Bike down On A40 WB Polish war memorial to Hillingdon

chunkytfg

As per title really.

Copper that 'escorted' me past it on the carriageway said the cyclist was actually cycling along the A40 and not using the perfectly good cycle path next to it.

From what I could see it was a grey road bike(frame was too far to see any more) the wheels were what looked like Trek branded 50mm aero wheels.

Does anyone do this route and know the cyclist? is it one of us?

Without trying to reinforce and stereotypes the car that hit him/her was an old duffer in a grey Toyota Aygo!
:roll: :roll:

thelawnet

not a good place to cycle, it's basically a motorway, vehicles do up to 90mph there, routinely.

cjcp

Aero wheels? He wasn't on TT practice, was he?

Hope the lad's ok.

chunkytfg

cjcp wrote:

Aero wheels? He wasn't on TT practice, was he?

Hope the lad's ok.

TBH I dont know. the wheels were by the curb hence I could see them.

The frame was over by the hedge so all I could see was the colour. I didnt think to look at the handlebars. I know the frame was pretty chunky and grey but thats it.

And yes cycling along there is suicide imo! As said it's basically a motorway and very very fast!

WhenI got there the ambulance was heading back along the A40 the other way which I thoguth was a little odd as hillingdon hospital has an A+E dept and is only a couple of miles away in the right direction!

Robstar24

speedy recovery to the rider in question.

the A40 is a seriously dangerous road for cyclists, it is a motorway in all but name beyong park royal. i once accidentally cycled along the westway...wont be doing that again in a hurry

chunkytfg

Bugger!

http://www.uxbridgegazette.co.uk/west-l ... -28319437/


Apologies to the old duffer in the Aygo I thought it was you that hit him

Gussio

RIP and condolences.

thelawnet

I don't understand how a cyclist can be said to collide with a van. Surely the van must have collided with the cyclist.

RIP.

Wallace1492

Condolences....

rolf_f

Ironic that when I click on the Uxbridge Gazette I get lots of adverts for VW vans.....

itboffin

RIP RAF Northolt Station Commander Tom Barrett

thelawnet

http://www.uxbridgegazette.co.uk/west-l ... -28320413/
http://www.hillingdontimes.co.uk/news/8 ... m_Barrett/
http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/89 ... collision/

zanes

thelawnet wrote:

I don't understand how a cyclist can be said to collide with a van. Surely the van must have collided with the cyclist.

RIP.

Logic Fail:

http://road.cc/content/news/32174-essex ... c-accident

However, this is not the time to be discussing such issues.

car.crash

i saw the guy shortly after he was hit. i saw him head first into the fence and no one around him or helping him but chatting amoungst themselves. he was completly lifeless although they say he died later that evening? i too can not understand why he would be on the a40 when the cycle path is perfect next to it.
rip fella.

car.crash

also he was wearing all black and the bike looked black too so not to easy to see untill its to late.

zanes

car.crash wrote:

i too can not understand why he would be on the a40 when the cycle path is perfect next to it.

That, my friend, is because you are a total mug.

car.crash

zanes wrote:

car.crash wrote:

i too can not understand why he would be on the a40 when the cycle path is perfect next to it.

That, my friend, is because you are a total mug.

why? have you seen the road and the cycle path? or are you just a jobs worth.

zanes

Ach, you're right, perhaps I was a little rude. However, I think you're erring on the side of "blame the victim" somewhat, especially considering your comment re.black clothing.

jeremyrundle

thelawnet wrote:

I don't understand how a cyclist can be said to collide with a van. Surely the van must have collided with the cyclist.

RIP.

:!:

So a cyclist can do no wrong........

Sincere condolences to the family, but let us not assume the driver was at fault.

What was the old expression "be SEEN, be SAFE"

Dudu

jeremyrundle wrote:

Sincere condolences to the family, but let us not assume the driver was at fault.

What was the old expression "be SEEN, be SAFE"

I'll believe that when all cars are required to have bright yellow ends like trains. And be controlled as strictly as trains.

The onus is on vehicle operators to avoid colliding with stuff in front of them. Pedestrians, deer, cattle, sheep and fallen trees do not usually wear hi-viz.

From what I've read, the late Group Captain was just leaving his base when the collision happened. So it's not surprising he wasn't using the cycle lane.

jeremyrundle

Oh get real, what a silly comment, sheep, deer, we are supposed to be rational higher thinking beings, so what you are in fact saying is that a cyclist can ride in front of a car and the driver is to blame, duh :!:

lost_in_thought

Great shame, I don't know the specifics, but having driven a lot down the A40, I sure as hell wouldn't be cycling on it. The entrance to Northolt isn't directly onto the A40...

Dudu

jeremyrundle wrote:

Oh get real, what a silly comment, sheep, deer, we are supposed to be rational higher thinking beings, so what you are in fact saying is that a cyclist can ride in front of a car and the driver is to blame, duh :!:

No, I'm saying people travelling on the road should look where they're going, pay attention and expect the unexpected. Like I would and like, I hope, you would.

And BTW, I regularly cycle in front of cars, usually going in the same direction, as, I assume, you do. They always seem to notice me, whatever I'm wearing.

thelawnet

Dudu wrote:

From what I've read, the late Group Captain was just leaving his base when the collision happened. So it's not surprising he wasn't using the cycle lane.

The A40 at this point is one of the fastest, busiest roads in and around London. The exits are designed for high speeds and do not lead directly into premises, but onto sliproads.

It's not clear why he was cycling on the A40, but it certainly wasn't a necessary function of the road design or his work location:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&sourc ... 16&iwloc=A

jeremyrundle

You said

The onus is on vehicle operators to avoid colliding with stuff in front of them. Pedestrians, deer, cattle, sheep and fallen trees do not usually wear hi-viz.


The onus is on the driver to take all reasonable steps and drive within the law, not to avoid a moron on a bike (aqnd I am NOT saying this poor chap was) who collides with them, and yes I do ride on the road, today in the sun great day and I was wearing a high vis sash, it is also the responsibility of the cyclist/pedestrian to act in accordance with the conditions and walk/ride safely.

Dudu

jeremyrundle wrote:

also the responsibility of the cyclist/pedestrian to act in accordance with the conditions and walk/ride safely.

I don't disagree with you. However, I also do not take kindly to being told what to wear. And road users should always expect the unexpected. There's a lot more to cycling safely than being yellow, such as

Cycling legally Cycling at least 1 metre from the kerb/parked vehicles Listening to and looking at what's going on around you Signalling before manoeuvring Not being bullied into adopting unsafe positions on the road

and much more.

Put it this way; a couple of friends of mine think they're very safety-conscious. They always wear helmets and yellow things. However, this is not much use if, as I once came across them doing, you ride on the wrong side of the road, even on a country lane.

thelawnet

Dudu wrote:

No, I'm saying people travelling on the road should look where they're going, pay attention and expect the unexpected. Like I would and like, I hope, you would.

True, true. But when you ride a bike you can be crushed to death with no trouble at all.

In a car that's not possible to same extent at all.

This is why although we should all look where we are going, cyclists should understand that the only thing protecting them is their own decisions. Hence if you're doing JOG-LE (for example) or whatever you need to think very carefully about which roads you use and whether it's really worth putting yourself in situations where there is a substantial risk of death (which might be caused by lazy motorists, but there's nothing you can do about them). And if you're just coming home from work/doing cycle training, cycling along a 70mph road is unlikely to ever be a good idea.

Dudu

thelawnet wrote:

Dudu wrote:

No, I'm saying people travelling on the road should look where they're going, pay attention and expect the unexpected. Like I would and like, I hope, you would.

True, true. But when you ride a bike you can be crushed to death with no trouble at all.

In a car that's not possible to same extent at all.

This is why although we should all look where we are going, cyclists should understand that the only thing protecting them is their own decisions. Hence if you're doing JOG-LE (for example) or whatever you need to think very carefully about which roads you use and whether it's really worth putting yourself in situations where there is a substantial risk of death (which might be caused by lazy motorists, but there's nothing you can do about them). And if you're just coming home from work/doing cycle training, cycling along a 70mph road is unlikely to ever be a good idea.

Again, I don't disagree, but we're talking about some poor sod (possibly a sporty poor sod, since the RAF has a tradition of cycle racing) who died leaving his place of work. The first and last few hundred metres of your commute are the most dangerous.

thelawnet

Dudu wrote:

jeremyrundle wrote:

also the responsibility of the cyclist/pedestrian to act in accordance with the conditions and walk/ride safely.

I don't disagree with you. However, I also do not take kindly to being told what to wear.

Nobody can tell you to do anything. However if you regularly cycle alongside the A40 at this point your life expectancy will be very short indeed, unless perhaps you do wear hi-vis and super-bright lights (even then I'd still expect you to be killed TBH). Make your own choices bearing in mind that other road users are sometimes going to be on their phone/playing with the satnav at 70mph, and the 6 points on their licence isn't going to bring you back to life.

Dudu

thelawnet wrote:

Dudu wrote:

jeremyrundle wrote:

also the responsibility of the cyclist/pedestrian to act in accordance with the conditions and walk/ride safely.

I don't disagree with you. However, I also do not take kindly to being told what to wear.

Nobody can tell you to do anything. However if you regularly cycle alongside the A40 at this point your life expectancy will be very short indeed, unless perhaps you do wear hi-vis and super-bright lights (even then I'd still expect you to be killed TBH). Make your own choices bearing in mind that other road users are sometimes going to be on their phone/playing with the satnav at 70mph, and the 6 points on their licence isn't going to bring you back to life.

C'mon, this guy was a high-ish-ranking RAF officer. Hardly likely to do anything stupid.

I think we should wait until all the facts are known.

BTW you can be told to do some things... like obeying the law which, thankfully, does not extend to specifying your clothing. You can ride around in a lime-green mankini and a tricorn hat if you really want to.

thelawnet

Dudu wrote:

Again, I don't disagree, but we're talking about some poor sod (possibly a sporty poor sod, since the RAF has a tradition of cycle racing) who died leaving his place of work. The first and last few hundred metres of your commute are the most dangerous.

I'm not sure where you get the idea he was leaving his place of work.

There's a barbed-wire fence running alongside it:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&sourc ... 28,,0,7.29

The entrances are on a 30mph speed limit road

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&sourc ... 4,,0,12.35

It seems from what I've read that he would have come out of the base, turned right along the road headed up to the roundabout and onto the A40 Westbound. As noted, there is actually a cycle lane alongside the road, but even if there wasn't, there are alternative routes adding about a mile