# Serious accident in Finchley. Another tipper-truck.



## User (22 Jul 2013)




----------



## HLaB (22 Jul 2013)

FFS  I hope he pulls through!


----------



## Leodis (22 Jul 2013)

Hope he is ok. 

Is this another case of cyclists filtering on the left past HGV's turning?


----------



## steve52 (22 Jul 2013)

thoughts are with him but guys and girls ffs, RIDE TO SURVIVE!!!!!


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (22 Jul 2013)




----------



## Ciar (22 Jul 2013)

Very sad, hope he fully recovers


----------



## Jezston (22 Jul 2013)

(Probably not the place to be a pedant, but Fortune Green is on Finchley Road, not Finchley itself)


----------



## gaz (22 Jul 2013)

Jezston said:


> (Probably not the place to be a pedant, but Fortune Green is on Finchley Road, not Finchley itself)


And the last cyclist to pass away was not Philippine de Gerin-Ricard


----------



## numbnuts (22 Jul 2013)

Fingers crossed for full recovery


----------



## Pat "5mph" (22 Jul 2013)

Hope he recovers from this


----------



## downfader (22 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> Hope he is ok.
> 
> Is this another case of cyclists filtering on the left past HGV's turning?


 

The witness statement to the press in the Evening Standard about the Holborn cyclist ...is there a possibility that the rider was waiting for green and the truck driver just went over him? That appears to be what was inferred by the restaurateur


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (22 Jul 2013)

downfader said:


> The witness statement to the press in the Evening Standard about the Holborn cyclist ...is there a possibility that the rider was waiting for green and the truck driver just went over him? That appears to be what was inferred by the restaurateur


It's possible but there are many other possibilities and the absence of a side guard on the HGV means it would also be possible for him to have been knocked under the rear axle. I think we can, however, draw clear conclusions about the safety of letting poorly regulated construction trade HGVs on our city roads.


----------



## Mallory (23 Jul 2013)

Hope the guy pulls through.

I was stuck in the traffic on a 13 bus not knowing what had happened so I feel guilty now for moaning about the chaos that was on the roads.

Regardless of who was at fault why should a cyclist have to pay with their life for a simple mistake i.e filtering incorrectly or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We've all seen suicidal filtering but we must have all had situations where we stop in a safe position only for a selfish driver to stop in a position that risks having a collision.


----------



## ManiaMuse (23 Jul 2013)

Just wondering, is there anything inherently more dangerous about tipper/construction trucks and cyclists? A very large proportion of serious/fatal cycling accidents do seem to involve them in London compared to other types of lorries.

Driven faster when lightly loaded?
Too much driving to deadlines/one more load?
Particular blindspots compared to other lorries?
More tempting to filter down the left because they're not as big/long as artics?
Easier to be sucked under wheels?
More likely to be on smaller roads?
Or just more construction traffic in London compared to other deliveries?


----------



## steve52 (23 Jul 2013)

User said:


> So you're assuming that the cyclist is to blame...


 no and you are makeing the wrong assumtion.all i was say is ride to survive, ie do every thing in your power to not be a statistic,regardless of blame.in the hope of less of us being injured or dieing.i do not know the details so am in no posistion to make a judgement.is that clear?


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> Hope he is ok.
> 
> Is this another case of cyclists filtering on the left past HGV's turning?


 


steve52 said:


> thoughts are with him but guys and girls ffs, RIDE TO SURVIVE!!!!!


 

Why do some people insist on immediately blaming the victim?
These trucks have no place on our roads - they are too dangerous.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (23 Jul 2013)

I knew someone that was shunted out of a road junction by a big tipper, as he was too busy admiring the enhanced assets of the girl in the car to his right.
On a bike? No.
He failed to notice for 50 yards that he was shunting a Fiat Punto sideways.


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> Why do some people insist on immediately blaming the victim?
> *These trucks have no place on our roads - they are too dangerous*.


 and your solution to loose material removal ?

the trucks themselves are NOT dangerous, what is dangerous is

Poor driving
Poor company standards
Poor regulation
Poor road design
Poor enforcement of the laws regarding use of vehicles on the road

a combination of any or possibly even 1 is enough to start a chain of events


----------



## Leodis (23 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> Why do some people insist on immediately blaming the victim?
> These trucks have no place on our roads - they are too dangerous.


