Another cyclist dies in London

[Finlandia]

IroningMan said:

ZX10R NIN said:

IroningMan said:

Why do tippers need to be dual purpose? DROPS systems have been around for decades and it's hardy rocket science to keep sites level - they don't have to be assault courses.

What about when they have to go to quarries, land fill sites etc

Either the sites should be graded so on-road wagons can cope, or they should dismount the load bed for collection by an off-road wagon.

There is the cost element to consider as well, twice as many lorries needed and more time spent loading/offloading, and the sites can't be held in a condition that grants on-road lorries access.

Someone mentioned those flags on a pole that you see on kids bikes, there's a good idea to work on.

[GC8]

IroningMan said:

Either the sites should be graded so on-road wagons can cope, or they should dismount the load bed for collection by an off-road wagon.

This shows a spectacular lack of understanding. It has little to do with the city sites and everything to do with the quarries and landfill sites on which they have to work.

[kev1974]

ZX10R NIN said:

That truck is not suitable for tipper truck purposes the cab is to low plus the lack of ground clearance would be a major issue.

That truck is a tipper isn't it? There's some more pictures of it here
https://twitter.com/MercedesTruckUK/status/5709554...
https://twitter.com/rosannadownes/status/570888627...
https://twitter.com/TfL/status/571000561413316608

[Finlandia]

kev1974 said:

ZX10R NIN said:

That truck is not suitable for tipper truck purposes the cab is to low plus the lack of ground clearance would be a major issue.

That truck is a tipper isn't it? There's some more pictures of it here
https://twitter.com/MercedesTruckUK/status/5709554...
https://twitter.com/rosannadownes/status/570888627...
https://twitter.com/TfL/status/571000561413316608

I won't be of any use in quarries and landfill sites, a private owner wouldn't buy one for that reason alone.

[kev1974]

Finlandia said:

I won't be of any use in quarries and landfill sites, a private owner wouldn't buy one for that reason alone.

Why not?

TfL have also been showcasing new skip lorries with low side guards at the same lorry safety show, it must be possible to unload/empty them, they must have looked into the landfill site issues?
https://twitter.com/ODonovanWaste/status/570876661...
https://twitter.com/rosannadownes/status/570998293...

[Finlandia]

kev1974 said:

Finlandia said:

I won't be of any use in quarries and landfill sites, a private owner wouldn't buy one for that reason alone.

Why not?

TfL have also been showcasing new skip lorries with low side guards at the same lorry safety show, it must be possible to unload/empty them, they must have looked into the landfill site issues?
https://twitter.com/ODonovanWaste/status/570876661...
https://twitter.com/rosannadownes/status/570998293...

Because private owners/drivers only have one lorry, and it needs to be able to access every job, those linked simply cannot access a quarry or a landfilling site, but TfL has more than one lorry to play with.

[IroningMan]

GC8 said:

IroningMan said:

Either the sites should be graded so on-road wagons can cope, or they should dismount the load bed for collection by an off-road wagon.

This shows a spectacular lack of understanding. It has little to do with the city sites and everything to do with the quarries and landfill sites on which they have to work.

They're killing people, therefore unfit for purpose - something about their design or the working practices that drive their design needs to be changed.

Personally I don't hold the profit margins of property developers above the lives of cyclists - or any other road users. The construction industry has had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the status quo, where it at least deigns to wash-down vehicles as they leave sites; that was apparently going to be the end of the world, too.

Tippers, and/or their operators, are the problem, and must be the solution.

[Finlandia]

IroningMan said:

Tippers, and/or their operators, are the problem, and must be the solution.

Or then people need to be more aware of the dangers of them.

We have these sorts on our roads, in towns as well as rural areas, and they very rarely kill anyone.

[ZX10R NIN]

Finlandia said:

Or then people need to be more aware of the dangers of them.

We have these sorts on our roads, in towns as well as rural areas, and they very rarely kill anyone.

Never seen one of them on London's roads

[kev1974]

Finlandia said:

kev1974 said:

Finlandia said:

I won't be of any use in quarries and landfill sites, a private owner wouldn't buy one for that reason alone.

Why not?

