# 21/10/13 - female cyclist down in Camden - Tipper lorry



## Beebo (22 Oct 2013)

Oh No - another tipper lorry incident in London. The report suggest the cyclist was on the outside of the lorry when it made a left turn, maybe it had to swing out to make the left hand turn.
(Warning - pictures of crushed bike and lorry, In case you dont want to look)
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...rash-with-tipper-truck-in-camden-8895992.html


----------



## Brandane (22 Oct 2013)

Pedantic point: It is a skip lorry, rather than a tipper.
Driver has been charged with careless driving.

Best wishes to the cyclist involved for a full recovery.


----------



## HLaB (22 Oct 2013)

Not again


----------



## HLaB (22 Oct 2013)

Brandane said:


> Best wishes to the cyclist involved for a full recovery.


I hope I'm wrong but the headline suggest not 'Life Changing Injuries'  Why did I come in here


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (22 Oct 2013)

Grim photos. Let's hope for a swift recovery.


----------



## compo (22 Oct 2013)

Terrible.

Do the lorries tend to pull over to the right a bit to give them clearance to make the left turn. I don't know the junction so have no idea.


----------



## glenn forger (22 Oct 2013)

compo said:


> Terrible.
> 
> Do the lorries tend to pull over to the right a bit to give them clearance to make the left turn. I don't know the junction so have no idea.



Yes, the cycle lanes the near side. Dumbass facility.


----------



## steve52 (22 Oct 2013)

its sickening do be carefull, and if u see a lorry near do think its trying to kill me! only to try and stay safe


----------



## numbnuts (22 Oct 2013)

Fingers crossed


----------



## Beebo (22 Oct 2013)

compo said:


> Terrible.
> 
> Do the lorries tend to pull over to the right a bit to give them clearance to make the left turn. I don't know the junction so have no idea.


 
I dont know the turn either, but look at this picture, and note the pavement protruding into the road from the right, it suggests that the turn is very tight and you may need to swing out to get round. It's a one way street.


----------



## Markymark (22 Oct 2013)

If she was also trying to turn left around teh outside of the lorry then it was only going to end one way. If she was continuing straight then, yes, the lorry may well have HAD to pull right to turn left but he should have looked as he is encrouching another lane.


----------



## MattyKo (22 Oct 2013)

another consequence of the years and years of promotion of motorised road use. 

a lot of the roads were made for cyclists, and at the most small to medium sized vehicles and not Heavy Goods Vehicles. there is only one outcome or one suffer following an adverse contact between a up to 40 or 50 tonne vehicle and a cyclist / pedestrian. 

another commercial vehicle been involved in a road traffic incident. the truck look very much like a rust bucket. 

cannot express a sufficient extent of my sympathy and
get well soon regards to this individual
from another person that suffered life changing injuries
following a road traffic incident with a commercial vehicle.


----------



## Domestique (22 Oct 2013)

Some quite shocking pictures in The Standard
Hope she recovers well.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...rash-with-tipper-truck-in-camden-8895992.html


----------



## Dragonwight (22 Oct 2013)

Terrible I hope she gets well soon , I saw an incident involving a lorry a few years ago while I was in my car waiting to get off a ferry when one of the lorries started moving forward and hadn't noticed the motorbike right in front of him it drove up and onto his bike with the rider trapped despite everyone beeping and shouting at him to stop. That was shocking enough.


----------



## Beebo (22 Oct 2013)

MattyKo said:


> the truck look very much like a rust bucket.
> .


The truck actually looks quite new, the detachable skip on the back looks old and rusty, but that is not part of the truck.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (22 Oct 2013)

Beebo said:


> The truck actually looks quite new, the detachable skip on the back looks old and rusty, but that is not part of the truck.


The bottom photo shows a non-working light, lop-sided guards, and an apparently bent down nearside.


----------



## BimblingBee (22 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> The bottom photo shows a non-working light, lop-sided guards, and an apparently bent down nearside.



I think that's an indicator that's still flashing if you compare it to the front view.


----------



## Strathlubnaig (22 Oct 2013)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-trailer-in-downtown-toronto/article14979062/


----------



## buggi (22 Oct 2013)

he should have seen her, she obviously knew he was turning left and decided to go up the outside not realising he would have to pull wide to make the turn. He may have been too busy looking for cyclists undertaking on the left side, if he knew there was a lane, not thinking a cyclist would overtake on the right. Cycle lanes should be abolished!! Cyclists should be in primary, not up the side of them where there is limited visibility. With the amount of deaths in London why are cyclists still taking chances round lorries? Why is word not getting to these cyclists?? I'm not blaming the cyclist, the lorry driver should look, but its self preservation! She is unlikely to recover properly, he has to live with what he's done. More needs to be done to educate both parties.
edited: bcoz on re-reading that sounds like I'm saying lorry drivers aren't to blame, but i don't mean it like that... It would be great if they used those things they call mirrors and checked their blind spots but this is the real world and we all know the poor design of lorries and miseducated drivers. We have to look out for ourselves coz no one else is!


----------



## glenn forger (22 Oct 2013)

> At P.B.Donoghue, we offer the best skip hire rates in London, including same day service in many areas.



http://www.pbdonoghue.com/

They boast about how fast they are, and have a conviction for fly-tipping.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> edited: bcoz on re-reading that sounds like I'm saying lorry drivers aren't to blame, but i don't mean it like that... It would be great if they used those things they call mirrors and checked their blind spots but this is the real world and we all know the poor design of lorries and miseducated drivers. We have to look out for ourselves coz no one else is!



You hit the nail on the head buggi.
Some cyclists really do have to take a long hard look at themselves and how they ride. Today I saw a cyclists go up the inside of a left turning bus. He had to brake sharpish and wheel himself back out of danger. What does go through these cyclists minds? What makes them think that it is anyway safe to attempt a manoeuvre like that?


----------



## phil_hg_uk (23 Oct 2013)

ianrauk said:


> What does go through these cyclists minds? What makes them think that it is anyway safe to attempt a manoeuvre like that?



I don't think anything goes through the minds of a lot of people to be honest, a lot of cyclists just aren't road aware. 

I know that if I am approaching a set of traffic lights and the car in front is a little too far to the left for my liking I will stop maybe a car or 2 back where there is plenty of space rather that trying to barge my way to the front, and if there is a bus or lorry stopped in traffic I wouldn't even think about trying to squeeze down the side of it and risk getting squashed but there are plenty on the road that do that everyday.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Oct 2013)

phil_hg_uk said:


> I don't think anything goes through the minds of a lot of people to be honest, a lot of cyclists just aren't road aware.
> 
> I know that if I am approaching a set of traffic lights and the car in front is a little too far to the left for my liking I will stop maybe a car or 2 back where there is plenty of space rather that trying to barge my way to the front, and if there is a bus or lorry stopped in traffic I wouldn't even think about trying to squeeze down the side of it and risk getting squashed but *there are plenty on the road that do that everyday*.




Indeed, you only have to watch some of @gaz 's you tube vids to see the amount of cyclists that do take those risks.


----------



## buggi (23 Oct 2013)

ianrauk said:


> Indeed, you only have to watch some of @gaz 's you tube vids to see the amount of cyclists that do take those risks.


i feel like dragging my ass to London and standing on the streets handing out some hard hitting leaflets to everyone who cycles past. I drill it into the cyclists at work not to do this, i bring it up in every safety meeting. Its all about education. Anyone coming with me?

maybe if they start to hear it from other cyclists rather than people in "authority" they will start to listen??


----------



## phil_hg_uk (23 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> i feel like dragging my ass to London and standing on the streets handing out some hard hitting leaflets to everyone who cycles past. I drill it into the cyclists at work not to do this, i bring it up in every safety meeting. Its all about education. Anyone coming with me?
> 
> maybe if they start to hear it from other cyclists rather than people in "authority" they will start to listen??



I think the problem is the people involved are not really cyclists as such just people who ride a bike who otherwise probably have no other reason for road knowledge.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Oct 2013)

phil_hg_uk said:


> I think the problem is the people involved are not really cyclists as such just people who ride a bike who otherwise probably have no other reason for road knowledge.




Sorry Phil I disagree, all sorts of cyclists seem to rlj in London. The sit up and begger, road racer, MTB'er, those that really should like they know better, really, it's allsorts..


