***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 25 *****
More pedal power chat.
PLEASE NOTE:-
To try and maintain some kind of logical order of discussion, if you start a new subject then reply to this post and remember to change the default subject header.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 23:20
|
Cycling forums report a female cyclist was killed in an accident near the Bank of England this morning.
tinyurl.com/pnqcnmr - Evening Standard website.
Eighth fatality in London this year.
|
BBC report says
On Friday, a 50-year-old cyclist died after colliding with a car in Harrow.
Last year a total of 13 cyclists were killed on the city's roads and 14 died in 2013.
|
>> Cycling forums report a female cyclist was killed in an accident near the Bank of
>> England this morning.
>>
>> tinyurl.com/pnqcnmr - Evening Standard website.
>>
>> Eighth fatality in London this year.
134 pedestrians were killed last year in London. Why do we have gnash and wail about so few cycling deaths?
|
>> 134 pedestrians were killed last year in London. Why do we have gnash and wail
>> about so few cycling deaths?
Back to what sells news I guess. People think cycling in London is much more dangerous than being a ped* so when a cyclist meets a horrible death it's headline stuff.
The prevalence of tip trucks in these cases might be another reason.
*The fatality rates are actually broadly similar.
|
>>The prevalence of tip trucks
Why is that?
There are more of them than anything else?
They are particularly slow/annoying so cyclists try to get up the inside of them?
They are shocking drivers?
Or something else?
And why, even they don;t legally have to, don;t the cyclists give them a very wide berth?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 16:01
|
>> There are more of them than anything else?
Lots of them 'cos of the construction boom. Far less numerous than buses though but involved in many more cycling deaths.
.
>> They are particularly slow/annoying so cyclists try to get up the inside of them?
They're not slow at all, which may be part of the problem. Yes, in some cases cyclists have gone up the side of them but that's not the whole story. To assume that to be answer barely scratches the surface.
>> They are shocking drivers?
The million dollar question. The firm involved in this one www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=19332&m=431031&v=e are up before the Traffic Commissioner later this week. Not the first involved in a cycling death to have been found employing unqualified drivers.
>> Or something else?
Maybe something about the way the tip/skip trade is organised and remunerated.
>> And why, even they don;t legally have to, don;t the cyclists give them a very
>> wide berth?
They do but still get killed. Victim in case referenced above is one such.
|
>To assume that to be answer barely scratches the surface.
Please try to bear in mind that not only applies to the cyclist, but also to the truck. You do tend to find that answers showing the responsibility to be the truck simplistically obviously valid but equally those pointing at the cyclist quite the opposite.
>> And why, even they don;t legally have to, don;t the cyclists give them a very
>> wide berth?
>They do but still get killed
Well, that's not what I'd call a wide berth then. The things wouldn't get me.
>>Maybe something about the way the tip/skip trade is organised and remunerated.
May be, but that sounds more like a contribution than a substantial reason.
Is there a common theme? Like the truck is usually turning left, or its always at a junction, Its always the left hand side of the truck (or the right) or something?
|
>> Well, that's not what I'd call a wide berth then. The things wouldn't get me.
I fear your animosity (for want of a better word) towards me regarding this subject is clouding your judgement. How would you have survived in circumstances in which Alan Neve (previous link) died in High Holborn?
He was hit from behind by a skip truck. The driver couldn't see him because of a bog roll and sat nav mount on the dash.
>> May be, but that sounds more like a contribution than a substantial reason.
>> >> Like the truck is usually turning left, or its always
Left turns are a factor and I've never denied the fact that some of these accidents involve cyclists venturing into truck's blind spot. But that blind spot is still there when the truck overtakes and then 'left hooks'.
See the debate following Zero's post I linked above regarding the speed and power/weight ratio of these jobbies.
|
>> He was hit from behind by a skip truck. The driver couldn't see him because of a bog roll and sat nav mount on the dash.
>>
That is rubbish a lorry driver can't see a car close in front of him, small stuff on the dash will make little difference.
|
>> That is rubbish a lorry driver can't see a car close in front of him,
>> small stuff on the dash will make little difference.
I'd submit it makes quite a lot of difference.
There's no source other than press reports but here's a quote regarding the trial/conviction of the driver Meyer, :
Meyer’s view of Mr Neve, who had the right of way, was blocked by a toilet roll and sat-nav holder on his dashboard.
CCTV footage from Meyer’s lorry and other vehicles showed how he drove through a red light in Procter Street and stopped the lorry in a yellow box junction in High Holborn, before advancing through heavy traffic on to Mr Neve.