 

I wasn't blaming the victim but since you mentioned it it doesn't take a genius to work out filtering on the left of HGV's and buses is not a wise move, since we don't know the facts I didnt mention this.



> These trucks have no place on our roads - they are too dangerous.


 
Your a sensitive soul aren't you


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> I wasn't blaming the victim but since you mentioned it it doesn't take a genius to work out filtering on the left of HGV's and buses is not a wise move, *since we don't know the facts I didnt mention this*.


 

Hang on, you said:


Leodis said:


> Hope he is ok.
> Is this another case of cyclists filtering on the left past HGV's turning?


What's that if it's not speculating that the cyclist was to blame for the collision?


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

subaqua said:


> and your solution to loose material removal ?
> 
> the trucks themselves are NOT dangerous, what is dangerous is
> 
> ...


 

The trucks themselves most certainly are dangerous - how can you possibly come to any other conclusion when they are so disproportionately involved in collisions with cyclists?

They should meet a minimum design safety standard, such as dustcart type cabs with proper visibility.
They should stop paying per load, to reduce the incentive to drive recklessly fast.
There should be a legal requirement for drivers to undertake specific training to do with driving around vulnerable road users.
The company's H&S responsibilities should include all subcontractors and include journeys to and from the site.
The lorries should only be allowed into the city at night time when cyclist traffic is low, as Paris does.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (23 Jul 2013)

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/keltbray-employ-maniacs.135905/


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> Get over yourself sweetheart.


 

Thanks for that valuable contribution to the discussion.
A bit pathetic TBH.


----------



## Leodis (23 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> Thanks for that valuable contribution to the discussion.
> A bit pathetic TBH.


 

I just mentioned that some cyclists are not helping themselves, its tragic when this happens, I was asking if this was a case of filtering, I wasn't accusing the victim of this of HGV left hand filtering. You are right more training for HGV drivers but on the other hand maybe training for cyclists or at least better awareness.


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2562376, member: 30090"]And they say that ignorance is bliss.[/quote]


So you don't think there is anything to worry about? We can just accept the status quo of HGVs and trucks disproportionately killing cyclists? The only thing we need to do is to fit a "belly bar". How is that going to help if one drives into you from behind or from the side?

Some are most certainly paid by the load, either explicitly or by hiring drivers on an ad-hoc basis.
As I understand it, the HSE only imposes legal responsibilities on the company for site safety. This should be expanded to consider collisions like this the same as a site accident.
Glad drivers are trained - looks like plenty could do with a refresher.
Don't see what your problem about restricting times is - it works for Paris.


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2562427, member: 30090"]Because it is harder to go under the wheels of a truck that is fitted with one - this is the sole purpose of abelly bar.

[/quote]Some are most certainly paid by the load, either explicitly or by hiring drivers on an ad-hoc basis.[/quote] No they are not, this is hearsay and a common misconception unless you have proof?
[/quote]As I understand it, the HSE only imposes legal responsibilities on the company for site safety. This should be expanded to consider collisions like this the same as a site accident..[/quote] Incidents that an operator has go on record and can be looked at when having an inspection from VOSA/Traffic Commissioner
[/quote]Glad drivers are trained - looks like plenty could do with a refresher.[/quote] That's speculation that the driver is at fault
[/quote]Don't see what your problem about restricting times is - it works for Paris.[/quote] Never said I had a problem - did you even bother to look at the link which I posted?[/quote]


Your clear implication is that the only measure you think is necessary is fitting of "belly bars". But that's not going to help much if a driver takes you out from behind or T-bones you, is it?

[Paid by the load:] I said "either explicitly or by employing drivers on an ad-hoc basis". You have only addressed the first. This thread, contributed to by truck drivers, says that load bonuses and time bonuses are common. What's that if not being paid by the load, albeit partially?
[Training:] "That's speculation that the driver is at fault" I'm talking generally, not this specific incident. Most collisions are the fault of the driver.
[Restricting times:] "did you even bother to look at the link which I posted?" Of course I did, but there's no reason we couldn't change that.

You're basically saying "nothing can be done" so we might as well give up and accept the status quo of vulnerable road users being killed by these death traps.


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> The trucks themselves most certainly are dangerous - how can you possibly come to any other conclusion when they are so disproportionately involved in collisions with cyclists?
> 
> They should meet a minimum design safety standard, such as dustcart type cabs with proper visibility.
> They should stop paying per load, to reduce the incentive to drive recklessly fast.
> ...


 
and none of that is the truck itself is it. following your sequencing lets look at evidence
thats down to designers , not the truck itself - dustcarts are also significantly lower to the ground for approach and departure angles for site access and egress Do you suggest double handling materials using more diesel and polluting more into a heavuily polluted atmospherre already. properly adjusted mirrors and looking properly ( driver error) also reduce these types of incidents.
quantity surveyors value engineering cutting prices is the cause of that NOT the truck, compounded by a basic human nature called greed.
down to the fleet operators and Client ( company I work for has a minimum requirement and ongoing standards checks for all demolition related vehicles and waste removal vehicles ( skip lorries) - a fail means no work on future contracts- we also share info between the Main contractors group ) .
see previous answer, and the HASAWetcA 1974 does have that provision- why No prosecutions _ ask the CPS or HSE for that one . its NOT THE TRUCK though.
You want to pay more for everything? Does Paris have the same laws as the UK? Construction and demo sites also have to comply with noise requirements after certain hours see Section 61 1974 pollution act http://www.westminster.gov.uk/services/environment/pollution/noisepollution/noise_building/ after 6pm it costs more to work there isn't the stopping and loading facilities to have vehicles sat waiting to leave

I wish i had the answers to solve the problem now, but lots of the major contractors in construction are now getting on board with cycling and lorries due to pressure from within by cyclists who work for them ( that would be me ). where major contractors go the smaller ones follow in a few years . there is no wave a magic wand for the mindset of a minority of drivers but we are getting there in educating them and letting them know exactly what will happen if they fail.

Dell righly said the LCC watsed millions pursuing the wrong target- they needed to go for construction contracts .


----------



## benb (23 Jul 2013)

subaqua said:


> and none of that is the truck itself is it. following your sequencing lets look at evidence
> thats down to designers , not the truck itself - dustcarts are also significantly lower to the ground for approach and departure angles for site access and egress Do you suggest double handling materials using more diesel and polluting more into a heavuily polluted atmospherre already. properly adjusted mirrors and looking properly ( driver error) also reduce these types of incidents.
> quantity surveyors value engineering cutting prices is the cause of that NOT the truck, compounded by a basic human nature called greed.
> down to the fleet operators and Client ( company I work for has a minimum requirement and ongoing standards checks for all demolition related vehicles and waste removal vehicles ( skip lorries) - a fail means no work on future contracts- we also share info between the Main contractors group ) .
> ...


 

The trucks themselves have very poor visibility, which in my view, makes them unsuitable for use on busy congested streets.
But by all means pretend there's nothing we can do if it makes you feel better.


----------



## Mallory (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2562604, member: 30090"]Do trucks have poor visibility?[/quote]

Yes!! Too high up and many blind spots


----------



## Brains (23 Jul 2013)

Re being paid by the load.
I only know one tipper truck driver.
He is paid by the load.
He works on a 'as required' basis as it is one of four jobs he has

(He is also a barman 2 nights a week and a chief for a catering company when they need him and does a bit of mini cabbing when needed to make up the money if the other jobs have not paid him enough that week)

With tipper truck driving he will get solid work for a week or two and then nothing for a month or so and then more tipper truck driving.
I think if the work was there he would do it full time, but as it's per load work it comes and goes


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

Mallory said:


> Yes!! Too high up and many blind spots


 nope. correctly adjusted mirrors eliminate blind spots travelling in a straight line. any vehicle turning will have blind spots.

and as for pretending nothings wrong I prefer hard evidence. if somebody can prove to me an inanimate object on its own is dangerous then i will listen. its the human factor that makes things dangerous . the knife sat on my plate on its own won't kill me- if I do something stoopid it becomes a dangerous item

A hole in a scaffold isn't dangerous until there is somebody thegre to be hurt. Schroedinger knew this.

I have asked my Board director for H&S, thats UK wide not my operating unit, to arrange a meeting with me and Keltbray MD to discuss the youtube vids and cyclists general opinion of Keltbray driving standards

if anybody has more time than me in the next week and can collate all the Keltbray stuff so I can show the MD exactly how his drivers behave it would be appreciated.


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

Brains said:


> Re being paid by the load.
> I only know one tipper truck driver.
> He is paid by the load.
> He works on a 'as required' basis as it is one of four jobs he has
> ...


 

I know a cyclist that jumps red lights so by that logic above all cyclists jump red lights . ( which is patent bollox )

my dad was a tipper driver. he didn't kill anybody. he wrecked his life by not killing somebody who pulled out in front of him . he wasn't paid by the load he was paid per hour..


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I hate to correct you User30090 but many tipper truck drivers are paid on a 'per load' basis...


 Many is NOT all.


----------



## Brains (23 Jul 2013)

subaqua said:


> Many is NOT all.


 
I don't think anyone is saying 'all', but we are saying 'some'
What we are saying, is by the way they typically drive (which is like all teenagers with a hot hatch and dark windows) would imply that 'many' are paid per load


----------



## slowmotion (23 Jul 2013)

I'm not suggesting that there is nothing to be done, but the idea of banning tipper trucks in the daytime is a bit of a non-starter. The trucks service construction sites. Construction sites work in the hours of daylight. If people are prepared to pay construction workers triple time to work at night, building costs are going to go through the roof, and there are going to be an awful lot of sleep-deprived neighbours.


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> I'm not suggesting that there is nothing to be done but the idea of banning tipper trucks in the daytime is a bit of a non-starter. The trucks service construction sites. Construction sites work in the hours of daylight. If people are prepared to pay construction workers triple time to work at night, building costs are going to go through the roof.


 yay somebody who gets it.


----------



## glenn forger (23 Jul 2013)

Those Dubai and Qatar billionaires are funding an awful lot of the building in London.


----------



## subaqua (23 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Those Dubai and Qatar billionaires are funding an awful lot of the building in London.


 and they didn't become/don't stay billionaires by spunking money willy nilly.

Mace put in a claim for delays etc on the Shard within 2 weeks of starting construction .


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I hate to correct you User30090 but many tipper truck drivers are paid on a 'per load' basis...


 

I think thats wrong tbh used to be the case sure but not nowadays.


----------



## steve52 (23 Jul 2013)

User said:


> You're original post certainly reads as if you're suggesting that the person cocerned was not riding to survive...[/
> theres no placating you,so see it any way you want,


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563186, member: 30090"]You sure? I've sat in a truck and I don't recall any blind spots.[/quote]


What he said. Blind drivers maybe more the case.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (23 Jul 2013)

The main difference between some of User30090's posts and those of an apologist for the tipper truck industry's posts is that an apologist would apologise.


----------



## smokeysmoo (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563186, member: 30090"]You sure?[/quote]

I am. I'm currently doing my LGV Class 2, (rigid), training. Believe you me, blind spots, mirror use and forward planning are drummed into you for the duration of each lesson.

[QUOTE 2563186, member: 30090"]I've sat in a truck and I don't recall any blind spots.[/quote]

Try driving one, it's very different to sitting in one.


----------



## glenn forger (23 Jul 2013)

A blind spot means the driver wasn't looking.


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> The main difference between some of User30090's posts and an those of an apologist for the tipper truck industry's posts is that an apologist would apologise.


 

Ive seen your video in the Keltbray thread that is just plain shoot driving on a horrible dangerous roundabout. Ive had cyclists who clearly have a death wish pull out on me from side roads but i dont say banish all cyclists from the roads. Educate everyone and hopefully the idiots on both sides will learn. Best wishes to the injured cyclist.


----------



## glenn forger (23 Jul 2013)

Not banish. Investigate, monitor, lorries have an extremely poor safety record, how many cyclist fatalities were connected with The Shard? Who insured Dennis Putz? How could a man with multiple driving bans get a job driving a lorry in London?


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563285, member: 30090"]
As for driving them, let me know when you've taken and passed your 'one'[/quote]

Although i agree with alot you have written in this thread arrogance in any form isnt pretty. What you have on your licence doesnt count for shoot when you dont look where your going (not saying that applies to you just in general).


----------



## gaz (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563311, member: 30090"]I'm not believe me and if the mirrors on a rigid are set up correctly and a class IV mirror is fitted then there are no blind spots.[/quote]
Can you clarify what a class IV mirror is for those of us that don't know.


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Not banish. Investigate, monitor, lorries have an extremely poor safety record, how many cyclist fatalities were connected with The Shard? Who insured Dennis Putz? How could a man with multiple driving bans get a job driving a lorry in London?


 

Just out of interest how do the statistics against say Black cabs or White van men stack up against lorries ? I dont know them im just asking i get if its just fatalities lorries probably come out worse but unfortunately they are a necessary evil imo .


----------



## Jezston (23 Jul 2013)

subaqua said:


> Many is NOT all.



And 'many' is a lot more than none, which User30090 was very rudely implying.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563278, member: 30090"]No the difference is that I understand logistics and have worked in the industry. Where as you and a few others are firing straight from the hip saying that HGV's should be banned without thinking through the implucations of such an action.[/quote]
Logistics in this context is just another word for cycling fatalities.


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

If the driver is impatient and not concentrating the best set up tipper lorry in the country is still potentially lethal.

The consequences for dangerous and careless driving should be much higher. For example if the fine for using a mobile whilst driving was 6 points and a £1000 fine it would almost end the practice.


----------



## gaz (23 Jul 2013)

User13710 said:


> Reasons for what? So that if a truck driver doesn't see a cyclist on their near side the cyclist will only have minor injuries? Why are you pursuing this in this way?


Because he's a ....


----------



## gaz (23 Jul 2013)

All this talk about mirrors is pretty pointless, whilst adding some mirrors removes blind spots, the driver still has to look into them to see if anything is there. And judging by the way that most people use the roads, mirrors are not something that are checked regularly.


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

Primal Scream said:


> If the driver is impatient and not concentrating the best set up tipper lorry in the country is still potentially lethal.
> 
> The consequences for dangerous and careless driving should be much higher. For example if the fine for using a mobile whilst driving was 6 points and a £1000 fine it would almost end the practice.


 

The fine for HGV or bus drivers can be up to £2500 compared to £1000 for car drivers i think. Points are the same though iirc


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

mark st1 said:


> The fine for HGV or bus drivers can be up to £2500 compared to £1000 for car drivers i think. Points are the same though iirc


Fair enough, I have learnt something new


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

Primal Scream said:


> Fair enough, I have learnt something new


 

Agree though the points should be higher as a greater deterrent as i doubt the fine ever gets near that maximum. There is so many dirt cheap bluetooth hands free stuff out nowadays that its an inexcusable thing to do anyway.


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

mark st1 said:


> Agree though the points should be higher as a greater deterrent as i doubt the fine ever gets near that maximum. There is so many dirt cheap bluetooth hands free stuff out nowadays that its an inexcusable thing to do anyway.


My hand free kit was £55, works a treat although I still try to avoid using it if i can even though it has voice control.


----------



## mark st1 (23 Jul 2013)

Tom Tom all singing all dancing lorry sat-nav has blue tooth built in lush piece of kit provided by my caring boss but for £570 if i was buying it id want it to perform favors for that price .


----------



## slowmotion (23 Jul 2013)

I've seen graphics showing the blind-spots on artics when they are turning (quite sobering), but tipper trucks aren't articulated. I would imagine that the lateral blindspots, with well set up mirrors, are pretty much non-existant. Personally, when I hear a tipper truck anywhere near me, the adrenaline starts pumping. They tend to be driven a bit "briskly".


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> I've seen graphics showing the blind-spots on artics when they are turning (quite sobering), but tipper trucks aren't articulated. I would imagine that the lateral blindspots, with well set up mirrors, are pretty much non-existant. Personally, when I hear a tipper truck anywhere near me, the adrenaline starts pumping. They tend to be driven a bit "briskly".


Keep well clear, I had an old cushion come off of one I was driving behind, scared the life out of me when it landed on the windscreen


----------



## campbellab (23 Jul 2013)

gaz said:


> Can you clarify what a class IV mirror is for those of us that don't know.


 
The link from regulator:

http://www.costain.com/media/330025/wi part 26 safety kit v1.pdf

Guide 6/10 shows the mirror classes.


----------



## slowmotion (23 Jul 2013)

User13710 said:


> Would you like to step off the fence then Slowmo?


 TMN, I really don't have any axe to grind on the matter of tipper trucks, so I have no preference for any side of whatever fence I am unaware that I am supposed to be on.


----------



## simon.r (23 Jul 2013)

I've only skimmed this thread, so apologies if it's already been linked, but this report (entitled Construction logistics and cyclist safety) may be of interest to you if you're not aware of it already:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/fr...gistics-and-cyclist-safety-summary-report.pdf


----------



## slowmotion (23 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563460, member: 30090"]It's a contentious issue SM. A lot of people (rightly or wrongly) seem to post with thier heart rather than thier head.[/quote]

That's quite understandable given that those trucks seem to be responsible for a disproportionate number of cycling casualties. My personal view is that they are needed by the construction industry (in which I have no interests), that banning them in daylight is not realistic, and that some of them are very badly driven. Increase driver training, increase cyclist awareness of their risks, and get them fitted with side bars and proper mirrors. Yes, that's been going on for a while, but keep plugging away.

I don't want to get sucked into acrimony. Bye.


----------



## martint235 (24 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> That's quite understandable given that those trucks seem to be responsible for a disproportionate number of cycling casualties. My personal view is that they are needed by the construction industry (in which I have no interests), that banning them in daylight is not realistic, and that some of them are very badly driven. Increase driver training, increase cyclist awareness of their risks, and get them fitted with side bars and proper mirrors. Yes, that's been going on for a while, but keep plugging away.
> 
> I don't want to get sucked into acrimony. Bye.


 That all seems fairly sensible to me rather than acrimonious.


----------



## Mallory (24 Jul 2013)

What about side sensors?? The industry seems reluctant to install these due to cost. This is something TFL could enforce. 

I also do wish even more education on both sides about the dangers of filtering up the inside of lorries.

Personally I think the time as come for shock tactics showing the aftermath. Obviously it would need the consent of the deceased family


----------



## Mallory (24 Jul 2013)

Bloody iPhone


----------



## snailracer (24 Jul 2013)

simon.r said:


> I've only skimmed this thread, so apologies if it's already been linked, but this report (entitled Construction logistics and cyclist safety) may be of interest to you if you're not aware of it already:
> 
> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/fr...gistics-and-cyclist-safety-summary-report.pdf





User said:


> Yebbut .... you forget that the TRL doesn't know what it's on about, 'cos some bloke in the internet says otherwise...





Mallory said:


> What about side sensors?? The industry seems reluctant to install these due to cost. This is something TFL could enforce...


Funny how the TRL report doesn't discuss sensors. Sure, they cost money, but very little, much less than redesigning trucks for better visibility, and require less driver workload than mirrors.


----------



## Mallory (24 Jul 2013)

snailracer said:


> Funny how the TRL report doesn't discuss sensors. Sure, they cost money, but very little, much less than redesigning trucks for better visibility, and require less driver workload than mirrors.


 
And TBH will cost a lot less money than potential lawsuits.

The technology exists and is proven and is at a reasonable cost , compared to the alternative so no real reason for not installing them


----------



## StuartG (24 Jul 2013)

One has to be careful of just willynilly adding aids. Especially if the driver is not fully utilising those already available. Sensory overload is a real danger - so many things to check, so little time.

Time may be an easier thing to manage. Piece rate payment is always going to encourage corner cutting (in all senses). The professional standard of the drivers is also relevant to these vehicles which is plainly lacking in some quarters. I am always astonished that we have so few problems with the potentially much more dangerous huge supermarket artics that use the same roads. It must be down to training and professional management - if only we could transfer the same standards to all tipper/construction vehicles.

We really ought to borrow some of the ideas used by the government to address other parts of a problematic industry. If they can put Hospitals with significantly above average death rates into special measures than we should be doing the same with transport companies and adding in vehicle/driver infringements too. Special measures could include being excluded during peak traffic times. This would give a heavy incentive to join the good guys. This would reverse the situation where the good guys are currently at a competitive disadvantage against the cowboy operators.


----------



## benb (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563260, member: 30090"]The No they are not, this is hearsay and a common misconception unless you have proof?[/quote]


I already sent you proof, of load bonuses and time bonuses. You just don't want to hear it.


----------



## benb (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563878, member: 30090"]I'm not disputing that they get a load bonus. I'm disputing that they get paid by the load which is not true.[/quote]


So a load bonus is not being paid by the load? What planet are you on?


----------



## benb (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563883, member: 30090"]But they do not get paid by the load. Being paid an hourly rate and a load bonus is different to being paid by the load. Is this concept so hard to grasp?[/quote]


A load bonus means they are being partially paid by the load, so it's an incentive to cut corners.
It's you who can't grasp simple concepts.


