[Closed] We loose yet another one to a lorry

sad news.
stay well away from lorries. far away.

would be interested to know the details of the crash.

EDIT: your link is missing a '9' off the end.

And the chap that was hit in West Lothian last week also died last night
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-23313515

EDIT: your link is missing a '9' off the end.

Not any more it isn't. (-:

perhaps not surprisingly it was a tipper truck.

I saw a cyclist go on the inside of a tipper truck this morning around Old St roundabout - bad move I thought, wonder if he'll get squished - the driver saw him though thankfully, but rather than let him pass through proceeded to make sure he got round the corner before the cyclist by gunning it - cyclist had to stop.
idiots.

[s]idiots[/s] you mean, idiot.

How many will it take?

Just a few, but the right ones, get a politician on a bike and run them over...

I've been complaining and reporting issues about the junction outside my office for years, plenty of close calls. Private road in a port so loads of lorries. Absolutely nothings been done and I've got nothing or been fobbed off at best and been told to cycle on the pavement at times to. Not surprisingly I gave up reporting anything.

Our FD had a very near miss a few weeks back, within a week there's a working group with our company and the port & road owners to look at what can be done to improve safety for cyclists at the junction.

I'm glad that somethings happening, but sad it's taken so long

Sad, sad news.

Way too many in the last few weeks.

I've written to my MP at least 3 times in the few months. 2,000 people per year die on the roads and this is not an acceptable rate of attrition, and it''s time that those in power did something about it.

I think [b]brakes[/b] was right when he said [b]idiotS[/b] there is no point cutting up the inside of lorries just because you have the right.
You don't want to be [b]dead right![/b]

I know it's been posted elsewhere on STW but if you haven't already signed it please put your name to [url= http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/police-petition ]this petition[/url] by the CTC.

It's in all our interests to get justice for road traffic incidents

tipper truck

don't suppose you got name of haulier? was it on crossrail business? (they have a sign in the cab

I think brakes was right when he said idiotS there is no point cutting up the inside of lorries just because you have the right.

like this idiot? You have no idea what happened in this case.
"A cyclist killed when she was knocked down by a lorry saw the driver turning towards her and waved desperately to try to stop him, an inquest heard today."
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/cyclist-killed-by-lorry-waved-at-driver-to-stop-him-crashing-into-her-8607713.html

[i]I've written to my MP at least 3 times in the few months. 2,000 people per year die on the roads and this is not an acceptable rate of attrition, and it''s time that those in power did something about it. [/i]

Since we have one of the lowest level of road deaths in the world, what is an acceptable rate?

HoratioHufnagel - from your linked article.....

But he also said the lorry’s indicator should have been seen, and she may have been listening to the radio: “Ellie had a clear view of the lorry ahead of her and should have been aware it was indicating left. She should not have moved along its nearside but waited behind it for him to complete the turn. She may have been listening to the radio while cycling and if she was, that might have been a distraction to her.”

Ignoring the radio comment for another thread it seems in that case the lorry driver failed to spot her for the 7 secs she would have appeared in his mirror and she failed to spot his indicators and put herself in a highly dangerous position. I'd call them both idiots (and sadly both now dead). Far too soon to make judgements (not that it is our place to) about what happened in that latest tragic case though.

I think it's relatively clear that the gravity of being in charge of a huge bit of metal needs to be made crystal clear. But I think it's also clear that putting yourself in harms way is likely to be dangerous needs to be made clearer to cyclists too.

We will never have a zero incident road network whilst human judgement and abilities are involved so I'm not sure when you cross the line into too dangerous territory.

Just a few, but the right ones, get a politician on a bike and run them over...

win, win

Since we have one of the lowest level of road deaths in the world, what is an acceptable rate?

There is no acceptable rate, the reality is that some people will always die, fast moving machines do break.

The idea that it is acceptable that third parties are killed by driver negligence, which is the sad reality, is abhorrent.

Is it acceptbale that a bmw can hit a driver turn the wrong way down and one way street and park the car astride a wall? If you read the news reports it seems so!

All too close to my office today. Thought it was likely to be a fatlity of somekind when I saw the traffic stacking up.

Lets all remember, someone isn't going home today. RIP whoever you are

I've written to my MP at least 3 times in the few months. 2,000 people per year die on the roads and this is not an acceptable rate of attrition, and it''s time that those in power did something about it.

Since we have one of the lowest level of road deaths in the world, what is an acceptable rate?

Err, somewhere closer to zero I would have thought. Fewer people are murdered than dies on the roads.

Roads are always going to be dangerous whilst there are humans in control of objects. People will die.

The only way to reduce road deaths is to make people walk, but then there will be accidents with people walking in to each other not wearing helmets

ut I think it's also clear that putting yourself in harms way is likely to be dangerous needs to be made clearer to cyclists too.

yep.

The only way to reduce road deaths is to make people walk

I'm pretty sure there are other things we can do as well....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero

It's got to start somewhere...

I don't know if this is what happened in this case, but cyclists going up the inside of cars anywhere near junctions is just not a good idea. Not saying anyone deserves to have an accident or that anyone is at fault - its all about assessing risks and taking precautions and this applies to life in general, not just when on bikes. You just cannot assume people have seen you whether on a bike or in a car.

I lose count of the number of times I see cyclists trying to go up the inside of cars at junctions. Similarly, I doubt vehicle drivers are checking their nearside mirrors and looking over their left shoulders every time they turn left at a junction. All the more reason for cyclists to be ultra-cautious.

Its a sad reality of our modern lives that roads are getting more and more dangerous. Faster, larger cars, more congested roads, people leading more stressful and busy lives, more distractions for drivers (roadside signage, sat nav's, mobile phones, nagging backseat drivers, silly overcomplicated road junctions and traffic lights where traffic lights are not needed etc), more foreign drivers and left had drive lorries on our roads, increasing number of cyclists, some of which don't seem to have much road sense. Its all a lethal cocktail.

Lets all remember, someone isn't going home today. RIP whoever you are

+1. RIP fella.

If we don't cycle into dangerous positions we go along way to being safeR .
Your still at risk of [b]SMIDSY[/b] and the idiot driving around midlands in a Silver BMW pushing people off bikes!
But these cyclists are still someone's loved one and most of us have got away doing the same thing.

I lose count of the number of times I see cyclists trying to go up the inside of cars at junctions. Similarly, I doubt vehicle drivers are checking their nearside mirrors and looking over their left shoulders every time they turn left at a junction. All the more reason for cyclists to be ultra-cautious.

but your taught to do it to pass your driving test...

Yes the cyclist is a prat for putting themselves in a dangerous position, but it happens, so the driver should look! have a read of the highway code about how to turn into a side road, the driver gives way to the pedestrian.

Would you switch lanes on the Motorway without looking because the car you overtook should be going slower than you?

Too many people accept bad driving, accept that driver negligence will kill people and that the choice is no cars or deaths.

That is wrong, the choice is drivers paying attention and no/minimal deaths or not paying attention and the status quo continues.

Look at any industry, deaths are not acceptable, and there are some potentially very dangerous working enviroments around where work happens and people don't die because the controls are in place to ensure accidents don't happen.

Would you switch lanes on the Motorway without looking because the car you overtook should be going slower than you?

Too many people accept bad driving, accept that driver negligence will kill people and that the choice is no cars or deaths.

That is wrong, the choice is drivers paying attention and no/minimal deaths or not paying attention and the status quo continues.

I don't think anyone would say it was acceptable, especially not on a cycling forum. But I think it would be reasonable to assume that as fallible humans who 'think' they look each and every time there will be occasions where we don't - be that one in a hundred, thousand or hundred thousand. If we didn't assume this the below you wrote would be unnecessary.

Look at any industry, deaths are not acceptable, and there are some potentially very dangerous working enviroments around where work happens and people don't die [b]because the controls are in place to ensure accidents don't happen[/b].

I suspect in most industrial scenarios the RA would recommend you remove the easily damaged cyclists from equation to mitigate losses - and that's not the answer we (as cyclists) are after.

I lose count of the number of times I see cyclists trying to go up the inside of cars at junctions. Similarly, I doubt vehicle drivers are checking their nearside mirrors and looking over their left shoulders every time they turn left at a junction. All the more reason for cyclists to be ultra-cautious.

and that is why I absolutely HATE cycle lanes that go up the inside of cars to a junction, even when there is an ASL box at the front, all they do is create a sense of false security for inexperienced (and experienced!) cyclists by suggesting that it is a safe place to be.