TfL have also been showcasing new skip lorries with low side guards at the same lorry safety show, it must be possible to unload/empty them, they must have looked into the landfill site issues?
https://twitter.com/ODonovanWaste/status/570876661...
https://twitter.com/rosannadownes/status/570998293...

Because private owners/drivers only have one lorry, and it needs to be able to access every job, those linked simply cannot access a quarry or a landfilling site, but TfL has more than one lorry to play with.

I'd wager these private owner/drivers are just going to have to change, i.e. start dumping at more accessible landfills that accomodate these newer trucks, or waste transfer sites where they dump into one accessible place and a vehicle belonging to the site then takes the contents onwards to other areas.

How many lorries bring stuff directly from quarries into central London? I'd guess at almost none in practice, beyond specialist jobs requiring a random rockery in front of the office or something, I certainly can't think of any quarries particularly nearby? Concrete, tarmac, aggregate places that supply London construction all have proper made roads straight from the loading hoppers surely.

[ZX10R NIN]

kev1974 said:

I'd wager these private owner/drivers are just going to have to change, i.e. start dumping at more accessible landfills that accomodate these newer trucks, or waste transfer sites where they dump into one accessible place and a vehicle belonging to the site then takes the contents onwards to other areas.

How many lorries bring stuff directly from quarries into central London? I'd guess at almost none in practice, beyond specialist jobs requiring a random rockery in front of the office or something, I certainly can't think of any quarries particularly nearby? Concrete, tarmac, aggregate places that supply London construction all have proper made roads straight from the loading hoppers surely.

Lots of lorries go straight from Quarries/Landfill to site & vice versa it'd be inefficient to do it any other way that's why some tippers have sleeper cabs. Random Rockery? what about all the land or old building that has to be removed before you even put the Foundations in.

[Antony Moxey]

ZX10R NIN said:

IroningMan said:

Why do tippers need to be dual purpose? DROPS systems have been around for decades and it's hardy rocket science to keep sites level - they don't have to be assault courses.

What about when they have to go to quarries, land fill sites etc

Quarries are some of the flattest sites you'll ever take a tipper truck into. They pretty much only go into the stock yard rather than the pit itself and stock yards normally have an even enough ground that you could drive a car around it comfortably.

Landfills are a bit different as they're made up ground so do get rutted very quickly, however for domestic waste sites it's not unusual to have regular bin lorries tipping there so if they can a normal tipper truck can. Inert sites are the worst, but I suppose there's the possibility that you could have a tip off point and let the site machinery move it around.

[heebeegeetee]

Bad housekeeping and lazy management is the main reason for construction vehicles being like they are, from my 25 years in the game.

[Finlandia]

kev1974 said:

Finlandia said:

kev1974 said:

Finlandia said:

I won't be of any use in quarries and landfill sites, a private owner wouldn't buy one for that reason alone.

Why not?

TfL have also been showcasing new skip lorries with low side guards at the same lorry safety show, it must be possible to unload/empty them, they must have looked into the landfill site issues?
https://twitter.com/ODonovanWaste/status/570876661...
https://twitter.com/rosannadownes/status/570998293...

Because private owners/drivers only have one lorry, and it needs to be able to access every job, those linked simply cannot access a quarry or a landfilling site, but TfL has more than one lorry to play with.

I'd wager these private owner/drivers are just going to have to change, i.e. start dumping at more accessible landfills that accomodate these newer trucks, or waste transfer sites where they dump into one accessible place and a vehicle belonging to the site then takes the contents onwards to other areas.

How many lorries bring stuff directly from quarries into central London? I'd guess at almost none in practice, beyond specialist jobs requiring a random rockery in front of the office or something, I certainly can't think of any quarries particularly nearby? Concrete, tarmac, aggregate places that supply London construction all have proper made roads straight from the loading hoppers surely.

For that to happen the entire way of society must change, the chasing of time and cost must change. As it is now the best way of getting jobs is to have a big off-road tipper that can access all sites, if you choose not to have one then many job opportunities vanishes.

[gazza285]

ZX10R NIN said:

What about when they have to go to quarries, land fill sites etc

I have worked in a lot of quarries throughout the north of England and not one had any access for tipper wagons in the quarry itself, they were all loaded on a level area by a shovel loader, or under a hopper/conveyor. Same with any landfill sites. You need a level loading/unloading area or else you run the risk of the shovel or wagon going over.

The worst conditions I've seen a tipper working in was in Central London when I worked on the Park Plaza Westminster, once the muck away starts nobody wants the plant to be stood, so the tipper drivers were under pressure to get off, tip, and back on site ASAP. The site was taking water in from the Thames and was a quagmire, there was no wheel wash and space was tight, so mud all over the road and water draining out of the back of the truck bodies as they left. After a bking a street sweeper was brought to site to clean the road, this was then tipped back on site, so more mess.

[GC8]

IroningMan said:

GC8 said:

IroningMan said:

Either the sites should be graded so on-road wagons can cope, or they should dismount the load bed for collection by an off-road wagon.

This shows a spectacular lack of understanding. It has little to do with the city sites and everything to do with the quarries and landfill sites on which they have to work.

They're killing people, therefore unfit for purpose - something about their design or the working practices that drive their design needs to be changed.

Personally I don't hold the profit margins of property developers above the lives of cyclists - or any other road users. The construction industry has had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the status quo, where it at least deigns to wash-down vehicles as they leave sites; that was apparently going to be the end of the world, too.

Tippers, and/or their operators, are the problem, and must be the solution.

Rubbish!

The problem is that the vehicles and cyclists are coming into contact. When this happens the vehicles are even more hazardous than other commercial vehicles.

The solution is to prevent their coming into contact, which is why I always urge cyclists to keep themselves out of situations where this is possible,

[v12Legs]

GC8 said:

Rubbish!

The problem is that the vehicles and cyclists are coming into contact. When this happens the vehicles are even more hazardous than other commercial vehicles.

The solution is to prevent their coming into contact, which is why I always urge cyclists to keep themselves out of situations where this is possible,

And for the umpteenth time, you (nor I) have absolutely no idea how many of these are caused by the cyclist putting themselves into that situation, and how many are due to "left hooks" or the driver's lack of correct observation.

[Finlandia]

gazza285 said:

the tipper drivers were under pressure to get off, tip, and back on site ASAP.

That is one huge reason, drivers put under pressure due to a tight schedule to minimise the cost, then add completely unaware people doing silly stuff around these big trucks and you have a recipe for disaster.

The solution, either loosen up the cost chasing or educate people in traffic awareness, or why not both.

[GC8]

v12Legs said:

GC8 said:

Rubbish!

The problem is that the vehicles and cyclists are coming into contact. When this happens the vehicles are even more hazardous than other commercial vehicles.

The solution is to prevent their coming into contact, which is why I always urge cyclists to keep themselves out of situations where this is possible,

And for the umpteenth time, you (nor I) have absolutely no idea how many of these are caused by the cyclist putting themselves into that situation, and how many are due to "left hooks" or the driver's lack of correct observation.

For fk's sake! Are your posts a true reflection of your personality here?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

There is no mention of blame in post! The reason that cyclists need to observe, to be aware and to ride defensively is to give themselves a chance where vehicle drivers ARE responsible.

[v12Legs]

GC8 said:

v12Legs said:

GC8 said:

Rubbish!

The problem is that the vehicles and cyclists are coming into contact. When this happens the vehicles are even more hazardous than other commercial vehicles.

The solution is to prevent their coming into contact, which is why I always urge cyclists to keep themselves out of situations where this is possible,

And for the umpteenth time, you (nor I) have absolutely no idea how many of these are caused by the cyclist putting themselves into that situation, and how many are due to "left hooks" or the driver's lack of correct observation.

For fk's sake! Are your posts a true reflection of your personality here?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

There is no mention of blame in post! The reason that cyclists need to observe, to be aware and to ride defensively is to give themselves a chance where vehicle drivers ARE responsible.

So why did you urge cyclists to not put themselves in that position, but not urge drivers to be more observant and not left hook cyclists? Why is the onus in your post completely on the cyclists to take all of the responsibility for avoiding being run over?

A cyclist can do everything 100% correctly and still get run over by a crap driver, so why are you only ever saying that it is the cyclist that needs to take all of the avoiding action?