to do? They indicate, they have audible warning, and yet idiots STILL try to pass on the nearside).
People ride along with earphones in, completely oblivious to what's going on around them, distracted by whatever they are listening to and cut off from their surroundings. Crazy.
They fiddle around with whatever's in their front basket, wear clothes that flap and catch, and shoes that can slip off the pedals. Worse, they ride along in the gutter where they can't be seen. Ye Gods!
Further, every cyclist who jumps a red light simply hardens the attitude of motorists against us. Swerving round pedestrians on crossings doesn't help us either.
It is very very sad when someone gets killed, however, the way some people ride my only surprise is that there are not many more fatalities.
It is true that vehicles have a duty of care towards more vulnerable road users, however, vulnerable road users also have a duty - to behave in a reasonable and responsible manner and to mitigate their damage/losses.
Hear, hear!
2010: 10 deaths, 4 involved HGVs
2011: 16 deaths, 12 involved HGVs
2012: 14 deaths, 5 involved HGVs
2013: 12 deaths, 8 involved HGVs
[url= http://www.itv.com/news/london/story/2013-11-13/cyclist-collisions/#transport-for-london-reveals-cyclist-death-figures_286334 ]source[/url]
Flame away!
Okay. There's no evidence that the cyclists killed were doing any of those things, and to suggest that the cyclists were at fault when there's no evidence is offensive to them and their families.
Ben, equally to [i]automatically [/i]suggest that the [s]cyclists[/s] drivers were at fault when there's no evidence is offensive to them and their families.
Everyone on the roads needs to take more care.
I agree with what Karin has said, apart from the stupid earphone comment. You are basically saying that deaf people shouldn't be allowed to cycle!
People are going to be/act stupid with or without earphones in.
There are a lot of bad cyclists out there and there are a lot of bad drivers, but its always going to be the driver that ends up winning in any accident.
As cyclists, we need to be aware of what is going on around us at all times, not just when we are about to make a manoeuvre.
I agree with a lot of the points above, I commute regularly in London via car and everyday I see so many illegal and dangerous moves by cyclists that I can't help think why more aren't killed each day.
There are bad motorists and bad cyclists and in my personal view, standards in both are getting a lot worse.
there are bad cyclists but the earphone comment is just stupid!
apart from the stupid earphone comment. You are basically saying that deaf people shouldn't be allowed to cycle!
...and here we go.
Ben, equally to automatically suggest that the cyclists drivers were at fault when there's no evidence is offensive to them and their families.
Most studies point the finger at blame massively towards drivers. SO to say it is probably drivers that caused these accidents is a reasonable first suspicion.
The reality is that we all know cyclists are red light jumping, lycra wearing, vegan, anarchists and get what they deserve!!!!
One of the motorbike mags used to analyse accidents and come up with ways (if any) to prevent them. Might be an interesting exercise to do on here.
We assume that most cyclists are enthusiasts like us.
They are just as likely to be the idiot with no lights, riding no hands on the pavement who then swerves onto road like the person I encountered last night.
I have just come out of a very interesting meeting with the CTC, discussing their [url= http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/ ]Road Justice Campaign[/url]
Well worth a read - and a sign of the petition, calling for all police forces to take investigation of all collisions seriously. It also calls for more appropriate sentencing and clearer definitions of careless as opposed to dangerous driving.
Investigating incidents properly and identifying the cause will invariably show it is not always the drivers at fault - but in doing so will hopefully highlight the need for better rider training.
One thing i hadn't realised is that victims of careless driving do not come under the victims support code and irrespective of overall physical injury are not entitled to have details of their case or be kept up to date with any proceedings.
One chap asked to find out why his case wasn't being continued as all he has was a letter stating the CPS weren't going to run with it - he eventually found out he could get the information - when he paid £84 for it!
Things need to change - and hopefully people will see this is a campaign to get a fairer system for everyone
Most studies point the finger at blame massively towards drivers
Source?
I agree with a lot of the points above, I commute regularly in London via car and everyday I see so many illegal and dangerous moves by cyclists that I can't help think why more aren't killed each day.There are bad motorists and bad cyclists and in my personal view, standards in both are getting a lot worse.
everytime i drive in London i am shocked by the standard of driving, it seems the rules are optional for ALL ROAD USERS! I spend a lot of time cycling the roads of the cotswolds and devon, and it is the London plated cars that are the worst.... make of that what you will.
I posted regards this on the other thread.
i see all that karin put down but added that in most of these cases so far there has been no blame attached to anyone yet. the main issue is Big things and little things dont mix on the roads well.
The bow roundabout looks like it needs a serious redesign.
bencooper +1million
Words fail me when people on a cycling forum are attacking other cyclists for cycling on roads. Yes, some people do things wrong, others don't. There's a very famous rule called the 80:20 rule, I'm sure it applies here.
The evidence points without any question towards HGVs and tipper trucks being the single most dangerous vehicles on London roads.
