Unmarked trucks used by the police.
Discussion
simoid said:
Dammit, would you position yourself between the kerb and an artic HGV at a junction, from which it may turn left, or wait behind it?
I wonder how many road deaths would be avoided if one of the drivers, despite being in the right, gave less opportunity for the mistake of someone else to be fatal.
Perhaps it should be law that the exhaust of an artic cab expels fumes down the near side of the unit?
Or the reversing alarm be wired up to sound when driving <10mph and indicating left
I won't go down the gap between an HGV and the curb at a corner, or if I know the truck may pull across to the left.I wonder how many road deaths would be avoided if one of the drivers, despite being in the right, gave less opportunity for the mistake of someone else to be fatal.
Perhaps it should be law that the exhaust of an artic cab expels fumes down the near side of the unit?
Or the reversing alarm be wired up to sound when driving <10mph and indicating left
However- the punishment for not knowing this should not be death, which seems to be the prevailing attitude in this thread.
The law should be that vehicles which cannot be driven safely in a built up area (solo) should not be driven in a built up area- if an HGV has to come into central London then maybe a motorcycle outrider would be a handy addition - whatever, it's insane to simply accept a woman a month being killed by a lorry driver as the price we pay for shoring up Tesco's profit margin.
dude, cars have like windows and s
t in them, so people can see out, they are also much smaller. Lorries are like fking massive and don't have these windows and st, they have a load of freight and st instead. The driver in a car can often hear an irate lycra clad mentalist banging on the windows before they squash him/her, but lorries are like fking massive and have like these massive engines that make loads of noise and st, so the driver can't see or hear anyone that was creeping up on the left side.
Unless lorries are made from some as yet undiscovered transparent material and all loads made invisible, it's going to be fking hard for drivers to be able to see right around their vehicles. Unless you are making eye contact with the driver, he (normally) cannot see you.
If you can, try and get a ride in a lorry in a built up area and see what the drivers can see, ideally have a driving lesson in one. I hope you aren't one of these people that steam up behind my tractor or other heavy vehicle before a set of lights the pull in front of me and anchor up turning my nice, gentle stop into a full on emergency stop because you have no concept of weight an braking distances.
t in them, so people can see out, they are also much smaller. Lorries are like fking massive and don't have these windows and st, they have a load of freight and st instead. The driver in a car can often hear an irate lycra clad mentalist banging on the windows before they squash him/her, but lorries are like fking massive and have like these massive engines that make loads of noise and st, so the driver can't see or hear anyone that was creeping up on the left side. Unless lorries are made from some as yet undiscovered transparent material and all loads made invisible, it's going to be f
king hard for drivers to be able to see right around their vehicles. Unless you are making eye contact with the driver, he (normally) cannot see you.If you can, try and get a ride in a lorry in a built up area and see what the drivers can see, ideally have a driving lesson in one. I hope you aren't one of these people that steam up behind my tractor or other heavy vehicle before a set of lights the pull in front of me and anchor up turning my nice, gentle stop into a full on emergency stop because you have no concept of weight an braking distances.
GC8 said:
You are an imbecile. Keep away from lorries on the road as much as possible. Never ride down their nearside under any circumstances and be aware that you will always come off worst even when you were in the right. With this in mind be aware as you ride into vulnerable positions.
Also, don't have children.
When you lose your job to a robot you could probably get a job as a motivational speaker, so look at the future as "glass half full".Also, don't have children.
Willy Nilly said:
dude, cars have like windows and st in them, so people can see out, they are also much smaller. Lorries are like fking massive and don't have these windows and st, they have a load of freight and st instead. The driver in a car can often hear an irate lycra clad mentalist banging on the windows before they squash him/her, but lorries are like fking massive and have like these massive engines that make loads of noise and st, so the driver can't see or hear anyone that was creeping up on the left side.
Unless lorries are made from some as yet undiscovered transparent material and all loads made invisible, it's going to be fking hard for drivers to be able to see right around their vehicles. Unless you are making eye contact with the driver, he (normally) cannot see you.
If you can, try and get a ride in a lorry in a built up area and see what the drivers can see, ideally have a driving lesson in one. I hope you aren't one of these people that steam up behind my tractor or other heavy vehicle before a set of lights the pull in front of me and anchor up turning my nice, gentle stop into a full on emergency stop because you have no concept of weight an braking distances.
The level of visibility is tragically low - I say tragically because we lose one woman a month (in London) to that lack of visibility.t in them, so people can see out, they are also much smaller. Lorries are like fking massive and don't have these windows and st, they have a load of freight and st instead. The driver in a car can often hear an irate lycra clad mentalist banging on the windows before they squash him/her, but lorries are like fking massive and have like these massive engines that make loads of noise and st, so the driver can't see or hear anyone that was creeping up on the left side. Unless lorries are made from some as yet undiscovered transparent material and all loads made invisible, it's going to be f
king hard for drivers to be able to see right around their vehicles. Unless you are making eye contact with the driver, he (normally) cannot see you.If you can, try and get a ride in a lorry in a built up area and see what the drivers can see, ideally have a driving lesson in one. I hope you aren't one of these people that steam up behind my tractor or other heavy vehicle before a set of lights the pull in front of me and anchor up turning my nice, gentle stop into a full on emergency stop because you have no concept of weight an braking distances.
I'm not denying it - far from it, it's criminal that vehicles with such limited visibility are allowed to share the roads with traffic that they simply cannot see.
Dammit said:
The level of visibility is tragically low - I say tragically because we lose one woman a month (in London) to that lack of visibility.
I'm not denying it - far from it, it's criminal that vehicles with such limited visibility are allowed to share the roads with traffic that they simply cannot see.
If the women that killed each month had stopped to think for a moment that as they cannot see the driver, there is a pretty goo chance the drive can't see them they won't get killed. Yes, the driver should always do their checks, but by the same token, it is quite literally suicidal riding a bike up the side of such a large vehicle where the driver hasn't a hope in hell of seeing you. I'm not denying it - far from it, it's criminal that vehicles with such limited visibility are allowed to share the roads with traffic that they simply cannot see.
If I am filtering on my motorbike, I won't filter up the side of a lorry near any turning an will only filter past them in stationary traffic if I know I can get past them into a position where the driver can see me.
The dump trucks they use in open cast mines have the same issue and they do squash decent sized service trucks, it's not the dumpers fault that the smaller vehicle can't see them, they didn't put themselves in a position where they could be seen. Same with the combine harvester at work, I'll never position a tractor (which is a lot bigger than a bike) where the operator can't see it or there will be an expensive crash. Do you think an airline pilot can see what is happening all around the plane at an airport?
The nature of a lorry is that it's big and carries things that cannot be seen through. This isn't a new phenomenon, it's not a design fault or negligence of whoever happens to be driving it, it's just how it is. Fitting them with umpteen mirrors and cameras then making the driver responsible for everyone elses failings goes someway to mitigate the problem, but the fact remains that as a motorcyclist and a bicyclist I need to keep away from lorries.
People want to buy things in shops in urban areas and the only practical way to have them delivered is with heavy good vehicles.
Dammit said:
Look at how the infrastructure is designed - the green cycle lane feeds all cyclists (who choose to use them) up the left at every junction.
Also every cyclist is used to abuse for "being in the middle of the road", the motorists want to be there and will drive a cyclist over to the left (into a dangerous location more often than not) if they can. Modern cycle training is very similar to that given to motorcyclists - taking the lane is key, but it's tough, especially for women it seems who are as we have seen the vast majority of those killed by lorry drivers.
So, just because the lane is there cant they hang back behind the lorry until it has turned? Lorry drivers are usually pretty good at indicating, so for the observant cyclists there is no need to put themselves in a dangerous position. All very well saying 'the roads are designed like that' - the roads are designed so I could do 120 down the motorway but it doesnt mean I do... Also every cyclist is used to abuse for "being in the middle of the road", the motorists want to be there and will drive a cyclist over to the left (into a dangerous location more often than not) if they can. Modern cycle training is very similar to that given to motorcyclists - taking the lane is key, but it's tough, especially for women it seems who are as we have seen the vast majority of those killed by lorry drivers.
There seems to be a total abdication of personal responsibility, and no understanding of how to ride in a way which keeps them safe. The result is a very dangerous combination.
Willy Nilly said:
If the women that killed each month had stopped to think for a moment that as they cannot see the driver, there is a pretty goo chance the drive can't see them they won't get killed. Yes, the driver should always do their checks, but by the same token, it is quite literally suicidal riding a bike up the side of such a large vehicle where the driver hasn't a hope in hell of seeing you.
If I am filtering on my motorbike, I won't filter up the side of a lorry near any turning an will only filter past them in stationary traffic if I know I can get past them into a position where the driver can see me.
The dump trucks they use in open cast mines have the same issue and they do squash decent sized service trucks, it's not the dumpers fault that the smaller vehicle can't see them, they didn't put themselves in a position where they could be seen. Same with the combine harvester at work, I'll never position a tractor (which is a lot bigger than a bike) where the operator can't see it or there will be an expensive crash. Do you think an airline pilot can see what is happening all around the plane at an airport?
The nature of a lorry is that it's big and carries things that cannot be seen through. This isn't a new phenomenon, it's not a design fault or negligence of whoever happens to be driving it, it's just how it is. Fitting them with umpteen mirrors and cameras then making the driver responsible for everyone elses failings goes someway to mitigate the problem, but the fact remains that as a motorcyclist and a bicyclist I need to keep away from lorries.
People want to buy things in shops in urban areas and the only practical way to have them delivered is with heavy good vehicles.
"If the women that killed each month had stopped to think for a moment that as they cannot see the driver, there is a pretty goo chance the drive can't see them they won't get killed."If I am filtering on my motorbike, I won't filter up the side of a lorry near any turning an will only filter past them in stationary traffic if I know I can get past them into a position where the driver can see me.
The dump trucks they use in open cast mines have the same issue and they do squash decent sized service trucks, it's not the dumpers fault that the smaller vehicle can't see them, they didn't put themselves in a position where they could be seen. Same with the combine harvester at work, I'll never position a tractor (which is a lot bigger than a bike) where the operator can't see it or there will be an expensive crash. Do you think an airline pilot can see what is happening all around the plane at an airport?
The nature of a lorry is that it's big and carries things that cannot be seen through. This isn't a new phenomenon, it's not a design fault or negligence of whoever happens to be driving it, it's just how it is. Fitting them with umpteen mirrors and cameras then making the driver responsible for everyone elses failings goes someway to mitigate the problem, but the fact remains that as a motorcyclist and a bicyclist I need to keep away from lorries.
People want to buy things in shops in urban areas and the only practical way to have them delivered is with heavy good vehicles.
They clearly aren't stopping to think (1 a month pretty much like clockwork) so whatever we're doing right now isn't working. Maybe we should try something else?
And it's fairly obvious why they're not stopping to think, as you put it - it's because being on the left of a bus, a coach, a minibus etc is not a death sentence as it is with a lorry, due to the driver being able to see out of other vehicles.
"Yes, the driver should always do their checks, but by the same token, it is quite literally suicidal riding a bike up the side of such a large vehicle where the driver hasn't a hope in hell of seeing you.
I agree - but it should not be! The driver should not be put in the position where he may become a killer before the end of his shift, and the cyclist should not be subjected to such danger when going about the course of their daily commute.
"If I am filtering on my motorbike, I won't filter up the side of a lorry near any turning an will only filter past them in stationary traffic if I know I can get past them into a position where the driver can see me."
This is why it's normally women who get killed - men tend to ride more as you do (this is a sweeping generalisation) and put themselves in the primary position, it's infrastructure, other road users and the attitude of the public to cyclists which puts women into the danger zone. All of these things need to change.
"Do you think an airline pilot can see what is happening all around the plane at an airport?"
I fly a lot - next week I'm flying five times - and spend a fair amount of time looking out of the window whilst waiting to board, and can confirm that the planes have a LOT of guidance and basically nothing to hit until they're coming up to the terminal. This is not a good comparison.
"The nature of a lorry is that it's big and carries things that cannot be seen through. This isn't a new phenomenon, it's not a design fault"
I totally disagree- we can make large vehicles which the driver can see out of, we're just failing to do it in this case. And until we do, HGV's should be banned from cities during rush hour.