----------



## StuartG (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563890, member: 30090"]So you not admit that lorry drivers are now not solely paid by the load, an argument over nothing but we got there in the end.[/quote]

Does this forum software have an ignore poster button?
This guy is just trolling us away from a really serious issue ...


----------



## Mallory (24 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> Does this forum software have an ignore poster button?
> This guy is just trolling us away from a really serious issue ...


yes it does.

click on his profile and then click ignore


----------



## AndyRM (24 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> Does this forum software have an ignore poster button?
> This guy is just trolling us away from a really serious issue ...


 
Perhaps he would understand if he actually rode a bike...


----------



## BentMikey (24 Jul 2013)

He seems awfully het up and awfully wrong to me.


----------



## StuartG (24 Jul 2013)

Mallory said:


> click on his profile and then click ignore


Thank you for that. I apologise for not knowing - only I have never felt the need to do this before.
Which is sad for both of us.


----------



## Mallory (24 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> Thank you for that. I apologise for not knowing - only I have never felt the need to do this before.
> Which is sad for both of us.


 
LOL i only just found out how to do it after you asked,

To say that lorries don't have blind spot was bad enough,to then argue about vehicles entering a RAB not having to give way to traffic from the right was the final straw


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (24 Jul 2013)

AndyRM said:


> Perhaps he would understand if he actually rode a bike...


There's an open invitation to a paid-for Boris Bike ride round the Sun and Sands roundabout here


----------



## benb (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2563890, member: 30090"]So you not admit that lorry drivers are now not solely paid by the load, an argument over nothing but we got there in the end.[/quote]


I'll admit they are not solely paid by the load, and you should admit that a load bonus equates to the same outcome.
If you really can't see an issue with a paid incentive for drivers to drive dangerously quickly and without regard for other road users, then you are quite deluded.


----------



## AndyRM (24 Jul 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> There's an open invitation to a paid-for Boris Bike ride round the Sun and Sands roundabout here


 
I noticed that. He'll not have the legs for a Boris Bike. If they are anything like the Scratch Bikes we have in Newcastle, they must weigh an absolute tonne!


----------



## snailracer (24 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> ...
> We really ought to borrow some of the ideas used by the *government* to address other parts of a problematic industry. If they can put Hospitals with significantly above average death rates into special measures than we should be doing the same with transport companies ...


Which brings up another topic...
I don't see any evidence that a cost-benefit analysis is ever carried out between transport and safety because they appear to be managed separately. For example, there seem little incentive for Dept for Transport officials to invest to reduce road accidents or pollution, because the costs of dealing with those don't all come out of the DfT's budget - there is cost to the NHS for treating injuries and to the Revenue due to lost wages, but that does not affect the DfT's bottom line so why should they care?
A lot of roads are managed by county and city councils, who are often even more disconnected from the consequences of their (non) actions, which makes me even more pessimistic.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (24 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> I've seen graphics showing the blind-spots on artics when they are turning (quite sobering), but tipper trucks aren't articulated. I would imagine that the lateral blindspots, with well set up mirrors, are pretty much non-existant. Personally, when I hear a tipper truck anywhere near me, the adrenaline starts pumping. *They tend to be driven a bit "briskly".*


Only one thing scares me more than a tipper lorry on my tail; a supermarket home delivery van.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (24 Jul 2013)

User said:


> Particularly those for Tesco and Asda.... I think they employ the drivers that Addison Lee and Keltbray won't touch.


True dat.


----------



## ianrauk (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2564061, member: 1314"]Beano looks a bit like Lee who used to post here. Truck driver and a cyclist if it is him. Always quite abrasive online but quiet as a mouse on rides. He was good going uphill on a fixed, though.[/quote]



Keeerching!


----------



## Supersuperleeds (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2564089, member: 30090"]That's incorrect.

And why was it bad enough to say that rigid vehicles have no blind spots? Based on my own experience, if the mirrors are set up correctly then they don't have any.

As for the traffic entering onto a RAB giving way I wanted the piece of legislation that stats this - no more and no less.[/quote]

https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/roundabouts-184-to-190


----------



## Mugshot (24 Jul 2013)

User said:


> Now will you stop posting knobbish rubbish?