Ben, equally to automatically suggest that the drivers were at fault when there's no evidence is offensive to them and their families.
It's much more likely though - [url= http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3758677.ece ]between 68% and 80% of cycle/motor vehicle collisions fault of driver[/url] and that's research from the legendarily pro-car Westminster council
I agree with the earphone comment - you need to engage with your surroundings as much as possible, situational awareness. Playing music in your ears is dulling one on your key senses.
There's little evidence to support either position.
What I've said IS hard to hear, but it's the truth, and the truth could just possibly save other lives.
A hard-hitting advertising campaign showing a cyclist being crushed by a lorry would do far more for safety than pussyfooting around being respectful to the dead and trying to spare people's hurt feelings.
Karinofnine, very well said.
Well said Kof9
Maybe if the CTC feel so strongly that the police/CPS aren't doing their job they should start taking out some private prosecutions against drivers instead of just complaining constantly?
Further, every cyclist who jumps a red light simply hardens the attitude of motorists against us.
[url= http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/shafted-again.html ]http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/shafted-again.html[/url]
You know what? **** that. The writer does make some good and sensible observations in this piece, but this little "proposal" obviates every single one of them. It's impossible, and in fact downright stupid, to "obey the letter of the law" on your bicycle when you find yourself in a situation where the streets and the laws are designed specifically for cars, which describes most of the United States. Moreover, it's gone way, way past the point where cyclists should need to prove to the very people who are ****ing us (that's drivers and police officers) that we "deserve respect." We deserve respect for being human, and it ends there. Yet we're supposed to be good little boy scouts and girl scouts--even when it's more dangerous for us to do so--to prove we're deserving of not being killed? That's just stupid and insulting.This op-ed reads like a homophobe defending gay marriage, but saying that homosexuals should "act less faggy" in order to earn the respect of straight people.
A hard-hitting advertising campaign showing a cyclist being crushed by a lorry would do far more for safety than pussyfooting around being respectful to the dead and trying to spare people's hurt feelings
I don't believe it would because every driver believes they are highly skilled and 'it will never happen to them'. The reason juries almost always fail to convict on 'dangerous driving' charges is they can imagine driving in the same way themselves.
tosh, that's what I make of that, most humans are idiots, even in the Cotswolds.and it is the London plated cars that are the worst.... make of that what you will
I am a regular long-term cycle commuter. Every day I observe cyclists pull out of side roads without looking, change lanes without looking or indicating,
I am also a long-term cycle commuter, everyday I observe [b]many more[/b] drivers than cyclists, pulling out of side roads without looking, change lanes without looking or indicating, and the big difference is the driver is in control of a ton or more of metal.
and they ride up the nearside of vehicles when the vehicle is indicating to turn left (FFS! what has a lorry driver got to do? They indicate, they have audible warning, and yet idiots STILL try to pass on the nearside).
I do occasionally see this too, but not all that frequently if I'm honest, and I really do believe that most of this is down to them just not realising the danger they're putting themselves in rather than a deliberate attempt to kill themselves.
People ride along with earphones in, completely oblivious to what's going on around them, distracted by whatever they are listening to and cut off fromtheir surroundings. Crazy.Well... there's a certain amount of debate to be had here, deaf people, wind noise vs music, volume of music etc, not to mention them still probably being able to hear more than the car drivers can inside the car, but we'll skip over this one or save it for another thread?
They fiddle around with whatever's in their front basket, wear clothes that flap and catch, and shoes that can slip off the pedals.Most of the cyclists I see are normally concentrating on ridign their bike, the only fiddling with stuff I ever see is when stopped at lights, maybe a location thing though? Clothes comments are a bit odd... are you suggesting some kind of recommended cycling uniform? Other countries seem to get by just fine with people wearing normal everyday clothes to ride a bike.
Further, every cyclist who jumps a red light simply hardens the attitude of motorists against us. Swerving round pedestrians on crossings doesn't help us either.Both of these p155 me right off when I see them, however, I genuinely see more cars jumping red lights and crossing than cyclists round here, so my theory is it's 'people' that do this regardless of their mode of transport, some will just do this, see comment about tons of metal above ^
It is very very sad when someone gets killed, however, the way some people ride my only surprise is that there are not many more fatalities.it is, it really really is, very sad indeed, I just wish our reaction was more around what we can do to improve rather than finger pointing and blame gaming. my surprise is that we don't (as a nation/public) get more upset and angry about them and try to do something about it.
It is true that vehicles have a duty of care towards more vulnerable road users, however, vulnerable road users also have a duty - to behave in a reasonable and responsible manner and to mitigate their damage/losses.agreed, BUT there is no evidence any of the people killed here were not doing absolutely everything they could have been to stay safe, the bad ones are the minority of cyclists, and the cyclists are a minority of road users, and a minority of a minority is a very small number, don't tar us all with the actions of so few, and there's still this elephant in the room of certain vehicles just not being suited to busy urban environments, no matter how careful everyone is.
consider yourself [s]flamed[/s] gently warmed 🙂
You do make some good points though but I think the reason so many people get grumpy when they are raised is the tone, we need less blame, more awareness/help.