----------



## phil_hg_uk (23 Oct 2013)

ianrauk said:


> Sorry Phil I disagree, all sorts of cyclists seem to rlj in London. The sit up and begger, road racer, MTB'er, those that really should like they know better, really, it's allsorts..



I was really just thinking of these women who are getting run over by tipper trucks.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Oct 2013)

phil_hg_uk said:


> I was really just thinking of these women who are getting run over by tipper trucks.




ah ok...


----------



## phil_hg_uk (23 Oct 2013)

ianrauk said:


> ah ok...



Unfortunately there will always be the other nobbers who think they can run red lights, cycle without lights at night etc and not come to harm, and I am not sure any amount of telling them will make any difference at all although I take my hat off to @buggi for trying.

As far as I am concerned I would like to see all RLJ, people with no lights at night and pavement cyclists (where it is not permitted) charged each and every time they do it, but it is not likely to happen mores the pity.


----------



## phil_hg_uk (23 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2726605, member: 30090"]Yeah, 'these' women are a pain in the arse.[/quote]

I didn't say that they were a pain in the arse so don't try to put words into my mouth this isn't the commuting or CAD forum, I would have quoted their names but I have no idea what they are


----------



## phil_hg_uk (23 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2726619, member: 30090"]You implied it by stating that 'these' women with little or no knowledge of road craft ride a bike on the road when they should not.[/quote]

Whatever you think ............ welcome to my ignore list


----------



## Crankarm (23 Oct 2013)

Why is it always skip or tipper lorries?! There must be something lacking in their driver training, their lack of awareness or general observation or understanding of how to drive carefully in an urban environment or more generally on the roads. It's chilling and depressing. I hope the cyclist lives and makes a full recovery.


----------



## Beebo (23 Oct 2013)

Crankarm said:


> Why is it always skip or tipper lorries?! There must be something lacking in their driver training, their lack of awareness or general observation or understanding of how to drive carefully in an urban environment or more generally on the roads. It's chilling and depressing. I hope the cyclist lives and makes a full recovery.


My take on it from watching buses and tipper lorries is that buses are generally slower and stick to defined routes. The driver cant throw the vehicle around because the people will fall over.
Where as tipper trucks are generally much quicker than buses, the drivers dont stick to defined routes are will hunt out rat runs.


----------



## Crankarm (23 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> i feel like dragging my ass to London and standing on the streets handing out some hard hitting leaflets to everyone who cycles past. I drill it into the cyclists at work not to do this, i bring it up in every safety meeting. Its all about education. Anyone coming with me?
> 
> maybe if they start to hear it from other cyclists rather than people in "authority" they will start to listen??




In stationary traffic waiting for traffic lights to change I have deliberately sat on the near side just behind lorries and buses trying to block cyclists from riding up the near side adjacent to the pavement or railings and from time to time I have had cretins barge past me and do just that. On these occasions if they were crushed I would be 100% on the side of the driver of said HGV/bus/etc. Whilst I don't want to see any one dead they rather deserve it. It is the driver of these vehicles I feel for. However some are complete tossers such as Stagecoach and especially Whippet bus drivers.


----------



## MattyKo (23 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> The bottom photo shows a non-working light, lop-sided guards, and an apparently bent down nearside.


 
thank you for your support in my contention about the vehicle.


----------



## buggi (23 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2726605, member: 30090"]Yeah, 'these' women are a pain in the arse.[/quote]
speaking as a woman... It is exactly that. When it comes to lorries there are more ignorant women than men. Its not a sexist statement, its fact


----------



## buggi (23 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2726619, member: 30090"]You implied it by stating that 'these' women with little or no knowledge of road craft ride a bike on the road when they should not.[/quote]
i didn't take it like that, i took it as "these women" = the ones in particular that got run over. I think what he meant got lost in translation


----------



## buggi (23 Oct 2013)

Crankarm said:


> In stationary traffic waiting for traffic lights to change I have deliberately sat on the near side just behind lorries and buses trying to block cyclists from riding up the near side adjacent to the pavement or railings and from time to time I have had cretins barge past me and do just that. On these occasions if they were crushed I would be 100% on the side of the driver of said HGV/bus/etc. Whilst I don't want to see any one dead they rather deserve it. It is the driver of these vehicles I feel for. However some are complete tossers such as Stagecoach and especially Whippet bus drivers.


 i agree some are complete tossers but some aren't and its awful to live with the knowledge you killed someone or gave them life changing injuries. When i read the report and how distressed the driver was i felt as sorry for him as the cyclist. Some drivers are idiots, some are just ignorant. Same with cyclists.


----------



## Crankarm (24 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> i agree some are complete tossers but some aren't and its awful to live with the knowledge you killed someone or gave them life changing injuries. When i read the report and how distressed the driver was i felt as sorry for him as the cyclist. Some drivers are idiots, some are just ignorant. Same with cyclists.



....... Or the red mist suddenly lifts and some acutely realise how their life is going to irrepairably change because of their dangerous driving and they try to think of the best excuse or defence to try to shift blame or extricate themselves from a situation they may have created which has resulted in some being killed or seriously injured.


----------



## classic33 (24 Oct 2013)

Tipper/skip lorries will always work on the quickest turnaround time possible. So corners will be cut by some drivers, simply by virtue of the fact that they may be getting paid by the load.
Coming back into the urban road structure, the system forces them to have to slow down, but does little to alter their need to get back on site as quick as is possible.
I asked why is it London only that seems to be seeing an increase in this type of incident & no clear answer could be given. Every large city in the UK will have major building work going on somewhere, so why isn't the problem occurring outside of London? First thing that springs to my mind is that for over a year the eyes have been on London due to the Olympics & the build-up to them, so its reported more.
The lorry involved in this latest incident was carrying a skip that someone said was batterred, it was also capable of use by two differrent types of lorry. Skip lorry as shown or the type that uses an arm to load/unload it. The lorry itself, subject to wear & tear through use is subject to an MOT, the skip isn't, the lorry itself is less than 18 months old.


----------



## mr_cellophane (24 Oct 2013)

All cyclists should spend a day driving a van around a big town. They would then see how difficult it is for drivers to see them and realise that, no matter how many mirrors you put on a lorry, they can't look in more than one at a time.


----------



## ianrauk (24 Oct 2013)

mr_cellophane said:


> All cyclists should spend a day driving a van around a big town. They would then see how difficult it is for drivers to see them and realise that, no matter how many mirrors you put on a lorry, they can't look in more than one at a time.




And those without a driving license?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (24 Oct 2013)

ianrauk said:


> And those without a driving license?


And the growing number of uninsured drivers who seem unable to stop after hitting something or someone....


----------



## CafGriff (24 Oct 2013)

I hope the girl is ok ... I do feel for the driver too, what a predicament. On our roads today that could be partentially any cyclist, any of us! I've been a motorist for the past 35 years, I've seen cyclists knocked off of their bikes and cyclist knock into pedestrians both on and off the roads.
No one is born with eyes in the back of their heads, nor with ESP. As a cyclist, I have been knocked off my bike whilst cycling down hill one winters night .. clothed in reflective, bright yellow jacket and shorts, with two front lights ( one flashing) and two rear red lights again one flashing ... a new 19 year old boy racer, over took my and without indicating, pulled into the near side kerb, and opened the door to get out.
I couldn't stop in time ... I was level with his boot when I saw the edge side of the door and his right leg immerging from the car. The edge of the corner of the door hit my left collar bone, and whilst I was on the floor, 'Matie' stood over me and started yelling that he couldn't shut his door properly .... mind you it was really 'cracking' loudly when he was checking it out.
Overall I was fine, I had a few days off work and the insurance eventually choked up about 8 months later.
Equally I have knocked a student over, in the road, because whilst approaching a set of traffic lights, the cars had stopped and I was cruising up to the lights on the inside .. Student had his back to me, walking on the pavement, on his mobile ... without looking behind himself, for his own saftey, he just stepped off of the kerb and I hit him. Thank God I was slowing up. He was fine ... more embarressed than hurt.
Stay safe everyone! spare a thought and say a pray for those involved in the incident posted.


----------



## glenn forger (25 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> And the growing number of uninsured drivers who seem unable to stop after hitting something or someone....



69 hit and runs a week in London alone.


----------



## dellzeqq (25 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> i feel like dragging my ass to London and standing on the streets handing out some hard hitting leaflets to everyone who cycles past. I drill it into the cyclists at work not to do this, i bring it up in every safety meeting. Its all about education. Anyone coming with me?
> 
> maybe if they start to hear it from other cyclists rather than people in "authority" they will start to listen??


stay away. And take a little time ask yourself this. How do cyclists get crushed in London?


