blindspots on trucks

gubber12345

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzL0Kyk4m-8

some of you out there may have seen this but it is a bit of an eye opener if you haven't. :!: :!: :shock:

hopefully it will make people think a bit more before diving down the inside of a lorry.

hope I've uploaded the link properly.

gubber12345

madasahattersley wrote:

Good video, only problem is that the morons who go up the inside of lorries indicating left don't usually keep as much distance as any of those people in the vid.

very very true

rickeverett

You see if people go up the inside of the lorry, this is what happens. If the Lorry overtakes or is on the outer lane then he would have seen you.

This is why I think a lot of these accidents (where there has been no action taken) is down to people cycling up the left hand sides.

Seen it so much in towns and cities. Same goes for going up the Right hand side of busses or down the left of buses at a bus stop !

Skinner2k3

Would it be so difficult for lorries to have an extra convex mirror, like you get at nasty junctions. Ok it will be distorted and not much use for manoeuvring the lorry but it should reduce the apparently huge blind spot.

kwi

Problem with artics is once the cab has started to turn all you're really looking at in your mirror is the side of the trailer. Convex mirrors do help but are difficult to see with and you're relying on something moving to really see it.

slowbike

How about a mirror on the traffic light post .... .

Baxter-Smythe

Cant believe everyone is so shocked at this, of course I am deeply saddened by what has happened of late in the London area concerning riders and heavy vehicles turning left across them, but to use this video as an example is a bit odd !
Pause the clip at around 10 seconds and you will clearly see the side curtain of the truck and the ground in the lower mirror,
Pause again at 33 seconds and you can clearly see the cab is at 30 degrees to the trailer,
Prior to any turn the cab and trailer would be in line with each other as the driver checks his mirror to signal, with the cab and trailer in line, all the road users on the nearside would be clearly visible in the lower mirror.

Just my opinion and this is in no way trying to be little the tragic death of the cyclists in London we have been told of on the news in recent weeks.

briantrumpet

Ramblings.

Risk assessment: even with all the advice, occasionally a cyclist will end up in the blind spot of a lorry turning left. It doesn't matter if the cyclist is being silly, we, and more importantly, the lorry companies, know that this is a risk (even though it's not necessarily their fault). IF, therefore, the lorry companies do not take reasonable steps to lessen this risk (i.e. if the technology is there, it should be deployed), then surely the lorry companies are failing in their duties?

Risk assessments are mostly there to stop people from hurting themselves, often from their own stupidity - but they are not there to apportion blame, but to make sure that anybody who is in the position to lessen risk in any given situation does so. So even if ALL the cyclists' deaths caused by lorries were the fault of the riders (which, in any case seems unlikely), the lorry companies could lessen that risk dramatically, from what I understand. And if they could, they should.

That's not to say that cyclists should not be continually told to ride intelligently, but expecting 100% compliance is as realistic as expecting unsupervised young children to accurately assess the danger of traffic at all times, however many times you've told them. You still hold their hands by a main road. You've done your risk assessment and taken appropriate action.

trek_dan

I seen a lorry from a building merchant chain the other day with a sticker on the back saying 'cyclists do not overtake on the left' - I assume this is their attempt at shedding liability for their drivers being in accidents involving cyclists. Appalling conduct IMO.

chrisgal

trek_dan wrote:

I seen a lorry from a building merchant chain the other day with a sticker on the back saying 'cyclists do not overtake on the left' - I assume this is their attempt at shedding liability for their drivers being in accidents involving cyclists. Appalling conduct IMO.

Or possibly an attempt to educate poor cyclists and remind others :?:

GiantMike

trek_dan wrote:

I seen a lorry from a building merchant chain the other day with a sticker on the back saying 'cyclists do not overtake on the left' - I assume this is their attempt at shedding liability for their drivers being in accidents involving cyclists. Appalling conduct IMO.

What? Anything that may make a cyclist think twice about slipping up the inside of a lorry is a good idea. Your assumption appears to be that lorries are automatically at fault if they are involved in an accident with a lorry. Every accident needs to be investigated on its specific facts rather than the usual assumptions made in the press about blame.

There's a huge difference between a lorry overtaking a cyclist and cutting in front of it, and a situation where a cyclist has slipped up the inside of a stationary lorry that is turning left. As a cyclist I can control the latter case.

Guanajuato

Every single lorry/bus near miss I've seen or experienced has been as a result of said vehicle overtaking and pulling left before they're clear. Sod-all to do with going up the inside of a stationary lorry. Sod all a cyclist can do in such a situation.

monkimark

The sticker is probably an attempt to stop cyclists passing dangerously on the left isn't it - seems perfectly reasonable to me. All London buses have something similar as do most of the delivery vehicles we get on site.

bigmat

A couple of points:

1. Most of the recent incidents in London have involved fixed wheelbase tipper trucks rather than artics like in that video. Tipper trucks don't have the turning cab visibility issues.

2. You can see a surprising amount in the mirrors of an artic - the real issue seems to be that drivers have too much information to take in all at once, but there are actually very few true "blind spots" before the turn has commenced, so unless a cyclist starts to undertake when the lorry is already turning then that video is pretty misleading.

3. Sounds like a lot of the historic cyclist / lorry incidents have involved cyclists going for gaps at the split second before the lorry starts turning - just misjudging what the lorry is going to do next. Too early to say for the recent deaths (something BoJo should take note of).

sungod

you can fit all the safety devices you like to lorries, buses, also cars for that matter

but drivers will still make mistakes, not look, get distracted, be drunk, be in a nasty mood, hate cyclists enough to assault them, whatever

then all the mirrors, flashing lights, sirens, electrodes on the testicles etc. will still not stop tons of metal squishing someone on a bike, or a pedestrian for that matter

doesn't matter who's to blame if you're under a lorry or crushed against railings

going up the inside of traffic increases risk, makes sense to avoid doing it

slowbike

Slowbike wrote:

How about a mirror on the traffic light post .... .

Or - additionally wind angle lens on the side window - like this: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/22125649 ... =95&ff19=0

mabbo

Transport for london put out this video, or one like it a couple of years ago. I am involved in work with Large Goods Vehicles and the safety aspects around them. Newer vehicles have lots of mirrors, and adding more is not an answer as the drivers themselves can only process so much information whilst trying to drive safely. Any accident is tragic, but as general guidance cyclists should follow basic highway code and stop behind a stopped vehicle. The issue at some junctions is that cycle lanes can allow the cyclist to come up alongside the vehicle, encouraging them to think they are safe. This is somethign that town planners need to consider. Personally, having travelled in HGV's, I stop behind the vehicle in front, cycle lane or no cycle lane.

peat

^all of which work well in good conditions. Throw spots of rain on the mirror/window glass and car headlights into the mix and you may aswell have these hung from every corner of your vehicle:

Pross

GiantMike wrote:

Every accident needs to be investigated on its specific facts rather than the usual assumptions made in the press about blame.

This could be the most sensible comment ever posted on Bike Radar! Hang your head in shame!!!

trek_dan

Highway code point 72:
On the left. When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Just before you turn, check for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left.

stringybob

Someone should tell Boris https://twitter.com/adamtranter/status/402767072608153600/photo/1

stevieboy308

every mirror fitted to see into a blind spot, creates another blind spot behind it. the more mirrors, the more time looking in different directions, add in sun in your eyes, sun in the mirrors, night time, rain, then unfamiliarity of the area, weight restrictions, width restrictions, time restrictions, low bridges, city traffic etc to look out for. so regardless of whether you're in the right or not, just hang back.

the worst place generally to be, is around and just in front of the cab on the passenger side of any truck. so either side - LHD / RHD. the taller the cab the worse it is. so don't think you've got in front so you will of been seen. one of the easy ways to quickly identify a whether it's LHD or RHD - the passenger door will have a mirror above it pointing down towards the kerb by the front wheel.

markyone

I drive a 44 tonne truck,or not so much now as I have taken a back seat in the company.
I would say cyclist and pedestrians can be a real nightmare coming from the side you sometimes just cant see them.

I hate driving now as its getting really bad out on the roads.

debeli

HGVs and buses have posed a threat of sorts to cyclists since the dawn of time. Kids should be taught when they learn to ride that it does not make sense to both pay into a pension fund and cycle to the nearside of HGVs: One or the other, but not both. Watching riders in London, I sometimes think that some have either very little experience or have been extremely lucky. That luck may run out in an unpleasant way.

There are certainly some very poor HGV drivers around, but most are excellent. Likewise, there are some brain-free cyclists, but most are good. Some HGV drivers need to learn to think more about cyclists and some cyclists need to be more patient and considerate.

Legislation to ensure that truck drivers have better visibility ought perhaps to be considered, but in the meantime it cannot make sense to hang around (or ride around) the N/S or front bumper of HGVs in traffic.

pinarellokid

the closest iv come to dying is when a wagon over took me, then cut me up by pulling in on a bend,,
he definitely saw me, but didnt care, or allow for me when tuning. i got hit by the curtain /trailer and actually let go of bars and grabbed railings to get myself further out of the way,, i never go up the side of wagons, and now find myself taking more of the road when coming towards junctions.. not sure if its right but im still here

peat

Debeli wrote:

There are certainly some very poor HGV drivers around, but most are excellent. Likewise, there are some brain-free cyclists, but most are good. .

Perhaps controversial around here, but i would say there were more 'bad' cyclists (%) than bad lorry/bus drivers. They are professional drivers, have attained a license standard and are under constant surveillance whoch makes them easily identifiable.

With all due respect pinerllokid, I don't think the chap you're talking about was intentionally trying to kill you. What on earth would be in it for him?

bernithebiker

Chris Boardman makes the point in the Telegraph that if HGV's have blind spots such that the driver cannot see cyclists, then should they really be in big cities mixing with cyclists?

He also points out that many cities do not allow HGVs into their centres, which seems eminently sensible to me.

Supermarkets, etc. can be supplied using smaller trucks.

It's quite astonishing by the way, just how much public opinion is against cyclists; anyone posting a 'crazy cyclists, get them off the road, don't pay road tax' type message instantly gets loads of thumbs up. Post a 'cars jump red lights too' message, and people will hate you for it......seems we have a long way to go on PR.....

bendertherobot

bernithebiker wrote:

Chris Boardman makes the point in the Telegraph that if HGV's have blind spots such that the driver cannot see cyclists, then should they really be in big cities mixing with cyclists?

He also points out that many cities do not allow HGVs into their centres, which seems eminently sensible to me.

Supermarkets, etc. can be supplied using smaller trucks.

It's quite astonishing by the way, just how much public opinion is against cyclists; anyone posting a 'crazy cyclists, get them off the road, don't pay road tax' type message instantly gets loads of thumbs up. Post a 'cars jump red lights too' message, and people will hate you for it......seems we have a long way to go on PR.....

This is the elephant in the room. We let vehicles with accepted design flaws onto our roads.

izza

Peat wrote:

Debeli wrote:

There are certainly some very poor HGV drivers around, but most are excellent. Likewise, there are some brain-free cyclists, but most are good. .

Perhaps controversial around here, but i would say there were more 'bad' cyclists (%) than bad lorry/bus drivers. They are professional drivers, have attained a license standard and are under constant surveillance whoch makes them easily identifiable.

With all due respect pinerllokid, I don't think the chap you're talking about was intentionally trying to kill you. What on earth would be in it for him?

bendertherobot wrote:

bernithebiker wrote:

Chris Boardman makes the point in the Telegraph that if HGV's have blind spots such that the driver cannot see cyclists, then should they really be in big cities mixing with cyclists?

He also points out that many cities do not allow HGVs into their centres, which seems eminently sensible to me.

Supermarkets, etc. can be supplied using smaller trucks.

It's quite astonishing by the way, just how much public opinion is against cyclists; anyone posting a 'crazy cyclists, get them off the road, don't pay road tax' type message instantly gets loads of thumbs up. Post a 'cars jump red lights too' message, and people will hate you for it......seems we have a long way to go on PR.....

This is the elephant in the room. We let vehicles with accepted design flaws onto our roads.

Another elephant just appeared. We let unlicensed, untrained cyclists on main roads. We then compound this by having no registration of said cyclists so that the minority which take out their brains are unrecognisable and untraceable should they do something reckless.

sungod

izza wrote:

Another elephant just appeared. We let unlicensed, untrained cyclists on main roads. We then compound this by having no registration of said cyclists so that the minority which take out their brains are unrecognisable and untraceable should they do something reckless.

by that argument the same should apply to pedestrians

either your attempt at humour has failed badly or you're not in touch with reality

the elephants are the motor vehicles, being hit or run over by one tends to be serious or fatal

cyclists are generally far slower, lower mass, smaller and much squishier, being hit by a cyclist at typical commuting speed will be about the same as a colliding jogger, it can hurt, but it's unlikely to shatter bones and rupture internal organs

bendertherobot

izza wrote:

Peat wrote:

Debeli wrote:

There are certainly some very poor HGV drivers around, but most are excellent. Likewise, there are some brain-free cyclists, but most are good. .

Perhaps controversial around here, but i would say there were more 'bad' cyclists (%) than bad lorry/bus drivers. They are professional drivers, have attained a license standard and are under constant surveillance whoch makes them easily identifiable.

With all due respect pinerllokid, I don't think the chap you're talking about was intentionally trying to kill you. What on earth would be in it for him?

bendertherobot wrote:

bernithebiker wrote:

Chris Boardman makes the point in the Telegraph that if HGV's have blind spots such that the driver cannot see cyclists, then should they really be in big cities mixing with cyclists?

He also points out that many cities do not allow HGVs into their centres, which seems eminently sensible to me.

Supermarkets, etc. can be supplied using smaller trucks.

It's quite astonishing by the way, just how much public opinion is against cyclists; anyone posting a 'crazy cyclists, get them off the road, don't pay road tax' type message instantly gets loads of thumbs up. Post a 'cars jump red lights too' message, and people will hate you for it......seems we have a long way to go on PR.....

This is the elephant in the room. We let vehicles with accepted design flaws onto our roads.

Another elephant just appeared. We let unlicensed, untrained cyclists on main roads. We then compound this by having no registration of said cyclists so that the minority which take out their brains are unrecognisable and untraceable should they do something reckless.

No, we don't let them. They have a right to use the roads without a licensing requirement.