That, and the fact that we do get so frustrated that these same arguments get trotted out all the time when it really really is a small, but more visible, group of people we are talking about.
You always hear the anecdote about the cyclist that jumps the lights or weaves all over the road listening to their ipod, never about the other 100 that also rode that same route safely and without incident.
way some people ride my only surprise is that there are not many more fatalities
I see so many illegal and dangerous moves by cyclists that I can't help think why more aren't killed each day
This has been said twice* and agreed with a few times but the death and serious injury rates are still very low so it would suggest that those moves only appear to be dangerous and aren’t actually that dangerous.
*Not a particularly large sample but hey ho you work with the data you have to hand.
Ps. I’m not condoning doing stupid things that may or may not be dangerous, I’m suggesting that cycling on London’s congested roads is generally quite safe.
[url= http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/ ]Road Justice [/url]
Please take a look at this CTC campaign - it really does make a lot of sense
There are a lot of bad cyclists out there and there are a lot of bad drivers, but its always going to be the driver that ends up winning in any accident.
It is true that vehicles have a duty of care towards more vulnerable road users, however, vulnerable road users also have a duty - to behave in a reasonable and responsible manner and to mitigate their damage/losses.
This is just old school thinking. It like saying some people just had to die working down the mines or deaths on oil rigs are just collateral.
Your never going to make every driver/cyclist perfect. We need to be working towards improving safety. An easy way to start would be to redesign lorrys to give the driver a better view. This would mean the lorry drivers would make few mistakes. Also item in cities should be carried in as small as vehicles as possible. I cant see why both drivers + cyclist would nt be in favour of safer vehicles.
The next step is some decent cycling infrastructure.
Karen
Sadly,a lot of that is true for most city commutes .
When I read some of that other thread about things that have changed you as a cyclist,my first thought was - 10 years commuting in London-( Essex road anyone 🙄 ) .
The thing that changed me ,was realizing that ( unless there was some massive infrastructure put in place) all my shouting and angry man stuff at other road users was a waste of time ,as there would be more along next week,doing the same old same.
So when things did happen ,I would try to let it go more often .I also found ways to avoid a lot of the aggro by changing routes and times that I cycled.
It would be interesting to know how much bike tuition courses have increased in cities or if there is still the "ah it's only a pushbike,how hard can it me?" kinda thinking ,and folk just go for it.
[i]Of course ,commuting on country roads ,where traffic is moving around a lot quicker ,now brings a whole different style of thinking and riding.[/i] 😯
Bring back cycling proficiency training in schools
Bring back cycling proficiency training in schools
it never went away
[url= http://bikeability.dft.gov.uk/ ]
http://bikeability.dft.gov.uk/ [/url]
Bring back cycling proficiency training in schools
Why ? Where has this got us cycling has been on the decrease for the last 70 years.
Although ur quote may be sarcasm.
The next step is teaching drivers and cyclists to share roads.
I'm not sold on segregation - I think for A and trunk roads it would be better to have a separate bike path, properly separated by a physical barrier, properly lit, swept and surfaced. However, in towns which were built long ago (ie most) there isn't enough room.
I think that segregation encourages motorists to believe that the roads are 'theirs'. That's my personal opinion and I understand there are good arguments for and against.
Re deaf people. FFS. I'm sure deaf people rely on other senses to keep up good observations when cycling.
And no, it isn't 'old school thinking' - you have to take responsibility for your own actions.
In the mercifully few collisions I've had on my bike, every one of them was the car driver's fault. And in every case I've heard of where someone I know has had a collision, it's been the same. I've admittedly had one or two lapses of concentration, but thankfully never caused a collision.
So some cyclists do silly things; attacking a small minority of cyclists who genuinely do things which cause danger to other road users is backwards and totally unhelpful. Because the simple truth is, the vast majority of cyclists don't ride in a manner that puts themselves in danger. They simply don't. Running the odd red light when it's safe for a cyclist to do so may infuriate frustrated motorists, but it seldom causes any real harm. Plus the relatively slow speed and low weight of a cyclist is seldom sufficient to cause serious injury.
Millions have been spent on dedicated cycle lanes (as well as millions wasted on painting blue strips on dangerous main roads), and things are improving, but it's at glacial pace really. Rather than cyclists replacing other vehicles, they are simply more sharing the same space on the roads.
The recent spate of large construction projects in the City and central London has meant a large increase in the number of HGVs on the roads of the capital. But I don't suppose a few cyclists dying will stand in the way of rampant corporate development. There are many ways of addressing matters, and making the roads safer for all, but they're not being explored, as it seems corporate interests will always trump the needs of greater society.