----------



## CafGriff (25 Oct 2013)

is that ' hit and runs' stat .... official reported numbers, Ibet the 'near missed' or the 'bloody 'ells' that was too close' far out number.
the other issue thatends to get my goat, is that once the newspapers reprt the accident, they don't really follow it up with the more human , how was/is the victim now sort of stories.


----------



## buggi (25 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> stay away. And take a little time ask yourself this. How do cyclists get crushed in London?



They get crushed by riding up the side of lorries/buses.


----------



## dellzeqq (25 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> They get crushed by riding up the side of lorries/buses.


no they don't.

Spend a bit of time finding out - a CCer has tabulated cycle deaths in London for about five years now.


----------



## buggi (25 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> no they don't.
> 
> Spend a bit of time finding out - a CCer has tabulated cycle deaths in London for about five years now.


educate me then


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (25 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> educate me then


I think it's this one here - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...bEZ1NVctVTBVeFRqTmNVbGZnbXc&pli=1&hl=de#gid=0


----------



## dellzeqq (25 Oct 2013)

classic33 said:


> Tipper/skip lorries will always work on the quickest turnaround time possible. So corners will be cut by some drivers, simply by virtue of the fact that they may be getting paid by the load.
> Coming back into the urban road structure, the system forces them to have to slow down, but does little to alter their need to get back on site as quick as is possible.
> *I asked why is it London only that seems to be seeing an increase in this type of incident & no clear answer could be given. Every large city in the UK will have major building work going on somewhere, so why isn't the problem occurring outside of London?* First thing that springs to my mind is that for over a year the eyes have been on London due to the Olympics & the build-up to them, so its reported more.
> The lorry involved in this latest incident was carrying a skip that someone said was batterred, it was also capable of use by two differrent types of lorry. Skip lorry as shown or the type that uses an arm to load/unload it. The lorry itself, subject to wear & tear through use is subject to an MOT, the skip isn't, the lorry itself is less than 18 months old.


It may be - but remember that 85% of all the cranes in the UK are in London. Then again, the startlingly low incidence of cyclists killed by buses might say something about the people who drive the relatively small tipper lorries and skip trucks.


----------



## classic33 (25 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> It may be - but remember that 85% of all the cranes in the UK are in London. Then again, the startlingly low incidence of cyclists killed by buses might say something about the people who drive the relatively small tipper lorries and skip trucks.


 And how many cyclists have been injured by cranes, many of which are tower cranes?
As for the truck in this incident, its one of the largest allowed on british road fully loaded.


----------



## dellzeqq (25 Oct 2013)

classic33 said:


> And how many cyclists have been injured by cranes, many of which are tower cranes?
> As for the truck in this incident, its one of the largest allowed on british road fully loaded.


my point was that a great deal of the construction activity in the UK is in London - that's all. And that construction traffic is responsible for getting on for half the cyclist death in London, and yet buses, which are undertaken all the time by cyclists are responsible for (iirc) three in the last six years.


----------



## dellzeqq (26 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2731055, member: 30090"]You're being unfair there, it might be to do with the design where there is a glass door on the n/s...[/quote]
or, alternatively it might be that bus drivers are properly trained. 

when it rains I go to work on the 133 bus. In the 45 minutes it takes me the bus is probably undertaken by forty or more cyclists. Npw. I think that's daft, but the driver sees them all coming - because he or she is looking.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> or, alternatively it might be that bus drivers are properly trained.
> 
> when it rains I go to work on the 133 bus. In the 45 minutes it takes me the bus is probably undertaken by forty or more cyclists. Npw. I think that's daft, but the driver sees them all coming - because he or she is looking.


Oh, and they know where they're going. Not always the case when you're jobbing per load, to judge by the number of hand-held calls these construction vehicles make whilst driving.


----------



## Dan B (26 Oct 2013)

Well, I know it's just anecdata, but I've seen more skip truck drivers on the phone than I ever have bus drivers


----------



## Dan B (26 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2731068, member: 30090"]
Compare the amount of windows on a bus to a truck, and the height of the cab...lot easier to see.[/quote]
Well, if the suggestion is that something inherent in the design of a tipper truck cab makes it unsafe to share the road with other road users no matter how much training the driver has had, the logical conclusion is that they should not be allowed to share the road. So we should ban them or require them to get road closures/police escorts whenever they travel in cities - sure, the price of construction would rise, but the price of construction is dwarfed by the price of land anyway, so on a practical level how much difference would it make?


----------



## Dan B (26 Oct 2013)

That's vaguely reassuring, I suppose. So, what can be done with truck cabs and their drivers/operators to make them at least as safe on the roads as buses are? I suggest that's probably about the minimum acceptable to allow them to use roads that other people are also using


----------



## MattyKo (26 Oct 2013)

Regarding the bus versus lorry discussion; accountability for "cyclists down". Buses carry more passengers than any lorry, and are probably therefore more considerate to other people - including road users.

With regards to the disproportionate level of cyclist down by commercial / construction vehicles, I do think that lorry drivers expect a lot more of other road users, and probably too much! This may well be because their vehicles are limited at the top end to 55 miles per hour, and subsequently rush about more in city / town centres. There is a great deal of validity to the comments regarding piecework.


----------



## buggi (26 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I think it's this one here - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...bEZ1NVctVTBVeFRqTmNVbGZnbXc&pli=1&hl=de#gid=0


 links not working for me


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> links not working for me


It just did for me. I wonder whether you have to have your machine enabled to use Google Drive (which is where the spreadsheet I found is).

EDIT: It's also embedded in his blog: http://cycling-intelligence.com/fatal-cycling-accidents-in-london/ but you need to do a bit more scrolling around because it's a small window.

If you want, I can save a version and then forward it to you in a format that your spreadsheet program can open. PM me, tell me if you have Excel or summat else, if so.


----------



## buggi (26 Oct 2013)

Thanks


----------



## buggi (26 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> no they don't.
> 
> Spend a bit of time finding out - a CCer has tabulated cycle deaths in London for about five years now.


 
I've read it. There's a lot of lorries involved! Doesn't say whether the cyclist rode up the side or not but as most of the debate on here is about exactly that, what is your point?


----------



## theclaud (26 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> I've read it. There's a lot of lorries involved! Doesn't say whether the cyclist rode up the side or not but *as most of the debate on here is about exactly that*, what is your point?



The point is that most of the debate is a waste of time, as long as it is about the behaviour of the victims, and not about the behaviour of those who are doing the killing.


----------



## dellzeqq (26 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2731068, member: 30090"]Bus drivers undergo the same training as lorry drivers...in terms of driver CPC and practical training.

Compare the amount of windows on a bus to a truck, and the height of the cab...lot easier to see.[/quote]
Bus drivers in London get training that is specific to bicycles, and that's backed up by a policy that says that they shouldn't put us in harms way. Some HGV drivers (mostly those working for local authorities) get the same training. Some construction firms have their own training schemes - the shining example being Cemex.

Now, as it goes I had to stand at the front of the bus all the way from Borough High Street to Brixton the other day. The care taken by the driver was extraordinary - he looked at the mirrors on both sides every few seconds. I don't think that happens by accident. I don't think the Cemex drivers take care by accident, or, even the Asda drivers that pass the FNRttC on the way out to the Dartford Crossing. Someone has taken the time to say 'this is what you have to look out for'.


----------



## Pale Rider (26 Oct 2013)

My experience leads me to give a big thumbs down to tipper/skip lorries.

I can't stop them overtaking, but if there's one in front in traffic I make sure there's another vehicle between me and it.

If you don't go within five metres of the damn thing, it can't squash you.


----------



## buggi (26 Oct 2013)

theclaud said:


> The point is that most of the debate is a waste of time, as long as it is about the behaviour of the victims, and not about the behaviour of those who are doing the killing.


 i can see where you and dellzeg are coming from, but until the behaviour of those doing the killing is addressed, then we have to look out for ourselves and each other. Its not victim blaming, its self preservation!


----------



## Pale Rider (26 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> then we have to look out for ourselves and each other. Its not victim blaming, its self preservation!



Quite so, and also known as defensive cycling.

If I'm being passed by a tipper I will often stop pedalling, or even dab the brakes, to get the thing past me sooner.


----------



## theclaud (26 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> i can see where you and dellzeg are coming from, but until the behaviour of those doing the killing is addressed, then we have to look out for ourselves and each other. Its not victim blaming, its self preservation!



Advising cyclists to take care around lorries is not victim-blaming. But responding to a report of a cyclist killed by a lorry by scrutinizing her behaviour and not that of the driver that killed her _is _victim-blaming. Some cyclists are extraordinarily careful, some are extraordinarily daft, most of us are somewhere in between. Everyone knows this. The drivers and operators of large and heavy vehicles are not entitled to kill any of them - even the really stupid ones.


----------



## Boris Bajic (26 Oct 2013)

A shocking story; my best wishes to the cyclist for a speedy and complete recovery.

I know that junction very well, although the pavement shape may have changed. This is the sort of vehicle around which I am very circumspect. This is the kind of junction which this kind of vehicle occasionally has to make a 'swing' at.

Certainly the driver needs to be aware of all other road users around his or her vehicle. We cannot know at this stage whether he or she was driving according to the law. Although there has been an arrest, it is not possible to lay the blame yet - and probably not helpful on an internet forum where we are all peeing into the wind to a greater or lesser extent - but there are cautionary observations to be taken away from those shocking photographs.

The immediate offside of such a vehicle in such a location is not the best place to cycle. I would not do so. If my children did so, I'd have my heart in my mouth.

Cyclists are killed by trucks like this. Cyclists are also killed by coming into contact with lorries like this. Wherever the fault lies, if indeed fault is demonstrated, I hope that no CC members (experienced or otherwise) who've read this thread and seen the images ride up alongside this sort of vehicle in traffic.

Best wishes for a full recovery to the cyclist.


----------



## CafGriff (26 Oct 2013)

I make an absolute rle of not undertaking buses or large vehicles such as the big trucks or lorries etc ... no matter how safe I think I am, I can;t stop them from overtaking me and edging after the overtaking manouvore and taking my road space off of me. That's frightening it it's self


----------



## buggi (26 Oct 2013)

theclaud said:


> Advising cyclists to take care around lorries is not victim-blaming. But responding to a report of a cyclist killed by a lorry by scrutinizing her behaviour and not that of the driver that killed her _is _victim-blaming. Some cyclists are extraordinarily careful, some are extraordinarily daft, most of us are somewhere in between. Everyone knows this. The drivers and operators of large and heavy vehicles are not entitled to kill any of them - even the really stupid ones.



Clearly from this statement i made earlier you can see i'm not victim blaming, what i am questioning is why some cyclists are still uneducated about the dangers of cycling up the sides of lorries?? and before i'm jumped on for "presuming she cycled up the side" this is because the witnesses said it. 

"he should have seen her, she obviously knew he was turning left and decided to go up the outside not realising he would have to pull wide to make the turn. He may have been too busy looking for cyclists undertaking on the left side, if he knew there was a lane, not thinking a cyclist would overtake on the right. Cycle lanes should be abolished!! Cyclists should be in primary, not up the side of them where there is limited visibility. With the amount of deaths in London why are cyclists still taking chances round lorries? Why is word not getting to these cyclists?? I'm not blaming the cyclist, the lorry driver should look, but its self preservation! She is unlikely to recover properly, he has to live with what he's done. More needs to be done to educate both parties"


----------



## theclaud (27 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> Clearly from this statement i made earlier you can see i'm not victim blaming, what i am questioning is why some cyclists are still uneducated about the dangers of cycling up the sides of lorries?? and before i'm jumped on for "presuming she cycled up the side" this is because the witnesses said it.
> 
> "he should have seen her, she obviously knew he was turning left and decided to go up the outside not realising he would have to pull wide to make the turn. He may have been too busy looking for cyclists undertaking on the left side, if he knew there was a lane, not thinking a cyclist would overtake on the right. Cycle lanes should be abolished!! Cyclists should be in primary, not up the side of them where there is limited visibility. With the amount of deaths in London why are cyclists still taking chances round lorries? Why is word not getting to these cyclists?? I'm not blaming the cyclist, the lorry driver should look, but its self preservation! She is unlikely to recover properly, he has to live with what he's done. More needs to be done to educate both parties"



My previous post wasn't directed specifically at you, or the incident in the OP - which, we hope, the cyclist will survive and recover from. It's more about the depressing inevitability of the focus on victim behaviour, which will do nothing whatever to discourage the perpetrators. Lorries that are being driven dangerously or have inadequate safety measures are taking out cyclists irrespective of whether they are cycling unwisely or sensibly. As DZ points out above, buses have managed to accommodate the full range of cycling and pedestrian behaviour. Not killing people does not need to entail approving of their cycling habits - it doesn't matter if lorry driver mutters "f***ing muppet" when he sees someone squeezing up the inside at a junction, but he _must_ see them - _because he is about to move xx tonnes of lethal machinery across a space shared with vulnerable road users_.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

theclaud said:


> My previous post wasn't directed specifically at you, or the incident in the OP - which, we hope, the cyclist will survive and recover from. It's more about the depressing inevitability of the focus on victim behaviour, which will do nothing whatever to discourage the perpetrators. Lorries that are being driven dangerously or have inadequate safety measures are taking out cyclists irrespective of whether they are cycling unwisely or sensibly. As DZ points out above, buses have managed to accommodate the full range of cycling and pedestrian behaviour. Not killing people does not need to entail approving of their cycling habits - it doesn't matter if lorry driver mutters "f***ing muppet" when he sees someone squeezing up the inside at a junction, but he _must_ see them - _because he is about to move xx tonnes of lethal machinery across a space shared with vulnerable road users_.


 yes but no one on here is saying that the focus should be on the cyclist behaviour, we are simply saying that until such focus is duly placed where it should be, we need to look out for ourselves and each other bcoz the lorry driver is not


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733200 said:


> Hang about there, your plan was to stand by the side of the road and tell cyclists stuff.


yes ... to EDUCATE them. Lorries have blind spots in which the driver CAN'T see... How is he to know if a cyclist rides up the inside bcoz the cyclist did not understand the danger? Its all very well to say if a lorry has a blind spot clearly its not road worthy and shouldn't be allowed on the road, or even that the lorry driver should be trained to look, but this is the real world, those lorries ARE on the road and so are those kinds of drivers, so if some cyclists still need educating about this, then yes, educate them. And don't tell me they don't bcoz I've met a few recently. Not everyone comes on forums or knows other people that cycle who tell them, some are novices and some don't drive so don't have that experience. All these cyclists fall through the net and don't understand the danger and some drivers are peanuts. Its a bad combination. I'm a cycle safety rep at work and we work at it from both angles. We educate the cyclists AND we educate the lorry drivers. hopefully the combination of training both will go some way to stop this happening.
its the difference between responsibility and avoidability... Yes its the drivers responsibility to look but that doesn't help you if you have life changing injuries. What does help you is knowing how you can avoid it.


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

so - someone cycles on the right hand side of a truck and gets killed, and you're going to stand by the side of a road in a city you don't know and tell people not to cycle up the left hand side of trucks? Good luck with that.

I, on the other hand, have no intention of lecturing people on the liabilities that attend sub-letting flats.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (27 Oct 2013)

A small point about design. Buses were designed with pedestrians in view - literally and figuratively - and largely for use in urban areas (because that's where most of the pedestrians are). Construction vehicles are designed primarily to carry as much as they can for the smallest amount of money, and in practice this appears to extend to the cheapest drivers. They were never designed with the urban environment in mind. For all its faults (see DZ's post hovering around this morning) LCC did spend some time looking at truck design. I haven't managed to find the article on the LCC website* but this (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2013/mar/20/cycle-safe-lorries) gives one possible direction to go in.

And while talking about design, I don't think anyone's mentioned the pavement build out as a possible factor in the incident. You narrow the road entrance and an oversized vehicle has to move out further to get in, and the driver has to focus much more on getting into a narrower gap. Maybe it was designed to accommodate large numbers of pedestrians but it wasn't designed like that with due consideration to the big vehicles using it.

*Found it - http://lcc.org.uk/articles/lcc-chal...er-urban-lorry-to-reduce-lorry-cyclist-deaths


----------



## mark st1 (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> Some construction firms have their own training schemes - the shining example being Cemex.



Cemex are good i deliver to alot of there concrete sites in and around TV and they do seem to take H&S and stuff more seriously than most. It may be just coincidence and i have no facts at all other than personal experience in that Cemex Lafarge Tarmac employ owner drivers as appose to just staff to drive. Ive worked with both and owner drivers come across like they care alot more than just a driver maybe its a financial thing i dont know.


