5th cyclist dies in 9 days
Comments
-
0
-
I can't believe some of the comments on here and felt I had to pass comment
I can’t speak on all of the 5 but of 3 they occurred on my daily route.
The police carried out a 2 week crack down on errant cycle behaviour and a high visibility campaign from the 22nd November aimed at reducing accidents and appeasing motorists along HS2 prior to the launch of the new segregated section between Strafford and Bow. What followed has been two weeks of casualty’s.
The first fatality on the route was as a result of a cyclist stopping at a set of lights near Queens Mary College on his way home and an earth moving lorry not see him.
The second and third were as a result of left turning vehicles where the cycles wasn’t seen.
The commonalty between these three are that the motorist didn’t see the cyclist (please note I am not blaming the cyclist or for that matter the motorist).
The position of the cyclist is critical to ensuring that we are seen.
The segregation of motorist and cyclists is a great idea but seeing the way that it’s been introduced in East London fills me with dread. 70% of cyclist accidents occur at junctions. The way forward would be to either reduce the number of junctions or redesign them to slow the motorist down further whilst navigating them.
I’ve been cycle commuting on and off for the last 26 years covering also 100K and I’ve seen cycling change greatly during this time in popularity. The roads in London haven’t changes but the numbers using them have.0 -
The roads in London haven’t changes but the numbers using them have.
Do you feel there's enough cyclists now to cause a change in driver behaviour towards them?http://www.strathspey.co.uk - Quality Binoculars at a Sensible Price.
Specialized Roubaix SL3 Expert 2012, Cannondale CAAD5,
Marin Mount Vision (1997), Edinburgh Country tourer, 3 cats!0 -
waytogohome wrote:I can't believe some of the comments on here and felt I had to pass comment
I can’t speak on all of the 5 but of 3 they occurred on my daily route.
The police carried out a 2 week crack down on errant cycle behaviour and a high visibility campaign from the 22nd November aimed at reducing accidents and appeasing motorists along HS2 prior to the launch of the new segregated section between Strafford and Bow. What followed has been two weeks of casualty’s.
The first fatality on the route was as a result of a cyclist stopping at a set of lights near Queens Mary College on his way home and an earth moving lorry not see him.
The second and third were as a result of left turning vehicles where the cycles wasn’t seen.
The commonalty between these three are that the motorist didn’t see the cyclist (please note I am not blaming the cyclist or for that matter the motorist).
The position of the cyclist is critical to ensuring that we are seen.
The segregation of motorist and cyclists is a great idea but seeing the way that it’s been introduced in East London fills me with dread. 70% of cyclist accidents occur at junctions. The way forward would be to either reduce the number of junctions or redesign them to slow the motorist down further whilst navigating them.
I’ve been cycle commuting on and off for the last 26 years covering also 100K and I’ve seen cycling change greatly during this time in popularity. The roads in London haven’t changes but the numbers using them have.
Good post!
I get pretty sick on here with the amount of daily mail style cyclist bashing that goes on...on a freaking cyclist forum. Yes there are bad cylists out there but time and time again the stats overwhelmingly lay the blame firmly at the driver - in around 70% of cases to be exact (in 10% of cases the cyclist is to blame).
I get sick of the idiots as much as eveyone but it's normally not the idiots who are getting squashed - it's road legal innocents.
And no, of course the motorist isn't to blame for all cases and no blame should be attached (on here) until after the investigation.0 -
CookeeeMonster wrote:waytogohome wrote:I can't believe some of the comments on here and felt I had to pass comment
I can’t speak on all of the 5 but of 3 they occurred on my daily route.
The police carried out a 2 week crack down on errant cycle behaviour and a high visibility campaign from the 22nd November aimed at reducing accidents and appeasing motorists along HS2 prior to the launch of the new segregated section between Strafford and Bow. What followed has been two weeks of casualty’s.
The first fatality on the route was as a result of a cyclist stopping at a set of lights near Queens Mary College on his way home and an earth moving lorry not see him.
The second and third were as a result of left turning vehicles where the cycles wasn’t seen.
The commonalty between these three are that the motorist didn’t see the cyclist (please note I am not blaming the cyclist or for that matter the motorist).
The position of the cyclist is critical to ensuring that we are seen.
