Another cyclist dies in London

[giantdefy]

George111 said:

You won't see a motorcyclist undertake a HGV or lane split between two HGVs on the motorway

No never

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUt57VtfU24

[saaby93]

Mr Will said:

The question here is why do you think that training the vulnerable road users to dodge better is the only thing that needs to be done? Why does none of the responsibility to change fall upon drivers? Particularly the professional drivers responsible for controlling the 30+ tonne off-road vehicles that are disproportionally involved in the deaths of pedestrians and cyclists.

Can you segregrate the stats again Mr Will
In the interests of fairness
Thanks

[Digby]

giantdefy said:

George111 said:

You won't see a motorcyclist undertake a HGV or lane split between two HGVs on the motorway

No never

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUt57VtfU24

He didn't see they were stopping and had no time to stop. Nothing like what you are suggesting.

[Digby]

Mr Will said:

If these off-road vehicles are not fit for the purpose of use in cities then we need to design a better vehicle. It's not beyond the wit of man.

They are looking at different designs, but then, as with changes made to current vehicles by law, that won't help the unaware cyclists or those in a hurry who ride with no intention of waiting anywhere.

The first time I sat indicating left with my new proximity sensors and a loud voice declaring "WARNING, THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT", in my down facing door mirror (one of seven), a cyclists stopped right beside my passenger door and started looking for the speaker trying to ascertain where the sound was coming from.

I sat there waiting, again, before I could move away.

[George111]

Digby said:

giantdefy said:

George111 said:

You won't see a motorcyclist undertake a HGV or lane split between two HGVs on the motorway

No never

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUt57VtfU24

He didn't see they were stopping and had no time to stop. Nothing like what you are suggesting.

Don't worry, you can always trust PH to find an exception despite how unrepresentative or unrealistic it is. The fact it's nothing like what we were talking about doesn't matter, this is the bicycle lobby on PH so anything goes

[walm]

George111 said:

If cyclists never went alongside a HGV they would never die.

Sadly cars kill cyclists fairly regularly too.

[walm]

George111 said:

I just don't understand why cyclists undertake HGVs.

I do it so I will try to help you understand.
Quite often the cycle lane is specifically designed to let you do it.
How about going up an empty bus lane?

If I know the light has just turned red and there is an empty lane in front of me with a visible empty ASL - why on earth wouldn't I carry on and head into the box? I might even do that if the HGV was signalling left and shouting at me, since I know the light timings very well and none of the ones I go through have those barriers that like to turn cyclists into a sandwich.

For an even more obvious scenario, imagine it's a straight road with a traffic jam and no left turn?

You expect me to stop in the middle of an empty bus lane and hold up a bus?

[Mr Will]

Digby said:

I'll ask again (although it will undoubtedly be shot down in flames again), but shall I list all we have had to go through and will have to continue to go through and the changes made to vehicles regarding cyclist safety?

Also worthy of mention is that not so long ago, the AA, the Road Haulage Association, British Cycling and the UK Health Forum asked that children in schools should be given lessons in riding a bike and negotiating traffic etc as part of their curriculum.

Studies also showed that those who took part in Bikeability cycle training used their cycles more often.

I think I will get my wish once a few more die.

There's no need to repeat yourself. Most of us here can read.

I'm fully in favour of cycle training in schools. Again you are trying to argue against a point nobody is making.

I'm also in favour of safer road designs, safer lorries, and increased driver training - are you in favour of these things or against them?

[walm]

Mr Will said:

I'm also in favour of safer road designs, safer lorries, and increased driver training - are you in favour of these things or against them?

Are you having a laugh?
You haven't read anything he wrote.

Do you want him to list all the training and cycle safety measures on his HGV again?

[Digby]

Digby said:

Mr Will said:

Digby said:

Mr Will said:

Finlandia said:

Run ads about the dangers of cycling irresponsibly on TV, newspapers and online, that would be a good start.

Have you been to London recently? They are all over the place. TV, Radio, Papers, Billboards, Bus-stops, Tube-lines. We've ticked that one off the list already.

Really? I am there a lot listening to BBC Radio London and other stations and can't say I have seen or heard anything.

You seem to have a lot of problems with observation. Perhaps you should get that checked out...

List where you see and hear them all and I will take a look.

Genuinely curious as to where this is happening because it's a massive step in the right direction. I seem to have missed almost all of it (not that I watch a lot of TV though but would still like to know)

[Digby]

walm said:

I might even do that if the HGV was signalling left and shouting at me..

And as you do, the driver now has to focus all his attention on you.

He now has to ignore anything else going on in all his mirrors and wait for you to no longer be a potential statistic. Once he goes back to his mirrors and you are out of harms way, everything will have changed and he will have lost track of numerous other cyclists he was aware of, all because you couldn't wait and ignored indicators, possible audible warnings, warning stickers etc.

You sound like the type of rider I see other riders shaking their heads at. Well done you.

[Vipers]

giantdefy said:

George111 said:

You won't see a motorcyclist undertake a HGV or lane split between two HGVs on the motorway

No never

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUt57VtfU24

Tard. Total lack of observation and anticipation, those trucks didn't just stop.

