Another London cycling fatality
Discussion
Ban cyclists and restrict them to velodromes.
Or ban lorries inside M25 (and get very strong cyclists to deliver produce by the tonne).
Or create protected cycle highways.
Or instill the fear of God into cyclists so they are always alert. (I'd imagine you could get quite cocky/confident if you haven't lost flesh to the road.) And make them wear Christmas decorations.
TBH I don't know. Is it as bad in other towns around the world?
Or ban lorries inside M25 (and get very strong cyclists to deliver produce by the tonne).
Or create protected cycle highways.
Or instill the fear of God into cyclists so they are always alert. (I'd imagine you could get quite cocky/confident if you haven't lost flesh to the road.) And make them wear Christmas decorations.
TBH I don't know. Is it as bad in other towns around the world?
It is sad 
The fact that nobody has been arrested suggests that the truck driver has done nothing wrong?
The current 'solution' being worked on in the capital appears to be a glorified cycle path system / network. This could work but I wonder how many fatalities there will be due to shards of broken glass and rogue pedestrians we are told make other cycle paths such trecherous grounds...
The fact that nobody has been arrested suggests that the truck driver has done nothing wrong?
The current 'solution' being worked on in the capital appears to be a glorified cycle path system / network. This could work but I wonder how many fatalities there will be due to shards of broken glass and rogue pedestrians we are told make other cycle paths such trecherous grounds...
There is a certain inevitability about cyclist deaths in London, so sad, but I guess if several million people are all trying to get somewhere at the same time, some small and vulnerable, some large and heavy then its always going to happen.
Neither Lorries or Bikes will be banned, not sure how much education will help as by 52 he probably was fairly proficient, can be just a lapse of concentration or a distraction.
When I spend time in London it does make me wonder how it isnt actually more often.
Neither Lorries or Bikes will be banned, not sure how much education will help as by 52 he probably was fairly proficient, can be just a lapse of concentration or a distraction.
When I spend time in London it does make me wonder how it isnt actually more often.
C.A.R. said:
The fact that nobody has been arrested suggests that the truck driver has done nothing wrong?
Unfortunately, not being arrested can still mean things like - the driver couldn't see where they were going due to being blinded by the sun which is apparently 'acceptable'. I'd of though not being able to see where you are going would mean stop but hey ho.It could also mean the driver couldn't possibly have noticed the cyclist either directly in front or directly to the side as again apparently driving a lorry n London it is not necessary to see all around you.
This may well not have been the fault of the driver, but do not assume that not being arrested does not put the driver ot the lorry at fault as there are so many excuses or reasons for killing a cyclist (he just came our of nowhere) it would be funny if it wasn't so tragic.
Now, it may also be the fault of the cyclist but please do not read 'no arrest' as necessarily being a faultless driver.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/boris-johnso...
report said:
Boris Johnson came under pressure today to put pedestrians, rather than vehicles, at the heart of his transport policy for London.
The Mayor was warned that a recent rise in the number of people killed or seriously injured - known as KSIs - could continue unless he sped up reforms.
A report by the London Assembly’s transport committee revealed that more pedestrians end up dead or as badly hurt than any other road user group.
Almost 70 pedestrians were killed and another 1,054 seriously injured - an average of three people a day - in 2012, the last year for which figures are available.
Val Shawcross, chair of the committee, said: “It’s time to redress the balance and place equal safety emphasis on pedestrians. It is not right that pedestrian deaths and injuries are treated as acceptable – they’re not and urgent steps are needed to stop the rise in its tracks. If an average of three people per day were killed or seriously injured on the buses, there would be an uproar.”
The Mayor was warned that a recent rise in the number of people killed or seriously injured - known as KSIs - could continue unless he sped up reforms.
A report by the London Assembly’s transport committee revealed that more pedestrians end up dead or as badly hurt than any other road user group.
Almost 70 pedestrians were killed and another 1,054 seriously injured - an average of three people a day - in 2012, the last year for which figures are available.
Val Shawcross, chair of the committee, said: “It’s time to redress the balance and place equal safety emphasis on pedestrians. It is not right that pedestrian deaths and injuries are treated as acceptable – they’re not and urgent steps are needed to stop the rise in its tracks. If an average of three people per day were killed or seriously injured on the buses, there would be an uproar.”
Disco You said:
As a cyclist, I'd say that the two most realistic and effective measures would be:
Education for cyclists.
Ensuring that lorries have a minimum level of all-round visibility/ other cyclist detection systems.
Unfortunately the cyclists who need most eduaction will not be reached.Education for cyclists.
Ensuring that lorries have a minimum level of all-round visibility/ other cyclist detection systems.
They won't be looking at cycling forums; they won't look at the tfl website; they won't look at the safety clips on youtube. They think they're invincible, or ignore the dangers of cycling.