However, in towns which were built long ago (ie most) there isn't enough room [b]for large vehicles with poor all-round visibility[/b]
FTFY.
Lorries and central London aren't compatible. High time this issue was addressed, rather than being ignored and red herrings such as cyclists' bad habits constantly highlighted.
It's massively oversimplifying to suggest that these incidents are purely caused by the fact that [i]some[/i] cyclists are riding without skill and judgement!
Basic consideration of the road environment (multiple independent actors with a whole range of abilities, experience and attitudes towards the law + many different road layouts and road conditions and weather conditions etc) tells you that the behaviour of a single group cannot influence things to the degree that they cause their own deaths!
The data says three things:
1. Lorries are disproportionally involved in the deaths of cyclists in London (see data posted above)
2. Collisions between people on bikes and people driving are disproportionally the fault of the driver (see link to Westminster study above)
3. The number of people cycling has massively increased in recent years. By definition that means there's an increase in the proportion of riders who are inexperienced
Anecdote suggests:
1. There's a low respect for operating with skill, consideration and within the law amongst all road user groups - cyclists, drivers, pedestrians
2. There's a horribly anti-cyclist attitude in the UK - within the Police, CPS, courts, and many drivers.
Personally I take the advice my Grandad gave to my Mum when she started driving in the early '60s (ie: not new advice!) - "assume everyone else on the road is an idiot"
So whilst when I'm cycling I will keep to the law, to best cycling practice as I understand it, and commonsense, my bitter experience is that it is not keeping me out of danger - too many psychotic, ill-informed, impatient and aggressive drivers out there.
Consideration of the cycling environment, data, anecdote and experience (c5k miles on my bike this year) suggest that whilst my own behaviour can keep me safe to a large degree, there's no way that 100% adherence to best practice and the law will stop getting cyclists killed... that's way too simplistic...
There's a lot of change needed to make cycling safe. Our own behaviour is one contributor but only one...
It's that time of year, clocks change, light conditions and temperatures are less than ideal, everybody's judgement is likely to be affected for a few weeks (cyclists, motorists and Ped's). meaning we ALL need to take more care... Unfortunately London is one of those places where good judgement is in pretty short supply.
Jumping to Apportion blame to one group of road users or another is missing the point a bit, no single group of road users is perfect... cyclists disproportionately feel the effects as they are more vulnerable...
Measures can be taken by all to improve safety for all... [url= http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3307660.ece ]CEMEX/Ready mix for example[/url]... After some significant campaigning.
Perhaps rather than just chucking about blame, it would be more use if people think about reasonable measures to help reduce deaths and put those forwards...
Dammit, this is really interesting, but I have to go out. I'll be back...
Are bicycles the only vehicle where you can be let out onto the road with zero training?
and sadly its declined by one more today. How can training kids in a school playground ever be a bad thing?Where has this got us cycling has been on the decrease for the last 70 years
Re deaf people. FFS. I'm sure deaf people rely on other senses to keep up good observations when cycling.
yep, the same ones available to hearing people.
my point is that just because you have earphones in it does not make you immediately unaware of your surroundings, nor does it actually mean you can't hear.
What you're actually grumpy about is people not paying attention, there is a difference, but too often people jump to the 'earphones in, therefore not listening' conclusion.
and, yes I have personal experience of this as a person wwith only partial hearing.
Regardless of any changes to the law we need to make sure everyone we know who commutes in a city knows that HGVs are what's going to kill you. They're the sharks swimming amongst all the other harmless fish and if you take that view and stay well clear you massively reduce your chances of being killed
The reality for commuting in central London is running red lights is safe. Riding on the pavement is safe. Filtering at speed between lines of stationary or slow moving cars is safe. Proximity to HGVs = Death
@karenofnine
I agree with your comments, I have been commuting in London for 15 years and have noticed in the past few years with the massive increase in numbers of cyclists, a very noticeable decrease in the numbers of "safe" cyclists on the roads.
I only commute 3 miles each direction to work at the moment, from NW1 to WC2H.
Even bearing in mind this short distance, every day I see numerous instances of cyclists RLJ, pavement pedalling, cyclists going through pedestrians on a pedestrian crossing and going up the inside of HGV and Buses (often between the vehicle and steel railings).
Only this morning I thought I was about to see a fatality when a lad on a bike (wearing headphones) squeezed up in the inside of a large lorry waiting at red light, even though the lorry was indicating to make a left turn, and was sitting at an angle to make this left turn. I tried shouting to warn him, but was 15 feet behind the lorry and he could not hear me!
Once the lights changed, as the lorry pulled forward the gap quickly narrowed, he swerved, hit the kerb with his tires and fell onto the pavement holding his bike. Thank god there were no railings there.
The junction between Southampton Row and Russell Square (going south towards Covent Garden) is notorious for cyclists RLJ and riding up onto the pavement to get around the light. You can sit on your bike at the stop line and see 6-8 cyclists merrily going through this junction whilst pedestrians are crossing on their green light, whilst all motor vehicle traffic has stopped.
yes I will see bad driving, but the traffic is not moving very fast in Central London (it seems to be heavily gridlocked most of the time)
we have to sort ourselves out in terms of making other cyclists aware of the danger they put themselves and other road users in ( pedestrians, motorbikers and even motorists) as a careless or dangerous cyclist can easily instigate a road traffic collision
It is what it is, Londons roads (& pavements) are far too small for the type & volume of traffic using them, more will die, people (drivers & cyclists) are all too busy in their own bubble, near misses are frequent and people become desensitized to the risks around them, education and adverts won't hit their mark of targeted audience, TfL are having some positive effect on Londons cycling community but aren't dealing with some core issues around cycle safety whilst encouraging more people to use the bicycle.
For my 2 pence worth i'd personally restrict vehicles of a certain size (eg HGV) from certain areas during certain hours, create HGV (etc) routes into & out of central London. Commence an assessment of how best to introduce cycle specific routes (local access by car only) in central London. Cyclist awareness training would be great and i believe would save lives, but, again, getting those at need into such training is nigh on impossible.
(eg mini rantette) I still find it ridiculous that a delivering HGV can reverse across pavements & roads in central London without having a dedicated pedestrian spotter seeing them back and into their unloading area.
Are bicycles the only vehicle where you can be let out onto the road with zero training?
nope, horse, bicycle, tricycle, moped on L plates (as long as license prior to Jan 2013), mobility scooter, and on foot!
however another way to look at is is that it is [b]only[/b] motor vehicles that require a license/training, everyone else is just plain allowed to be there if they want to be*
*doesn't mean I don't think training is a good idea though
The reality for commuting in central London is running red lights is safe. Riding on the pavement is safe.
What a pile of utter, steaming bullshit!
Safe for the pedestrians crossing the road as you run a red? Safe for the car/bus/truck/other cyclist who is legally going through a green as you run a red?
Pavements? Oh do grow up. Or would you ride a motorbike on the pavement as well? Perhaps a car, too. Pavements are for pedestrians. Bike lanes are for bikes. Roads are for all road users (Buses, taxis, cars, trucks, motorbikes and, yes, bikes)
FFS.
so lets ban people who are deaf or have hearing problems and we'll be banning car radios too eh?Playing music in your ears is dulling one on your key senses.
Drop the headphones thing it's bollocks.
yep and the ones that are cyclist fault tend to result in bruises, grazes and sprains. Kinetic energy innit, cyclists don't have much compared to cars - there are a few KSI cases caused by cyclists and that is a terrible thing, but amending driver behaviour will save a lot more lives than amending cyclist behaviour. But yeah both would be good.between 68% and 80% of cycle/motor vehicle collisions fault of driver
<edit>BTW I'm all for a bit of training, especially cycle training in school so everyone gets to ride a bike on roads. Teaching kids to stop at redlights may stay with them once they get a licence too (don't forget the multitude of RLJ drivers) and learning to watch out for drivers being dicks will save a few people. Of course actually stopping drivers being dicks will save a lot more.
Only this morning I thought I was about to see a fatality when a lad on a bike (wearing headphones) squeezed up in the inside of a large lorry waiting at red light, even though the lorry was indicating to make a left turn, and was sitting at an angle to make this left turn. I tried shouting to warn him, but was 15 feet behind the lorry and he could not hear me!
good on your for trying to shout and warn him, why do you think he did that? genuine question by the way, do you think he:
a> didn't know the danger
b> knew but didn't care?
c> didn't even think?
d> other?
so lets ban people who are deaf or have hearing problems and we'll be banning car radios too eh?Drop the headphones thing it's bollocks.
thanks DONK! 😀
and sadly its declined by one more today. How can training kids in a school playground ever be a bad thing?
Im not saying its a bad thing. Im just saying if there's money to be spent its probably better spent on some thing else. Like a campaign to ban lorries from inner cities or on decent cycle infrastructure.
If there was plenty of money do both Im sure the dutch do.
every day I see numerous instances of cyclists RLJ, pavement pedalling, cyclists going through pedestrians on a pedestrian crossing
Yet how many actual collisions do you see?
We shouldn't ignore bad cycling habits, but to focus on them rather than address the far more serious issue of the dangers posed by large vehicles helps no-one.
Are bicycles the only vehicle where you can be let out onto the road with zero training?
What part of driver training involves driving safely in relation to cyclists?
every day I see numerous instances of cyclists RLJ, pavement pedalling, cyclists going through pedestrians on a pedestrian crossing
Yet how many actual collisions do you see?We shouldn't ignore bad cycling habits, but to focus on them rather than address the far more serious issue of the dangers posed by large vehicles helps no-one.
true indeed, the way some people rant you get the feeling they wont even consider doing anything until every last cyclist is a 100% law abiding and trained to perfection. It's not an either or situation...
