Cyclists and lorries:

AndyManc

Amy Aeron-Thomas from the road accident charity RoadPeace says:

I don't put much faith in education because I think the drivers are under pressure. There's no excuse for any driver to be on the road with a blind spot. They can be designed out. We don't allow blind drivers so why should we allow the equivalent?


Full article here ;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/jul/02/cycling-lorries-women-roads


.

Gussio

Recognising that large vehicles have blind spots and not cycling up the inside is a good to step towards staying safer on the roads. All too familiar sight this morning of a girl just about getting away with riding between a bus and the pavement as the lights changed from red to green. It just isn't worth it. By all means educate lorry drivers and add bits of kit to the HGVs, but as cyclists we have to take responsibility for our own actions too.

Aguila

+1

Most important thing I have learned from this board is to always stay behing HGVs and buses at lights.

WesternWay

Gussio wrote:

Recognising that large vehicles have blind spots and not cycling up the inside is a good to step towards staying safer on the roads. All too familiar sight this morning of a girl just about getting away with riding between a bus and the pavement as the lights changed from red to green. It just isn't worth it. By all means educate lorry drivers and add bits of kit to the HGVs, but as cyclists we have to take responsibility for our own actions too.

The thing is that even if you were to build a mechanism where you could get rid of all the blindspots, you have absolutely no confidence that they will be used.

I cycle and drive a car and on both of these vehicles I have occasionally done stupid things because I have not been paying attention.

I think that you have to have an attitude by and large that people will do silly things and do your best to make sure that you are in a position to avoid terrible consequences when they do.

The Rookie

The more mirrors you add to a vehicle to elimiante blind spots, the harder you make it for a driver to check them all, we are the vulnerable ones, and Darwin's theories still hold, take care.

I never pass a large vehicle to the left unless its stationary and I am 100% certain it won't be moving until I am fully in front, fortunately on my commute there is only one place and its either a long stationary queue or moving, if its stationary I can see a good 30 seconds ahead and know I have time, if its moving I stay where I am.

Simon

shouldbeinbed

8/13 = 61.5% high but not the over 80% quoted.

how will an external voice system work if you've already been daft enough to roll up the side of a truck - it'll be too late by the time it starts talking to you, will give the driver a false sense of reassurance that he can go safe in the knowledge his intention has been signalled (the little orange flashy light on the corner of the vehicle should be doing that anyway- I assume the voice thing will be activated by a turn signal or it'll be lying a lot of the time when not turning left) and you can no more legislate for the bad vehicle driver than the inexperienced, cocky or optimistic cyclist who still thinks they can give it a go before the truck gets moving.

bikes have blind spots too and naturally when we're going in a direction our primary attention is focussed in that direction. how many mirrors or cctv displays could a driver safely look at without becoming distracted or overwhelmed with info and just as much of a danger to everything else?

If they're checking half a dozen mirrors and blind spots they'll be moving off not looking forwards and as likely to hit the biker turning right across the front of them as squishing the one up their left.

They need our cooperation and we all need to take a shared responsibility for our safety - pointing the finger solely at trucks is wrong and demanding more technology will just make for different accidents and a far greater misplaced sense of complacency all round.

the quoted bit "I don't put much faith in education etc" :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

how do we share our experiences with drivers and them with us if not by education?

And we're going to be obliterating every possible cause of on the road blindness are we????? switching off the sun so as not to be dazzled, special spongy roads to soak up puddles that glare, closing every road with a sharp bend, tearing down country walls and hedges, surgically fitting eyes into the back of humans heads if they ride a bike, mandating cars drive at nights with their lights switched off so as not to dazzle people in front or blind in a rear view mirror (on my bike and in my car)...... a blind spot, or a temporary moment of impaired vision are not the same as blind drivers and such comments as these make the woman look stupid.

shouldbeinbed

a better idea at junctions would be a camera facing the traffic with a CCTV screen showing the queue to the queue - no blind spots and the truck driver would be able to see at a single forward glance if there are bikes up the left and then manually activate a verbal left turn warning device or wait for them to pull off first.

WesternWay

shouldbeinbed

+1

mroli

There are indicators on cars, but two turned without them on me today.

Driving behind a car the other day, it pulled left into a layby without indicating. After that it then tried to pull a U Turn without indicating right in front of me. There were indicators and mirrors on that car.

The best thing is to try and educate drivers AND for cyclists to be patient and sensible and only cycle up the inside of a heavy vehicle if they KNOW they're going to get past/out safely.

daviesee

Two simple rules for road safety:-

1. Assume everyone else on the road is an idiot.

2. Rule 1 always applies.

Underscore

shouldbeinbed wrote:

8/13 = 61.5% high but not the over 80% quoted

8/13 was women killed by HGVs; 80% was cyclists killed by HGVs.

_

sarajoy

shouldbeinbed wrote:

a better idea at junctions would be a camera facing the traffic with a CCTV screen showing the queue to the queue - no blind spots and the truck driver would be able to see at a single forward glance if there are bikes up the left and then manually activate a verbal left turn warning device or wait for them to pull off first.

What's wrong with a nice convex mirror on a post that shows a view from pavement to the side of the vehicles in the queue? No need to faff about with videos and screens:



Aha, just like this: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... alities.do

shouldbeinbed

Underscore wrote:

shouldbeinbed wrote:

8/13 = 61.5% high but not the over 80% quoted

8/13 was women killed by HGVs; 80% was cyclists killed by HGVs.

_

cheers :oops:

but 10/13 is 76%. quite a rounding in the article even for my misreading

shouldbeinbed

sarajoy wrote:

shouldbeinbed wrote:

a better idea at junctions would be a camera facing the traffic with a CCTV screen showing the queue to the queue - no blind spots and the truck driver would be able to see at a single forward glance if there are bikes up the left and then manually activate a verbal left turn warning device or wait for them to pull off first.

What's wrong with a nice convex mirror on a post that shows a view from pavement to the side of the vehicles in the queue? No need to faff about with videos and screens:



Aha, just like this: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... alities.do

the mirrors round my neck of the woods are old, scratched, get fogged up and show a bit of a small and distorted view of the world. A camera and TV (would get nicked and vandalised) could show a lifelike image with less distortion and foreshortening of the distances of things and could zoom a bit to show more clearly what is and isnt there, but even these mirrors would be a quicker, cheaper and just as effective effective attempt at designing out the left turn blind spot as legislating to make a lorry look like a mods mirrored up scooter.

Wallace1492

sarajoy wrote:

shouldbeinbed wrote:

a better idea at junctions would be a camera facing the traffic with a CCTV screen showing the queue to the queue - no blind spots and the truck driver would be able to see at a single forward glance if there are bikes up the left and then manually activate a verbal left turn warning device or wait for them to pull off first.

What's wrong with a nice convex mirror on a post that shows a view from pavement to the side of the vehicles in the queue? No need to faff about with videos and screens:



Aha, just like this: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... alities.do

What if the lorry/vehicle is not at front of queue beside the mirror? Does he have to stop when level with it to look in it to make sure no-one is creeping up the inside? It would be a help, but certainly not a "cure all".

My philosophy is simple:

My first and main objective when cycling is to get to destination alive, and I do what ever is required to achive that. If that means waiting in a queue, so be it, if it means stopping at red lights, fine. It certainly means treating all road users as idiots (apologies to vast majority that are not) and that they have not seen you.

Specialized Needs

shouldbeinbed wrote:

a better idea at junctions would be a camera facing the traffic with a CCTV screen showing the queue to the queue - no blind spots and the truck driver would be able to see at a single forward glance if there are bikes up the left and then manually activate a verbal left turn warning device or wait for them to pull off first.

Same principle, but cheaper and less likely to breakdown, would be to put a mirror there on the post (until it gets vandelised :evil: ). You could also put a couple of notices with it, one to inform motorised traffic of the penalty for rolling into the ASL if the lights are red and another (possibly contravertially) to remind people on bikes that the traffic lights apply to them, too.:roll:

At least that would be a balanced approach.

EDIT: Damn you SJ, you beat me to it!

TommyEss

sarajoy wrote:

shouldbeinbed wrote:

a better idea at junctions would be a camera facing the traffic with a CCTV screen showing the queue to the queue - no blind spots and the truck driver would be able to see at a single forward glance if there are bikes up the left and then manually activate a verbal left turn warning device or wait for them to pull off first.

What's wrong with a nice convex mirror on a post that shows a view from pavement to the side of the vehicles in the queue? No need to faff about with videos and screens:



Aha, just like this: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... alities.do

Yep - they had these in Basel on the traffic light poles - worked a treat (and the cyclists have their own traffic lights, allowing them to set off a few seconds before the other traffic)

sarajoy

Wallace1492 wrote:

What if the lorry/vehicle is not at front of queue beside the mirror? Does he have to stop when level with it to look in it to make sure no-one is creeping up the inside? It would be a help, but certainly not a "cure all".

Well, no - if it wasn't at the front then it's likely the cyclist has already squeezed past it, so in theory it should see the cyclist anyway before passing it.

If someone's creeping up on the inside further back, either the lorry will accelerate away anyway, or won't be turning left there and then and crush the cyclist. If it's turning left by the mirror then yes, why shouldn't the driver glance into it while coming up to the left turn, just to make sure? I doubt the HGV would need to stop (unless of course there's a daft cyclist in there).

Specialized Needs

Wallace1492 wrote:

What if the lorry/vehicle is not at front of queue beside the mirror? Does he have to stop when level with it to look in it to make sure no-one is creeping up the inside? It would be a help, but certainly not a "cure all".

My philosophy is simple:

My first and main objective when cycling is to get to destination alive, and I do what ever is required to achive that. If that means waiting in a queue, so be it, if it means stopping at red lights, fine. It certainly means treating all road users as idiots (apologies to vast majority that are not) and that they have not seen you.

Why does it have to be either/or? I don't think we are arguing that a mirror is a miracle cure? People on bikes have a responsibility for their own safety, true, but that is shared with other road users - in fact we all have some responsibility to everyone else using the road (isn't that what being part of a society is?). Why not have the mirror as well to allow those drivers who do want to, to reduce risks and improve matters. Yes, it won't help in some circumstances, but that doesn't mean it will never help.

dondare

Buses hav low placed driver's cabs with clear visibility all round. Bus drivers can see cyclists that lorry drivers cannot because of this and are therefore much less of a threat.
It would be possible to design all large vehicles this way, but it's unlikely to happen and even if it did there would be old style lorries on all the roads for decades to come.

deptfordmarmoset

Specialized Needs wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

What if the lorry/vehicle is not at front of queue beside the mirror? Does he have to stop when level with it to look in it to make sure no-one is creeping up the inside? It would be a help, but certainly not a "cure all".

My philosophy is simple:

My first and main objective when cycling is to get to destination alive, and I do what ever is required to achive that. If that means waiting in a queue, so be it, if it means stopping at red lights, fine. It certainly means treating all road users as idiots (apologies to vast majority that are not) and that they have not seen you.

Why does it have to be either/or? I don't think we are arguing that a mirror is a miracle cure? People on bikes have a responsibility for their own safety, true, but that is shared with other road users - in fact we all have some responsibility to everyone else using the road (isn't that what being part of a society is?). Why not have the mirror as well to allow those drivers who do want to, to reduce risks and improve matters. Yes, it won't help in some circumstances, but that doesn't mean it will never help.

+1. I don't think there is any one answer that can sort the problem out, but trialling Trixi mirrors is a good way of looking at one possible way of reducing the problem.

leehellcat

daviesee wrote:

Two simple rules for road safety:-

1. Assume everyone else on the road is an idiot.

2. Rule 1 always applies.

This is the only way to stay truly safe, make yourself 100% responsible for your own actions. If you put yourself in a stupid place, expect motorists to treat you like an idiot.

Cycle lanes are IMHO one of the worst ideas invented, it creates segregation between the motorists, and lures cyclists into a false sense of security about their 'right of way', even if the cycle lane does put them in a stupid place.
Common sense, thats all it requires

BentMikey

Funnily enough there's a new TfL viral lorries/cyclist undertaking video due out in a couple of weeks. Filmed on Borough high street.

You guys seen my vid here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12fMTAQyXTI

shouldbeinbed

Wallace1492 wrote:

What if the lorry/vehicle is not at front of queue beside the mirror? Does he have to stop when level with it to look in it to make sure no-one is creeping up the inside? It would be a help, but certainly not a "cure all".

My philosophy is simple:

My first and main objective when cycling is to get to destination alive, and I do what ever is required to achive that. If that means waiting in a queue, so be it, if it means stopping at red lights, fine. It certainly means treating all road users as idiots (apologies to vast majority that are not) and that they have not seen you.

100% agree, I've been very consistent on threads in my criticism of people riding up the side of lorries, RLJ'ing, assuming a god given right to be at the front of any stationary queue etc.

But even if the truckis down the queue and even waiting behind another big vehicle that the driver can't see over, they would still see the monitor/mirror before they made it onto the junction and it would be a single glance in the same direction as they're looking already failsafe check in case there had been someone stupid or inexperienced enough to try a swift undertake, without the need to check regular and blind spot mirrors taking their eyes further off the road and for longer.

maybe I'm lucky or very unobservant but I don't see a whole lot of cyclists rolling up the inside of lorries already in motion.

Porgy

daviesee wrote:

Two simple rules for road safety:-

1. Assume everyone else on the road is a violent idiot.

2. Rule 1 always applies.

Fixed that - after this week - still waiting for the swelling to go down - really f*cked my week up - and haven't been able to cycle for two days. :evil:

ms pepperpot

leehellcat wrote:

daviesee wrote:

Cycle lanes are IMHO one of the worst ideas invented, it creates segregation between the motorists, and lures cyclists into a false sense of security about their 'right of way', even if the cycle lane does put them in a stupid place.
Common sense, thats all it requires

and a surprising number of motorists seem to think that if a cyclist is in a cycle lane they are protected by some magic invisible force field along the boundary so it doesn't matter how close they over take them.

On a more general note I think one of the problems is a lot of cyclists have a false (in my view) idea that they must get to the front of the traffic at all times at lights or at any other junction where there is a queue. There is nothing wrong with staying back and just waiting in the main body of traffic, particularly if it's just a short queue waiting for the lights to change. Getting to the front is unlikely to much difference to when you actually get through the lights (and if you're fast there's a good chance you'll then overtake half the cyclists who've filtered past you while you were waiting)

AndyManc

ms pepperpot wrote:

On a more general note I think one of the problems is a lot of cyclists have a false (in my view) idea that they must get to the front of the traffic at all times at lights or at any other junction where there is a queue. There is nothing wrong with staying back and just waiting in the main body of traffic, particularly if it's just a short queue waiting for the lights to change. Getting to the front is unlikely to much difference to when you actually get through the lights (and if you're fast there's a good chance you'll then overtake half the cyclists who've filtered past you while you were waiting)

The consensus of opinion doesn't support that view, it's why advance stop boxes were designed.

I nearly always get to the front, unless it's not safe to do so.

Ahead of traffic I can set off sooner and position myself safely, if you stay back in the queue you will get a constant flow of vehicles passing you and many will end up cutting you up in their attempts to pass and turn left.

Apart from that, if I wanted to sit in a static queue I'd own a car.

.

greg66_tri_v2.0

AndyManc wrote:

Ahead of traffic I can set off sooner and position myself safely, if you stay back in the queue you will get a constant flow of vehicles passing you

Unless you outrun cars, I suspect you'll find that setting off from the front will also result in "a constant flow of vehicles passing you"

AndyManc

leehellcat wrote:

.

Cycle lanes are IMHO one of the worst ideas invented, it creates segregation between the motorists, and lures cyclists into a false sense of security about their 'right of way', even if the cycle lane does put them in a stupid place.
Common sense, thats all it requires

Totally disagree, a well designed (and enforced) cycle lane infrastructure is essential.

I agree that what we have in the UK today is sud-standard and they will often create more hazards than they attempt to cure, but, other countries have shown how it can be done and their efforts result in a far higher proportion of cyclists on their roads.

AndyManc

Greg66 wrote:

AndyManc wrote:

Ahead of traffic I can set off sooner and position myself safely, if you stay back in the queue you will get a constant flow of vehicles passing you

Unless you outrun cars, I suspect you'll find that setting off from the front will also result in "a constant flow of vehicles passing you"

Not if 70% are turning left or right.

Clearly at a junction the flow of traffic will be staggered past your route as vehicles head different directions.

.

ms pepperpot

AndyManc wrote:

Ahead of traffic I can set off sooner and position myself safely, if you stay back in the queue you will get a constant flow of vehicles passing you and many will end up cutting you up in their attempts to pass and turn left.

.

Not if you are in the middle of the main lane, ie. not hovering to the left. As the traffic moves you will easily be travelling at the same speed as the traffic and they aren't in a position to overtake. If there is an HGV ahead of you I would say this is safer - better to hang back than go ahead at all costs, particulary as for inexperienced/unknowledgeable cyclists this means they will often filter up the left.

I would say the ASL is there to put you in a good position if you can safely get to the front, but too many cyclists try to get to the front at all costs irrespective of whether there is an ASL. Inexperienced cyclists often seem to believe this is what they should do but often don't have the skills or confidence to do so safely. They will also position themselves in what I would see as a vulnerable position in the ASL, ie hovering to the left, rather than in a more assertive position in front of the first vehicle in the traffic. By doing this they are still vulnerable to idiots who decide they must overtake cyclists at all costs.