----------



## mark st1 (27 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2731068, member: 30090"]
Compare the amount of windows on a bus to a truck, and the height of the cab...lot easier to see.[/quote]

I disagree yes a bus has more windows but the mirrors are the same which is what is used to see whats coming up beside you behind you. A bus may have a bigger front window but all that offers is a greater front view nothing else. Every bus ive been on the driver is behind a perspex window with a solid back so i wouldn't say they have any use for the windows provided for the rest of us to look at the grumpy passengers.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> so - someone cycles on the right hand side of a truck and gets killed, and you're going to stand by the side of a road in a city you don't know and tell people not to cycle up the left hand side of trucks? Good luck with that.
> 
> I, on the other hand, have no intention of lecturing people on the liabilities that attend sub-letting flats.


i fail to understand what my flat has got to do with this and no i wouldn't tell them not to cycle up the left hand side of lorries, i would educate them about the blind spots on both sides and let them decide for themself. Its a little bit like process safety... You have lorry equipment (ie sensors), road design, driver education, cyclist education, perhaps lights on bikes, maybe some hi viz or other colour that stands out... Basically come at it from all angles and all these "processes" overlap so that if one missing, another takes over. This is how we stop major accidents at work and the same applies. education is just one of those processes. Eg if the process fails because the drivers forgets to check, the cyclist has maybe decided NOT to cycle up the left ... or the right ... and the incident doesn't occur. Job done.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

just out of interest how many of you cycle up the side of lorries and if you don't.... why not? Is it bcoz you perhaps have been educated about the dangers? I'm not saying things shouldn't be done to improve it from the driver point of view, there is loads that can be done, training, road design, lorry equipment, etc but you can avoid putting yourself in that position also until those things are in place


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733507 said:


> Oh dear


 o here we go, i dare mention hi viz, such a crime! sometimes i wear it, sometimes i don't but if it means some fukwit driver might see me when he wouldn't normally have, coz he's not looking, then that's all good for me init. doesn't mean I'm to blame if I'm not but for all I know, my bright pink top might of saved me at some point or another.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733527 said:


> You don't seem to be getting this, if we all do the job for them perfectly and just concede the road in every conflict situation, none of those things will ever be put in place because the need will have evaporated.


 so are you gonna volunteer to continue riding up the side of a lorry then, just to make the point? cheers for that, well done. take one for the team!


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733544 said:


> If you have read any of the equivalent threads on this subject before you would know that I do. I know what I am doing though, the rhythms of the lights etc, so I know when to and when not to. What I don't need is any patronising so called educating thanks very much.


 well whoopee for you... some people don't ! !


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733552 said:


> Yes because it is more of the same. Your thinking is all about taking responsibility for danger off the shoulders of those that pose the danger and putting it on the potential victims.


 No its about preserving my own life and getting home in one piece. i don't let traffic intimidate me off the road, as you would know if you knew me, but i don't put myself in this position either, just to make a point.


----------



## anothersam (27 Oct 2013)

Crankarm said:


> In stationary traffic waiting for traffic lights to change I have deliberately sat on the near side just behind lorries and buses trying to block cyclists from riding up the near side adjacent to the pavement or railings and from time to time I have had cretins barge past me and do just that.



On the one hand I think, well, clearly cyclists can get into trouble scooting up alongside large vehicles. It's hard to fault you if you may be saving their life. On the other hand, if you were blocking me I'd just go around you if I could. I'd try not to do it in an impolitely barge-y kind of way though!



buggi said:


> i feel like dragging my ass to London and standing on the streets handing out some hard hitting leaflets to everyone who cycles past. I drill it into the cyclists at work not to do this, i bring it up in every safety meeting. Its all about education...





buggi said:


> i would educate them about the blind spots on both sides and let them decide for themself.



Leaflets are OK. I might even take one from you, to scribble my own suggestions about what to look out for:
_Are there railings or other impediments to pedestrianising myself if it becomes necessary? How close to the kerb is the vehicle? Can it turn left? Can it turn at all? What is the situation at the front? At what stage is the traffic light? When it turns green can they move, and if so, how fast are they likely to? Are there other cyclists about and what are they up to? Can I safely get past this guy trying to block me or will he knock me over with his concerned glare? Etc._ All done with a Terminator-type information overlay complete with GPS, vectors, probabilities and windspeed, of course.

If you have a hard and fast rule to NEVER NEVER NEVER (as the CC guide to commuting puts it) go up the near side of large vehicles, I certainly respect that, but for my own part, constantly figuring all this stuff out is part of what makes city cycling (much as I hate to use this word given the sad context) fun.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733585 said:


> It is not just to make a point, it is using the roads to go about my day.


 
Well carry on as you are if you feel you are experienced enough to make up for other people's mistakes. I hope sincerely you are not up the side of the next lorry driver that does and you have some way to exit if he doesn't see you. In the meantime, I'll stay behind any lorry that is at the junction before me and let him take his turn. I'd rather wait a few seconds and be able to go about my day, than risk a wheelchair for the rest of my life.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (27 Oct 2013)

If I saw a cyclist go up the inside of an hgv I'd judge him to be a muppet. If the manoeuvre was done while the hgv was about to turn left, I'd feel it my duty to alert said muppet to the likelihood of his imminent demise. 

Is that patronising? Lecturing? Who cares?

The object is to educate some cyclists who appear to be unaware of the risks they're taking, maybe even save a life. There's a cracking video by bentmikey where he shouts at one such muppet.


Buggi handing out an information leaflet isn't any different.

GC


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733527 said:


> You don't seem to be getting this, if we all do the job for them perfectly and just concede the road in every conflict situation, none of those things will ever be put in place because the need will have evaporated.


 .. And of course your not doing it to make a point either?

i don't continue to miss the point, I'm fully aware if whose responsibility it is but they are not taking responsibility are they? So go ahead, take one for the team so we have some more ammunition to fight our cause. Also i know this... If or when that woman wakes up to her life changing injuries, its not going to make any difference to her recovery that its the lorry drivers fault... She'll get a nice big payout yea, and he might get sacked and they might put sensors on their lorries, which is all good for us... But when she's been spoon fed she's still gonna wish deep down she hadn't cycled up the side of him. And if she did it knowing the risks well then that's that, but it would be a shame if no one had ever told her that could happen so she could make her own informed decision to risk it or not.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733698 said:


> But both should be talking to the driver. Is this really so very difficult?


i never said i didn't, in fact i am a key person at work for getting them to implement driver training if you had bothered to read my posts, but this is exactly my point about "process safety". If you put as many things in place as possible to help avoid it, then when one process fails (ie driver error) hopefully the other process prevents it (ie cyclist decision to wait behind). Its about doing everything possible, not about victim blaming or shifting focus


----------



## glasgowcyclist (27 Oct 2013)

2733698 said:


> But both should be talking to the driver. Is this really so very difficult?



When I witness this muppetry, it's far more expedient to alert the cyclist than hope that the driver, high in his cab, might hear me over the din of his engine.

And I didn't say that the road safety education should exclude the driver.

GC


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

2733527 said:


> You don't seem to be getting this, if we all do the job for them perfectly and just concede the road in every conflict situation, none of those things will ever be put in place because the need will have evaporated.



I get the impression you don't cycle that much or are you being deliberately obtuse?


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

2733544 said:


> If you have read any of the equivalent threads on this subject before you would know that I do. I know what I am doing though, the rhythms of the lights etc, so I know when to and when not to. What I don't need is any patronising so called educating thanks very much.



Well it's your funeral and if you barged past me and got squished I would say it was your own fault and the driver was totally blameless. If you can't anticipate your own stupidity then at least be grateful that there are some around you that can. They MIGHT save your life.


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

Wrt to this current collision we don't have the full facts so may be it is better not to speculate on what may or may not have happened, but to hope only that the injured cyclist pulls through and makes as full a recovery as possible.


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

2733984 said:


> Which part of "I know what I am doing" did you not understand?



The irresponsible always say that until what ever high risk dubious activity they are carrying out claims them. Are you trying for a Darwin Award? Do you have kids yet? If not you could be a real contender for a Darwin Award along with all other muppets who ride up the confined space of the nearside of large vehicles as they move off or begin to turn. It is a posthumous award so I shall collect it on your behalf if that is ok?


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

anothersam said:


> On the one hand I think, well, clearly cyclists can get into trouble scooting up alongside large vehicles. It's hard to fault you if you may be saving their life. On the other hand, if you were blocking me I'd just go around you if I could. I'd try not to do it in an impolitely barge-y kind of way though!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



As I already replied to Adrian, it's your funeral and I would be a witness for the driver.


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

2734025 said:


> Except I am not undertaking any dubious or high risk activity at all. I am merely engaging in that most innocent of practices, riding a bike. The dubious and risky is all other people's, bringing heavy and dangerous machinery into a public arena.
> I am not going to answer the rest of it. I shall put that down to your recent experience.



Tell me you are being obtuse with nothing better to do on a sunday the first sunday the clocks have gone back signifying the start of the dark season. You don't seriously practice what you preach do you as frankly you do write some rubbish?


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

so - to recap

a woman is hit by a truck. There's a mix of circumstances, but it appears that she did not undertake. Notwithstanding this, another person, knowing nothing about the circumstances of cyclists' deaths in London, or that it is the safest place to cycle in the UK, declares that she will come 120 miles south to tell people what not to do.

At the very least it'll be entertaining. If brief. Just let us know.


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

Crankarm said:


> Tell me you are being obtuse with nothing better to do on a sunday the first sunday the clocks have gone back signifying the start of the dark season. You don't seriously practice what you preach do you as frankly you do write some rubbish?


well, I've had the pleasure of commuting with Adrian, and I reckon that he's pretty good at it. Ever ridden a bike yourself?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (27 Oct 2013)

2733949 said:


> Carry something to throw at the windows to attract their attention



Is that what you would do?

GC


----------



## Crankarm (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> Bus drivers in London get training that is specific to bicycles, and that's backed up by a policy that says that they shouldn't put us in harms way. Some HGV drivers (mostly those working for local authorities) get the same training. Some construction firms have their own training schemes - the shining example being Cemex.
> 
> Now, as it goes I had to stand at the front of the bus all the way from Borough High Street to Brixton the other day. The care taken by the driver was extraordinary - he looked at the mirrors on both sides every few seconds. I don't think that happens by accident. I don't think the Cemex drivers take care by accident, or, even the Asda drivers that pass the FNRttC on the way out to the Dartford Crossing. Someone has taken the time to say 'this is what you have to look out for'.



And how do you think that the drivers of these companies and organisations have reached this high level of awareness towards cyclists? Because people like Buggi have kept on campaigning to get them trained and to give training to their staff so that all cyclists and other vulnerable road users will be a lot safer on the roads. Instead of being so critical and dismissive of Buggi why are you not grateful that there are people out there who are prepared to give up their time to educate and inform drivers and cyclists of such dangers so the roads are safer for everyone including you to use meaning fewer cyclists are killed or seriously injured. What is your input to reducing the high incidence of cyclists being in collision with large vehicles resulting in serious or fatal injuries to cyclists?


----------



## anothersam (27 Oct 2013)

Crankarm said:


> The irresponsible always say that until what ever high risk dubious activity they are carrying out claims them. Are you trying for a *Darwin Award*? Do you have kids yet? If not you could be a real contender for a *Darwin Award* along with all other muppets who ride up the confined space of the nearside of large vehicles as they move off or begin to turn. It is a posthumous award so I shall collect it on your behalf if that is ok?


----------



## MattyKo (27 Oct 2013)

mark st1 said:


> Cemex are good i deliver to alot of there concrete sites in and around TV and they do seem to take H&S and stuff more seriously than most. It may be just coincidence and i have no facts at all other than personal experience in that Cemex Lafarge Tarmac employ owner drivers as appose to just staff to drive. Ive worked with both and owner drivers come across like they care alot more than just a driver maybe its a financial thing i dont know.


 
I maybe wrong however I believe it to be a cement delivery firms that I shall be referring to. 

From recollection

A mother following the death of her daughter cyclist by a HGV vehicle in the London area purchased shares in the company to permit her to attend the Annual General Meeting (AGM). During the AGM she stood up and told the attendees' her story and how her daughter was killed by one of their firms delivery vehicles (HGV) whilst the lorry was undertaking a left turn. 

The directors' acknowledged the consequences of one of their vehicles' errors upon this mother and her family. The effort this mother took to highlight the issue, to the firm. The issues were surrounding the lack of visibility cyclists posed to the HGV driver when in close proximity to HGV vehicles. The firm invested in training their drivers and fitted additional mirrors to the fleet of delivery vehicles.

Sorry to interrupt and reply so late after your initial posting.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2733945 said:


> Going back to your earlier post, you were quite specific that you wanted to lecture London cyclists, with no mention of lorry drivers at all. Perhaps you could have made yourself clearer then.


 at what point did i say lecture? just as you misinterpret my posts or choose to use only the bits you want, you also take them out of the context of conversation and add words in


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

MattyKo said:


> I maybe wrong however I believe it to be a cement delivery firms that I shall be referring to.
> 
> From recollection
> 
> ...


you're exactly right. Cemex have shown what can, and should be done. At the other end of the scale there's Thames Materials.


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

Crankarm said:


> And how do you think that the drivers of these companies and organisations have reached this high level of awareness towards cyclists? Because people like Buggi have kept on campaigning to get them trained and to give training to their staff so that all cyclists and other vulnerable road users will be a lot safer on the roads. Instead of being so critical and dismissive of Buggi why are you not grateful that there are people out there who are prepared to give up their time to educate and inform drivers and cyclists of such dangers so the roads are safer for everyone including you to use meaning fewer cyclists are killed or seriously injured. What is your input to reducing the high incidence of cyclists being in collision with large vehicles resulting in serious or fatal injuries to cyclists?


no. Lots of people campaign to get them trained (since 2006 since you didn't ask), and I'd count myself amongst them. Other people write risk assessments designed to reduce the risk to pedestrians and cyclists and I'd count myself among them too. Some people stand up in front of cyclists at the beginning of rides and tell them that they shouldn't be undertaking (that would be me).

Buggi, on the other hand, knowing nothing, wants to get a day ticket to come and tell us where we're going wrong.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> so - to recap
> 
> a woman is hit by a truck. There's a mix of circumstances, but it appears that she did not undertake. Notwithstanding this, another person, knowing nothing about the circumstances of cyclists' deaths in London, or that it is the safest place to cycle in the UK, declares that she will come 120 miles south to tell people what not to do.
> 
> At the very least it'll be entertaining. If brief. Just let us know.


 while I'm there i might arrange some FNRttC!


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

A havedrian said:


> Which part of "I know what I am doing" did you not understand?


 
shall we have that engraved on your headstone?


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> while I'm there i might arrange some FNRttC!


that would be unwise. You're supremely unqualified


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> so - to recap
> 
> a woman is hit by a truck. There's a mix of circumstances, but it appears that she did not undertake. Notwithstanding this, another person, knowing nothing about the circumstances of cyclists' deaths in London, or that it is the safest place to cycle in the UK, declares that she will come 120 miles south to tell people what not to do.
> 
> At the very least it'll be entertaining. If brief. Just let us know.


 No.. To recap a woman is hit by a lorry bcoz the lorry driver pulled wide to make a left turn and the woman was hit bcoz, according to witnesses she was overtaking and the driver didn't see her, to which i suggested that as the dangers of a driver not seeing you if you are under or overtaking doesn't seem to be getting through to some cyclists, perhaps we as a community could do more, with a suggestion of educating them ourselves as the authorities are clearly doing a shoot job all round. I never once suggested it was her fault, i suggested that some cyclists would not anticipate this danger and questioned why. I'm surprised you haven't written me another abusive pm, like the last time i dared say something you didn't like. How is that patent application going by the way???


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> that would be unwise. You're supremely unqualified[/quote
> worry I've spread the word, quite a few people are organising them on your behalf ip this wa
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> no. Lots of people campaign to get them trained (since 2006 since you didn't ask), and I'd count myself amongst them. Other people write risk assessments designed to reduce the risk to pedestrians and cyclists and I'd count myself among them too. Some people stand up in front of cyclists at the beginning of rides and tell them that they shouldn't be undertaking (that would be me).
> 
> Buggi, on the other hand, knowing nothing, wants to get a day ticket to come and tell us where we're going wrong.


 no that's just your interpretation of it. Perhaps your not doing a very good job of it then


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

2734806 said:


> Getting a little unpleasant now.


isn't it!! May i remind you that your and dellzegg are the ones that jumped down my neck for wanting to educate the cyclists who are not getting this message, yet dellzegg admits he tells cyclists this himself before every ride?


----------



## Dan B (27 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> isn't it!! May i remind you that your and dellzegg are the ones that jumped down my neck for wanting to educate the cyclists who are not getting this message, yet dellzegg admits he tells cyclists this himself before every ride?


I don't believe that either of them have suggested you should get yourself killed by a lorry, though


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

and guess what? People listen to me because I put things in some kind of context and they reckon I know what I'm on about. Like they respect Adrian because he sets an example and goes out of his way to help people. And then again, I listen to people like Titus and Olaf because they know more about this stuff than I do, and because they, like Adrian think and speak clearly

now you can come down to the Great Wen and stand by the side of the road and tell people what to do. I reckon Borough High Street or The Strand might good. I'm sure you'll have a great time. But, for the umpteenth time - undertaking is not a big deal if you're undertaking buses. Undertaking tipper trucks is dumb, but the fact is that people get killed by tipper trucks when the truck comes up behind them, whether turning or not. So, once again, work out where the risk is...


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> and guess what? People listen to me because I put things in some kind of context and they reckon I know what I'm on about. Like they respect Adrian because he sets an example and goes out of his way to help people. And then again, I listen to people like Titus and Olaf because they know more about this stuff than I do, and because they, like Adrian think and speak clearly
> 
> now you can come down to the Great Wen and stand by the side of the road and tell people what to do. I reckon Borough High Street or The Strand might good. I'm sure you'll have a great time. But, for the umpteenth time - undertaking is not a big deal if you're undertaking buses. Undertaking tipper trucks is dumb, but the fact is that people get killed by tipper trucks when the truck comes up behind them, whether turning or not. So, once again, work out where the risk is...


 so you're now saying people that do this are dumb?? Which is exactly what you're accusing me of? I'm fully aware of the risk of trucks coming up behind but there is little a cyclist can do about that, we're discussing the cyclists who choose to ride up the side of lorries, who some of which don't know the dangers. I don't think they are all dumb, i think they are uneducated. Which is my whole point.


----------



## buggi (27 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2734989, member: 9609"]Can't believe the way buggii has been picked on in this thread - ffs she's on our side.[/quote]
thank you


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> so you're now saying people that do this are dumb?? Which is exactly what you're accusing me of? I'm fully aware of the risk of trucks coming up behind but there is little a cyclist can do about that, we're discussing the cyclists who choose to ride up the side of lorries, who some of which don't know the dangers. I don't think they are all dumb, i think they are uneducated. Which is my whole point.


I said undertaking was dumb pages ago, but dumb doesn't equate to risk. My point is that the risk does not lie with the actions of the cyclists, but with the type of vehicle, and that the false analysis of the risk by people like you is ignorant.

And, actually, there is a great deal you can do if you hear a truck coming up behind, starting with looking over your shoulder and checking out the truck. I've been riding around London for 45 years, and there's not a lot that scares me, but if I see a tipper truck or a skip lorry behind me then I head for safety.

So - get your awayday, bring your soapbox and see how it goes.


----------



## dellzeqq (27 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2734992, member: 9609"]The design of buses is just so much better for busy town centers than tipper trucks.......[/quote]if Cemex can change the way they do things, why can't other companies?

You might, by the way, want to look up Thames Materials.
http://road.cc/content/news/28852-fatal-accidents-and-buzzed-riders-thames-materials-responds


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> I said undertaking was dumb pages ago, but dumb doesn't equate to risk. My point is that the risk does not lie with the actions of the cyclists, but with the type of vehicle, and that the false analysis of the risk by people like you is ignorant.
> 
> And, actually, there is a great deal you can do if you hear a truck coming up behind, starting with looking over your shoulder and checking out the truck. I've been riding around London for 45 years, and there's not a lot that scares me, but if I see a tipper truck or a skip lorry behind me then I head for safety.


 
it does equate to risk if you don't know what the risk is. That's what I'm saying... That the cyclist doesn't understand the risk... The risk that lays with the vehicle and driver. And how can they avoid it if they don't know? You're having a go at me for wanting to educate cyclists, Yet you admit you wouldn't be "dumb" enough to ride up the side of one, you tell your own group not to ride up them and you admit you head for safety when you see one? Its completely contradictory. I never said there were no other risks, like lorries coming up from behind, or cars hitting cyclists, its not a false analysis just bcoz you talk about about one element of danger.


----------



## dellzeqq (28 Oct 2013)

[QUOTE 2735052, member: 9609"]I'm not here to defend the haulage industry. It is a hard pushed industry and hard pushed business often need to cut corners to survive, low paid drivers pressed to get that extra load in, probably haven't got time to give a sh1t about other people.

The two companies you mention. Is one carrying it's own products (ie its business is not haulage) and is the other a hire and reward haulier (carrying other peoples goods)?
From my own experiences as a cyclist, I think the "carrying our own goods companies" are *usually* better driven than the hire and reward boys.[/quote]
Sort of. Cemex is basically a mixtures and aggregates business, but they do haul a lot of bulk around. Thames Materials do have an aggregates business, but they are, as you say, at the dirty end of the industry. The real difficulty is that the construction industry is made up of subcontractors on short length contracts, and that main contractors don't manage them well. There is also the question of (this is the best word I can come up with and I may return and change it) machismo. There's a lot of it about, and it takes effort on the part of management to eliminate it - it's a fact that a good number of skip and tipper truck drivers are aggressive in a personal way.

And then.......the HSE hasn't been interested in off-site risks.


----------



## dellzeqq (28 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> i*t does equate to risk if you don't know what the risk is........*.


well, that's all right then.....


----------



## Crankarm (28 Oct 2013)

> There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
> 
> Donald Rumsfeld, former United States Secretary of Defence




View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtkUO8NpI84


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

take a look at this "swiss cheese model". Companies use this to protect themselves against disasters occurring. Its called process safety. Its where they risk assess what could happen and put a procedure in place to stop it.
http://patientsafetyed.duhs.duke.edu/module_e/swiss_cheese.html

however, by design, no procedure can be fool proof, so they add layers of protection ensuring that "holes" in each procedure don't line up, so that if the first measure fails, the next measure hopefully prevents the disaster.

now if you apply that to what we're talking about you could label each measure as follows:

lorry equipment (mirrors)
driver training (human factors)
lorry equipment (sensors)
road design

so... You improve the visibility of the driver by making the mirrors bigger, but you know on its own, that's not enough, so you target your drivers with specific training, but in case they fail to look you add in some new technology that senses cyclists and warns the driver. Meanwhile road design is improved. Hopefully, these layers of protection working together prevent a cyclist getting run over a killed.

but what if they don't? What if one of these layers missing and holes in the procedures line up? And next thing another cyclist is dead?

wouldn't it be sensible to have another layer of protection called cyclist education?

this is what I'm saying. Its not victim blaming, it's adding in another layer of protection...so that if all the other processes fail, or are missing, then hopefully disaster is avoided because the cyclist knew of the risk and decided to wait behind.

and my original suggestion was all around what we, as a cycle community could do, to ensure that layer was there, although some people chose to have a go at me ... even though they admit they wouldn't be dumb enough to cycle up the side of a tipper and they already tell their own group not to do it.

i would suggest the reason he isn't "dumb" enough to do this (his words not mine) is because of his experience as a cyclist and the fact he's been educated about the dangers of tippers. Something not all cyclists have had the luxury of; there have been plenty of posts in the beginner section asking for "commuting advice" bcoz the last time they were on a bike was when they were 10.

so don't tell me I'm victim blaming.


----------



## Pale Rider (28 Oct 2013)

If there is an accident between two road users it is common sense to examine the behaviour of both parties.

Calling that victim blaming is stupid, but there are some members on here who are so hidebound by their own ideology they are unable to apply an open mind to certain topics.

Don't believe me?

Pop over to current affairs and debates and start a thread about immigration.


----------



## Boris Bajic (28 Oct 2013)

Pale Rider said:


> If there is an accident between two road users it is common sense to examine the behaviour of both parties.
> 
> Calling that victim blaming is stupid, but there are some members on here who are so hidebound by their own ideology they are unable to apply an open mind to certain topics.
> 
> ...


 
Excellent post. Many drivers are dreadful, but in some cyclists one sees an innocence about defensive behaviour that is alarming. We all see it regularly. Advocating training 'to prevent the taking of unnecessary risks in ignorance' is not tantamount to blaming victims. Nor is it ignoring the other (perhaps more damaging) side of the issue. 

As to the *'immigration row',* there's no need to start anything. Look at the thread below. Plenty of welcoming attitudes to someone with non-native English.

Some egregious piffle now deleted in embarrassment, but the core of the sentiment can still be detected. Sorry to go OT:

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/woman-pushed-of-bike-by-police-officer.142415/


----------



## NEO (28 Oct 2013)

Best wishes for a swift recovery.


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

2735164 said:


> You have misunderstood what Del said about his safety briefings. It is not undertaking each other.





2735164 said:


> You have misunderstood what Del said about his safety briefings. It is not undertaking each other.


 priceless


----------



## glasgowcyclist (28 Oct 2013)

Dan B said:


> I don't believe that either of them have suggested you should get yourself killed by a lorry, though


 
Has anyone?

GC


----------



## Aperitif (28 Oct 2013)

I was thinking about this thread, during quieter moments on my ride to work this morning, and sizing up vehicles etc. and one thing came to mind - no two actually. One. Do any statistics exist on the original training of lorry drivers ie: Driving test passed in the UK, or are EU (for example) qualified drivers of HGVs allowed to drive anywhere in Europe without 'retraining' to drive on 'our' side of the road...first in a small vehicle, then in a lorry..? It just made me wonder a bit - and I'm not doubting competence. Two. Just calm down everyone. It seems wherever I poke my nose into a thread on here, there is animosity developing, or someone trying to 'win' a point. Sure, we all have experience - unique experience often, so let's share and learn for the most part, rather than confront each other, but collectively confront issues of safety and simple road sense that keeps cyclists safe.


----------



## dellzeqq (28 Oct 2013)

I seriously can't be bothered. And to be clear - my horror was a composite in the sense that the ignorance of the real circumstances, the lack of analysis and the individual were all of a piece. Still and all - if this mission for repentance ever comes off I doubt that any of us will ever notice. Leaflet away!


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

2735454 said:


> Buggi this is quite simple. If you had said that you intend to come down to London and leaflet cyclists about the dangers of undertaking lorries and then intended to move on to a cement delivery or tipper depot and leaflet their drivers, I wouldn't have much problem with it. You didn't though and thus, fairly or unfairly, you put yourself into the position of, at the minimum, appearing to be blaming cyclists for the problem.


 no, i didn't, you just interpreted how you wanted to, no one but you or Dell interpreted it that way. Dell i can understand, he obviously has an issue with me judging by the uncalled for abusive message he once sent (which after someone told me he was actually quite nice i was prepared to forgive, but now i think my first instincts were right). But you came in late and seem to have just jumped on his bandwagon. You obviously don't disagree with my last post showing the process safety model and how it can apply to us as the best you can do is tell me i have misinterpreted the fact he's telling cyclists to undertake (when in fact all that does is make me laugh that you see the dangers around cyclists but then don't give a toss about lorries). You should have read my conversation in the context of everyone else's, not waded in after him and tried to gang up on me, when in fact i totally support the full responsibility being on drivers and don't think cyclists should have to wear hi viz or helmets just to frickin survive! i think drivers should open their frickin eyes! But everyone is human, and they make mistakes, so while it would be nice to be able to go about our daily business without worrying we're going under the wheels of a truck, this is reality and what i really want, in the real world, is for everyone to get home safe, uninjured, untraumatised (and that includes drivers) and if we can all work together to achieve that then all the better. Obviously i wasn't really planning on coming to London ( i think i actually said "it makes me want to...") what i was suggesting is that cyclists take a more proactive stance in educating other less experienced cyclists (Dell himself admits he heads for safety when he sees a tipper). But now he so rudely tells me to stay away like owns the place i might just pop down!!
And if you really want to get a measure of what I'm really like, i hear you ride with swansonj... Well ask him. I'm sure he'll fill you in on all the work i do for the cyclists across the company, in my own time, to make their commute a little bit safer, which includes driver training and I'm also pushing for the new technology, plus the other stuff with other companies he probably doesn't know about. Across-the-board my company has spent over £12k this year just on cyclists, and i haven't even added in the costs of a refurb of cycle facilities at one site coz i don't yet know them, or the training costs for the next year for the rest of the cyclists to teach them the cycling techniques that we are all well versed in. And that is down to me. I may not be on here much and i do tend to stick to the light hearted banter but it doesn't mean i don't know what I'm talking about, am any less experienced than you or Dell, and yes actually I AM qualified too, so next time you should maybe think a little harder before ganging up with your mates and picking on someone. The bottom line is, the current system is failing us and i don't really want to see another one of us have to "take one for the team" (surprisingly that includes you) so until the system is fixed i will continue to look out for my fellow cyclists and if i can persuade someone to think a little bit harder before under or overtaking a lorry, and possibly save them from this awful fate, then yea, I'll put myself out there.
I'm a little sick of being bullied and made out to be the bad person, so I'm probably gonna leave this thread now. I think the majority of people know where I'm coming from and i know longer care if you or Dell "get me" or understand what I'm saying. I actually like to think i have a life outside of this thread.


----------



## dellzeqq (28 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> no, i didn't, you just interpreted how you wanted to, no one but you or Dell interpreted it that way. Dell i can understand, he obviously has an issue with me judging by the uncalled for *abusive message* he once sent (which after someone told me he was actually quite nice i was prepared to forgive, but now i think my first instincts were right).


_Buggi
you might not like what I've written in your thread, but I'm telling you this - I'm really surprised that you started the thing off without asking me. Really surprised.
Simon
_
HI Simon.
We have asked Buggie to change the heading of the post to take out FNRttC.
Cheers.
The mods.
_http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/night-ride-to-coast-from-solihull-warwick-area.74150/_

(obviously I can do abusive, but the message was written more in pity than in anger)


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> _Buggi
> you might not like what I've written in your thread, but I'm telling you this - I'm really surprised that you started the thing off without asking me. Really surprised.
> Simon
> _
> ...


 o yea that's right, you had a go at me in the thread followed by the message and then reported me to the mods. It may surprise you to know you don't own Friday nights and you don't own the coast and you can't own a phrase, but yea report it to the mods coz that's not petty! Not that it ever once occured to you that perhaps i didn't know it was "your" thing and maybe just a polite request would have been sufficient. It may also surprise you i don't need your permission to arrange an FNRttC although if you'd asked politely i probably would have never used the catchphrase again. But no, you just had to go over the top, as you've done in this thread. Well.. I don't like being told rudely what to do so I'll use it when i want.
by the way you don't own London either so when i stay away it will be be bcoz i cant be arsed to drag my ass 120 miles to hand out a leaflet, and not bcoz you told me to stay away.


----------



## dellzeqq (28 Oct 2013)

buggi said:


> o yea that's right, you had a go at me in the thread.


_Buggi - You're not going to like this, but here you go..

FNRttC is a name that's had a lot of effort put in to it. It carries an assurance that things are done in a particular way. Please use something else by way of a handle. 

If somebody started up another forum called 'Cycle Chat' Shaun would be put out by it, and with good reason._


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

2736684 said:


> Buggi I would almost be prepared to apologise for upsetting you but when I look back and read these two rather unnecessary and personal jibes
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 again, taking it out of context, i was making a point that you saying "I know what I'm doing" are very famous last words, not wishing death on death on you, or the other bit was in response to you saying that if cyclists stop doing it we will no longer have the deaths to show the problem, so me saying take one for the team was making a point that its a big price to pay for a statistic. you well know this but further twist it..


----------



## buggi (28 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> _Buggi - You're not going to like this, but here you go..
> 
> FNRttC is a name that's had a lot of effort put in to it. It carries an assurance that things are done in a particular way. Please use something else by way of a handle.
> 
> If somebody started up another forum called 'Cycle Chat' Shaun would be put out by it, and with good reason._


well i didn't get offended for that so maybe it was the reporting to the mods that was over the top?? Whatever was written it was stronger than that, so maybe we're missing a pics of the jigsaw. Yea i think so


----------



## Pale Rider (28 Oct 2013)

Roll up, roll up, last chance to post on this thread approaching....


----------



## Spinney (28 Oct 2013)

Quite right, Pale Rider.

Buggi, Adrian, dell - if you really want to continue to argue, do it by PM.

Thread locked.


----------

