CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 37 min ago

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 5:11pm
pwa wrote:Mjr

you make a good point, but we would all have to be willing to pay more for things. The same would be true if we demanded better service from the companies that deliver our parcels. They employ people on very low wages with poor terms and conditions so that we don't have to pay more for our parcels. Competition and all that. Like you say, it's a race to the bottom at the moment. And every time we go out looking for a low cost bargain we encourage it.
We are already paying enourmous amounts of money every time there is a fatality.

Re: Not all bad..

24 February 2015 - 4:55pm
Dynamite_funk wrote:If a car waits behind me for longer than say 20-30 seconds I always give a quick hand raised to say thank you (as long as it;s not on a >10% hill!). It only takes a second and I like to think it has an effect on how they will react to other cyclists on the road

^ +1 = Me too ✔✔✔ and often one gets a friendly toot back or a quick flash of hazards

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 4:08pm
horizon wrote: It's a long lorry though and I presume it "cuts a corner". Am I right?

With a longer wheelbase rigid vehicles always 'cut' more of a corner(think tandems compared to solos)Articulated vehicles are even worse for this hence the need for them to 'take a swing' at tight corners.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:48pm
danhopgood wrote:horizon wrote:Any answers?

Was the lorry involved in the accident articulated?
From the accounts I've read it was a non-articulated tipper truck


In the photo on the BBC website it doesn't look articulated (initially I thought it looked as though it was). It's a long lorry though and I presume it "cuts a corner". Am I right?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:48pm
Mjr

you make a good point, but we would all have to be willing to pay more for things. The same would be true if we demanded better service from the companies that deliver our parcels. They employ people on very low wages with poor terms and conditions so that we don't have to pay more for our parcels. Competition and all that. Like you say, it's a race to the bottom at the moment. And every time we go out looking for a low cost bargain we encourage it.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:42pm
mjr wrote:........ If the market is racing to the bottom, isn't it time to tighten the rules?
My SinL(truck driver,artics)has just handed his notice in with a company that expected him to present himself for work at 5am and not leave for home until 7/8/or even 9pm six days a week!
All of that time wasn't spent driving obviously,he would spend time being unloaded and waiting for loads,etc but how anyone can be fit to drive such machinery with those kind hours per day I really don't know.
His new job guarantees he'll only work a 12hour day

So yes I agree it is time to tighten the rules.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:42pm
horizon wrote:Any answers?

Was the lorry involved in the accident articulated?
From the accounts I've read it was a non-articulated tipper truck
horizon wrote:If so, does it take a different path when turning from a non-articulated lorry?
Articulated vehicles are generally longer and the articulation makes it more difficult for the driver to use his or her mirrors.
horizon wrote:If so, does that make it more dangerous than a non-articulated lorry?
Possibly, but articulated vehicles are accepted on the roads worldwide
horizon wrote:If so, could non-articulated lorries be used?
Rigid trucks are generally smaller and smaller vehicles are less cost efficient and cause more congestion.
horizon wrote:Does the size of the lorry matter?
Yes. Big vehicles are more efficient but more difficult to fit onto narrow streets. Tipper trucks tend to be limited by weight rather than length and are generally shortish rigid vehicles with 4 axles.
horizon wrote:If so, could the delivery have been made in a smaller lorry?
Probably yes, but at greatly increased congestion levels and both monetary and environmental cost.
horizon wrote:Would having a banksman/assistant have made a difference?
Subjective. My own view is having an assistant would not not have helped much. When I was passenger in the car the other day and Mrs H went to hit the hedge at the front of our house at very slow speed, the hedge was hit before I finished saying "stop".
horizon wrote:If so, why didn't the lorry have one?
There's no requirement for it - and an assistant would cost money.
horizon wrote:Could the driver have seen the cyclist had he looked?
Probably.
horizon wrote:If not, why did he attempt the manouvre without asking for assistance?
The driver was doing his best and making that manoeuvre he would have had several places to look simultaneously. It's not reasonable to expect the drivers eyes to be everywhere all at once.
horizon wrote:If he could have and didn't look, why didn't he?
See previous answer.
horizon wrote:Was the driver aware that cyclists sometimes foolishly, mistakenly and stupidly enter the trajectory path of a left turning articulated vehicle?
Probably.
horizon wrote:If not, why not?
See previous answer
horizon wrote:If yes, given that he couldn't look in two directions at once, why had the driver no assistant or banksman to check this all-too-frequent possibility?
Because there's no requirement for it, it would nearly double the cost of operating the vehicle, rapidly putting any vehicle operator using ithem out of business pretty rapidly and it probably wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Large vehicles and cyclists mixing it in the same space is hazardous - especially for the cyclist. There's no easy solution. Simply having more road space would make the biggest difference in my view. But that will take decades of development with an iron will to make it happen - a la continental Europe. About time we started getting genuinely taking account of space for cycling in this country. Unfortunately vulnerable road users are the ones who take the brunt of the problems created by the P*SS poor sustainable road transport provision we have. All road users have a responsibility to minimise the risk. Training and enforcement would help. As would in my view a change in the culture of self-centred selfishness that pervades.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:38pm
pwa wrote:Horizon

forgive me for misunderstanding what a banksman does. My time on construction sites (landscaping) taught me that a banksman is the only person on site authorised to supervise vehicles coming entering / leaving. He / she is a trained and qualified person with a specific role, paid a lot more than some of the other people on site. I didn't realise they were now expected to ride around with the drivers when they leave the site. Sounds like a lot more jobs!

pwa: you're right - I use the term "banksman" in the loosest possible way. An "assistant" would be right too - even a 16 year old work placement with no driving skills (well, actually a nine year old IMV would have spotted that cyclist and called out). So, yes a "banksman" in the sense of anyone assisting the driver. A £6.50 per hour assistant and this young lady would probably still be alive.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:31pm
reohn2 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:That's patently rubbish - a banksman can have a role in any traffic conditions, although you might want to call them a co-driver if you're being really picky. A second pair of eyes...

But it's never going to happen is it?
When I was younger, maintenance vehicles from the local factory going off-site to collect and deposit bulky items used to have two people on board. It had two advantages: a second pair of eyes when moving in awkward locations, plus one can rest while the other is driving. As far as I know, almost no-one does that any more. They do the bare minimum allowed by https://www.gov.uk/drivers-hours/eu-rules or the even weaker https://www.gov.uk/drivers-hours/gb-domestic-rules - How's your concentration after 4 hours continuous driving? What about 5h15?

Highway Code Rule 91 https://www.gov.uk/rules-drivers-motorc ... e-90-to-94 recommends 15 minutes break every 2 hours (and I plan for that) - yet truck drivers seem pressurised to drive to the legal limits all the time. Sometimes a lorry is parked obstructing the way to my house (easy mistake to make - we're on an A road) and the driver will often apologise that they can't move it for another N minutes because they're timed out. If the market is racing to the bottom, isn't it time to tighten the rules?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 3:16pm
Horizon

forgive me for misunderstanding what a banksman does. My time on construction sites (landscaping) taught me that a banksman is the only person on site authorised to supervise vehicles coming entering / leaving. He / she is a trained and qualified person with a specific role, paid a lot more than some of the other people on site. I didn't realise they were now expected to ride around with the drivers when they leave the site. Sounds like a lot more jobs!

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 2:54pm
[XAP]Bob wrote:pwa wrote:Horizon

sorry if I misunderstood your post. It was the reference to the possible use of a "banksman" that confused me. In moving road traffic a banksman would have no role.
That's patently rubbish - a banksman can have a role in any traffic conditions, although you might want to call them a co-driver if you're being really picky. A second pair of eyes...

But it's never going to happen is it?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 2:14pm
FWIW,before I overtake anything there's a risk assessment carried out(it's done in an matter of seconds usually and sometimes less)if it's not safe to carry out the manoeuvre,I simply don't do it.
I will almost always pass on the right,if there's oncoming traffic I wait until it's clear.
For me to overtake on the left,the vehicle I'm overtaking has to be indicating right and be positioned correctly for that manoeuvre.
Very occasionally there are times when it's quicker to walk through a junction or hazard,I don't have a problem with that either if it's unsafe to do otherwise.
If my journey takes a little longer but it means I arrive in one piece I don't have a problem with that.
If people take risks to save what amounts mostly to seconds or at most 5 minutes*,they are stupid or insane.I'm sorry if that offends anyone but TBH such people should leave more time for their journey and think that their life or limbs are are more precious than minutes or seconds saved.

*Rarely on a bike can you save more than a few minutes on any journey of 20miles or less,and more often than not it's only seconds so why risk it?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 1:31pm
Horizon

sorry if I misunderstood your post. It was the reference to the possible use of a "banksman" that confused me. In moving road traffic a banksman would have no role.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 1:27pm
pwa wrote:Horizon

the lorry was on the road, not leaving a building site,

pwa: just as a matter of interest, did you think I thought it was? (I can't see the connection.)

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 12:45pm
Horizon

the lorry was on the road, not leaving a building site, and from witness reports it seems to have been in motion when the cyclist tried to overtake on the left between the lorry and a hoarding. The lorry appears to have been indicating left and in the process of turning before the young lady began passing on the left.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 12:41pm
beardy wrote:If the HGV was stuck in a line of traffic that was going nowhere, also OK.

However each passing of a HGV was a deliberate, planned act, not just a matter of sailing along the inside of the traffic.I was in my car earlier this morning. I was stuck in a queue of traffic - not moving. HGV in front, HGV behind me. This was at 08:30 - there must have been four or five cyclists go past on the inside - no one batted an eyelid (well, I didn't - not sure about anyone else as I couldn't see them as there was a blummin' great lorry in front and one behind me.)

In this instance it was a single carriageway road but on the lane I was in there was a natural gap down the side of the traffic. It was near a school. The biggest danger in this instance were the teenage school children on the pavement - far less predictable than two 20 tonne plus vehicles. As mentioned above though, the passing of each HGV is a deliberate act and needs consideration. For example, one needs to get into primary before the junction that is causing the hold up (or use the ASL box - I don't). After the junction though, there is insufficient space to pass anything on the left - so that would be dangerous. Basically, sometimes it's safe - sometimes it isn't.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 12:36pm
Any answers?

Was the lorry involved in the accident articulated?
If so, does it take a different path when turning from a non-articulated lorry?
If so, does that make it more dangerous than a non-articulated lorry?
If so, could non-articulated lorries be used?
Does the size of the lorry matter?
If so, could the delivery have been made in a smaller lorry?
Would having a banksman/assistant have made a difference?
If so, why didn't the lorry have one?
Could the driver have seen the cyclist had he looked?
If not, why did he attempt the manouvre without asking for assistance?
If he could have and didn't look, why didn't he?

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 11:51am
pwa wrote:I'd like to raise a point for discussion. If, as I believe, trying to overtake a lorry on the left (while you are sharing the same lane) is inherently dangerous, is it possible to get around London on a bike without doing this? I'm not talking about lorries trying to overtake bikes, then squeezing them against the edge of the road. That is another issue. My feeling is that if passing on the left (whilst in the same lane) is hazardous, and if people cannot get around on a bike without doing it I would say cycling in London is, for me, too risky to contemplate. At least until infrastructure changes sufficiently.
Possible? Yes. However, it will make some of the most obvious routes so slow that you may as well be walking. That's pretty much been my approach to Bressenden Place where this incident happened: I've walked around it at least once and I think I've used a relatively lengthy detour along Palace Street to avoid it at least twice. It's a bit of a nuisance because it is an obvious route south from Buckingham Palace and it's labelled on Google as a "Bicycle Friendly Road" which certainly isn't true at the minute. However, the usually-great http://cycle.travel/map won't send you that way today unless you really force it.

I'd say London is OK for riding, but check the route beforehand, try to spot useful infrastructure (even if it's only bus lanes) and landmarks and know where the blackspots to try to avoid are (I hate Holborn gyratory, for example, but I will ride around Trafalgar Square if I'm feeling confident enough). Put a route into a bicycle satnav and use it (you'll need the screen on or an earpiece in most of London, though!). Basically do pretty much as I think you should when driving a car or van into London... but at least with a bike, you can ask other road users (I do that a fair bit, especially where roadworks have changed the layout - I still get lost every time I try to cross Islington Upper Street, though) and jump off onto a refuge or footway if needed, which aren't good options if it all goes wrong in a van!

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 11:36am
Back in the days when I did such things, I would undertake HGVs so long as I had a plan and an escape route. So if there were railings to be crushed against then I would not do it. However if there was a pavement and I had enough room between myself and the HGV that I could get on it in time then OK.

If the HGV was stuck in a line of traffic that was going nowhere, also OK.

However each passing of a HGV was a deliberate, planned act, not just a matter of sailing along the inside of the traffic.

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

24 February 2015 - 11:26am
Vorpal

your comments sum up my feelings on this matter.

I'd like to raise a point for discussion. If, as I believe, trying to overtake a lorry on the left (while you are sharing the same lane) is inherently dangerous, is it possible to get around London on a bike without doing this? I'm not talking about lorries trying to overtake bikes, then squeezing them against the edge of the road. That is another issue. My feeling is that if passing on the left (whilst in the same lane) is hazardous, and if people cannot get around on a bike without doing it I would say cycling in London is, for me, too risky to contemplate. At least until infrastructure changes sufficiently.

Thoughts?

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

Copyright © CTC 2015

Terms and Conditions