"People want to buy things in shops in urban areas and the only practical way to have them delivered is with heavy good vehicles."
If that was the case then there would be no shops in Paris, which is clearly not true.
Condi said:
So, just because the lane is there cant they hang back behind the lorry until it has turned? Lorry drivers are usually pretty good at indicating, so for the observant cyclists there is no need to put themselves in a dangerous position. All very well saying 'the roads are designed like that' - the roads are designed so I could do 120 down the motorway but it doesnt mean I do...
There seems to be a total abdication of personal responsibility, and no understanding of how to ride in a way which keeps them safe. The result is a very dangerous combination.
It's only dangerous when one (1) type of vehicle is on the road with them.There seems to be a total abdication of personal responsibility, and no understanding of how to ride in a way which keeps them safe. The result is a very dangerous combination.
If women were being eaten by tigers at the rate of one per month, would you be saying "if they just avoided the tiger/knew how to ride around it this would not be a problem"?
No- you'd remove the tiger from the equation.
Read this Dammit
http://www.cityam.com/208156/every-cycling-acciden...
One thing I noticed was the amount of mini bus collisions with cyclists.
And I am waisting money putting stickers on the rear of my vehicles to discourage cyclists from
passing on the left.
Perhaps I should put a box there and suggest the cyclist helps themselves to an Organ Doner card
as they pass.
One thing for sure you hate Trucks and dislike professional drivers too.
On your other argument "my car is quicker than yours"
Well mine certainly is and infact one of my trucks would make you look foolish in drag race.
Are to Jeremy Clarkson in disguise ??
And on that note .................
http://www.cityam.com/208156/every-cycling-acciden...
One thing I noticed was the amount of mini bus collisions with cyclists.
And I am waisting money putting stickers on the rear of my vehicles to discourage cyclists from
passing on the left.
Perhaps I should put a box there and suggest the cyclist helps themselves to an Organ Doner card
as they pass.
One thing for sure you hate Trucks and dislike professional drivers too.
On your other argument "my car is quicker than yours"
Well mine certainly is and infact one of my trucks would make you look foolish in drag race.
Are to Jeremy Clarkson in disguise ??
And on that note .................
Dammit said:
Condi said:
So, just because the lane is there cant they hang back behind the lorry until it has turned? Lorry drivers are usually pretty good at indicating, so for the observant cyclists there is no need to put themselves in a dangerous position. All very well saying 'the roads are designed like that' - the roads are designed so I could do 120 down the motorway but it doesnt mean I do...
There seems to be a total abdication of personal responsibility, and no understanding of how to ride in a way which keeps them safe. The result is a very dangerous combination.
It's only dangerous when one (1) type of vehicle is on the road with them.There seems to be a total abdication of personal responsibility, and no understanding of how to ride in a way which keeps them safe. The result is a very dangerous combination.
If women were being eaten by tigers at the rate of one per month, would you be saying "if they just avoided the tiger/knew how to ride around it this would not be a problem"?
No- you'd remove the tiger from the equation.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying trucks are entirely blameless, but people should take some responsibility for their own actions and if riding up the side of a truck is dangerous then don't do it.
It would appear that the best option would be to remove the cyclists and make it illegal in built up areas as the trucks have a purpose, they are delivering goods, collecting waste and generally contributing to society, cyclists dont do anything that couldn't be achieved using public transport, a car or a motorbike which means that there would be a 100% reduction in cyclist deaths.
Plus his statement that a cyclist is qualified because they have a car license, by this logic I will allow my daughter to drive herself to school tomorrow as she has recently completed her cycling proficiency
Plus his statement that a cyclist is qualified because they have a car license, by this logic I will allow my daughter to drive herself to school tomorrow as she has recently completed her cycling proficiency
Dammit said:
It's only dangerous when one (1) type of vehicle is on the road with them.
If women were being eaten by tigers at the rate of one per month, would you be saying "if they just avoided the tiger/knew how to ride around it this would not be a problem"?
No- you'd remove the tiger from the equation.