So they'll continue to die. Cycling lobby groups - another are where these cyclists won't look - will lobby for the same things they always lobby for, but the vast majority won't know or care that they should ride round Bow roundabout in a specific way for their own safety, etc, etc, etc.
There will be more punitive measures for (lorry) drivers or owners, but ultimately you stand a better chance of survival if you don't go to the left of lorries. But again, that message....and numerous signs on lorries themselves....gets ignored.
My bus to work goes through this spot every day and I'm surprised more don't die there to be honest. Cars and buses not being in the correct lane and moving across, cyclists riding up the inside of buses and in between cars in lanes, I wince every time I look out of the window.
The problem with London is that the standard of road user is lower than almost anywhere else, in my experience, regardless of their mode of transportation.
The problem with London is that the standard of road user is lower than almost anywhere else, in my experience, regardless of their mode of transportation.
0markymark0 said:
Unfortunately, not being arrested can still mean things like - the driver couldn't see where they were going due to being blinded by the sun which is apparently 'acceptable'. I'd of though not being able to see where you are going would mean stop but hey ho.
It could also mean the driver couldn't possibly have noticed the cyclist either directly in front or directly to the side as again apparently driving a lorry n London it is not necessary to see all around you.
This may well not have been the fault of the driver, but do not assume that not being arrested does not put the driver ot the lorry at fault as there are so many excuses or reasons for killing a cyclist (he just came our of nowhere) it would be funny if it wasn't so tragic.
Now, it may also be the fault of the cyclist but please do not read 'no arrest' as necessarily being a faultless driver.
From what I see every day in London, I'd put a few quid on the cyclist putting themselves in a position where the lorry wouldn't be able to see them. Despite all the publicity, a lot of cyclists just don't seem to have grasped how dangerous large vehicles are. It's all very well saying "he should have seen me", but that's not much use when you're dead or seriously injured. It could also mean the driver couldn't possibly have noticed the cyclist either directly in front or directly to the side as again apparently driving a lorry n London it is not necessary to see all around you.
This may well not have been the fault of the driver, but do not assume that not being arrested does not put the driver ot the lorry at fault as there are so many excuses or reasons for killing a cyclist (he just came our of nowhere) it would be funny if it wasn't so tragic.
Now, it may also be the fault of the cyclist but please do not read 'no arrest' as necessarily being a faultless driver.
BJG1 said:
The problem with London is that the standard of road user is lower than almost anywhere else, in my experience, regardless of their mode of transportation.
As a regular London commuter I would slightly disagree. I often feel safer in central London than cycling through Essex and most cars are used to cyclists and give them adequate space. I feel more vulnerable on quieter roads when cars are often driving at speeds they cannot stop in the distance they see.Back to the story, the fact that it is a disproportionate number of deaths due to lorries, specifically tipper trucks, it could be that cyclists favour throwing themselves only under these types of vehicles or that these types of lorries are not fit for London's roads. For example, not being able to see directly in front or to the side of you is apparently acceptable in a lorry. How than can be allowed in London's network of tiny roads is astonishing. Or the incentivastion of tipper trucks to get to the destination as quick as possible is a danger.
Geekman said:
From what I see every day in London, I'd put a few quid on the cyclist putting themselves in a position where the lorry wouldn't be able to see them. Despite all the publicity, a lot of cyclists just don't seem to have grasped how dangerous large vehicles are. It's all very well saying "he should have seen me", but that's not much use when you're dead or seriously injured.
I see a lot of people putting themselves in dangers way, I agree. The argument is difficult though. 1. Cyclist, it's dangerous to go there so dont....
2. Lorries, you cannot see to the side or directly in front of you so you should fit cameras/sensors so you can.
Cyclists will keep being bullied and told by cars and lorries they should get out of the way for their own safety, but how about the lorries fit proper equipment to minimise the danger they bring to the streets.
If I wanted to setup a chainsaw juggling show at a shopping centre, would I have a reasonable expectation everyone should stay out of the way? If you passed by, of course you would stay out of the way, but as the juggler, I am bringing the danger and should therefore make the most effort to minimise the danger rather than just making sure everyone stays out of my way.
saaby93 said:
What to do? Note the situation is improving?
"In 2013 the number of road cycling deaths in London remained the same as the previous year at 14, although the number of serious injuries involving cyclists fell 28%, TfL said.
The number of cycle journeys on London's main roads had nearly doubled in the past 10 years, TfL added."
saaby93 said:
mike-r said:
Dangerous road is dangerous, and should be treated as such by the judgment of those using said road as they are the people at risk. Bit harsh to pin it on TfL.
How are people using it told it's dangerous before they decide to use it ?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff