Preventing lorry vs. bike collisions

spen666

amnezia wrote:

Anyone that wants apply to the cycle to work scheme should have to attend a mandatory road safety session in order to qualify.

There could be some mileage in this idea- but one issue would be who pays for course and where are courses held- if not near enough it will just oput people off buying bikes

spen666

Il Principe wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

amnezia wrote:

Anyone that wants apply to the cycle to work scheme should have to attend a mandatory road safety session in order to qualify.

See, I think that's a really good idea. Those of us who know what we're doing may learn something, and it won't be a big hassle, and it may save lives.

Whereas I think it might just put people off. I seriously think that more should be done to discourage people from driving in Central London. So limit the hours HGV's are allowed to be on the roads. Also hike the CC massively and link it to earnings - the more you earn the more you pay. At the moment it's hugely weighted in favour of mr fat cat who can happily cruise to work in his 7 Series. All this money could then be ploughed back into PT (assuming of course that tfl can find contractors to work with who can actually do their f*cking job, as oppose to taking our money and then taking the p1ss).

Of course this will never happen.

I think this is potentially a very bad idea

If you limit the hours HGVs are allowed on the roads, that will increase the pressure on them to use the limited time available to them more- thus driving faster,taking more chances etc

If you mean limiting hours - eg nort in rush hour- this just makes it more dangerous outside of rush hour- you are displacing risk. I would also venture that outside of rush hour with lwess traffic to slow the HGVs up, they will go faster and make roads more dangerous for cyclists

Tonymufc

spen666 wrote:

amnezia wrote:

Anyone that wants apply to the cycle to work scheme should have to attend a mandatory road safety session in order to qualify.

There could be some mileage in this idea- but one issue would be who pays for course and where are courses held- if not near enough it will just oput people off buying bikes

Just playing devils advocate here, but wouldn't this discourage new cyclists. For what its worth I do think its a good idea.

amnezia

Tonymufc wrote:

spen666 wrote:

amnezia wrote:

Anyone that wants apply to the cycle to work scheme should have to attend a mandatory road safety session in order to qualify.

There could be some mileage in this idea- but one issue would be who pays for course and where are courses held- if not near enough it will just oput people off buying bikes

Just playing devils advocate here, but wouldn't this discourage new cyclists. For what its worth I do think its a good idea.

Is it really worth having cyclists on road who wouldn't attend a road safety session? The city police visit companies in The City giving FREE road safety sessions for cyclists, i attended one. Why couldn't this be integrated into the cycle to work scheme?

il_principe

Greg66 wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Also hike the CC massively and link it to earnings - the more you earn the more you pay. At the moment it's hugely weighted in favour of mr fat cat who can happily cruise to work in his 7 Series.

F*ck off, commie.

If you like Russia so much, why don't you move to Moscow, etc, etc.

Yeah I felt a bit wrong writing that, I came over all Biondino - no hang on, that doesn't sound right. :shock:

greg66_tri_v2.0

Il Principe wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Also hike the CC massively and link it to earnings - the more you earn the more you pay. At the moment it's hugely weighted in favour of mr fat cat who can happily cruise to work in his 7 Series.

F*ck off, commie.

If you like Russia so much, why don't you move to Moscow, etc, etc.

Yeah I felt a bit wrong writing that, I came over all Biondino - no hang on, that doesn't sound right. :shock:

I really, really, don't want to ask. :shock:

goco

zanes wrote:

Thing is, we can all sit round and discuss ever cleverer ways of alerting lorry drivers/restricting them/training them but I think simple education of cyclists ((turning) lorries = DANGER) would go a long way. I've watched people on bikes under take lorries indicating left, follow them to uni and point out what they did and get met with a shrug and a "oh, what could have happened??" look. These people just don't (for whatever reason) realise that a truck can do real harm to a cyclist in other ways than a simple head on collision.

I wonder how many incidents could be prevented by cyclists staying the hell away from trucks that are signalling/manouvering (although in london etc I guess this might be difficult). Obviously this wouldn't stop the "lorry up the backside" problems, but I'm not sure there's any statistics on what the lorry was doing when it struck a cyclist.

This. Not wanting to absolve the lorry drivers of any blame, but the more we stay away from anything big, the less likely we are to be hurt by them. And this is all about education and awareness. A bit of high impact, visible advertising (ie not a 3am on ITV3) about what can happen when cyclist meets truck would go a long way to educating people about the dangers.

I started commuting by bike about 6 months ago, and the thing that has opened my eyes the most about the dangers of undertaking has been reading about the tragic incidents where cyclists have died. More publicity and details around these would be a huge help. Of course there should be action on the HGV side, but this is something we can all do for ourselves. Personally I wouldn't dream of undertaking an indicating bike, let alone a car or HGV, and will only filter past when traffic is stationary and will remain so until I'm at the front.

owenlars

Surely the simplest way to improve this is for cyclists not to go up the inside of a bus,van or lorry indicating left, moving or doing both. In fact try and avoid doing it ever but I know it's difficult.

This won't stop being run down from behind, run off the road by someone forcing themselves into a gap that's too small or being taken out by a determined left hooker. It should however help to reduce those horrible accidents where the rear wheels run you over as a lorry turns left or you get squished into the railings put there to protect pedestrians.

We all need to use our heads, cycling around with brain in neutral is a recipe for disaster!

amnezia

owenlars wrote:

Surely the simplest way to improve this is for cyclists not to go up the inside of a bus,van or lorry indicating left, moving or doing both. In fact try and avoid doing it ever but I know it's difficult.

This won't stop being run down from behind, run off the road by someone forcing themselves into a gap that's too small or being taken out by a determined left hooker. It should however help to reduce those horrible accidents where the rear wheels run you over as a lorry turns left or you get squished into the railings put there to protect pedestrians.

We all need to use our heads, cycling around with brain in neutral is a recipe for disaster!

The problem is getting that information out to people who don't frequent forums like these.

goco

amnezia wrote:

owenlars wrote:

Surely the simplest way to improve this is for cyclists not to go up the inside of a bus,van or lorry indicating left, moving or doing both. In fact try and avoid doing it ever but I know it's difficult.

This won't stop being run down from behind, run off the road by someone forcing themselves into a gap that's too small or being taken out by a determined left hooker. It should however help to reduce those horrible accidents where the rear wheels run you over as a lorry turns left or you get squished into the railings put there to protect pedestrians.

We all need to use our heads, cycling around with brain in neutral is a recipe for disaster!

The problem is getting that information out to people who don't frequent forums like these.

Hard hitting adverts of the sort that were used for driving without seatbelts (remember pizza on the windscreen?), driving while tired and drink driving. But I guess there isn't the political will to push this as reducing cyclist injury statistics isn't a vote winning policy.

s-worksenduro

Why can they not change the traffic lights so that there is, for example, a blue light, which would only allow cyclists through and give them a ten second headstart? This would allow the cyclists who are in a vulnerable position to move off ahead of the traffic behind. Stricter enforcement would be needed for red light jumpers who would use this light for themselves with more cameras fitted at traffic lights.

jedster

To be completely frank, I feel that I am able to manage the risk of trucks through awareness, caution and road positioning.

I think this is the best way of avoiding cyclists being killed by trucks.

I think ideas like banning trucks or restricting them to night time would be significantly more expensive to our economy (i.e., make people poorer) than banning cyclists. I don't think we want to get into that debate with the media, legislators, etc.

I'm all for stressing cyclist awareness in truck driver training. I think the penalties for not paying full attention to the chance of a cyclist incident at junctions should be stiffer.

But ultimately cyclists have to take responsibility for their own safety and not rely on proximity sensors, extra mirrors or driver behaviour to protect them.

It's just like the way that ultimately women probably couldn't rely on men to take a contraceptive pill...

J

il_principe

jedster wrote:

I think ideas like banning trucks or restricting them to night time would be significantly more expensive to our economy (i.e., make people poorer) than banning cyclists. I don't think we want to get into that debate with the media, legislators, etc.

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

It's all well and good to take responsibility for your own safety (and I see a lot of cyclists that ride like they're invincible) but bottom line is some of these HGV's are simply far too big to be on London's roads, especially narrow roads like Weston St.

Porgy

Would this have anything to do cyclists being killed by lorries?
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/b ... unit-23738
http://www.movingtargetzine.com/article ... ps-protest

and found this:

It is well worth writing to your MP, asking them to sign the motion. The easiest way is to use the Write to them web-site, asking them to sign ‘EDM 2144 (Cyclist’s safety in London)’.

Who else knew about this EDM?

jedster

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Yeah, IP, I realise that and in case it is not crashingly obvious I'm not suggesting cyclists should be banned from roads! The thing is that peds walking a long a train track wouldn't kill anyone but it is not allowed. Cyclists riding on the hard shoulder of a motorway wouldn't kill anyone but it is not allowed.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives. I think if we get into a P1ssing contest about who is mpore important to keep on the road we won't like the result...

J

holybinch

jedster wrote:

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives.

rail, rail, rail...

Tonymufc

jedster wrote:

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Yeah, IP, I realise that and in case it is not crashingly obvious I'm not suggesting cyclists should be banned from roads! The thing is that peds walking a long a train track wouldn't kill anyone but it is not allowed. Cyclists riding on the hard shoulder of a motorway wouldn't kill anyone but it is not allowed.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives. I think if we get into a P1ssing contest about who is mpore important to keep on the road we won't like the result...

J

+1

Tonymufc

holybinch wrote:

jedster wrote:

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives.

rail, rail, rail...

Haven't seen many supermarkets or BIKE SHOPS that are next to a railway line. A huge amount of freight goes by rail everyday but unfortunately at some point that same freight has to go by road.

_Brun_

holybinch wrote:

jedster wrote:

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives.

rail, rail, rail...

You're suggesting trains should be used around central London?

:?

Kieran_Burns

_Brun_ wrote:

holybinch wrote:

jedster wrote:

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives.

rail, rail, rail...

You're suggesting trains should be used around central London?

:?

They would be called trams...

davmaggs

A lot of trucks would love to travel at night, but actually they aren't allowed. Not many residents want trucks queuing up outside supermarkets or unloading on building sites as they sleep.

I wonder if the forum has any graphic designers who would be willing to put together a flyer of key commuting tips for newbies that could be offered to the big chains. It doesn't have to be doom and gloom so they wouldn't feel negatively towards distributing it. Keep it simple so its not expensive to make and it would probably work

il_principe

Tonymufc wrote:

holybinch wrote:

jedster wrote:

But cyclists don't kill people,
Truckers do.

Trucks perform a crucial economic role for which there aren't many alternatives.

rail, rail, rail...

Haven't seen many supermarkets or BIKE SHOPS that are next to a railway line. A huge amount of freight goes by rail everyday but unfortunately at some point that same freight has to go by road.

I'm fully aware of this and not suggesting a blanket ban. But IIRC Dublin has banned HGV's of a certain size from areas of the city centre during certain times... it's not impossible. My issue is more around the size of the vehicles and the roads they are allowed to use...

Gypsum_Fantastic

W1 wrote:

I think that just as much as we need truckers to look out for us, we need to make that as easy for them to do as possible. Maybe more of those events where cyclists can sit in a truck cab and see what's happening would be good?

I think that in some cases (of course not all) it evidently takes two to tango.

jedster wrote:

But ultimately cyclists have to take responsibility for their own safety and not rely on proximity sensors, extra mirrors or driver behaviour to protect them.

+1 to the above

As a commuter mountain biker and roadie when I'm out and about I find the best way of avoiding being run over by a lorry / bus / van is to give them plenty of space and do my best to avoid the things. True Lorries are like velociraptors and I could get taken out by the one that I don't see but it's all about giving yourself the best chance of survival the more of them I avoid the less likely I am to be run over.

Regarding the OP, anything that requires any sort of capital investment from haulage firms / bus companies isn't going to get off the ground in any financial climate let alone this one!

Waving the ban hammer around at lorries / busses / cyclists is just going to p*ss everyone off, take for ever to sort out and die a death five years down the line having swallowed huge amounts of tax money.

Education of the ignorant seems to be a general consensus and I think it could be the way forward. Regarding who should pay / carry out the training surely someone would be able to get a grant for it either from the lottery or the government it's promoting sustainable transport / making people healthier / reducing obesity after all.

Eau Rouge

Il Principe wrote:

I'm fully aware of this and not suggesting a blanket ban. But IIRC Dublin has banned HGV's of a certain size from areas of the city centre during certain times... it's not impossible. My issue is more around the size of the vehicles and the roads they are allowed to use...

Only after they build a tunnel from the orbital motorway to the docks the trucks were all heading to. The trucks they banned were the ones with 5 or more axels (so basically pulling trailers and heading to or from the docks) whereas most of the incidents in London seem to be with 2 or 3 axel trucks.

You could be vindictive, put all the onus on the truck driver to avoid a fatal collision with a cyclist or ped and lock them up if they don't manage it, pretty much only needing to prove it was them driving at the time and the person did indeed die as a result of the collision. Part of me loves that as a law, but only part of me.

Canny Jock

The flier idea could be a good one, but getting it seen by enough of the right people is the problem.

Now I'm sure in London there is an email distribution list which informs people (mainly office managers) about any travel disruptions. I think it comes from the police or TFL. Maybe we could get them to send a cyclist safety flier out and ask for it to be forwarded on to all employees? It could also ask for it to be sent on by individuals to anyone they know who commutes by bike.

Is there a similar list for other towns?

il_principe

This sums things up rather well:

For
 many 
decades 
road
 safety 
measures 
have 
focused
 on 
making 
vehicles 
safer 
to 
crash 
in
 and
 road
 environments
 more
 forgiving
 of 
heedless 
driving. 
Where 
concern 
has
 been
 directed 
at 
vulnerable 
road
 users 
it 
has 
emphasized
 deference 
to 
traffic.

Pedestrians 
are 
channeled
 by 
guard rails 
or 
forced 
to 
use 
underpasses 
and footbridges. 
Cyclists 
are 
offered
 inadequate 
cycle
 paths, encouraged
 to 
believe
 other 
roads
 are
 dangerous, 
and 
urged
 (and 
in 
some 
jurisdictions 
compelled) 
to 
wear 
helmets. 

Policy 
has
 been
 to
 with draw 
vulnerable
 road
users 
from
 the 
threat, 
rather
 than 
to 
withdraw 
the 
threat 
from 
the 
vulnerable.

John Adams - Emeritus Professor of Geography at University College of London

Lifted from here via Moving target

holybinch

Well, what you need is to have a lot of rail freight, then use smaller vehicles to dispatch the goods.
Not to mention that, even if it were lorries doing the dispatch, you would just need a reduce fleet, since you wouldn't have the lorries getting in/out of London.

It's crazy that the amount of freight on rail has diminished so much over the last 30-40 years///

rjsterry

Very neatly summed up. Too many people think of driving as a basic human right as opposed to a luxury, which explains how the above came about. Having studied the development of Bristol's street layout in some detail at university, it gives a pretty good example of how the entire city centre was reorganised around (supposedly) fast moving traffic, with the exclusion of pedestrians to elevated walkways, footbridges and underpasses.

These were never finished (recession in early 1970s) and deteriorated into places to be mugged which have now been replaced with numerous street level crossings, which of course reduce the dual carriageway inner ring road to a start-stop carpark. I could go on, but I'm heading OT and probably boring people.

Eau Rouge

goco wrote:

Hard hitting adverts of the sort that were used for driving without seatbelts (remember pizza on the windscreen?), driving while tired and drink driving. But I guess there isn't the political will to push this as reducing cyclist injury statistics isn't a vote winning policy.

It's not (just) a lack of political will or vote, it's pure cold economics. The number of people being killed on the roads is of the order of 3000 people a year (currently declining) and only about 100 of those are cyclists, across the whole of the UK.
The figures for the cost of a campign vs the number of lives it would save do not compare with the same figures for excessive speed, drink/drug driving or probably even seat belts.
In terms of road safety a life is a life, cyclist, driver, victim, perpetrator. it's hard to argue with it.

the_hundredth_idiot

Canny Jock wrote:

The flier idea could be a good one, but getting it seen by enough of the right people is the problem.

On the traffic light pole? A laminated poster (or even a proper road sign), eye level, facing towards where a cyclist sits waiting at the red. Something simple (a graphic or a short phrase: "The lorry driver to your right probably hasn't seen you." or "What would happen if that lorry to your right turned left?"*) which warns of the dangers of being sat there** with a large vehicle to your right

* there's a very good reason why I'm not in a more creative profession :?
** cycle lane, gutter, etc