No, actually I wouldn't. I would accept that if I am going to stray into the tigers natural environment then its me who needs to change to avoid them. If women were being eaten by tigers at the rate of one per month, would you be saying "if they just avoided the tiger/knew how to ride around it this would not be a problem"?
No- you'd remove the tiger from the equation.
Same with our roads, they are full of very dangerous animals (cars/lorries) and you need to show respect to them. Our roads, in general, are designed with cars, lorries and buses in mind. Until we get dedicated cycle lanes/paths which are separate from the main carriageway it will always be the cyclists responsibility to be extra careful. It doesnt matter who is 'right' if one party is dead. Being 'right' wont bring you any comfort when your body goes cold.
Dammit said:
I won't go down the gap between an HGV and the curb at a corner, or if I know the truck may pull across to the left.
However- the punishment for not knowing this should not be death, which seems to be the prevailing attitude in this thread.
The law should be that vehicles which cannot be driven safely in a built up area (solo) should not be driven in a built up area- if an HGV has to come into central London then maybe a motorcycle outrider would be a handy addition - whatever, it's insane to simply accept a woman a month being killed by a lorry driver as the price we pay for shoring up Tesco's profit margin.
Unfortunately, sometimes the natural punishment for dangerously disregarding the advice of the Highway Code and common sense can be death.However- the punishment for not knowing this should not be death, which seems to be the prevailing attitude in this thread.
The law should be that vehicles which cannot be driven safely in a built up area (solo) should not be driven in a built up area- if an HGV has to come into central London then maybe a motorcycle outrider would be a handy addition - whatever, it's insane to simply accept a woman a month being killed by a lorry driver as the price we pay for shoring up Tesco's profit margin.
Every vehicle has blind spots and every other road user should be driving to accommodate this.
Cfnteabag said:
It would appear that the best option would be to remove the cyclists and make it illegal in built up areas as the trucks have a purpose, they are delivering goods, collecting waste and generally contributing to society, cyclists dont do anything that couldn't be achieved using public transport, a car or a motorbike which means that there would be a 100% reduction in cyclist deaths.
Plus his statement that a cyclist is qualified because they have a car license, by this logic I will allow my daughter to drive herself to school tomorrow as she has recently completed her cycling proficiency
To follow the same logic as yourself we could reduce rape by making it illegal for women to leave the house - but as that would be targeting the victim it sounds a little unfair, not to say stupid, just like your argument.Plus his statement that a cyclist is qualified because they have a car license, by this logic I will allow my daughter to drive herself to school tomorrow as she has recently completed her cycling proficiency
simoid said:
Unfortunately, sometimes the natural punishment for dangerously disregarding the advice of the Highway Code and common sense can be death.
Every vehicle has blind spots and every other road user should be driving to accommodate this.
And if we all took that attitude we'd be dying in our droves from consumption and cholera.Every vehicle has blind spots and every other road user should be driving to accommodate this.
SVTRick said:
Read this Dammit
http://www.cityam.com/208156/every-cycling-acciden...
One thing I noticed was the amount of mini bus collisions with cyclists.
And I am waisting money putting stickers on the rear of my vehicles to discourage cyclists from
passing on the left.
Perhaps I should put a box there and suggest the cyclist helps themselves to an Organ Doner card
as they pass.
One thing for sure you hate Trucks and dislike professional drivers too.
On your other argument "my car is quicker than yours"
Well mine certainly is and infact one of my trucks would make you look foolish in drag race.
Are to Jeremy Clarkson in disguise ??
And on that note .................
You've managed to do a lot of typing without actually making any coherent point, would you like to try again?http://www.cityam.com/208156/every-cycling-acciden...
One thing I noticed was the amount of mini bus collisions with cyclists.
And I am waisting money putting stickers on the rear of my vehicles to discourage cyclists from
passing on the left.
Perhaps I should put a box there and suggest the cyclist helps themselves to an Organ Doner card
as they pass.
One thing for sure you hate Trucks and dislike professional drivers too.
On your other argument "my car is quicker than yours"
Well mine certainly is and infact one of my trucks would make you look foolish in drag race.
Are to Jeremy Clarkson in disguise ??
And on that note .................
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff