EVERY CYCLIST AND EVERYONE WHO RIDES A BICYCLE KNOWS THAT UNDERTAKING STATIC/SLOW MOVING TRAFFIC IS BLOODY DANGEROUS.
If a vehicle turns across the path of a cyclist (as in the RMC case) then said driver deserves all he gets!!!
I say let the cyclists keep doing it, natural selection and all that
Oh and by the way in my younger days, Yorkshire regional junior hillclimbing champion and CTC member and Morley CC member and time triallist (solo,2 up, tandem, 72" fixed wheel) and countless Audax and Grimpeur and charity events done and in the 100k club before my 21st birthday!!!
Give me one thing I CAN do as a LGV driver, and I shall, can’t say fairer than that can I?
Like a lot of drivers I am employed through an agency, I.E Sent to a different client every day, wherever they require a driver. I don’t have a fixed truck in any way shape or form, nor do I have a fixed employer.
However anything I can do on a day to day basis I am more than happy to give a go if it makes me a safer driver.
Using all the mirrors effectvely, fitted to the vehicle is about all drivers can do.
However mirrors have their problems. They don’t see blindspots and neither can the driver. The LGV driving test and training thereafter is geared to the safety of vunerable road users. This cannot help the driver when cyclists or whoever get into places the driver cannot possibly see. Cyclists and others must understand the dynamics surrounding such large vehicles and stay out of these dangerous areas until the threat has passed
Not that I’m supporting undertaking HGVs in narrow conditions or approaching left turns, but maybe it’s worth considering whether councils are encouraging cyclists to do it by installing cycle lane approaches to advance stop lines?
MADBAZ:
‘…EVERY CYCLIST AND EVERYONE WHO RIDES A BICYCLE KNOWS THAT UNDERTAKING STATIC/SLOW MOVING TRAFFIC IS BLOODY DANGEROUS…’
How do they know? Not if they have never consulted the Highway Code …which, let’s face it, is only a code & not a law to understand/comply with.
Also, the Junior Highway Code is almost impossible to source now, having effectively gone out of publication …I know, because I’ve tried getting one for a ‘road-curious’ sprog.
Spardo:
If cyclists would accept the rules of the road like most others have to, and wait in turn at lights there would be less of a problem. It is the weaving and undertaking ban that they insist on being excused from which causes most problems. I doubt it is often because an HGV draws alongside a cyclist already in front of him at the lights.
I know of at least one case where the lorry driver passed and repassed the cyclist before turning left and killing her.
There you go, condemned out of your own mouth. How could the driver pass and repass the cyclist if the cyclist had not undertaken between each set of lights? Illegal. Unless of course,
Undertaking by cyclists illegal? Sorry, mate, that’s not right. And what’s more, there is heaps of paint in London that encourage cyclists to do exactly that.
I presume you are talking about painted cycle lanes. That isn’t undertaking. That is using seperate lanes in a correct manner and drivers should respect them, but that is not what I am talking about. Undertaking is passing on the left a vehicle which is in the same lane and is a frequent practice by cyclists. And is illegal. Also extremely dangerous not least because of the frustration it gives rise to in drivers constantly held up by slow cyclists, finally able to pass only to find themselves behind the same numbskull at the next lights and having to go through the whole thing again. If a cyclist arrives at lights behind an HGV, why doesn’t he wait there, like everyone else?
But that means that all parties trying share the road, which means both groups accept that the other has a right to be there. I don’t hear that from you
,
That is because you aren’t listening. With rights comes responsibilities. Obey the rule of the road. Wait your turn.
Am wondering if vehicle cab-height is a contributory issue to ‘not seeing’ that maybe adds a greater degree of sensed alienation by a driver from his immediate environment? Is vehicle manufacturer/model/cab height data a factor in fatal incidents?
Compare DAFs with Renaults: Why the need for, what I have experienced as the extra alienating altitude on the latter?
Does Europe experience the same degree of LGV/cycle confrontation as we evidently see here? I ask because most RHD units are converted from Euro originals, whereby manufacturers may have less incentive to reduce cab height if it is a contributory issue.
Just thoughts…
Also, I know that with the radio on I can be on a different planet ie, ‘above it all’…
Therefore, I turn it off, wind down the nearside window in town: Sure, it invites a butty/coke-tin being hurled-in but it also gives me a chance to hear a cycle bell if a cyclist has the nous to use it in a conflict scenario…
Whilst I’m here …cyclists with an Ipod/ear-phones: No, no, no… They’d get strung-up in Germany …but what is our Governmental Road Safety enforcers stance on their use by the ‘vulnerable’ cyclist fraternity? Is it further evidence that all road users are systematically subjected to a nationally sponsored lack of discipline enforcement?
Spardo:
‘…painted cycle lanes. That isn’t undertaking. That is using seperate lanes in a correct manner and drivers should respect them…’
We need to take care here: Apparent lanes might not necessarily be a separate lane: I have queried this with my local council because around town both the ‘lanes’ & the main carriageway were frankly too narrow to practically separate cyclists. I learned that " having a cycle lane type marking, ie, with a line, etc does not necessarily construe a separate cycle lane …but serves to remind both groups of the others presence"
I asked ‘what’s that about…’ to which I was told that cyclists were at liberty to still use the whole carriageway, ie, to overtake if appropriate conditions were met or if, ie, a car is parked across the ‘cycle awareness’ ‘lane’, etc.
Spardo:
If cyclists would accept the rules of the road like most others have to, and wait in turn at lights there would be less of a problem. It is the weaving and undertaking ban that they insist on being excused from which causes most problems. I doubt it is often because an HGV draws alongside a cyclist already in front of him at the lights.
I know of at least one case where the lorry driver passed and repassed the cyclist before turning left and killing her.
There you go, condemned out of your own mouth. How could the driver pass and repass the cyclist if the cyclist had not undertaken between each set of lights? Illegal. Unless of course,
Undertaking by cyclists illegal? Sorry, mate, that’s not right. And what’s more, there is heaps of paint in London that encourage cyclists to do exactly that.
I presume you are talking about painted cycle lanes. That isn’t undertaking. That is using seperate lanes in a correct manner and drivers should respect them, but that is not what I am talking about. Undertaking is passing on the left a vehicle which is in the same lane and is a frequent practice by cyclists. And is illegal. Also extremely dangerous not least because of the frustration it gives rise to in drivers constantly held up by slow cyclists, finally able to pass only to find themselves behind the same numbskull at the next lights and having to go through the whole thing again. If a cyclist arrives at lights behind an HGV, why doesn’t he wait there, like everyone else?
But that means that all parties trying share the road, which means both groups accept that the other has a right to be there. I don’t hear that from you
,
That is because you aren’t listening. With rights comes responsibilities. Obey the rule of the road. Wait your turn.
“Rule 88 Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.”
Apart from that there is no specific mention of filtering in the HC. Ie no prohibition. Unless you know better than me, and can point me to a specific point of law.
Apart from these:
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.
73
Pay particular attention to long vehicles which need a lot of room to manoeuvre at corners. Be aware that drivers may not see you. They may have to move over to the right before turning left. Wait until they have completed the manoeuvre because the rear wheels come very close to the kerb while turning. Do not be tempted to ride in the space between them and the kerb.
Which makes it pretty clear that both groups of road users have an equal responsibility to look out for each other.
ROG:
Do you believe, as I do, that every driver or rider using any sort of transport on our public highways should be properly trained and tested to do so
Thanks for the welcome!
But no, we will have to agree to disagree on that one. Before you ask, I have 3rd party insurance (actually 2 different policies!).
Do you also believe that there should be a law banning ‘jay-walking’?
I did not mention pedestrians
Why do you not agree that every driver or rider using any sort of transport on our public highways should be properly trained and tested to do so
Happy Keith:
Whilst I’m here …cyclists with an Ipod/ear-phones: No, no, no… They’d get strung-up in Germany …but what is our Governmental Road Safety enforcers stance on their use by the ‘vulnerable’ cyclist fraternity? Is it further evidence that all road users are systematically subjected to a nationally sponsored lack of discipline enforcement?
As far as I know, treated the same as in-car stereos under law. There was a case 2 or 3 years ago where the iPod was blamed for left-turning lorry cyclist fatality, but I didn’t see how this was deduced - difficult to say how loud the iPod was, what music was being played etc etc. Having used various earpieces, I can tell that the conventional designs do not come even close to matching traffic noise, never mind drowning out.
As for being able to mask the sound of the average lorry, forget it.
BillChi:
“Rule 88 Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.”
Apart from that there is no specific mention of filtering in the HC. Ie no prohibition. Unless you know better than me, and can point me to a specific point of law.
Apart from these:
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.
73
Pay particular attention to long vehicles which need a lot of room to manoeuvre at corners. Be aware that drivers may not see you. They may have to move over to the right before turning left. Wait until they have completed the manoeuvre because the rear wheels come very close to the kerb while turning. Do not be tempted to ride in the space between them and the kerb.
Which makes it pretty clear that both groups of road users have an equal responsibility to look out for each other.
BillChi
1 - The Highway Code is not law - it is advice sometimes based on the law.
2 - It sounds to me like you are prepared to “die for the right to be right”
3 - Have you ever spent more than a short time in a lorry cab and actually seen what is going on? Obviously not, or if you did it did not sink in.
Sorry to be aggressive, but I believe that a large number of cyclists (all over the country) have a death-wish. Lorries are here to stay, they have visibility issues particualrly around small vehicles, they can flatten a cyclist with out even knowing it - use your brain - stay away from them and educate other cyclists about the dangers and the reasons for the dangers. Or die of ignorance. The choice is yours and your fellow cyclists.
BTW - how did your bike get from the Raleigh factory to the shop? A delivery rider? I think not!
I am also a former high milage cyclist (including in London) so have seen both sides of the coin.
Why do you not agree that every driver or rider using any sort of transport on our public highways should be properly trained and tested to do so
Well, I agree that some sort of training is useful, but if you want more people on bikes (which I am sure you all do, more cyclist = a lot less cars = less congestion, more efficiency), then you have to get more kids on bikes. Requiring them to have some sort of license you will deter a large majority, in exactly the same as helmet laws have deterred people from cycling, having the opposite effect to that intended, ie actually decreasing the health of the general population.
I am strongly in favour of training school-kids to ride bikes safely and enjoyably. In general, this is much more likely to have the desired outcome (more people on bikes) than training adults.
1 - The Highway Code is not law - it is advice sometimes based on the law.
2 - It sounds to me like you are prepared to “die for the right to be right”
3 - Have you ever spent more than a short time in a lorry cab and actually seen what is going on? Obviously not, or if you did it did not sink in.
Sorry to be aggressive, but I believe that a large number of cyclists (all over the country) have a death-wish. Lorries are here to stay, they have visibility issues particualrly around small vehicles, they can flatten a cyclist with out even knowing it - use your brain - stay away from them and educate other cyclists about the dangers and the reasons for the dangers. Or die of ignorance. The choice is yours and your fellow cyclists.
BTW - how did your bike get from the Raleigh factory to the shop? A delivery rider? I think not!
I am also a former high milage cyclist (including in London) so have seen both sides of the coin.
Errr. Written literally hundreds of thousands of words on this topic, including a report on the view from a drivers cab.
Have no intention of dying to prove a point.
Ask again: is there anything beyond blaming the other party, that you lot are prepared to do to prevent these types of collisions?
Why do you not agree that every driver or rider using any sort of transport on our public highways should be properly trained and tested to do so
Well, I agree that some sort of training is useful, but if you want more people on bikes (which I am sure you all do, more cyclist = a lot less cars = less congestion, more efficiency), then you have to get more kids on bikes. Requiring them to have some sort of license you will deter a large majority, in exactly the same as helmet laws have deterred people from cycling, having the opposite effect to that intended, ie actually decreasing the health of the general population.
I am strongly in favour of training school-kids to ride bikes safely and enjoyably. In general, this is much more likely to have the desired outcome (more people on bikes) than training adults.
In some respects, I agree but to put a car driver on a bicycle means that the rider has, at least, some idea of the rules of the road, whereas, to put a cyclist on the road with no formal training of the hazards out there has to be plain dumb in my book.
Regarding ‘health’ - I thought that being safe was the heathiest thing one could do - no point in being physically fit and dead
As a former racing cyclist and now wagon driver I have been following this subject with interest.
Some of the guys I Train with have very little discipline with regard to there position on the road and the effects it might be coursing.
When riding in groups of 2 more on roads it is important that riders understand when to ‘‘single out’’ (ride behind each other) as to make it easier for other road users to pass.
As said in other posts, allot of this is down to education for us cyclist. We need to understand that if involved in a crash it will probably cause a lot of pain.
As an example, whilst in a road race we got stopped at a set tempory traffic lights.
Some of the riders decided to ignore the lights and proceed around a blind corner at speed ( 30 + mph ). Luckily nobody was killed. pure stupidity !!!
As a warning to wagon drivers, if you see road side signs ‘’ Cycle Race Ahead’’
or the like, please be extra vigilant.
It maybe possible that some interesting manoeuvres may come your way !.
ROG:
‘…I thought that being safe was the heathiest thing one could do - no point in being physically fit and dead…’
Quite so, ‘being safe & healthy’ now falls into the realm of Primary Healthcare that we hear so much about. It’s largely about encouraging society to adopt healthy behaviour, which many of us for myriad reasons are reluctant to do, it seems.
A lot about ‘being safe & healthy’ was once imparted by the ‘system’ but has now arguably percolated away from our social culture, ie, plod are no longer funded to teach kids invaluable bike/road skills; the boy-scouts, etc being largely perceived as unfashionable whilst the adoption of using - or even carrying - a cycle-hat is frankly, on a High Street par with being a gay train-spotter or wearing socks with sandals…
BillChi:
Ask again: is there anything beyond blaming the other party, that you lot are prepared to do to prevent these types of collisions?
Yes - try to get through to some of the people who may have influence with these suicide jockeys that there is not much else we can do (other than being as vigilant as possible) and that they need to be aware of, and comprehend the danger into which they put themselves.
The only other possiblility I can think of is to put a soft, fluffy pink (day-glo of course) “bump bar” completely surrounding the lorry to push them gently over without causing too much damage.
I’ll ask you - is there anything we can do to stop the top of my cooker being dangerously hot when I turn the rings on? What can we do to stop me being burned when I put my hand on a hot ring? Should we make cookers cooler? Should we cover it in warning signs to tell us it is hot and dangerouse? Or should we advise people not to be stupid and avoid touching the hot bits?