Meyer had been following a colleague driving another tipper truck
Prosecutor Allison Hunter said: “Had Meyer reacted as a dynamic driver would have been expected to do, he could not fail to have seen Mr Neve.
“It appears clear from what Meyer said in an interview that his focus was upon keeping up with his partner in the vehicle in front.
“Not only had Meyer not turned his head or used his mirrors but he then failed to stop, as his front and rear wheels crushed Mr Neve beneath and dragged him along the road, to shrieks of pedestrians and other road users.
The bold is mine.
I know the road involved intimately. It was on my daily commute for 10yrs. I passed on the day of the incident and saw the appeals for witnesses.
|
Do you think this driver can see the car? No one in their right mind would get close in front of a lorry in traffic.
youtu.be/z6nqEbu9nzU
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 17:22
|
|
I do not claim that lorry drivers are always blameless, but they do not go to work intending to kill cyclists.
|
>> Do you think this driver can see the car? No one in their right mind
>> would get close in front of a lorry in traffic.
>>
>> youtu.be/z6nqEbu9nzU
Tippers are designed to go onto building sites and too operate in urban streets. In order to protect pedestrians and site workers they have mirrors allowing the driver to see directly in front. In the case we're discussing the cyclist was ahead of the lorry at all material times.
He was run down from behind. No question of him either deliberately or inadvertently putting himself in any blindspot.
While I accept no driver sets out to kill Meyer was reckless as to whether he did. How many others are at least careless.
|
|
Has "Prosecutor Allison Hunter" ever sat in the drivers seat of a lorry? Does she actually know what the driver can and can't see?
|
>> Has "Prosecutor Allison Hunter" ever sat in the drivers seat of a lorry? Does she
>> actually know what the driver can and can't see?
Don't know. The prosecutors job is to present evidence, not make it. The witness upon whom she relied will have sat in not just any lorry but that driven by Meyer. He will then have had photographs too. CCTV from Meyer's lorry showed what happened and that whole area is covered by TfL and or Camden LBC's surveillance cams too.
The driver was convicted FFS, this one was 100% down to the nut behind the wheel. You can no more defend him than I could or would defend the idiot who hit that little girl while riding on the pavement - see previous volume.
|
Well you would be fundamentally wrong. I have no animosity towards you on any subject.
I do, though, find you very biased on this subject. It bothers me not a jot which is at fault, it only bothers me that the "right" answer is sought.
Quite obviously its different if the cyclist is hit from behind bur you said "they" not "he" .
So, do most of them occur when the truck is turning left? By the way, i am not clear what "left hooks " means
|
>> So, do most of them occur when the truck is turning left? By the way,
>> i am not clear what "left hooks " means
Obviously, as these vehicles are RHD and in a country driving on the left, the drivers view of the 'inside' of a left turn is dependent on mirrors. The danger applies whether the cyclist is undertaking or the lorry overtaking.
Left hook is a slang term for those incidents where a vehicle overtakes another road user, usually one on two wheels, and then turns left across them.
Some of the tip accidents have involved that scenario. Either the truck turns left into a side road or, in multi lane roads moves to left, catching a recently overtaken cyclist in the process. The fact that these vehicles, as a consequence of their need to go off road on sites and at landfill, lack decent safety bars between front and rear wheels is a factor as the victim is more likely to go under thee rear wheels.
|
Not to be painful, but are most of the incidents to the left of the truck?
Presumably if so it can only ever be the truck dangerously turning across the cyclist or the cyclist trying to cut up the inside when he shouldn't?
So of the accidents on the left of the truck, statistically how many involved the cyclist coming up the inside and how many were the truck turning into him?
And if we solve those problems how many of the fatalities would have been avoided?
|
I'd hazard a guess that a lorry that first overtakes a cyclist... then turns left or whatever, is a less dangerous move than the cyclist coming up the inside of a slow moving or stationary lorry.. and then the lorry moves forward or turns left...
... because in the former, the driver has either seen or has had the chance to see the cyclist, whereas in the latter he might well not.
You create your own luck in life, mostly.
|
>> I'd hazard a guess that a lorry that first overtakes a cyclist... then turns left
>> or whatever, is a less dangerous move than the cyclist coming up the inside of
>> a slow moving or stationary lorry.. and then the lorry moves forward or turns left...
That's obvious. The question is which scenario is causative/contributory to fatalities. If the cyclist comes up the inside (a) did the infrastructure, lane markings etc invite him or (b) was he ill trained/ignorant.
In either case, why could the driver not see him.
|
>> That's obvious.
Not seemingly to everyone it isn't.
The question is which scenario is causative/contributory to fatalities. If the cyclist comes
>> up the inside (a) did the infrastructure, lane markings etc invite him or (b) was
>> he ill trained/ignorant.
If you are the cyclist, it doesn't really matter for that particular moment... what matter is that you ride according to the conditions and the knowledge that you gleaned, same principle as a motorcyclist.
As a motorcyclist I know that riding down a straight road in decent conditions with my headlight on and a bright white crash helmet... at some point some twonk IS going to pull out on me, so I ride expecting that.
Well the same applies to a cyclist versus a large vehicle. It matters not who is right or wrong, accept the fact you are vulnerable and don't put yourself in vulnerable situations.. and nipping up inside a lorry / bus is exactly that... you are in a blind spot and you are very vulnerable to being crushed.
I can't work out why some can't 'get it'.
Last edited by: Westpig on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 22:05
|
>> Well the same applies to a cyclist versus a large vehicle. It matters not who
>> is right or wrong, accept the fact youfare vulnerable and don't put yourself in
>> vulnerable situations.. and nipping up inside a lorry / bus is exactly that... you are
>> in a blind spot and you are very vulnerable to being crushed.
>>
>> I can't work out why some can't 'get it'.
>>
I think the reason why some don't "get it" is ignorance or lack of road safety education. Anyone can hop on a bike and go for it. Even so the lack of self preservation is worrying, especially among well educated mature people. Even I know a lorry can hurt big time.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 22:18
|
>> Presumably if so it can only ever be the truck dangerously turning across the cyclist
>> or the cyclist trying to cut up the inside when he shouldn't?
>>
>> So of the accidents on the left of the truck, statistically how many involved the
>> cyclist coming up the inside and how many were the truck turning into him?
That's the million dollar question. The only way to find out is by analysis of individual accidents and other than Olaf Storbeck's spreadsheet* I'm 'stuck for weft'.
* docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oBZ-aQWBdrYT0NM40KVAKz0ei3xQEbX3hJccnBr5JT8/edit?hl=de#gid=0
|
>> That's the million dollar question. The only way to find out is by analysis of
>> individual accidents and other than Olaf Storbeck's spreadsheet* I'm 'stuck for weft'.
>>
>> * docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oBZ-aQWBdrYT0NM40KVAKz0ei3xQEbX3hJccnBr5JT8/edit?hl=de#gid=0
One only has to read the tone of the "what happened next" column to realise this is not exactly written or complied in a neutral manner.
|
>> One only has to read the tone of the "what happened next" column to realise
>> this is not exactly written or complied in a neutral manner.
Ok, so if, for the purposes of his question, I accept that Olaf is biased where are my less coloured sources?
|
>> >> One only has to read the tone of the "what happened next" column to
>> realise
>> >> this is not exactly written or complied in a neutral manner.
>>
>> Ok, so if, for the purposes of his question, I accept that Olaf is biased
>> where are my less coloured sources?
I would guess that TfL or the Met have those details.
Edit
Although clearly Olaf is not happy with either of them or the CPS, which I assume is why he compiles his own list
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 21:16
|
>> I would guess that TfL or the Met have those details.
>>
>> Edit
>>
>> Although clearly Olaf is not happy with either of them or the CPS, which I
>> assume is why he compiles his own list
I too would be surprised if TfL/Met/CPS don't have numbers, but are they available to Johnny Public?
|
>> Although clearly Olaf is not happy with either of them or the CPS, which I
>> assume is why he compiles his own list
It's no secret that Olaf is compiling this from the perspective of a road safety campaigner and to that extent his conclusions carry a health warning.
OTOH he cannot make up accidents and as his 'day job' is financial journalism he's a likely to be a competent processor and analyst of statistics.
Unless anyone can link to something better he's all we've got.
Ignoring him completely is at level of sticking fingers in ears and shouting la la la!
|
>>The only way to find out is by analysis of individual accidents and other than Olaf Storbeck's spreadsheet* I'm 'stuck for weft'.
I wish you wouldn't keep doing these little inserts; whether its the "oh so clever" Latin, the rather pointless French or the incomprehensible slang; "stuck for weft" is just the latest. That last I've googled and still have no idea what it means.
If you're doing it in some belief that it helps your communication be understood then I can only tell you that for me it is a barrier. If its to appear clever, then that isn't the word that I would use.
However, I am assuming that this latest phrase means something around having no sources of evidence or facts.
In which case, given that you are unable to answer simple questions about what happened in these accidents, where does your firm belief in the generally reasonable and legal behaviour of cyclists come from? Or, indeed, any of the other statements you've made on the matter.
And given that a fair amount of these accidents seem to involve cyclists to the left of the truck, why doesn't the cyclist either not go there or brake when they notice a truck doing it to them. "I was in the right" doesn't seem to be a very helpful position to take as you're splatted on the tarmac.
|
I wish you wouldn't keep doing these little inserts; whether its the "oh so clever"
>> Latin,the rather pointless French
m.youtube.com/watch?v=Jet29TQv2uA ;)
or the incomprehensible slang; "stuck for weft" is just the
>> latest. That last I've googled and still have no idea what it means.
>>
i assumed it was a typo, as all searches said it was related to the making of cloth.
|
Interestingly, if you put "stuck for weft" (with quotes) into Google there is only one hit. Google doesn't have many one hit wonders.
And that's something to do with one forum member offering another his washing to do, if I'm reading it right.
"If your stuck for weft flashy you can pop over and pick mine up".
www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f66/weather-29920-114.html
|
|
The warp and the weft are the two starnds in weaving, the warp rolled on the loom, and the weft woven through it. So if you're stopped or stuck for weft, you have run out of the necessary, and can't go on. Another one from the Lancashire and Yorkshire weaving area is "stopped for bobbins" - "I cannot carry on spinning, since I have no bobbins to spin to"
|
Well you live and learn.
Thanks.
I kind of prefer "stopped for bobbins" though.
|
>> Well you live and learn.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I kind of prefer "stopped for bobbins" though.
As above, a northern colloquialism. I stick things like that in occasionally for a bit of fun.
You also accused me of Latin. Never taught it at school but while not a lawyer myself I spent my entire career working with the bu**ers. Stuff used as professional shorthand rubbed off on me.
French? not sure. Used today as I was quoting French waiting staff. The subject was obvious and I'd be surprised if either vous or connaissez stretched anybody's schoolboy memory.
However if I'm guilty of pretentious language then multiple charges of using 'outwith' while not a Scot need to be taken into account too.
|
>> As above, a northern colloquialism. I stick things like that in occasionally for a bit
>> of fun.
Oh my aching sides.
>> You also accused me of Latin. Never taught it at school but while not a
>> lawyer myself I spent my entire career working with the bu**ers. Stuff used as
>> professional shorthand rubbed off on me.
Since I presume your intention was communication, that "shorthand" isn't work out that well.
>> French? not sure. .......
" 'pour encourager les autres'" Why? It doesn't enhance or simplify communication, as you must be aware, its not shorter or easier to write, it doesn't imply or include anything additional. So why?
|
|
Oh do stop scolding FMR. How can you see poor old Bromptonaut as pretentious? Really.
|
AC, this is a discussion subject with views and counter views and it is 2 minutes to 6.
Thus I suspect that its not your kind of thread and you may find somewhere in another thread more your style and type.
Being here will only upset you, what with all the facts and things.
|
>> Thus I suspect that its not your kind of thread and you may find somewhere in another thread more your style and type.
They're all my type of threads if I post in them my son. Just sod off yourself, cheeky so and so.
You very clearly accused Bromptonaut of writing or citing pretentiously. He isn't guilty and I twitted you for it.
|
You see, I did warn you.
Now why don't you run along and find where I very clearly accused omp of pretentiousness.
Or perhaps just trot along to the 20mph thread. You were doing so well there.
|
>> Now why don't you run along and find where I very clearly accused omp of pretentiousness.
Look it up yourself you idle sod. It's right there a bit upthread.
'Run along' indeed! I can outpatronize you any time FMR, but really can't be bothered.
You're a good cat though, all that aside. Sprauncy. A real PITA. Sort of the real thing almost sometimes. You can't help being a bit sort of environmentally foreign.
(That's enough patronage - Ed.)
|
|
No wonder you admit to having your 5th vodka already.
|
>>Since I presume your intention was communication, that "shorthand" isn't work out that well.
Que?
Seriously which bit of Latin do you mean?
>> " 'pour encourager les autres'" Why? It doesn't enhance or simplify communication, as you must
Voltaire's commentary on the execution of Admiral Byng and suggestion that sacrifice of a few high ups (or not so high ups) helps morale. In another tone, the executions will continue until morale improves.
An ironic observation on motivation/discipline of staff or citizens
Are you suggesting I underestimate the audience's education?
|
This is a difficult, contentious issue, the result of a highly variable, very complex road network, inner-city alleys to suburban NSL dual carriageways with everything in between, having to be shared by so many different categories of traffic which are absolutely certain to misunderstand one another's intentions all the time.
Cyclists and pedestrians are the most vulnerable... but you wouldn't want your new shiny limo to rub up against a tipper truck on a roundabout, would you?
I feel that Pat and other Hell Drivers on this site must have a particular perspective on this. I have a friend, a cousin-in-law, who is a regular London cyclist, and I can't help worrying about him a bit. He's very bright but not a vehicle or road person, a careful driver who doesn't like cars.
All I can say for myself is that I've nearly always got away with it over 55 years, never written a car off (although damn nearly, that cost the insurance a bomb) or killed anyone or sustained serious injury. Blind luck, skill and intelligence. We all need those.
|
|
It is simple, lorries have blind spots which the driver can not see. Cyclists get in these blind spots and get crushed. I have driven lorries, cyclists are their own worst enemy. I also ride a bike, I will not get crushed, knowledge is safety.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 16:51
|
Cycling Corner could be a welcome addition to Car4play as there are a number of us cyclists here. But 90% of the posts seem to be about someone who was killed with a lengthy slanging match about who was to blame.
We don't spend most of the time discussing car or motorcycle fatalities.
|
I missed the "lengthy slanging match".
It seemed like a reasonable discussion to me.
|
>> I missed the "lengthy slanging match".
Keep tuned to this channel.....
|
>> I missed the "lengthy slanging match".
>>
>> It seemed like a reasonable discussion to me.
>>
I was talking in general rather than specifically. Cycling corner is mostly a rather depressing read.
|
>> We don't spend most of the time discussing car or motorcycle fatalities.
>>
Because we don't have any militant car or motorcycle users.
Bromp, have you thought of approaching a local transport company to organise a safety demo for your cycling pals? All you need is the static use of a full sized lorry for half an hour put one of them in the drivers seat and get another to push a bike around the lorry, they may be surprised at the view from the cab. The local traffic police might want to get involved or even organise it. It might even save a life.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 22 Jun 15 at 19:17
|
|
It isn't militant cyclists that are the problem, it's the cyclist haters.
|
>> It isn't militant cyclists that are the problem, it's the cyclist haters.
Nah its the "all cyclists are blameless" crowd to blame.
|
|
If you mean me, I don't hate anyone. I do however think that cyclists should be better educated about the safe use of the roads.
|
|
Not to mention drivers. Not that you did:)
|
>> If you mean me, I don't hate anyone. I do however think that cyclists should
>> be better educated about the safe use of the roads.
I've no argument with that but it's not just a cyclist problem. The truckers in London have something to learn too.
|
|
I hope you don't mean me, I thought I was being dead reasonable.
|
>> Because we don't have any militant car or motorcycle users.
Oh yes we do, at least so far as cars are concerned.
>> Bromp, have you thought of approaching a local transport company to organise a safety demo
>> for your cycling pals?
Have you actually read ANYTHING I've posted on the subject? Must have mentioned at least half a dozen times I've actually sat in the cab of a Keltbray tip truck. I understand how little (and how much) the driver can see.
Neither have I denied that some of the deaths are down to cyclists putting themselves in a blind spot.
I do though think that's not the whole story.
|
|
I'd be genuinely interested in your response to mine of 17:36 or thereabouts.
|
>> I'd be genuinely interested in your response to mine of 17:36 or thereabouts.
Sorry I was (a) cooking and (b) eating.
Will deal shortly.
|
>> >> I'd be genuinely interested in your response to mine of 17:36 or thereabouts.
>> Sorry I was (a) cooking and (b) eating.
well at least you got that in the right order. ;p
|
>> Have you actually read ANYTHING I've posted on the subject? Must have mentioned at least
>> half a dozen times I've actually sat in the cab of a Keltbray tip truck.
>> I understand how little (and how much) the driver can see.
>>
Remember I am very old, my memory is turning into a forgetery. :-)
|
|
Is the cycle / lorry problem worse in London than other cities? I ask because the Edinburgh cyclists seem to be more concerned about tram tracks and I have not heard that there is a specific problem elsewhere. London is not the only place with lots of cyclists, lorries, buses, and traffic.
|
>> Is the cycle / lorry problem worse in London than other cities?
I'm not aware of a similar problem in say Manchester or Birmingham. Is there redevelopment in other UK cities on the sheer scale seen in London?
Was on Chancery Lane last week for first time since we closed the office there in July 13. The scale of subsequent redevelopment, including our old building, has to be seen to be believed. Probably 4 construction sites, all demolition or rebuilds in existing 'shell' on a road a few hundred yards long and with 25% of it's street frontage being part of Lincoln's Inn and subject to listing etc.
I suspect the combination of that level of activity AND cycling that's probably trebled or more over ten or so years is unique,
London has tram issues to (in Croydon) as does Manchester. I think there's been a cycle fatality on Manchester's system, with subsequent RAIB report, but googling's not finding it for me ATM.
|
>> Is the cycle / lorry problem worse in London than other cities?
Yes, too many cyclists in London. So probability of accident is much higher.
Govt should encourage people to NOT to ride bikes in London (unless there is a dedicated cycle lane separate from vehicle traffic).
|
>> Govt should encourage people to NOT to ride bikes in London (unless there is a
>> dedicated cycle lane separate from vehicle traffic).
Classic British attitude:
I don't do it, have no interest in it and might at a pinch be marginally inconvenienced by it.
Answer? Ban it or tax it.
|
>> Answer? Ban it or tax it.
Quite Bromptonaut. We often seem a nation of ignorant, half-blind faffing prats.
The roads and their traffic mix have been changing constantly throughout my life. There's no end in sight yet. Sensible road users just adapt. It's quite easy really if you aren't rigid or thick.
|
|
If you wanted to see an inner city building site the Edinburgh tram fiasco was a classic, and an extension is on the cards. First dig up the roads to move all the services from under the route. Then dig them up again to lay the tracks, (twice in some places due to errors). When that is finished lnstall the poles and overhead power cables, then the tram stops. That does wonders for the traffic flow.
|
Victim named as Ying Tao, 26. An Oxbridge grad, originally from China, working for management consultants PWC.
www.standard.co.uk/news/london/cyclist-26-killed-in-bank-tipper-truck-crash-was-newly-married-oxford-graduate-10339057.html
Young, female and foreign; a characteristic shared by a disproportionate number of deceased in these truck collisions.
Location seems to be junction of Princes St and the Bank 'circus'. Now look at Princes St approaching that junction:
goo.gl/maps/diZua
And what do we find? Our old friend the advanced stop line with entry via a kerbside 'gate'. So you have a cycle lane which everybody, including Highway Code rule 61, tells you can make your journey safer, leading you into what is literally death alley.
I wouldn't go up there but I'm a 55yo experienced driver and a sinewy, cynical, old (and no longer bold) cyclist. But if I were not? I'm convinced this sort of infrastructural 'farcility' accounts for a significant number of those incidents where cyclist has ventured up side of trucks.
Do we really just chalk these things up to Darwin or should get road designers out there providing routes that are actually safe - even if that means staying in the traffic?
|
|
All those streets round the Bank used to be my daily stamping ground... worked out of Cannon St for a couple of years and gnawed my fingernails over the jalopy parked on yellow lines. It could cost you, that, even back in the day...
|
|
That makes a change, no mention of the lorry driver, this time it's the road designers fault.
|
>> That makes a change, no mention of the lorry driver, this time it's the road
>> designers fault.
Positing an alternative theory.
Appreciate thinking before posting doesn't suit everyone here but I thought I'd give it a try.
|
>> That makes a change, no mention of the lorry driver, this time it's the road
>> designers fault.
t***.
|
|
As always your opinion is welcome.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 23 Jun 15 at 20:33
|
Thought you'd prefer it to a frownie.
I was busy at the time, but a witty, well argued response would have come to the same thing:)
|
|
You could look at this document: www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/industrial-hgv-task-force-review-of-first-six-months-of-operations.pdf TfL identify construction and waste industry elements as the main source of danger to other, vulnerable, road users.
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 09:00
|
>> identify construction and waste industry elements as the main source
Actually, going by Appendix A, its actually "Other Vehicles".
|
>Young, female and foreign; a characteristic shared by a disproportionate number of deceased in these truck collisions.
And what in God's name does that mean?
Young, foreign females are more vulnerable? They are magnetically attracted to trucks?
Which of female, foreign and young do you see as being the key issue?
And where did you obtain this statistic?
>> tells you can make your journey safer, leading you into what is literally death alley.
I'd appreciate a pointer to your source leading you to "dub it" Death Alley. I think you might need to check up on your use of "literally" as well.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 13:49
|
>> And what in God's name does that mean?
>>
>> Young, foreign females are more vulnerable?
That category of rider features disproportionatley amongst the victims. The question is why?
|
>>That category of rider features disproportionatley amongst the victims.
Point me at a source, I'd be interested to understand a bit more.
|
>> Point me at a source, I'd be interested to understand a bit more.
later.
|
>> Point me at a source, I'd be interested to understand a bit more.
I refer you to the spreadsheet mentioned previously:
tinyurl.com/phrbvpm
Of 8 deaths so far this year 6 are female. Three of them, Ying Tao (Chinese) Federica Baldassa (Italian) and Claire Hitier-Abadie (French) were foreign. With exception of Moira Gemmel, 55, all the women were 32 or younger.
Last year's were male dominated but during the clusterfu** of 8 in the last few months of 2013 three were young/foreign.
Looking back further you'll find quite a few more.
Not perhaps so many as anecdote/press coverage has suggested but enough I think to bear out my point.
|
>> Not perhaps so many as anecdote/press coverage has suggested but enough I think to bear out my point.
Absolutely not. Unless you also accept that we could reduce cycle deaths by 75% by banning their use in November.
Your point is spurious and distracting to the main issues and a typical misuse of statistics of which you should be above.
3 were foreign? Of what statistical relevance is that? What about the month where no foreign people died?
Ridiculous.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 17:35
|
In fact ridiculous to such an extent that i suspect you wouldn't have posted it yourself if you had thought beyond media kerfuffle and gossip.
It doesn't say much for the substance behind your opinions in this area or your threshold for fact.
|
>> Govt should encourage people to NOT to ride bikes in London (unless there is a dedicated cycle lane separate from vehicle traffic).
Don't know why someone found it offensive! I think some members might be using this feature as defacto "disagree" or "thumbs down" button.
Encouraging something is different from legal obligations. I didn't say govt. should pass law to prevent riding bike in London.
I do ride (mountain) bike myself but I wouldn't do so in London. Simply too risky.
The greatest safety for cyclists could be obtained by separating cyclists from motor traffic (and pedestrians).
Every loss of life is a sad thing but sometimes people need to understand the risk of their actions and foresee the consequences of such acts.
I often commute to London and the way most cyclists ride there, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more fatalities.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 14:06
|
A great article on what it's like to be at the sharp end of a bunch sprint in a professional bike race, by mark Cavendish -
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/33222937
|
Cyclists seem to be the target of some real vitriol in the press and judging by the comments attached to the articles, many would like to see them off the road.
The old excuses are trotted out; “they don’t pay road taxâ€, “they don’t obey the rules of the road†etc. etc. Of course motorists have not paid road tax since the 30’s and many cars don’t even pay excise duty. How many cars speed regularly, even if just creeping over the limit without realising?
There appears to be a trend to demonise cyclists to a point when drivers will care less about them then they will to rubbish on the road.
With that attitude it is not surprising to read of drivers laughing on line when they run cyclists off the road or thugs getting out of vehicles to beat up cyclists that might make the wrong move at a junction. I regularly see car drivers passing cyclists without yielding an inch, yet for horses they will cross to the other lane.
Councils also need to take responsibility too, for example, it is madness setting a cycle lane to run contra to motor traffic on a one way street.
Last edited by: zippy on Tue 23 Jun 15 at 21:40
|
>> Councils also need to take responsibility too, for example, it is madness setting a cycle
>> lane to run contra to motor traffic on a one way street.
Taking London as an example I'd say it works well enough on quiet streets like Endsleigh Gardens or Newton St. OTOH just watching bikes use the contra-flow bus lane on Theobalds Rd/Bloomsbury Way gives me the willies!!
It could (and should) have been properly set up for bike use with a bit more segregation. But effectively surrendering to it's illegal use is asking for accidents.
Another case of dangerous by design.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 23 Jun 15 at 21:58
|
>>I regularly see car drivers passing cyclists without yielding an inch, yet for horses they will cross to the other lane
Oh I've been sat on a horse and had a wing mirror clip by foot. Equally I've been sat behind two horses who won't assist me in passing them.
The way road users behave towards each other is beyond daft.
People seem to be able to walk along a crowded footpath dodging other people ok. They manage to walk in and out of cinemas, sports grounds etc. and dodge each other.
So why can't they live and let live when they are using the roads?
|
Am sure I have posted on this subject before but on my cycle commute to work yesterday, on the roads through traffic, I passed a gut on one of these 3 wheel sitting down bikes.
Now the tallest part of the bike was the wheels apart from a pole with a flag on it.
I am all in favour of everyone sharing the road etc etc but surely a risk assessment needs to be taken at which point you would say to yourself, wait a minute, I am actually below the level of vision for anyone looking out their windows, possibly their mirrors also and you just wouldn't do it!
Fine for on a private or cycle track or whatever but not for mixing with vehicles of all sizes on a major route in and out of Glasgow? And I know sometimes these are used by people with disabilities but that does not take away the inherent risk factor of a vehicle not knowing you are alongside them?
|
|
For a few days I was driving a substantial tractor and trailer in a situation where I had to cross an open cast coal mine haul road. The tractor was fitted with a tall pole and flag, as were all the normal sized vehicles. I felt very vulnerable when in the vicinity of the huge mine dump trucks which dwarfed the tractor. The recumbent bikes remind me of the Sinclair C5s, another lethal contraption in traffic. You would be lucky to be able to say "But I had a flag" after a collision.
|
My next bike will probably be a recumbent trike. As one ages one gets less stable balancing on two wheels, the days when I could bang handlebars in a road race bunch are decades behind me now and something more sure footed and relaxing (And very fast by all accounts, due to much less wind drag).
There is a thriving 'Bent scene in the UK and you don't seem to hear of any safety issues. Modern LED flashing lights are incredibly bright and I'd prefer one of those stuck on a mast to a flag. Watch this space.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 18:29
|
>> There is a thriving 'Bent scene in the UK and you don't seem to hear
>> of any safety issues. Modern LED flashing lights are incredibly bright and I'd prefer one
>> of those stuck on a mast to a flag. Watch this space.
I think riding a recumbent in heavy traffic would, or would come very close, to a decline on my risk assessment. Consequence same as that on a normal bike but probability too close to tweaking the meter's end stop.
OTOH they're fascinating machines. Bikes, trikes where the single wheel leads and trikes in mould of a Morgan car where it trails. Various different forms of steering from relatively conventional handlebars through Harley style 'ape hangers' to toggles under the seat. Being close to road they're streamlined and in right hands incredibly fast.
They also open the door to cycling for a range of disabled folks who'd never feel the joy of two (or three) human powered wheels. Some are hand propelled. Others offer a seat to those who's disability whether visual, physical or mental mean ordinary bikes are out of the question.
|
>> OTOH they're fascinating machines. Bikes, trikes where the single wheel leads and trikes in mould of a Morgan car where it trails. Various different forms of steering from relatively conventional handlebars through Harley style 'ape hangers' to toggles under the seat.
Yeah, all that and more with electrical help, but the real saving really isn't worth it. All sorts of small economical cars are better, almost as cheap to run, maybe cheaper, and they are sort of rather embarrassing little cars that cost peanuts to run without making you get in the way. Not even embarrassing really, no need to get in the way with them .
|
>> Yeah, all that and more with electrical help, but the real saving really isn't worth
>> it. All sorts of small economical cars are better, almost as cheap to run, maybe
>> cheaper, and they are sort of rather embarrassing little cars that cost peanuts to run
>> without making you get in the way. Not even embarrassing really, no need to get
>> in the way with them .
Electric? Cars?
YOU'RE MEANT TO PEDAL IT.....
|
>> YOU'RE MEANT TO PEDAL IT.....
I remember those things and their bedraggled flags jousting through the Est End trying to make a living without killing anyone.
They were usually in bike lanes though when they weren't broken down. They didn't get in the way Alhamdulll'Illah cause, knowImean?
I mean what a moronic thing to do, run over one of those.
|
Held the office door open today so a colleague could get his recumbent through; not easy! It's one of these:
www.advancedvelodesign.com/windcheetah/windcheetah-recumbent-trike-clubsport.php
He claims 'it's huge fun to ride being very fast and agile', although he usually only rides it when the weather's ok - too close to the puddles when it's not. And he makes the most of the Kennet & Avon canal towpath and/or Two Tunnels route, so relatively risk-free I guess.
EDIT: jeez - I've just seen the price!!
Last edited by: Focusless on Wed 24 Jun 15 at 20:49
|
>> And he makes the most of the Kennet & Avon canal towpath and/or Two
>> Tunnels route,
Picture from inside one of the Two Tunnels:
i969.photobucket.com/albums/ae173/focushj/Two%20Tunnels%20Bath_zpsv43mz3gl.jpg
That section is 1800m long I think he said.
|
|
I thought people might be interested to hear my recent experience cutting these super-duper security D-locks that people use to lock up their precious bikes. A 4" angle grinder with a metal cutting disc goes through them in under 20 seconds. It doesn't matter what the make is (I had several to do).
|
Another London Tipper Death - Bromptonaut