May I suggest that people stop feeding him?


----------



## Leodis (24 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2564101, member: 1314"]Don't want to take a serious topic OT so will just say  to Lee and go!

View attachment 26680
[/quote]


Day trip out?


----------



## User6179 (24 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> I'll admit they are not solely paid by the load, and you should admit that a load bonus equates to the same outcome.
> If you really can't see an issue with a paid incentive for drivers to drive dangerously quickly and without regard for other road users, then you are quite deluded.


 
Depends, a lot of these drivers are self employed and own the lorry and are paid by the load , the company that pays them may even pay to have the company logo on the side of the lorry.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (24 Jul 2013)

Eddy said:


> Depends, a lot of these drivers are self employed and own the lorry and are *paid by the load* , the company that pays them may even pay to have the company logo on the side of the lorry.


----------



## benb (24 Jul 2013)

Eddy said:


> Depends, a lot of these drivers are self employed and own the lorry and are paid by the load , the company that pays them may even pay to have the company logo on the side of the lorry.


 

Don't tell Beano that; he won't hear of it!


----------



## marknotgeorge (25 Jul 2013)

My dad's been making a living out of driving since he was old enough to drive: he's driven ambulances, army wagons, buses, coaches, and most recently HGVs - he used the redundancy money from a coach driving job to pay for his HGV licence. One of the first non-agency jobs he had was driving a bulk powder tanker, where he was paid a wage plus a percentage of the load. He quickly left that because of the constant pressure to get another load in. Slightly different to tippers, I know, but I suspect that a remuneration policy that rewards more loads is going to put negative pressure on driving standards.

I spoke to him about cyclists and tippers, and he mentioned that when he's in his car, he's wary when there's a tipper about. He also mentioned the higher percentage of owner-drivers in the tipper trade. Not only does this mean that there's added pressure on making every driving hour earn money (no load = no cash, whereas the empty time is calculated into, say, a supermarket truck's costings), but such vehicles are likely to be older, without the extra mirrors fitted to the newer supermarket trucks, which are contractually likely to be no more than a year or two old. And that's leaving aside the muck and increased wear and tear caused by moving, well, muck about.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Jul 2013)

Lee, hell of a nice bloke in real life, good cyclist, utter count of a forum personality. Sorry mate, but it's true IMO.


----------



## Andrew_P (25 Jul 2013)

BentMikey said:


> Lee, hell of a nice bloke in real life, good cyclist, utter count of a forum personality. Sorry mate, but it's true IMO.


  A bit of a Royal then?


----------



## mark st1 (25 Jul 2013)

marknotgeorge said:


> such vehicles are likely to be older, without the extra mirrors fitted to the newer supermarket trucks, which are contractually likely to be no more than a year or two old.


 

All HGV vehicles have to meet whatever criteria that VOSA set out no matter what age of the vehicle if they dont then they fail an MOT test.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (25 Jul 2013)

mark st1 said:


> All HGV vehicles have to meet whatever criteria that VOSA set out no matter what age of the vehicle if they dont then they fail an MOT test.


Serious question

Are the VOSA regs not age related?


----------



## mark st1 (25 Jul 2013)

GregCollins said:


> Serious question
> 
> Are the VOSA regs not age related?


 

Serious answer...........

I dont know lol i dont think so my company owns trucks going from V reg up to 13 plate brand new and all of them have to go through the same process of checks mirrors are all the same on every truck etc etc. I suppose there maybe exemptions for old old truicks but im not so sure you will find many or any of them still pulling dirt nowadays ??


----------



## Boris Bajic (25 Jul 2013)

BentMikey said:


> Lee, hell of a nice bloke in real life, good cyclist, utter *count* of a forum personality. Sorry mate, but it's true IMO.


 
This reminds me:

Many years ago, I was doing a lot of work around language and how to identify the origin of a non-native speaker of this or that language and all that malarkey... On dark winter evenings I'd go to a colleague's home and watch the latest videos. We were working in foreign, so they all had subtitles.

Anyway, there is a wonderful speech in _Snatch _where Brick Top defines the word Nemesis as _"A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible daffodil... me."_

In the Bosnian (or maybe Croatian) subtitles, the C-word was rendered as 'Grof'.... Count. It was quite sweet in a sweet sort of way.

Carry on.


----------