The segregation of motorist and cyclists is a great idea but seeing the way that it’s been introduced in East London fills me with dread. 70% of cyclist accidents occur at junctions. The way forward would be to either reduce the number of junctions or redesign them to slow the motorist down further whilst navigating them.
I’ve been cycle commuting on and off for the last 26 years covering also 100K and I’ve seen cycling change greatly during this time in popularity. The roads in London haven’t changes but the numbers using them have.
Good post!
I get pretty sick on here with the amount of daily mail style cyclist bashing that goes on...on a freaking cyclist forum. Yes there are bad cylists out there but time and time again the stats overwhelmingly lay the blame firmly at the driver - in around 70% of cases to be exact (in 10% of cases the cyclist is to blame).
I get sick of the idiots as much as eveyone but it's normally not the idiots who are getting squashed - it's road legal innocents.
And no, of course the motorist isn't to blame for all cases and no blame should be attached (on here) until after the investigation.
I have to agree with this post! I enjoy riding in towns, I like the fact that all the vehicles are going about the same speed. I don't jump red lights, I try to signal every manoeuvre, I look in the eyes of drivers, I have two lights front and rear, I have a very fluoro jacket, I wear a helmet, I tend to avoid cycle lanes. My eyes and head are constantly on the move, assessing potential threats etc. I thank people for waiting for me and recognise when they have given me space, and try to do the same to other road users.
I will filter past a line of stationery or slow moving traffic though. Is that right or wrong? I will overtake slower vehicles if there is space to do it.0 -
DaveP1 wrote:
I will filter past a line of stationery or slow moving traffic though. Is that right or wrong? I will overtake slower vehicles if there is space to do it.
The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.0 -
Buckie2k5 wrote:DaveP1 wrote:
I will filter past a line of stationery or slow moving traffic though. Is that right or wrong? I will overtake slower vehicles if there is space to do it.
The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.
If it's a scenario where there are some cars ahead waiting at lights and you insist on getting in front , that's plain selfish. It's risky for you, because they have to overtake and it's frustrating for them I'd imagine. This does depend on the width of the road though.
However if it's a case where you're likely to get ahead and not hold back the traffic I see no wrong there.0 -
Buckie2k5 wrote:The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.
You've summed up the very attitude that he was complaining about. Lumping in filtering straight away with light jumping, when he explicitly said he doesn't jump red lights.
I would suggest from your attitude you need to chill out, or quit driving.0 -
markhewitt1978 wrote:
You've summed up the very attitude that he was complaining about. Lumping in filtering straight away with light jumping, when he explicitly said he doesn't jump red lights.
I would suggest from your attitude you need to chill out, or quit driving.
To a driver flitering is just as annoying a light jumping if you are going to hold him up. As for my attitude it is no diff from the majority of drivers. Which is the problem with the roads today, So many things to do such little time.
Do you drive?0 -
Drive approx 20,000 miles per year, cycle approx 2,000
0 -
markhewitt1978 wrote:Buckie2k5 wrote:The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.
You've summed up the very attitude that he was complaining about. Lumping in filtering straight away with light jumping, when he explicitly said he doesn't jump red lights.
I would suggest from your attitude you need to chill out, or quit driving.
Yes- he does need to chill out - but then IMHO, the cyclist could perhaps show a bit more respect for other road users - providing it's clear he is actually holding up the traffic rather than just slowing down the queue ...
Filtering may get you to the front of the queue, but if you've just filtered past 10 cars and now they're stuck behind you and have to overtake before they get to open road then you've held them up. Of course, you can't always be certain that you're going to hold up those cars you've just filtered past so you can't get it right every time, but a repeated course such as on a commute you should get an idea of the traffic flow - show a bit of give as well as take and you'll get more respect from other users.
I believe I've "trained" most of the drivers on my commute route - the regulars know to expect me (there aren't many riders going up and down - I usually don't see another rider) and where it's safe to pass. In return I will ride carefully and give them room to get past where I can and say thank you when they do slow up - I rarely get a close pass these days and when I do it's normally from a vehicle I don't recognise.
Having driven the route in a car many a time I know that waiting for a short while to get past a cyclist has no impact on the overall time taken for that journey.0 -
Thing is if a cyclist is passing a queue of cars at the lights, then they are passing him and then he passes them at the next set of lights, etc. It suggests to me that it's the traffic lights and not the cyclist that is determining the speed of the traffic.0
-
markhewitt1978 wrote:Thing is if a cyclist is passing a queue of cars at the lights, then they are passing him and then he passes them at the next set of lights, etc. It suggests to me that it's the traffic lights and not the cyclist that is determining the speed of the traffic.
Oh I agree - that's just not really holding up the traffic - I don't get that on my commute as it's country roads, I occasionally get the twit that _MUST OVERTAKE NOW_ only to stop just around the corner - usually self imposed stopping rather than because of someone else.0 -
markhewitt1978 wrote:Thing is if a cyclist is passing a queue of cars at the lights, then they are passing him and then he passes them at the next set of lights, etc. It suggests to me that it's the traffic lights and not the cyclist that is determining the speed of the traffic.
yes but passing the cyclist again takes time, ie oncoming cars etc. So the next set of lights the driver reaches he may well have been through them already. At the end of the day people have no patience and as you said about me need to chill out, i agree. This not only goes for the driver squeezing past cyclists but also the cyclist queue and light jumping.0 -
There again, you term it "queue jumping". Which is isn't really, it's just about using the road space effectively? Of course there are caveats that come with that, but done properly filtering should not be dangerous.0
-
Buckie2k5 wrote:markhewitt1978 wrote:Thing is if a cyclist is passing a queue of cars at the lights, then they are passing him and then he passes them at the next set of lights, etc. It suggests to me that it's the traffic lights and not the cyclist that is determining the speed of the traffic.
yes but passing the cyclist again takes time, ie oncoming cars etc. So the next set of lights the driver reaches he may well have been through them already. At the end of the day people have no patience and as you said about me need to chill out, i agree. This not only goes for the driver squeezing past cyclists but also the cyclist queue and light jumping.
I don't see anything wrong in filtering (or 'queue jumping' as you call it) if it's done safely and you stop at the reds. It's one advantage of riding a bike.
Would you set a minimum limit of the number of vehicles you wouldn't pass - 2, <10, >10?
For example. On my commute there are often queues of 20-30 vehicles waiting to get across traffic light controlled roundabouts or junctions. Would you sit there for 10 mins in the queue before you take your turn at front because you don't want to upset the drivers by queue jumping or holding them up?
If drivers are that upset, then they should get out of their tin boxes, get on a bike and gain the same advantages – after all, they are the ones contributing to the congestion.0 -
Iam a cyclist too remember, ofcourse i dont sit in a queue for 10mins when its safe to filter. But i do get the feeling and know that iam being a pain once the traffic i have already passed is now moving and trying to get by me. All i have done is angered them which then places me in a tiny bit more danger imo.
Do you like it when a car overtakes you and then slows you up?0 -
Buckie2k5 wrote:markhewitt1978 wrote:
You've summed up the very attitude that he was complaining about. Lumping in filtering straight away with light jumping, when he explicitly said he doesn't jump red lights.
I would suggest from your attitude you need to chill out, or quit driving.
To a driver flitering is just as annoying a light jumping if you are going to hold him up. As for my attitude it is no diff from the majority of drivers. Which is the problem with the roads today, So many things to do such little time.
Do you drive?
In my experience of urban cycling and driving (30,000 miles + per year in the car including regular commuting in Cardiff and Bristol, up to 5,000 miles a year on the bike in a decent year) I would say that in major cities it is more likely that a car will force its way passed on the approach to the lights or the back of any other queue leaving the cyclist to have to get back through to avoid being stuck in a queue caused by too many motorists. Once within the centre of a city the bike will quite often be faster than the car so by your rationale the car shouldn't overtake a bike in that situation.0 -
Buckie2k5 wrote:DaveP1 wrote:
I will filter past a line of stationery or slow moving traffic though. Is that right or wrong? I will overtake slower vehicles if there is space to do it.
The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.
I have SO nearly commented on the overtaking issue (as a cyclist) on so many similar threads recently but held back because I was convinced I would get shot down. As well as the "cyclist bad behaviour" comments on here (which I completely accept) there are quite a few people on Bikeradar who almost apologise for being a cyclist using the roads. The roads are there for us all and we all have as much right to them as anyone else. I've seen threads saying (as a cyclist) to not do anything to make car drivers angry or to provoke them. What is that about?! I only get angry when some half-asleep bast*rd in a 2 ton (or a lot more) lump of metal turns left in front of me, or pulls out and causes me to even think about braking or passes me within a metre (what is unacceptably close?) or JUST DOESN'T SEE ME...
I had an argument with a guy at work the other day about overtaking stationery cars. This was on a dual carriageway with about a 2.5 mile tailback to a roundabout. The vehicles were moving at about 10 mph while they shuffled forward to cross the roundabout; I went down the middle of the two lanes at a relaxed pace; if the gap narrowed between the vehicles, I slowed down. Sometimes the gap in front would open up, so as not to delay the cars I sped up to cross the gap. I went down the middle because the gap was wider than on the left side between the kerb and the vehicles, and because that side has more drains/potholes etc etc. My colleague said it was mad, although I think he may have been thinking more of motorbikes which could easily have been doing 30 mph plus. My reply was - why was my behaviour worse than the vehicles before and after the hold up, who would have been passing me as close if not closer and at least 20-40 mph faster?
Here's what the Highway Code says about overtaking - https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-t ... 162-to-1690 -
TakeTurns wrote:Buckie2k5 wrote:DaveP1 wrote:
I will filter past a line of stationery or slow moving traffic though. Is that right or wrong? I will overtake slower vehicles if there is space to do it.
The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.
If it's a scenario where there are some cars ahead waiting at lights and you insist on getting in front , that's plain selfish. It's risky for you, because they have to overtake and it's frustrating for them I'd imagine. This does depend on the width of the road though.
However if it's a case where you're likely to get ahead and not hold back the traffic I see no wrong there.
I don't insist on getting past, if the gap is narrow, or the lights change or there are people ahead waiting to cross the road, I'll happily wait. It shouldn't be risky for me just because they may have to overtake me again though.0 -
Buckie2k5 wrote:
To a driver flitering is just as annoying a light jumping if you are going to hold him up.Buckie2k5 wrote:Sorry, this is not right. The roads are there for us all to use equally, nobody has more right than anyone else. If you drive any distance in any big city at rush hour you know a bike is quicker than a car, and not just a £10k Pinarello ridden by a Wiggo-wannabe. If you filter with care, it should not be a problem, and it should not matter whether you may or may not hold up the car at a later point.Buckie2k5 wrote:As for my attitude it is no diff from the majority of drivers. Which is the problem with the roads today, So many things to do such little time.
Your first sentence there is the problem! The roads are there for us all, whatever method of transport we use.
Do you drive?0 -
What a poor post; lacking in understanding of the problem but somehow feeling the need to 'balance' the debate to excuse bad driving attitudes. You actually are saying there is something wrong with cyclists overtaking a car in slow moving traffic. This is part of driving and sharing the road, particularly in built-up urban areas. Drivers just need to deal with it. Simple really.Buckie2k5 wrote:DaveP1 wrote:
I will filter past a line of stationery or slow moving traffic though. Is that right or wrong? I will overtake slower vehicles if there is space to do it.
The problem with passing slow moving traffic is that once they speed up the same drivers have to pass you time and time again. Now iam not saying there is anything wrong with this but i can see why drivers can start to get annoyed with this and light jumping. Especially on commutes when people are tired. There is 1 cyclist i have to pass in my car every morning and there is always a tailback behind him, on most occasions even me a cyclist can start to feel my blood boil and feel the need to get passed him as quick as possible.
In your case of the cyclist slowing traffic up, this is only your opinion and no=one can make any sort of valid assessment of your claims without being in that particular environment and weighing up all the other factors which may be involved. However, even if in the worst case, it is poor cycling by the cyclist, that is one out of how many hundreds and thousands of other cyclists you pass on a daily basis, all doing the right thing? I can say without fear of contradiction that during the same drive, you will have encountered far more cases of poor and illegal driving than the encounter with the isolated cyclist. It happens so often in your drive that you've stopped noticing the poor and illegal driving and taking it for granted. By your post, you sound as though you may be part of the problem you accuse others of. The irony!0 -
AndyK2479 wrote:I see this from a couple of different angles, I'm a cyclist and a copper, in fact I cycle at work and was around the Millbank area yesterday, when the lad was in the collision outside Millbank tower. I've been off today so don't know his condition but just seeing his bike in the aftermath was spine chilling.
I see some poor driving when I'm out and about BUT....some of the cycling I see is verging on the maniacal, some of it I put down to inexperience, some to a lack of common sense, some to sheer arrogance.
The number of times I have said to cyclists "watch yourself going on the inside of this static traffic" and been met with rolling eyes, sarcastic replies or mainly just being ignored bemuses me. But they are all grown ups and can make their own choices.
I'm not one for dishing out tickets, believe me I'm not, but I'm obliged to stop and speak to cyclists who shoot through red lights, reason why? Because if I don't the next time I pull over the cabbie or the van driver driving poorly, I get the standard response "What you doing about the cyclists going through the reds".
It's easy to blame truck drivers for every tragedy, but every one of these collisions is investigated by experienced Collision Investigators and I'm not certain, but how many have ended in prosecutions?
I would like to see, as a cyclist, segregated cycling lanes in London, will it happen? Your guess is as good as mine.
But while sensible and not so sensible cyclists are in close proximity to big vehicles then these tragedies will continue, all you can do as a cyclist is give yourself the best chance of getting anywhere safely.
It's good to hear a balanced viewpoint for once. As is with human nature, some people will never accept that they are wrong, those people as mentioned are adults and make their own choices, hopefully not putting themselves or others in harms way.
It seems to me that there are a number of people out there who want to cycle, some for fitness, some to get to work, some for leisure and others for all or some of the above.
I cycle at work at home, have driven lorries professionally in the armed forces, and ride motorcycles. I feel that there is a place for some type of training for people who want to use the roads safely, perhaps police cyclists could assist with this, there do appear to be more of them about at the moment, which is good to see, obviously with cutbacks this may not be possible, but if this amount of deaths and serious injuries were attributed to knife crime and gang violence, funds would be found to tackle the problem.
I tend to ride as if everyone is out to get me and accept that if I have an accident involving a car, lorry, van or bus that whoever is at fault I'm always going to come off worse.0 -
I was in London the other day, no end of cyclist jumping red lights, cutting in front of vehicles, using pedestrian crossings, riding up the inside of cars and vans who had there left indicators on, I know there not all like it but I must say the majority I saw were. I drive 35k a year and what I saw in London in one day was worse than what I've seen in east Anglia in a whole year.0
-
A 6th cyclist has been killed in London today: http://news.radiojackie.com/2013/11/cyc ... mpton.html0
-
What the heck is going on in London. ?
As said above another person has lost there life tonight.
There doesn't seem to be much info about how these accidents happen.
There needs to be a serious cycle safety campaign. Are they inexperienced. Are they lit? Are they warring gear like a helmet? Is it the drivers fault or the cycle?
Cycle groups need to stop moaning about the roads or cars and perhaps focus on cyclist behaviour too.
The imag s if cycling in London are frightening. So many poor cyclist behaviour. Couple this with stressed city drivers and you have a nightmare.0 -
14 deaths in London this year
122 Deaths nationally this year, it's not just London!!!
All but 6 of the 122 involved a motor vehicle, in 99% of the fatal accidents the driver walked away unhurt. I think that the 1 occasion where the driver was injured the police charged the driver with premeditated causing death by dangerous driving so they pretty much mean't to kill the cyclist and injured themselves in the process.
Never ever assume that drivers will give you space or the right of way, anticipate the worst thing that could happen and protect yourself drivers attitudes towards other road users will never change. Education and road awareness is the answer.0 -
This is all that should need to be said on the subject of filtering. I have no objection to doing it when I think it makes sense and (more importantly) is safe to do so. I don't go out of my way to do it at every opportunity as I see many other cyclists doing. It's not worth it to save yourself a few (likely illusory) seconds. If everyone (both drivers and cyclists) could be a little more patient it would make the roads much safer.DaveP1 wrote:I don't insist on getting past, if the gap is narrow, or the lights change or there are people ahead waiting to cross the road, I'll happily wait. It shouldn't be risky for me just because they may have to overtake me again though.0 -
Sentence 4 of a 4-sentence article:michael_roadie wrote:A 6th cyclist has been killed in London today: http://news.radiojackie.com/2013/11/cyc ... mpton.htmlIt was thought the victim was a cyclist, however, Met police have confirmed she was not on a bike.0 -
Top_Bhoy wrote:You actually are saying there is something wrong with cyclists overtaking a car in slow moving traffic.
My whole point is i can see the problem from both sides and why both sides can get annoyed. A cyclist doesnt like to get overtook and then slowed down by the same car and vice versa for drivers.
Iam going to throw this 1 at you, If filtering was illegal would most of these deaths occured?0
