Another cyclist dies in London

[Antony Moxey]

GC8 said:

To those who can dot, and know what theyre talking about, you look particularly foolish.

What does 'dot' mean? I'm keen not to look particularly foolish in future.

[v12Legs]

The Vambo said:

v12Legs said:

Two thirds of lorries defective or illegal

But yeah, I'm sure you're right that the problem mainly lies with cyclists.

That logical fallacy was written by an moron and posted by someone desperate to believe a moron.

The police and VOSA deliberately do not stop an even cross section of LGV traffic, if you are driving something like a Dentressangle wagon you are significantly less likely to be pulled than an unbranded or small operator vehicle.

They know what wagons are likely to be faulty so they pull them.

The large companies, in my experience are even more anal about vehicle maintenance than even VOSA.

V12Legs will be telling us that speed kills next

Edited by The Vambo on Wednesday 25th February 15:41

That's a valid point.
But no one has yet showed any credible evidence that cyclists are being killed more through their own poor hazard awareness than by poor driving, yet practically every fifth post is "cyclists bring it on themselves by putting themselves in dangerous positions"

We simply don't know how many of these are caused by cyclists doing something wrong, drivers doing something wrong, or a mixture.
We do already know that overall drivers are far more likely to be at sole fault in a collision, so unless people are suggesting that it's only lorries that cyclists are for some reason throwing themselves underneath, I think we should assume the ratios are broadly similar.

[heebeegeetee]

Antony Moxey said:

ep, hands up, I'm pathetic and ridiculous. So what's the point of the photographs looking out of the truck windscreen? What are they illustrating - if it's a lack of vision why can I see a cyclist and tape on the floor when it's supposed to be a blind spot? As a driver would you not see that from your seat in your cab - I presume that's the whole point of that particular photograph.

So every truck is the same, and the view from every truck is identical, for all drivers of whatever height, just as the view of the outside world is identical in every single car?

And in fact, there is no blind spot issue at all, everyone is making it up including the police, and the root of all it is nothing but laziness?

[boz1]

walm said:

d/c of 2 is reasonable.
d/c of 3 is not.
d/c of 3 would require the driver being 1.5 metres back from the windscreen.
Or d/c of 3 would require just being say 30cm above the bottom of the screen - that's too low.

Completely agree if you mean looking straight out the front of the screen, but I was thinking of looking diagonally across the cab at someone on the left of the truck.

walm said:

Also the bottom of the screen looks to be about around head height - well under 2m and nowhere near 2.3m.

Also agree, but there are plenty of bigger lorries out there.

[Antony Moxey]

heebeegeetee said:

Antony Moxey said:

ep, hands up, I'm pathetic and ridiculous. So what's the point of the photographs looking out of the truck windscreen? What are they illustrating - if it's a lack of vision why can I see a cyclist and tape on the floor when it's supposed to be a blind spot? As a driver would you not see that from your seat in your cab - I presume that's the whole point of that particular photograph.

So every truck is the same, and the view from every truck is identical, for all drivers of whatever height, just as the view of the outside world is identical in every single car?

And in fact, there is no blind spot issue at all, everyone is making it up including the police, and the root of all it is nothing but laziness?

Is that so? I was just commenting on the pictures posted recently in this thread, I think I might even have said so when referring to a picture quoted within one of my replies. Why are you making all that other nonsense up - is that what you think I've said?

[heebeegeetee]

Antony Moxey said:

Is that so? I was just commenting on the pictures posted recently in this thread, I think I might even have said so when referring to a picture quoted within one of my replies. Why are you making all that other nonsense up - is that what you think I've said?

I just don't think you'll ever have an appreciation of how bloody annoying and indeed deeply upsetting it is to see comments like yours. Strong pronouncements on what goes on on the roads you drive on, based on photographs on the internet. You've possibly never sat in the vehicles in your life, and have completely zero experience of what a truck driver can and can't see, but you're still making pronouncements about their daily life.

Truck drivers have to share the roads with millions of people like yourself don't forget, because imo you accurately reflect how the public thinks.

Let's just remind ourselves:

Antony Moxey said:

walm said:

NinjaPower said:

He certainly won't see a cyclist parked in front of his bumper.

Funnily enough, I wouldn't sneak into the blind spot (frankly that would be way more effort!).

You would end up around 6ft+ in front of him, at least.

The whole point is to AVOID the area within the yellow boundaries here:

If you couldn't see a cyclist on the bike in front of the truck or one where the plod is stood just to the front left of the truck then seriously, you shouldn't be driving. That isn't a blind spot, it's a cant be arsed to look properly spot.

[walm]

boz1 said:

walm said:

d/c of 2 is reasonable.
d/c of 3 is not.
d/c of 3 would require the driver being 1.5 metres back from the windscreen.
Or d/c of 3 would require just being say 30cm above the bottom of the screen - that's too low.

Completely agree if you mean looking straight out the front of the screen, but I was thinking of looking diagonally across the cab at someone on the left of the truck.

walm said:

Also the bottom of the screen looks to be about around head height - well under 2m and nowhere near 2.3m.

Also agree, but there are plenty of bigger lorries out there.

Very fair point about the blind spot on the left hand side.
I was still stuck in defensive mode because a whole bunch of people called me a moron for wanting to be right in front of the truck rather than to the side!
Your handy maths is strongly reinforcing the point as to quite how dangerous the left hand side is.

[Antony Moxey]

heebeegeetee said:

I just don't think you'll ever have an appreciation of how bloody annoying and indeed deeply upsetting it is to see comments like yours. Strong pronouncements on what goes on on the roads you drive on, based on photographs on the internet.

But they're not though. If you read what I've written I've only commented on the photographs. In those photos, from where the photo has been taken, you can CLEARLY see a cyclist in front of the truck. That's all I've said, and yes, I stand by my comment that in that scenario if you can't see that cyclist that's clearly visible you shouldn't be driving.

I didn't say it was the case for all roads, all trucks, all truckers, all cyclist or all photographs. Just those posted on here that I quoted. Surely you can see that? If you're upset it because you're not reading what I've written

[rambo19]

v12Legs said:

rambo19 said:

Sadly, there are to many cyclists who put themselves in danger.
I lived and worked in london for years, and cyclists were, on the whole, a complete nightmare.
What I would like to see is the police doing more, but they are overworked as it is.

Two thirds of lorries defective or illegal

But yeah, I'm sure you're right that the problem mainly lies with cyclists.

Good point, but, how many cyclists are killed because of a mechanical defect on the lorry................

[hornetrider]

Antony Moxey said:

But they're not though. If you read what I've written I've only commented on the photographs. In those photos, from where the photo has been taken, you can CLEARLY see a cyclist in front of the truck. That's all I've said, and yes, I stand by my comment that in that scenario if you can't see that cyclist that's clearly visible you shouldn't be driving.

I didn't say it was the case for all roads, all trucks, all truckers, all cyclist or all photographs. Just those posted on here that I quoted. Surely you can see that? If you're upset it because you're not reading what I've written

You, sir, are a buffoon.

[Mr Gear]

hornetrider said:

You, sir, are a buffoon.

It's easier to call him names than it is to properly address what he has written. I've yet to see anyone post anything that actually disproves what he has written.

[Mr Gear]

rpguk said:

I just came across an interesting video which really demonstrates how these things can develop http://youtu.be/sCfiYT_Aa_g?t=45s - the setup is very similar to the oneu in Victoria. Keep watch Samsunging to see the footage from the rear view cam which is even more sobering.

Hey come on, play fair! You should know it's always the cyclists fault, no CGI footage of lorry drivers driving like cretins please.

[v12Legs]

rambo19 said:

v12Legs said:

rambo19 said:

Sadly, there are to many cyclists who put themselves in danger.
I lived and worked in london for years, and cyclists were, on the whole, a complete nightmare.
What I would like to see is the police doing more, but they are overworked as it is.

Two thirds of lorries defective or illegal

But yeah, I'm sure you're right that the problem mainly lies with cyclists.

Good point, but, how many cyclists are killed because of a mechanical defect on the lorry................

Probably not many, but it illuminates a widespread disregard for the safety of other road users, plus many of the defects were inadequate mirrors and other safety features.

[The Vambo]

v12Legs said:

rambo19 said:

v12Legs said:

rambo19 said:

Sadly, there are to many cyclists who put themselves in danger.
I lived and worked in london for years, and cyclists were, on the whole, a complete nightmare.
What I would like to see is the police doing more, but they are overworked as it is.

Two thirds of lorries defective or illegal

But yeah, I'm sure you're right that the problem mainly lies with cyclists.

Good point, but, how many cyclists are killed because of a mechanical defect on the lorry................

Probably not many, but it illuminates a widespread disregard for the safety of other road users, plus many of the defects were inadequate mirrors and other safety features.

All it illuminates is your desperation to cling to any shoddy piece of work that supports your militant, bigoted views.

[Antony Moxey]

hornetrider said:

You, sir, are a buffoon.

Obviously. Your efforts in putting me right are most appreciated.

[GC8]

Antony Moxey said:

hornetrider said:

You, sir, are a buffoon.

Obviously. Your efforts in putting me right are most appreciated.

They aren't though, are they?

You cannot be told anything because you are a know-it-all.

[ZX10R NIN]

BugLebowski said:

Does it have to be a competition?

Not a competition but was making a point to the guy that posted

[Antony Moxey]

GC8 said:

Antony Moxey said:

hornetrider said:

You, sir, are a buffoon.

Obviously. Your efforts in putting me right are most appreciated.

They aren't though, are they?

You cannot be told anything because you are a know-it-all.

Welcome to the party, the bandwagon's parked just over there on the left. Feel free to jump on at any time, it should be good fun. As a special treat I've hired an act that specialises in written comprehension.

[ZX10R NIN]

Antony Moxey said:

Welcome to the party, the bandwagon's parked just over there on the left. Feel free to jump on at any time, it should be good fun. As a special treat I've hired an act that specialises in written comprehension.

Do you not feel Cyclists especially those commuting into London should undertake some form of training?

As has been said it's not always the Trucks fault & vice versa.

[Antony Moxey]

ZX10R NIN said:

Antony Moxey said:

Welcome to the party, the bandwagon's parked just over there on the left. Feel free to jump on at any time, it should be good fun. As a special treat I've hired an act that specialises in written comprehension.

Do you not feel Cyclists especially those commuting into London should undertake some form of training?

As has been said it's not always the Trucks fault & vice versa.

Yep, of course it's not always the trucks' fault, every mode of transport has its share of stupid operators.

The trouble with compulsory training for cyclists is how do you administer and police it, and I'm not entirely sure it'll achieve a lot anyway. Like I said, there's stupid in all forms of transport yet every one apart from the cyclists (unless they are only cyclists and not someone who also drives a car/truck/bike/bus etc) has had some form of training and had to pass some form of test anyway.