What part of driver training involves driving safely in relation to cyclists?
That's a little unfair, there is (supposed to be) plenty in there, however it's down to the individual instructors how they deliver and push this and problem being many people forget/ignore it after passing.
Could probably be improved/stressed more but to say there's nothign in there is a bit unfair, and I'm all for being fair.
I didn't say there was 'nothing in there', merely asking how much of driver training involves driving safely in relation to cyclists.
had a few learner drivers do close passes, I always wonder if the instructor told them off later, in one or two cases I wondered WTF the instructor hadn't grabbed the wheel to steer away from me....That's a little unfair, there is (supposed to be) plenty in there, however it's down to the individual instructors how they deliver and push this and problem being many people forget/ignore it after passing.
Oh and I did my test <10years ago I don't remember anything about cyclists other than them being hazards on the awareness test.
you're right, sorry I did over-assume a bit there cybicle
to answer honestly - not enough, but there is some about giving room, safe overtaking etc. it's probably not stressed enough in the hazard awareness tests and a lot of instructors probably don't give it the time it deserves.
had a few learner drivers do close passes, I always wonder if the instructor told them off later, in one or two cases I wondered WTF the instructor hadn't grabbed the wheel to steer away from me....
the optimist in me likes to think they got a stern telling off.
the realist in me thinks they probably said nothing
the pessimist in me thinks the instructor muttered under their breath about f'in cyclists
I cannot speak for him, but from my observations I think a lot of new cyclists just don't understand how dangerous riding in heavy traffic can actually be, and how quickly things can go wrong (especially the HGV fatalities where it only takes brief contact with tire to get pulled under vehicle)
The old advise was "assume everyone is out to kill you" which just means keeping your wits about you at all times, and not putting yourself into risky situations where something can quickly go very wrong and perhaps cause serious injury or death
Something experienced commuters in London will tell you (I work in bike shops and hear this a lot) is what a hazard other cyclists have become to them in recent years, with lots of near misses from cyclists RLJ, failing to indicate, undercutting cyclists who are riding defensively in the correct position on the road, suddenly swerving, etc.
I regularly have cyclists trying to ride against me on a one-way street I use every day in Covent Garden, even when there is a motor vehicle just behind me.
The street outside our bike shop in Covent Garden is also one-way and our customers, shop staff and pedestrians have had numerous near misses as well as several accidents as riders plough into them after speeding the wrong-way up this street - if a motor vehicle is coming the cyclist will move onto the pavement (there is no kerb edge) to get around the oncoming vehicle.
Its become such a problem that the local Police Team has undertaken several blitzes ticketing cyclists, and the local authority has adjusted the no-entry signage on the street to reinforce this (not that these cyclists pay any attention..)
@esher
I'd tend to agree, I genuinely thing most people simply have no concept of how dangerous large vehicles can be, and how quickly things can go wrong if they are in the wrong place, and even what the 'wrong place' is.
Training can certainly help mitigate that, but doesn't change the fact that those vehicles are simply not suited to busy urban environments.
I do feel for the HGV drivers, it's a difficult job and even the best and most aware can find themselves struggling in busy towns and cities, and most of that is not down to their shortcomings, its down to the shortcomings of that vehicle in that environment.
it's a toughie to be sure...
What we need to do is take a "scientific approach" to this...
We have a situation where something bad is happening and there is debate over what is the cause. It is affecting people across the country, not just London.
So, looking at other similar situations, I would say it is very much like the Badger/Bovine TB debate.
I propose a selective cull of cyclists in one area, I'm going to nominate Manchester as a suitable candidate, and then what we can do is compare statistics before and after the cull.
Rachel
Are bicycles the only vehicle where you can be let out onto the road with zero training?
I don't remember having any specific pedestrian training but I seem to cope with that OK.
When was the last time a driver had any specific training? The answer for 90% of them will be "when they passed their test" which for some 60 year old doddering to the shops in his Micra will be 40-odd years ago. So nigh on useless and in modern terms may as well be considered as "having no training".
We can't keep focussing on:
cyclists have no training
cyclists have no insurance/don't pay "road tax" blah blah
cyclists all jump red lights
cyclists...
All it does is drive a deeper wedge into the knowledge gap of the average driver who thinks they own the roads, for every tiny step forward that cycling takes, it then slips back 9/10ths of that when some idiot pro cyclist wades in saying how helmets should be compulsory or when some idiot opinion columnist prints another anti-cycling diatribe.
So depressing that the answer to road safety seems to be to victimise the cyclist, paint the car driver as a law-abiding pillar of society and then say "just one of those things". 🙁
Its become such a problem that the local Police Team has undertaken several blitzes ticketing cyclists, and the local authority has adjusted the no-entry signage on the street to reinforce this (not that these cyclists pay any attention..)
Whereas if they simply banned cars from using those narrow streets (which are particularly unsuitable for motor vehicle traffic), and made them two-way for cyclists, the problem would be drastically reduced.
I propose a selective cull of cyclists in one area, I'm going to nominate Manchester as a suitable candidate, and then what we can do is compare statistics before and after the cull.
Can't we simply cull [i]all[/i] people in Manchester?
its something that is probably very unreported, unless a serious accident occurs.
in the past 14 months, whilst on foot, I have been hit by 2 cyclists in Camden, one outside the tube station where the lad rode straight through the red light and rode into me as I was crossing on a green pedestrian light, knocking me to the ground bruising my jaw and arm
then several months later on the pavement next to Sainsburys, women on old bike rode straight into me knocking my shopping bags over.
Last week on Friday night near New Oxford Street, as I was making a left turn on my bike (fully lit and indicating with my arm) a women rang straight across the pavement into the road, I rang my bell and shouted and managed to slide to a stop but she still ran straight into me knocking us both over.
I've seen numerous pedestrians / cyclists collisions especially junctions like the Strand onto Waterloo Bridge where the cyclists ignore the red stop light after coming off the cycle path across the pavement. I commuted this route every day for 6 years.
So it does happen.
It's not just cycling numpties in london who give us a bad name. I've begun to notice more and more of them in leeds and huddersfield every day.
Last nights numpty was wearing a grey corduroy jacket, black jeans (his sisters probably), no lights, no reflectors, and massive beats style headphones where i could hear his music from 10ft away. The little sh1te then tried to jump the red light and sneak across the ringroad from the station side of trinity street (stupid stupid stupid)
I wear earphones myself HOWEVER i only every listen to spoken word podcasts whilst riding and on low volume. I never listen to music and i can hear traffic around me just fine.
I've been flamed on here when i told how i'd had a conversation with another rider who was doing stupid maneuvers everyday and he'd reacted poorly to my advice. He still rides like a twonk everyday and it does my nut in. TBH if riders are going to be stupid then they are increasing their chance of dying.
I found cycling training extremely useful (i did bikeabilty level 3) and will insist that my nephews and niece all do it as well, even if i pay for it myself. It should be compulsory in schools - and there should be more awareness work done when people are being taught to drive. Flame me for sterotyping but my most recent near misses have been taxi drivers and young women/teenage girls
What a pile of utter, steaming bullshit!
Safe for the pedestrians crossing the road as you run a red? Safe for the car/bus/truck/other cyclist who is legally going through a green as you run a red?
Pavements? Oh do grow up. Or would you ride a motorbike on the pavement as well? Perhaps a car, too. Pavements are for pedestrians. Bike lanes are for bikes. Roads are for all road users (Buses, taxis, cars, trucks, motorbikes and, yes, bikes)
FFS.
People are overwhelmingly getting killed by HGVs. Any training or advice for cyclists in London has to focus on that fact and all the scaremongering about RLJing and headphone wearing is dangerous because it distracts people from the real risks. The recipe to drastically reduce your chances of being killed commuting in central London is simple:
1. Stay away from HGVs
2. Do whatever else you like, just remember the HGVs
On a more serious level to my previous post, I must admit that having spent years riding in Cambridge, I just won't do it any more - it's too dangerous, even compared to actual Mountain Biking...
The trouble is; the cause is very obviously other cyclists - last Winter I counted the bikes that actually had working lights that I saw between the centre and the train station - a big fat zero. Didn't seem to stop them doing all sorts of stupid things, including the one that had a go at me for stopping at a pedestrian crossing and riding into the back of my bike. :-/
Rachel
Esher-shore; I'm not denying that there are problems with cyclists (and pedestrians; I avoid the West End at all costs), just that as Crazy-Legs points out, we should be focussing on the main problems firts, namely too many cars in too small a space, too many HGVs, etc, before leaping to attack cyclists as being the main cause of issues.
If there are more people on bikes, then we should be reducing the amount of motor vehicles in built up urban ares, not forcing everyone to share the same shrinking space.
This, wrong:
I don't remember anything about cyclists other than them being [b]hazards [/b]on the awareness test.
I'd love to see motor vehicles removed from city centres, but as it stands we cannot use our feelings about "what should be" as an excuse to ignore cyclists that are breaking the law and putting people in danger.
The area around our shop is all one-way streets, and it only takes 30 seconds more on your bike to take the correct route to get onto Long Acre, rather than short cutting this by riding up a one-way street that has numerous pedestrians laden with shopping coming down the pavements.
The concern the police have about our street is that sooner or later someone will actually get killed, and it will probably be a cyclist having a head-on collision with a motor vehicle, because these cyclists are coming into this street off a left turn that is clearly designated "no left turn" and "no entry" and this corner is blind
You can stand in our shop in the morning when we take deliveries (there is a parking bay across the street) and watch numerous cyclists whizzing the wrong way up this one-way street, at considerable speed
It's not just cycling numpties in london who give us a bad name. I've begun to notice more and more of them in leeds and huddersfield every day.
That's the other thing I [b]hate[/b]
"give us a bad name"
If I said that all black people had a bad name cos I once saw a group of black people beat someone up, what response do you think that'd get?
If I said that all drivers had a bad name cos I saw a driver using her mobile this morning, it'd just be dismissed as talking bollocks.
But somehow, cos some cyclist jumped a red light in London this morning, that means it's OK for Mr White Van Man to punish pass me in Manchester cos hey, all cyclists have a bad name.
🙄
1. Stay away from HGVs
2. Do whatever else you like, just remember the HGVs
I agree with your first point in full. Very valid.
Second point? Utter shit. Sorry.
Do whatever you like? Really? So, mow your way through the red light outside a school? (Child's face, etc). Perhaps you'd like to ride the wrong way down a cycle lane? How about just nipping along the pavement down Cannon Street? After all, far safer to be on there than with those nasty HGVs...
No. Not the answer, and I'm struggling to work out if you're trolling or just a bit stupid, to be honest.
The answer, as many have said, is better awareness for ALL road users, better design of road junctions for ALL road users, better design of vehicles on the road (Look at what the trucking industry has already done with mirrors, audible signals etc. Still a lot to be done, but....), and a massive amount more common sense for ALL road users.
Advocating RLJing and riding on pavements it entirely counterproductive.
also, what crazy legs just said...
I'm sorry let me correct my sentence for your nit-picking sensibilities
It's not just cycling numpties in london who give [u]all cyclists including the readers and contributors to this conversation thread who the vast majority will identify themselves as cyclists[/u] a bad name. I've begun to notice more and more of them in leeds and huddersfield every day.
FTFY
EDIT: And no it is far from alright for those pathetic drivers to punish pass other cyclists for the numpties mistakes
I don't think he was picking on you specifically there, and he wasn't being nit-picky, it's a genuine problem with the way things are reported in the media and discussed in general
Us v Them
Cyclist Vs Non-Cyclist
it's not productive or helpful, we're just people using a bike to get from A to B, we have no agenda as 'a cylist' nor are we organised as a group, or any more affiliated with each other than you my be with other pedestrians when walking into town, or drivers when driving.
I once tested this on a a couple of my friends by telling them how I saw 'someone' jump a red light at a pedestrian crossing on the way to work, and nearly mowing down a woman with a pushchair and how annoyed I was about them giving 'us' a bad name, which then resulted in lots of agreement about bad cycling and the menace they cause and how they don't help themselves etc.
I then pointed out I was actually talking about a car and the sudden silence and perplexed looks said it all. Knowing that I was a cyclist they had just made the assumption, but I'm a driver too yet people are so quick to dismiss bad a driving as something 'someone else' does, where as bad cycling is something 'cyclists do'
I'd love to see motor vehicles removed from city centres, but as it stands we cannot use our feelings about "what should be" as an excuse to ignore cyclists that are breaking the law and putting people in danger.
But when those laws are drawn up to accommodate motor vehicle use, they often discount cyclists as unworthy of consideration. You know how if the council put a path round a patch of grass or park, and everyone takes a shortcut diagonally, creating a new path? That's what cyclists are doing, in a way. It's not ideal, but cyclists are often inconvenienced in order for car drivers to be catered for. Covent Garden s a ****ing nightmare to cycle round, chiefly because the road system is designed for motor vehicle traffic, in an area unsuitable for such heavy vehicle use. What should be happening in such areas, is enforced reduction of motor vehicles, especially at busy times. I can't see why it's a good idea to allow private motor vehicles in that area at all, during the day. Yet another example of the 'car is king' mentality that prevails. This attitude must be challenged if we're to find an effective solution. Constantly pandering to motorists doesn't help matters at all.
CFH I'm not advocating those things I'm just saying whether you do them is relatively unimportant when it comes to your safety
It's like saying if you smoke the biggest thing you can do to protect your health is give up. Don't worry about the gym or your diet, just focus all your efforts on quitting because smoking is so much more dangerous than anything else you can do. That's not the same as advocating pizza every night
If you give cyclists a long list of things they should and shouldn't do you'll get the situation where people are filtering up the inside of HGVs and thinking they're safe because they never run a red or listen to their walkman
12 deaths so far this year in London, 8 by HGVs. Concentrate on what matters
12 deaths so far this year in London, 8 by HGVs. Concentrate on what matters
Agreed in full. This was covered in your first point above. The second was the stupid comment.
I agree though, we need to get people focussing on how to be safer. I'd amend your points as follows;
1. Stay away from HGVs
2. [s]Do whatever else you like, just remember the HGVs[/s] Don't ride like a dick
It's worked for me for ages in London. Not one incident/near miss crash in years. (Apart from breaking my own point 2 by falling off when a little pished riding home from my local one night. Oops. All my own fault, and on an empty road thankfully)
@ameidas - too true. I reacted a bit there because i'm tired and cranky today. Sorry crazy-legs