[funinhounslow]

George111 said:

If cyclists never went alongside a HGV they would never die. You won't see a motorcyclist undertake a HGV or lane split between two HGVs on the motorway - we know what happens and the HGV always wins, 44 tonnes -v- 230Kg motorcycle and 100Kg or so rider, no contest.

I just don't understand why cyclists undertake HGVs. But we'll not get an answer here other than "they can" and "it makes the journey faster". I can make my car journey faster by not stopping at red lights but I'd end up with an injury, dead or a summons within the hour so I don't do it. I don't understand why it's so difficult for other road users to understand this.

I would suggest that it is because in many cases that is where the "cycle lane" (painted gutter) leads you. If you're an inexperienced cyclist and approach a queue of traffic with a "cycle lane" to the left you will assume the lane has been provided for you to get past the queue . In particular, if you are used to European cycling infrastructure, the possibility of a vehicle cutting across your lane and crushing you to death probably won't occur to you.

In the absence of physically segregated lanes I suggest that all cycle lanes approaching lights should be abolished (making it clear to the cyclist that you are on your own rather than giving them a false sense of security) or redesigned thus:

[saaby93]

funinhounslow said:

I would suggest that it is because in many cases that is where the "cycle lane" (painted gutter) leads you. If you're an inexperienced cyclist and approach a queue of traffic with a "cycle lane" to the left you will assume the lane has been provided for you to get past the queue . In particular, if you are used to European cycling infrastructure, the possibility of a vehicle cutting across your lane and crushing you to death probably won't occur to you.

In the absence of physically segregated lanes I suggest that all cycle lanes approaching lights should be abolished (making it clear to the cyclist that you are on your own rather than giving them a false sense of security) or redesigned thus:

Youve highlighted just some of the things that are wrong with so called cycle lanes there, giving false sense of security is one, the Advanced stop lines shown in that photo are another - encouraging cyclists to squeeze through to the front into a space thats probably an HGV blind spot
Dont get me going about the uselessness of pavement cycle lanes in towns or worst of all that sign that says 'Cyclists Dismount' have you ever seen anyone do that?
Where cycling seems to work is in normal rural towns and villages where they dont have any of this and everything is treated as shared space without harping on about it, or where there are purpose built proper cycle lanes say the red routes in Milton Keynes.

Are the cycling deaths in London mainly attributable to the way the so called cycling infra structure leads to a false sense of security?

[funinhounslow]

Not one hour ago I was "clipped" by a minicab on the way to the supermarket (me not the cabbie!). He swerved to avoid another car, and hit me with his wing mirror, which I knocked in. A minor incident, but it startled me; any closer and he would have knocked me off.

I suppose Digby would say this is fine "because congestion" and by driving up my jacksee he could save time getting to the next red light. I prefer to think of it as rather than risking a scratch to his Mondeo estate he decided to swerve towards me and let me take my chances.

Yesterday I tried out the new cycle superhighways and cycled from Parliament Square to the City, down to Elephant and Castle and back all on segregated lanes and it was wonderful. Far quicker than any other mode of transport, safe and stress free.

Physically segregated bike lanes really are the only answer. They are even installing them in Manhattan. We can't keep putting this into the "too difficult" pile - if we really want to encourage cycling in London then the political will and resources need to be invested.

[saaby93]

funinhounslow said:

I suppose Digby would say this is fine "because congestion" and by driving up my jacksee he could save time getting to the next red light.

I wouldn't have thought Digby (or anyone) would have said that all
Are some people misreading his posts?


Surely the cabbie was alongside rather than behind if he clipped you with his wing mirror?
not that that's an advantage

[Vipers]

Theres no hope really, daily I have to move out of the way of some moron walking towards me looking at their phone, same people cross the road just because the green light is flashing, drivers on their hand held phones, education is a wonderful thing, but sadly lacking.

Couldnt believe they actually had to warn cyclists in Edinburgh not to get their wheels stuck in the tram lines, are some people that thick, guess they are.

I dont know what the answer is for London, cycle lanes are a non starter, matter of time that before some enterprising chappie comes up with a suggestion of a blanket 15 mph in London.............. except for cyclists

How do the statistics for London involving cyclists match other busy towns and cities in the UK?

[anonymous-user]

Another tipper lorry/cyclist collision this morning on the Edgware Road.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/edgware-road...

[saaby93]

Jeez what's happened there poor guy

Edited by saaby93 on Friday 3rd June 11:20

[funinhounslow]

saaby93 said:

I wouldn't have thought Digby (or anyone) would have said that all
Are some people misreading his posts?


Surely the cabbie was alongside rather than behind if he clipped you with his wing mirror?
not that that's an advantage

Sorry yes I just meant he was too close - should have chosen my words more carefully.

I don't think I'm misreading Digby's posts; they seem pretty clear to me...

Digby said:

funinhounslow said:

If I avoid a pothole and get in the way of a car, then by definition that car was too close.

No, on congested city streets, it means you didn't bother to look before swerving. Seriously. Stop with all the "too close" crap.

Digby said:

So you are saying never pass a cyclist, then? That's what you are saying on the vast majority of London Streets I use because we are often a foot apart. Never pass one for fear they may dodge a black broken drain cover, on a black road, that I should have spotted. They do not need to look ahead to spot this drain cover themselves, nor do they need to look when they avoid it. All of that falls to the motorist?

Incredible.