And that's before we get onto the situation where motorised vehicles overtake cyclists and THEN turn left on them, it happens far too frequently and that's nothing to do with filtering.

You simply should not turn (left or right) without checking your mirrors, whether or not it is dangerous for the cyclist to be there is kinda besides the point, in the same way we expect cyclists not to put them selves in dangerous situations we should expect drivers not to cause them, you don't change lanes on the motorway without looking, why would you do it in town when its more likely there will be someone there!?

My thoughts with the family as we yet again lose a life to the roads.

I suspect in most industrial scenarios the RA would recommend you remove the easily damaged cyclists from equation to mitigate losses - and that's not the answer we (as cyclists) are after.

That's still the same approach though isn't it, making the assumption that the product* comes with an intrinsic value that must be preserved and that human losses be mitigated, instead of making the assumption that the human factor be preserved and that the mitigation occurs elsewhere.

*couldn't think of a better word, but you know what I mean, in a closed system like in industry it may be easier to make that choice, but it shouldn't be that way on the streets.

It seems that on the road the focus too often jumps to how to remove the vulnerable users from danger instead of removing the danger from vulnerable users.

Well said Hora, +1

My own rule is to stay between the 1st and 2nd vehicle at the stop line. I can see what the car / truck in front of me is doing and "hopefully" the car behind me can see me....

I think I could be in a blind spot in front of a truck even in the ASL...

Its a sad reality of our modern lives that roads are getting more and more dangerous.

No they aren't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reported_Road_Casualties_Great_Britain

It seems the focus too often jumps to how to remove the vulnerable users from danger instead of removing the danger from vulnerable users.

exactly,

How many car journeys are neccesary in an urban enviroment? how many new estates are built around cars with no thought to pedestrians or cyclists. Why do we have a school run involving cars? Why do we continue to build out of town shopping centres and not link public transport to them.

There are roads where it makes sense to remove cyclists, Motorways for instance, but in an urban environment which should take priority cars or pedestrians?

No they aren't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reported_Road_Casualties_Great_Britain

now rearrange the numbers for deaths by user group,
It is getting better if your a driver but not if your a cyclist.

The chap at Winchburgh was a friend of a friend- 79 and still riding, RIP 🙁

Some interesting observations in this blog post.

http://andywaterman.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/death-on-holborn.html

and what about the middle aged idiot driving probably his company van and almost pizzaering me on the junction, all because the stupuid idiot didnt want to wait a few seconds for me to pass the junction, i have emailed and drawn a revised junction layout for our cycle officer and the local council, will see if any engineering options are taken.

Like all buses and coaches the owner of all large commercial vehicles, and company cars,should be named on the side just behind the passenger door,that should stop a lot of the idiots.

So sad for the poor cyclist, his family and freinds, my thoughts are with you Sir.

You can't defend yourself against selfish morons.
Any point in showing this to the Police or drivers boss?

How many car journeys are neccesary in an urban enviroment? how many new estates are built around cars with no thought to pedestrians or cyclists. Why do we have a school run involving cars? Why do we continue to build out of town shopping centres and not link public transport to them.

There are roads where it makes sense to remove cyclists, Motorways for instance, but in an urban environment which should take priority cars or pedestrians?

Couldn't agree more with this. We need to rearrange priority on our road network to look after the more vulnerable users. The car user has been king for too long and we've gone the way of our American cousins.

Government is too sh*t scared to make the decision to do this for fear of aggravating the 'war on motorists'.

I've said it before .....

It's not drivers or cyclist or pedestrians, it's people being inconsiderate to other people.

Until we ALL start applying more thought to our actions on the roads (indeed also the trails) then collisions will keep occurring.

RIP to those that have needlessly died, regardless of their age.

But that is never going to happen mk1fan is it? It is a small minority of careless drivers/cyclists/pedestrians etc. that are the problem.

And with that in mind, it is up to town/city planners to create infrastructure that removes the element of risk faced by vulnerable road users, rather than expect people to behave well

To be blunt, given the comments posted on this forum and the things I witness each day I don't think it is a 'small minority'.

While I agree that better road layouts would be very beneficial - there are plenty of roads where a 'cycle lane' has clearly just been added to satisfy a check box - ultimately the buck to stops with each of us.

Unfortunately, no political party is going to want to run a campaign based upon the slogan 'You, Mr & Mrs Public are just not good enough'.

Unfortunately, no political party is going to want to run a campaign based upon the slogan 'You, Mr & Mrs Public are just not good enough'.

Isn't the whole point of governemnt to enact the will of the people?

If there is enough pressure from the population then it will happen, the problem is we are expecting 'someone' else to do it, when the drive has to come from the public.

The only way we are going to get there is a united front from the various groups and societies involved (cycliing and non-cycling), you're absolutely right that no govenerment will want to do anything right now, but they will IF the public demand it, so we need to focus efforts on turning [b]public opinion[/b] and attitudes around, not goverenment, it won't be quick, and it won't be easy.

Since we have one of the lowest level of road deaths in the world, what is an acceptable rate?

Zero would do for a start.

we are on the cusp of a "tipping point" with cycling in London

the mayor thinks that getting more cyclists onto the roads will take care of safety as there is "safety in numbers"

unfortunately not, when cycling on dangerous roads, its just more 'meat for the grinder'...

we all need to take responsibility. motorists, lorry drivers, taxi drivers, pedestrians and cyclists

I cycle every day in central London. I apply a good sense of paranoia to the highway code when I use the roads. I assume everyone is trying to kill me. I do not take any risks. If its too dangerous I will get off and walk. I am a very experienced cyclist who has ridden bikes all over the World.

every day, I see different road users doing very stupid things, especially cyclists, that put their lives in serious danger. How more cyclists are not killed is something I am still trying to work out?

we all need to get along and take responsibility for our own actions. I regularly see shocking examples of bad driving from motorists jumping red lights, turning without indicating, pulling off the kerb without indicating.

but a huge amount of pressure needs to be applied to politicians to implement a safer (segregated) cycling network on our highways as cyclists cannot be trusted to take responsibility for their own safety (its probably not their own fault, as there is no evidence of highway competency required when purchasing a bicycle?)

its always concerned me that a 12 year child can receive a bicycle and go straight onto the highway with no training

Isn't the whole point of governemnt to enact the will of the people?

If there is enough pressure from the population then it will happen, the problem is we are expecting 'someone' else to do it, when the drive has to come from the public.

The issue is that, at the moment, the 'average' person thinks that they are considerate / observant / thoughtful enough.

The reality though, is they are not. So who is going to vote for a Government who is saying 'You are not good enough and therefore we need to control you more.'

Based on pure probability I could state that you, amedias, do not act with due care and consideration whilst using public roads etc .... and I am likely to be correct. Likewise, the same could be said of me.

I agree that Public Opinion does need to be changed but where to start? Our own children? Our friends and relatives?

Personally, I think the driving test should be a lot harder (so that includes a lot of the IAM methodology) and there should be compulsory re-tests every 10-years.

This would at least introduce an increased level of thought into driving which you would hope would be carried over into other use groups.

It's no going to happen though. There is the mindset that driving is a 'Human Right' and necessity rather than a privilege that comes with responsibilities.

A death in Southampton last week on Thomas Lewis Way by the Shell garage in broad daylight in the middle of the day. Nothing really reported on the circumstances so no indication of fault but something has gone badly wrong. Police motorcyclist killed along there just a few months ago.

People still driving down there like total tools at 60 (40limit). Got aggresively overtaken through the accidentvsite the night after it happened and I was in the car. Oil granules still on the road and crash call signs on the lamp posts. I reckon 25% of the drivers on the south's roads have no place behind the wheel of a car on attitude alone.

Its time to blitz that road over and over with speed cameras and traffic units until the message sinks in.

The reality though, is they are not. So who is going to vote for a Government who is saying 'You are not good enough and therefore we need to control you more.'

thats exactly my point though, we shouldn't be thinking about how impossible it is that anyone would vote in a government that says that, we should be thinking about how to drive that change from within the general populace, to get to the point where people realise that things need to change, start to enact that change and demand the government support it, rather than hoping for a government to do it for us.

I agree that Public Opinion does need to be changed but where to start? Our own children? Our friends and relatives?

Yes, absolutely, start local, it will take time, lots of time, but I believe it can happen.

Road safety groups, childrens societies, cycling societies, schools, business, community groups etc, everyone needs to unite on this, the drive needs to come from the public, not the authorities and it's not just about cyclists, it's about road safety in general.

Personally, I think the driving test should be a lot harder (so that includes a lot of the IAM methodology) and there should be compulsory re-tests every 10-years.

I would support that too, but again, it's another initiative that would never happen from above, it would have to be pushed from below.

It's no going to happen though. There is the mindset that driving is a 'Human Right' and necessity rather than a privilege that comes with responsibilities.

I sincerely hope you are wrong, the cynic in me wants to agree, but I have to hold onto the hope that that mindset CAN change.

personally I recon the first step would be for all commercial vehicles to be fitted with a spy in the cab* (forward facing camera + camera on driver) that way the courts would have a far clearer view of what happened in the vent of an accident - as it stands we generally have a one sided version of events from the driver. At least with more camera evidence the courts would stand a better chance of making convictions for poor driving stick.

If found guilty the likes of Ray Wilkins & Frank Wrathall & any others like them need to be put behind bars for a very long time.

Thoughts to the family & friends 🙁

HoaratioHufanagel
No they aren't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reported_Road_Casualties_Great_Britain

those are numbers of road casualties...that is not the same as a measure of how dangerous the roads are.

In that same time huge numbers of people have removed themselves from the roadspace and this is a big part of why there has been a reduction in road casualties.

If there were still the same number of children walking or cyling to school today as there were in 1926 and the same number of pedestrians and cyclists going to work as there were in 1926 do you really think road traffic casualties would be where they are now.

Despite the effective abandonment of the roadspace by all of society except the motorist 2000 people still manage to get killed by motorists.

Less people being killed on roads does not mean roads are getting safer...just that motorists have less targets to aim at.

Isn't the whole point of governemnt to enact the will of the people?

The will of the people is to bring back hanging. On some things they need to ignore the will of the "people" and do what is best for them rather than what they want.

Yes, absolutely, start local, it will take time, lots of time, but I believe it can happen.

It took 10+ years for drink driving to become socially unacceptable. Bit less for seatbelts when the law about wearing those came into effect.

It'll take the same time with regards to mobile phone use (which in spite of the recently increased punishment is more rampant than ever).

I reckon it'll take 20 years to get to the point where driving is considered a privelege rather than a right, where courts actually give meaningful sentences to drivers who kill and where the rights of vulnerable road users are recognised in good quality road/infrastructure design.

It can be done and it must be pushed for at every opportunity. But it will take getting on for one generation.

[i> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero

It's got to start somewhere...
[/i]

Yes, and if I remember correctly a part of this was to ban motorcycles entirely:

http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/1198.html

And presumably if we banned cycling on roads that would also help reduce the accidents?

amedias, I think we're singing from the same hymn sheet. It would be great if 'the public' would have the will to vote for such changes.

Call me pessimistic on this subject.

Perhaps we do have to bring pressure as a 'minority' along with other groups.

Anyone fancy bridging the gap?

"Thats a good point, but all this forum could do is reach out a hand to cyclists forum's admin and ask if they pop a sticky link to this thread as we are here and wanting to discuss this topic."

http://www.trucknetuk.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=102239&start=150

In London, being a cyclist often feels like you're just another inconvenience, a fly that needs cleaning off a windscreen, to a van/lorry driver. Something thats just 'in the way'.

I know that most cyclists are also drivers, so most understand the difficulties of driving and watching out for cyclists. No we dont all understand big trucks, but we have in some way 'walked in the shoes' of a driver. I suspect very few truckers have walked in cyclist shoes.

The thought of 'standing up' in front of a truckers forum and getting abused doesnt appeal. What are you proposing Horatio?

And presumably if we banned cycling on roads that would also help reduce the accidents?

Probably, but that's going to have knock on consequences eleswhere (increased sedentary lifestyle, illegal cycling on public roads etc.) not sure it's practical to be honest. Just like I don't think banning motorcyles is practical (or reasonable for that matter).

I think the Swedish chap behind Vision Zero said that motorcycles would be discouraged over the long term and that there would come a poiint where they would be considered too unsafe by the general population, rather than an outright ban. The same could be said for bicycles. I doubt either proposal would get the support necessary to enact them though!

Useful to at least consider these things though, just because one or two comments seem unreasonable it doesn't mean the whole lot is.

The thought of 'standing up' in front of a truckers forum and getting abused doesnt appeal. What are you proposing Horatio?

I think i might put together a post at some point, but a bit busy today. I reckon its best to give it a bit of thought, as blaming each side is a bit pointless.

FWIW i work in the automotive industry (on driver assist stuff) and their goal IS zero deaths, for any car sold with the safety stuff fitted. Mostly through the same technology used for autonomous driving, though the driver retains ultimate responsibility.

The engineers see every single death as avoidable, whether its down to human behaviour (about 95% of the time), mechnical faults or just unforseen accidents.

However, its currently very difficult to get this stuff fitted to protect cyclists due to the deeply ingrained view its their fault (just scroll through the lorry driver comments). As long as this view remains, government will be very reluctant to introduce legislation, and private companies aren't interested.

Drivers will feel as if its unfair as they are burdoned with costs and responsibilities whilst the "law-breaking" cyclists continue unchecked.

The use of blind spot cameras is very common off-road in quaries and the like, even on the rear of bin lorries (where its their own employees at risk).

Getting them used on the road is more difficult.

The (really quite sensible) recommendations of the [i]Get Britain Cycling Report[/i] are going to be debated in the House of Commons on the 2nd of September.

[b]Write to your MP, tell them your views and ask them to attend the debate.[/b]

The Times has a page to make writing to them a bit easier:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/pledge/ (step 3)

.

Oh and for the OP: [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/psa-loose-is-the-opposite-of-tight ]an important PSA that you may have missed[/url]. 😀

That thread on the truck forum is pretty scary...

There's a lot of well meaning, open minded and intelligent posts on there, but there's a also few really properly disgusting comments which bring a chill when you realise that people with those attitudes (no matter how much of a minority) are in charge of such vehicles.

And there's a lot of 'my roads' style stuff on there too rather than 'our roads'

I cycle every day in central London. I apply a good sense of paranoia to the highway code when I use the roads. I assume everyone is trying to kill me. I do not take any risks.

A noisy minority on this forum seem to advocate the opposite. "I'm vulnerable so it's up to everyone else, and the law had better catch up soon etc etc."

I often see cyclists confused at "weird" choices motorcycles make in traffic where they share common space and speed. But the biker has seen the junction, the indicator, the driver's head movement, the gap left in a queue. But then again how are cyclists supposed to learn this stuff? Would a few ad campaigns be enough?

You're vulnerable, so you need to look out for yourself. No point worrying if that's how it should be, that's how it is.

We do need to look out for ourselves - but I disagree there is no point worrying about how it is.

To draw an deliberately emotive parallel: women should be careful to keep an eye on their drinks in clubs and make sure they don't walk home alone at night.

But that doesn't mean we don't need the laws against sexual assault or that women should just be quiet and put up with that risk.

No point worrying if that's how it should be

Why not? if it's wrong then it needs addressing, not ignoring. What you're saying there is that the motorcycling groups have given up on treating the disease and are just trying to lessen the symptoms, I don't believe that is true at all, but that's how your interpretation sounds.

It is absolutely right to teach people to be safe and look after themselves, but that doesn't have to mean ignoring other ways to improve safety.

"I'm vulnerable so it's up to everyone else, and the law had better catch up soon etc etc."

no no no, that's not what its about, it's about making the drivers realise you are vulnerable [i][b]as well[/b][/i] as making cyclist realise it and not putting themselves in danger, so that we all can get along and [i][b]share [/b][/i]the space.

The law does need to catch up with regards to appropriate justice when things go wrong, but the end goal is not to give cyclists carte blanch to say 'I'm vulnerable, so its your job to keep me safe'

It is not solely one groups responsibility, its the responsibility of all to keep safe and also make sure you're not causing a danger.

But then again how are cyclists supposed to learn this stuff? Would a few ad campaigns be enough?

no, but its a start, other options are to get it drummed into kids when they first learn to ride, and at school/bikeability etc, as well as trying to teach adults through community groups in conjunction with local authorities and businesses.

There is much that can be done, and much that should be done, cyclist training is very much one of those things, what is missing is focus and co-operation.

if I'm honest I think there is a social change coming, at least I hope so, where the critical mass of people now adopting bikes as a transport method forces the social acceptance of cyclists and adoption of a more positive attitude towards them on the road.

I think, as 'early adoptors' we should continue to push, and pull people into understanding.

Carrot and stick.

I will write to my MP about the debate.

And Horatio I will support you in a balanced, reasoned and dare I say gentle, forum debate with the truckers if you'd like. I am sure some truckers will be aggressive on this topic but I will try and bite my tongue and reply sensibily when it happens.

I still recomend that riding a bike into a city at rush hour, should be part of the drivers test, or even the truckers HGV test.

I still recomend that riding a bike into a city at rush hour, should be part of the drivers test, or even the truckers HGV test.

An interesting point someone made to me the other day is that what might be required is an extension of 'driving test' to be more like a concept of 'road using test'

ie: to widen the perspective to include other types of vehicle, and not just recognising how to drive a car well and anticipate hazards to a car driver but to a wider understanding of how different vehicles interact with each other and how the environment shifts with different viewpoints

amedias, sounds interesting and I'm sure it would help even cyclists to sit in a cab of a truck in rush hour and 'feel' what its like. like i said understanding on both sides... but more from drivers as they are the ones in charge of tonnes of lethal metal and not usually also cyclists.. most cyclists are drivers to some degree.

I'm sure it would help even cyclists to sit in a cab of a truck in rush hour and 'feel' what its like.

I've never really understood that one. Demonstrations of how many blind spots a truck has and how little you can see from the can just make me think "So why the hell do we let that thing drive through busy city streets at rush hour??"

It's like saying "Look how remarkably dangerous it is when I am blindfolded and wave around this massive sword. Everyone should stay out my way as I walk down the street."

personally I recon the first step would be for all commercial vehicles to be fitted with a spy in the cab* as it stands we generally have a one sided version of events from the driver. At least with more camera evidence the courts would stand a better chance of making convictions for poor driving stick.

Graham, and there's the problem, I'm sure most truckers would ask the same, why should I ride a bike to see how it feels. It's time to help each other. Not continue the same fickle defence! 😉

I see your point ti_pin_man, but I'm aware of those truck blind spots. I've seen the photos and videos with a dozen cyclists all invisible to the driver.

But I can't help thinking that they just show why HGVs shouldn't be allowed on busy city streets.
HGVs make up 5% of traffic in London but are involved in half of the cyclist deaths!

They have very limited visibility and minimal protection for other road users.
In a works yard, where Health and Safety applies, they drive slowly and require multiple people to assist them moving around. But as soon as they leave the yard that disappears and they can drive freely through busy city streets.

That's just daft.

I see your point Graham (and to a large degree I support it), and while we as a society ponder the impact of removing vehicles like that from certain areas it can't hurt to raise awareness and improve understanding for anyone that has to interact with them.

Even IF they were banned from town centres during hours X - Y or whatever, there would still come a time when they would be there, for special occasions, or in other hours, and it still makes sense that other road users understand the dangers involved.

You do, I do, many simply don't because they've never thought about it or never been shown.

Needs effort and understanding on both sides.

For balance (puts on flame suit) and both a person that commutes to and from work by bike along a busy dual carriageway them get to work I then drive a 44tonne truck do I see both sides of the argument.

But as for banning large vehicles from busy areas at certain times is a stupid idea. I cycle to work and I know a lorry or van can't see me so I stay well begins at the lights as i've got more brains than to put myself at danger.

If saving yourself 30 seconds by skipping up on the inside of a large or any vehicle then I think you are a contender for a Darwin award.

Fair enough that collision in Cornwall was tragic and I can't stick up for the driver there but when the cyclist has under taken a large vehicle then it's the cyclists fault and whatever the outcome is the result of their own idiotic/suicidal decision.

These stories are getting more regular and yet the cyclist is still chancing their lives by still doing it.
A couple of quotes from [url= http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/bexley/10092005.Belvedere_pupils_amazed_as_40_tonne_truck_comes_to_playground/ ]Here[/url]

"When I sat in the truck with the engine running I couldn’t see or hear any of my friends outside, even when the whole class shouted as loud as they could!”

how big the lorry’s blind spot was by fitting 28 children in it.

I drove the company sprinter van the other day and the blind spot on that was surprising as I couldn't see a freelander on my nr side.

heed the warnings and stay safe.

it's the cyclists fault and whatever the outcome is the result of their own idiotic/suicidal decision.

I don't think they do it realising the blind spot and risk.

But as for banning large vehicles from busy areas at certain times is a stupid idea

No, it's a great idea, and not just from a road safety perspective, from a congestion and road longevity POV it makes good sense. Most urban roads were not built to accomodate the behemoths we have on the roads these days. Trunkroads and motoroways were. Using distribution centres outside of urban areas reduces costs, improves safety and is better for society and the environment.

It's only the haulage industry's outdated views and modes of operation that keep it from happening on a bigger scale, never understood why they aren't keen to change: it would make so much sense longer term. But then, the movement of goods in Britain is pretty inefficient anyway.

I don't think they do it realising the blind spot and risk.

It's a very harsh punishment for a mistake that is very easy to make (and sometimes encouraged due to road engineering/marking). Undeserving of the Darwin award I think.

But as for banning large vehicles from busy areas at certain times is a stupid idea.

Why's that then? Other countries do it quite successfully.
In fact some enlightened countries manage to exclude motor traffic completely from city centres.

To go back to my previous metaphor: if I was swinging a sword blindfolded in a busy street, is it better to warn people not to get too close to me, or suggest that I might want to do it somewhere quieter, or at the very least [url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/mar/19/cyclist-friendly-lorry-design-accidents ]take the blindfold off[/url]?

If saving yourself 30 seconds by skipping up on the inside of a large or any vehicle then I think you are a contender for a Darwin award.

Three points:

firstly, the bike lanes that are painted on the road specifically to help cyclists (particularly novices) always go up the inside. So there is a definite issue of mixed messages there.

secondly, it is very misleading to assume that [i]every[/i] cyclist killed by a lorry was trying to go up the inside. There are plenty of cases of cyclists being struck from behind or being squashed by a lane change or bad overtake.

thirdly, in many ways it doesn't matter whose "fault" it is. People will make mistakes. We should do all we can to reduce the number of mistakes and avoid the consequences being fatal.

have any more details emerged about the Holborn incident?

+3 for your 3 points Graham

> Road design makes things worse in many cases and actively encourages dangerous behaviour, often without the person realising it

> Often its the overtake and left turn that claims them, or a cyclist wh was already in position and then found a large vehicle alongside them and nowhere to go, or sadly sometimes they just dont know that its a dangerous place to be, often due to point 1!

> mistakes happen, the goal should be to reduce them through better understanding and to make them less likely to result in death wehn they do happen.

If saving yourself 30 seconds by skipping up on the inside of a large or any vehicle then I think you are a contender for a Darwin award.

We have conflicting messages for cyclists at the moment. "Don't go up the inside of lorries" and "stay in the gutter where you belong". The latter is implicit in the ridiculously narrow bits of painted lane that pass for 'cycle infrastructure' in most places, and that lead into ASLs. If a 50cm wide painted lane is what you're meant to be in why wouldn't you go up a similar gap? I had some idiot woman on her horn and shouting out of her car window earlier this week "Get out of the middle of the road, you should be on the left, that's where the cycle lane would be" if there was one, in the doorzone, so that you can squeeze past dangerously close as the road narrows. So that you can get around the corner to stop on the 'no stopping' lines to let your kids out to go to the school.

The nature of traffic in London means you can't avoid being on the inside of lorries at times - what are you meant to do if you're in a narrow marked lane and a truck pulls alongside?

But as for banning large vehicles from busy areas at certain times is a stupid idea

The more I mull this over, the more apathetic I'm getting to talking about it, this isnt good. We can talk about it till the cows come home but what can we do to actually change anything?
I wrote a letter to my mp, via the Thimes link at the top. Vince Cable hmm. lol. But what else can we actually do to help this problem?

Any of these incidents due to silly cyclists going up the inside of HGVs?

(warning: some entirely understandable swearing on the soundtracks)

But what else can we actually do to help this problem?

The last two deaths in London have resulted in [url= http://waronthemotorist.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/what-do-we-want-marginal-gains/ ]people taking to the streets for flash protests[/url]. Perhaps we are heading towards the same kind of atmosphere as the [url= http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/how-the-dutch-got-their-cycling-infrastructure/ ]"Stop De Kindermoord"[/url] that woke up the Dutch?

Sad that it takes deaths for action to happen though - the hidden reality people are dying every day by [b]not[/b] cycling and choosing sedentary lifestyles.