# Cyclists down a30



## Kiwiavenger (2 Jul 2013)

Just heard on local radio two cyclists have been involved in a collision with a lorry and died. Been told not from the area so thinking may have been doing lands end john ogroats. Hope its no one on here thoughts go out to the families


----------



## GlasgowFinn (2 Jul 2013)

It's on the beeb http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-23143314

Very sad


----------



## HLaB (2 Jul 2013)

Two yikes 

Edit: I've just googled tne A30 at Fraddon


----------



## Accy cyclist (2 Jul 2013)

The lorry driver will appear in court in two months time for the customary slap on the wrist fine,stating that he's had sleepless nights since the "accident" and that it'll put him off driving for life therefore losing his livelihood! The judge/magistrate(never been a bike since he/she was 10) will empathize with him and he'll leave the court feeling pleased with himself!


----------



## fossala (2 Jul 2013)

All of us locals avoid the A30 as much as we can. I was on it the other day, but I try to avoid. We don't have any motorways down here, but this is the closest thing we have.


----------



## Accy cyclist (2 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2529265, member: 30090"]That's crass speculation and you are bang out of order.[/quote]

This is a forum for cyclists not lorry drivers! I'm naturally going to side with my fellow cyclists,and speculate about a person who belongs to a group who in the majority see cyclists as a menace!


----------



## Kiwiavenger (2 Jul 2013)

fossala said:


> All of us locals avoid the A30 as much as we can. I was on it the other day, but I try to avoid. We don't have any motorways down here, but this is the closest thing we have.



I've cycled it a few times as it's part of a local TT circuit I try my hand at (unofficially and on strava) but this has made me think twice about it. 

Just after I heard about it on pirate they played a u2 song that was played at a funeral I attended recently. So close to home too as I'm doing the Cornish leg of a jogle challenge next weekend


----------



## lejogger (2 Jul 2013)

Horrible news 

My best pal and I spent 100+ miles on the A30 during our End to End in 2009. It's not a comfortable ride but we never felt in danger. 

However (without knowing the specific details and being largely unwilling to speculate) any road user can have a lapse in concentration at any time and on any road. We don't know which party was at fault here. 

My sympathies are with the families and friends of all those involved.


----------



## Rob3rt (2 Jul 2013)

Accy cyclist said:


> This is a forum for cyclists not lorry drivers! I'm naturally going to side with my fellow cyclists,and speculate about a person who belongs to a group who in the majority see cyclists as a menace!


 

Please reflect on this!


----------



## steve52 (2 Jul 2013)

*in collison with? its a duel carridgeway and the lorry being faster, i think the term mown down by would be more appt *


----------



## numbnuts (2 Jul 2013)

Yet another R.I.P. condolances to family and friends


----------



## ColinJ (2 Jul 2013)

RIP 

I generally believe in asserting our rights to cycle where it is legal to do so, but I would definitely give that road a miss. (A quick look on Streetview shows that it looks like a motorway. The results of a quick search for "Is the a30 safe for cycling?" suggest that it isn't.)


----------



## lejogger (2 Jul 2013)

Are we really going to point at a choice of route for the cause of this? If it was really that unsafe then like many A roads across the country it would prohibit cyclists, especially with it being the main route out of Lands End. There must be hundreds of cyclists every week using it throughout the summer.

I'd rather be within the hard shoulder and highly visible on a wide duel lane road with plenty of space to be overtaken, than confronted by a boy-racer on the wrong side of the road on a blind corner of a country lane.

There's also a difference between a road being safe for cycling on and a cyclist being safe/experienced enough to cycle on a busy road of that kind. As I said earlier too, a cyclist or a motorist could have a lapse of concentration at any time on any road that could lead to an accident of this nature.

We don't know whether the motorist or the cyclist was at fault and whether the circumstances were unique to the fact that both were on this particular road or not.

I'm all for a thread to express sympathy on these occasions, but do wish they wouldn't degenerate into often wild and moral speculation of the causes before they are known.


----------



## Glow worm (2 Jul 2013)

Confirmed the two were LEJOGers. Driver of an articulated lorry arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving, which I understand is normal protocol in these circumstances.

Bloody horrendous RIP.


----------



## StuartG (2 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2529265, member: 30090"]That's crass speculation and you are bang out of order.[/quote]

+1


----------



## StuartG (2 Jul 2013)

Using the BBC photo this appears to be the carriageway at the point they were travelling. What may be of relevance is the lay by. The lorry may have been turning into it (classic left hook) or they were already there and the driver couldn't stop/swerve. I do wish the police would routinely publish and publicise the forensics when the coroner has done his work so we, and drivers, may learn from other people's tragic mistakes. More important than punishment.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Summercourt,+Cornwall&hl=en&ll=50.364271,-4.980927&spn=0.012086,0.033023&sll=51.48931,-0.08819&sspn=0.755048,2.113495&oq=summercourt,+corn&hnear=Summercourt,+Cornwall,+United+Kingdom&t=h&layer=c&cbll=50.364362,-4.980824&panoid=HT6yt_ARq1M_1I1ngZRg5A&cbp=12,45.26,,0,4.8&z=16

It is certainly a road I would avoid (and appears to be avoidable by a lovely lane just to the north).


----------



## HLaB (2 Jul 2013)

Its very likely I'm 100% wrong but I've never heard of a left hook involving two cyclists and a lorry


----------



## lejogger (2 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> ...(and appears to be avoidable by a lovely lane just to the north).


All main roads are avoidable, but the alternatives are not always as direct/straight-forward/easy to navigate, the hill gradients are generally more severe and the surfaces can be poorer.

The cyclists weren't killed because they chose to cycle on the A30. They were killed because either one of them or the lorry driver made an error, an error which could have easily been made on a 'lovely lane to the north' with similar consequences.


----------



## StuartG (2 Jul 2013)

lejogger said:


> All main roads are avoidable, but the alternatives are not always as direct/straight-forward/easy to navigate, the hill gradients are generally more severe and the surfaces can be poorer.


I did check out the alternative and it doesn't look that bad. Which means I would have elected to use the other road. You might not - that's our mutual right to determine the risk/benefits we wish to take. However, I would only use a road like that if there was NO reasonable alternative. Interested to hear of other opinions especially of those local to the area.


----------



## lejogger (2 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> ...You might not...


I guess that's my point, it's not that I might not, but that I didn't. I spent the whole first day and 100 miles on that road from LE to Okehampton. 

I completely respect your view and right to choose whichever route you desire and most importantly makes you feel safest, but cycling can be a dangerous activity when choosing to share any and every road with large, heavy, fast moving traffic.


----------



## briantrumpet (2 Jul 2013)

lejogger said:


> I guess that's my point, it's not that I might not, but that I didn't. I spent the whole first day and 100 miles on that road from LE to Okehampton.
> 
> I completely respect your view and right to choose whichever route you desire and most importantly makes you feel safest, but cycling can be a dangerous activity when choosing to share any and every road with large, heavy, fast moving traffic.


It's a road I would never chose to cycle - in effect a two-lane motorway, with a 2ft-wide hard shoulder. Since it was dualled virtually all the way down, it's treated more than ever like a motorway. Of course accidents happen on all sorts of roads, but I can't help feeling that on this sort of road a collision is nearly always going to be fatal for a cyclist, given that the speed difference between the cyclist and the traffic is going to be getting on for 60mph, whereas it's likely to be closer to 30mph difference on an average westcountry A-road. There are what I would judge (unscientifically) as safer, and certainly prettier alternatives, and I'd advise anyone to take them.

Condolences to the families, obviously, whatever the circumstances in this instance.


----------



## Breedon (2 Jul 2013)

A dual carriageway 70 MPH? there is no way on earth i would cycle along that, i would be quite happy making a 10 mile detour to avoid that sooner be knackerd than dead.
Cycled along the A52 ONCE on a Sunday morning at around 7am even then brown shorts time and thats reason i wouldn't do it again.


----------



## TonyEnjoyD (2 Jul 2013)

R.I.P. the two cyclists and condolences to all family and friends affected by such a tragic turn of events.

I do agree that we don't know the circumstances of the incident, the condition of the road or any debris that could have caused any of those involved break line, the competence of the driver or cyclists, nor the weather conditions to name but a few possibles.

Again, with the alternate routes, not knowing the actual terrain, there were decent-ish almost parallel roads from Carland Cross to Bodmin, but beyond these two poins it looks very sporadic.

Personally, I would avoid as much of that road as I could, but thats just me.


----------



## Tommy2 (2 Jul 2013)

I've driven that road a couple of times and it is effectively like a motorway, and the side of the road is very slim and looks very poor condition, full of debris.

That would scare the s**t out of me to cycle that, especially as its largely straight therefore in my experience most drivers speed down it when there is little traffic.


----------



## Leodis (2 Jul 2013)

RIP the cyclists.

A roads are a tough call, I use one for a couple of miles but not as open at this one (its the A6110 Leeds) and need to cross two lanes of traffic to turn off to Elland Road


----------



## jefmcg (2 Jul 2013)

BBC had a link to this article, which has some disturbing images of the destroyed cycles. They are just of the bikes, but it doesn't take much imagination to think what happened to the riders


----------



## 400bhp (2 Jul 2013)

lejogger said:


> All main roads are avoidable, but the alternatives are not always as direct/straight-forward/easy to navigate, the hill gradients are generally more severe and the surfaces can be poorer.
> 
> *The cyclists weren't killed because they chose to cycle on the A30. They were killed because either one of them or the lorry driver made an error, an error which could have easily been made on a 'lovely lane to the north' with similar consequences*.


 

That's a difficult one fella.

Choice involves (somewhere perhaps in the annals of our minds) a risk assessment. I strongly suspect the risk of having a serious accident travelling on such roads is higher.


----------



## briantrumpet (2 Jul 2013)

jefmcg said:


> BBC had a link to this article, which has some disturbing images of the destroyed cycles. They are just of the bikes, but it doesn't take much imagination to think what happened to the riders


If anyone is considering using the A30 for LEJOG, I think one viewing of those photos would dissuade them. Horrific.


----------



## StuartG (2 Jul 2013)

briantrumpet said:


> If anyone is considering using the A30 for LEJOG, I think one viewing of those photos would dissuade them. Horrific.


The photo of the other bike is even more disturbing - utterly crushed.

It was not being able to avoid the similar A9 south of Inverness that would inspire me to avoid this. One has to take risks but no more than necessary.


----------



## bof (2 Jul 2013)

I took a short section just west of the crash location on my LeJog because the gate to the short gated road I thought I could nip down was covered in barbed wire. The dual carriageway was busy and a couple of passing vehicles - bus and truck - came uncomfortably close. I was certainly relieved that I only had to do a mile or so.


----------



## ComedyPilot (2 Jul 2013)




----------



## BigonaBianchi (2 Jul 2013)

There are better and more picturesque/safer roads to ride down there. I didn't ride the a30 in favor of smaller lanes.

But that's not really the point. The point is that these poor guys are dead because of some bloody lorry driver.
Only yesterday I was passed so close by a lorry driver he brushed my right arm ..I'm currently discussing the incident with his employer.

Time and time again lorries can't be bothered to pass wide enough and the attitude is that they own the road and cyclists are like flies to swot.

RIP fellow riders.

Let the driver live with his guilt. No sympathy for him. Every sympathy for the families of the dead.


----------



## fossala (2 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> Interested to hear of other opinions especially of those local to the area.


 
I live near there, around 10 miles. I do ride on the A30 (I rode on it the other day when I had the job interview I was talking about on here) but I try not too very often because I end up getting wound up. It's a bad road, it's not meant for cyclists, but if everyone did obey the rules of the road, things like this shouldn't happen.


----------



## Accy cyclist (3 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2529288, member: 30090"]What an utterly ridiculous statement, you carry on though.

RIP to the two cyclists.[/quote]



Have a look at the mangled bike,then tell me if you're still keen to defend the lorry drivers "union" over the dead cyclists. http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...-lorry-crash/story-19453652-detail/story.html


----------



## DRHysted (3 Jul 2013)

Accy cyclist said:


> Have a look at the mangled bike,then tell me if you're still keen to defend the lorry drivers "union" over the dead cyclists. http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...-lorry-crash/story-19453652-detail/story.html



Without the facts I am unwilling to defend or attack the lorry driver. There are so many different things that could have happened to have caused this which could have been out of the drivers control. 

I am not willing to defend the driver, but I am also not willing to gather the pitch forks and start building gallows. Two people have tragically lost their lives, lets not add a third until we know the facts and not media sensatialisum.


----------



## betty swollocks (3 Jul 2013)

So desperately sad.
Two cyclists set off for a lovely 10 days or so cycling the length of the land and end up dead within just a few miles, never thinking this would happen to them.
I extend to their family, friends and loved ones my sincere condolences.
May they rest in peace.


----------



## jefmcg (3 Jul 2013)

I'm wondering what scenario it could have been the fault of 2 cyclists? One, sure, loses concentration and suddenly swerves out into the lane; but both of them? Also, they are visually more obvious, so reduce the chances of a genuine SMIDSY.

And I do not have a problem judging the lorry driver: he is not dead; he is not injured; if he is distressed about killing them, then my further condemnation will not worsen that (what could be worse than the knowledge you ended two lives in agony?); there is not the remotest chance I will be on the jury; if a court does find that he is guilty, his sentence will be derisory compared to he has done.


----------



## BigonaBianchi (3 Jul 2013)

The only way drivers will change is if the law automatically finds them at fault in any collision with a cyclist, and instantly and permanently removes their licence to drive.

It won't bring these two back though.


----------



## Darren Jeffrey (3 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> The only way drivers will change is if the law automatically finds them at fault in any collision with a cyclist, and instantly and permanently removes their licence to drive.
> 
> It won't bring these two back though.



Even if you are not at fault?


----------



## HLaB (3 Jul 2013)

Some shocking newpaper reports out there; this headline is particularly shocking (hopefuly its typical media attention grabbing )


----------



## Col5632 (3 Jul 2013)

Just so sad to hear of news like this, trip of a lifetime and this happens just moments after they start 

Thoughts are with the family's as i can not imagine what they are going through


----------



## BigonaBianchi (3 Jul 2013)

Darren Jeffrey said:


> Even if you are not at fault?


 
yep...totally.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Jul 2013)

HLaB said:


> Some shocking newpaper reports out there; this headline is particularly shocking (hopefuly its typical media attention grabbing )


For once, they have probably got the wording right, rather than using the pathetic "in collision with".


----------



## HLaB (3 Jul 2013)

ColinJ said:


> For once, they have probably got the wording right, rather than using the pathetic "in collision with".


Tentatively agree although I cant' bring myself to 'like' any posts in this thread


----------



## StuartG (3 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> The only way drivers will change is if the law automatically finds them at fault in any collision with a cyclist, and instantly and permanently removes their licence to drive.


Which cannot happen whilst >50% people rely on cars. Or are you advocating the end of democracy?
Would it be better not to go for presumed liability which is feasible? A greater deterrent than we have now even if far from perfect.

We can presume this driver did not intend to kill. We do not even know if a collision was unavoidable (and if it was deterrents don't count). Why not wait until we know the cause and hence what remedies might be best employed. And presuming somebody out there is going to suggest banning bicycles on the A30 - how we deal with that?

For what its worth I would love to see the national speed limit reduced to 40 mph EXCEPT where a carriageway is provided for cyclists and maintained to the same standard allowing two cyclists side by side in each direction to cover the same distance in the same time. Yep, I know I'm dreaming too - except isn't this much the norm in the Netherlands?


----------



## mooseracer (3 Jul 2013)

I grew up in Blackwater (Itself on the A30 until it was bypassed some years ago and not far from this terrible tragedy) and still travel on that road frequently. It is _very _busy at this time of year. Despite the fact there's a hard shoulder on most if it I would feel very uncomfortable indeed riding any distance on it.

RIP to these 2


----------



## Risex4 (3 Jul 2013)

Horrific and tragic. Potentially an understatement, but I can't think of the right words to use in this instance.

I'm not going to get into the blame game as there are too many questions for other people to consider first, but regardless of who ends up being at fault here, at what point does someone turn around and say we need to review the rules of the road re: cycling allowance on such highways?

I get what people have said about weighing up the risks on an personal basis, but truly its not fair when people don't/can't understand the individual risks. Motorways are motorways, everyone knows what to expect, and that bikes shouldn't be on them; everyone's happy.

IMO, the A-Road classification (and the subsequent allowance of cycling transit upon them) in this regards is far too broad. A Roads can be anything from pseudo-motorways to gridlocked, single-lane moving car parks in town centres. Ok, people can prepare to a degree by pre-investigating them, but you will never truly know the nature of a road until you've cycled it, sometimes to a very high cost. Locals would know to give it a wide birth, "foreigners" may well think its a risk worth taking through lack of experience. 

I know it may be a dubious subject, but I believe roads like this stretch need some kind of re-categorization and subsequent banning of bikes. Whether we like it or not, this kind of road was designed for the fast transit of heavy transport, the fact that we are allowed upon them is a technicality and an oversight. To simply say lorry drivers need training or some such thing is too simplistic. 

I've been measuring up a direct JOGLE route, and the A30 was very much in consideration. I'm now having a serious rethink.


----------



## DWiggy (3 Jul 2013)

Would it be a stupid idea/suggestion if cyclists were able to ride on the hard shoulder but on the opposite side of the road (Facing oncoming traffic) on these large unavoidable A roads?


----------



## subaqua (3 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> Which cannot happen whilst >50% people rely on cars. Or are you advocating the end of democracy?
> Would it be better not to go for presumed liability which is feasible? A greater deterrent than we have now even if far from perfect.
> 
> We can presume this driver did not intend to kill. We do not even know if a collision was unavoidable (and if it was deterrents don't count). Why not wait until we know the cause and hence what remedies might be best employed. And presuming somebody out there is going to suggest* banning bicycles on the A30 - how we deal with that?*
> ...


 
In much the same way that the A406 north circular in vast parts has, the same way the A12 link road has, the same way the A55 expressway has local byelaws for that particular road.
I know that bit of road fairly well and it is a motorway in all but name all the way from Bodmin to Carland Cross. even the single carriageway towards Zelah from carland is terrible - even more so at this time of year when tourist season hits.
When i ride in that area I try and use the A3075 but even that is hairy in the summer between 3 Burrows and Newquay and the hill at Rejerrah ain't my favourite


----------



## Mo1959 (3 Jul 2013)

They have been named now.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-23157100


----------



## lejogger (3 Jul 2013)

StuartG said:


> And presuming somebody out there is going to suggest banning bicycles on the A30 - how we deal with that?


There are sections of other A roads that prohibit cycling and maybe that's something to be looked into on the A30.
Although it may seem from my posts that I'm pro cycling on the A30, I'm not so much, (although I have done and didn't feel much more in danger than other busy A roads) it's more that I think by blaming these deaths on the fact that they chose to cycle on a busy road we're doing them a huge disservice. Any road that doesn't ban cycling should in theory be somewhere a cyclist can ride and feel safe. Blaming the A30 is excusing the true cause of the accident which I believe is as yet unknown but likely to be something that 'could' have happened anywhere.

There's a whole lot of knee jerk reaction going on. Yes this is an absolutely horrific case, but it would be interesting to see the stats on cycling related incidents/injuries/fatalities for this road especially considering the location on the LEJOG route it must be one of the most used sections of dual carriageway by cyclists in the country.

If we start shouting to be banned from roads whenever a horrible accident takes place we'll eventually be restricted to cycle lanes and pathways only. What we should be shouting for is making all suitable roads safer for us to be on. Whether it's by reducing speed limits, separate cycle lanes, redesigned or better visibility on large vehicles, or whatever else it may be.

Let's enable ourselves to cycle safely, not restrict ourselves from our right to travel by our own means.


----------



## Mo1959 (3 Jul 2013)

@lejogger Excellent post.


----------



## BigonaBianchi (3 Jul 2013)

....there are to many cars...its that simple...we are a tiny country with way way to many cars . Reduce car ownership and you reduce the risk....

That lorry driver killed. Simple as that, intentional of course not, but that's no excuse, when you point a bloody great big lorry at anybody that person will die just as if you 'accidently' point a gun in their direction. Its a lethal weapon and the law should reflect it.


----------



## lejogger (3 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> ....there are to many cars...its that simple...we are a tiny country with way way to many cars . Reduce car ownership and you reduce the risk....


 
Car drivers would argue that there are too many bikes. Why should they be disadvantaged because we want to feel safer?
We can't stop them owning a car in the same way that they can't stop us owning a bike.

Infrastructure needs to reflect that the numbers of drivers and cyclists are only going to increase and there needs to be a way for us all to live together.

I'm sure there are many options to improve the situation, but denying freedom of choice to travel how you wish isn't one of them.


----------



## StuartG (3 Jul 2013)

lejogger said:


> If we start shouting to be banned from roads whenever a horrible accident takes place we'll eventually be restricted to cycle lanes and pathways only.


It isn't us but non-cycling centric road safety people and sound reasonable to most people. It something we need to be pro-active about as heavily used near motorway roads are likely to proliferate in the Government's projected infrastructure investments.

Which didn't mention cycling! Realistically we need to push that any new road being 'dualled' should accommodate cyclists in some way. And not being banished to an ill maintained, narrow, windy, junction ridden cyclepath. The bottom line is the cyclist should be seen as having the right to progress on any alternative as fast as on the new provision. It would be great if that could be made statutory.If, for practical or cost reasons it isn't realistic than the speed limit be lowered to lower risk to cyclists on the road. It isn't just about collisions. An artic doing 60 making a close pass will blow/suck you from your path ...


----------



## BigonaBianchi (3 Jul 2013)

lejogger said:


> Car drivers would argue that there are too many bikes. Why should they be disadvantaged because we want to feel safer?
> We can't stop them owning a car in the same way that they can't stop us owning a bike.
> 
> Infrastructure needs to reflect that the numbers of drivers and cyclists are only going to increase and there needs to be a way for us all to live together.
> ...


 
there is a limit to what we as humans can just keep taking....just to assume more cars and bikes will mean more cars...we don't have a god given right to just expand our tin can culture endlessly...we don't need more roads...we need less cars, less greed and people just have to accept that they cant always get what they want...the car culture is king in this mixed up society, its time to change attidudes...and not just keep saying we need more cars more roads more more more more more....

roll on the next oil crisis...


----------



## jefmcg (3 Jul 2013)

http://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/fun....action?userUrl=mcmenigallwallace&isTeam=true


----------



## Deleted member 20519 (3 Jul 2013)

Absolutely awful


----------



## nilling (3 Jul 2013)

RIP fellow cyclists 

I commute on an A-road not too dissimilar. There are no alternative routes with it being on the coast. Expect more calls to ban cyclists from busy A-roads


----------



## 4F (3 Jul 2013)

RIP to the two cyclists and thoughts with the families left behind.

I think the problem with this road in particular is that it is treated as an extension of the M5 being the main artery route into the south west inwards from Exeter and road users just do not expect to see cyclists on it. There are some A roads in this country which literally are essentially motorways all bar the name. The A14 here is another one I would put in this catagory and whilst I have ridden on part of it on a Saturday morning, it is not an experience I would consider doing again and certainly not one I would ever do on a week day down to the constant flow of HGV's that use it.


----------



## HLaB (3 Jul 2013)

nilling said:


> RIP fellow cyclists
> 
> I commute on an A-road not too dissimilar. There are no alternative routes with it being on the coast. Expect more calls to ban cyclists from busy A-roads


 I think they did that with the A90 when a cyclist was killed (RIP) they introduced a bylaw banning cyclists.


----------



## BigonaBianchi (3 Jul 2013)

> I think they did that with the A90 when a cyclist was killed (RIP) they introduced a bylaw banning cyclists


 
typical of this warped car is king country...ban the bloody lorries !!!!!

...oh sorry I got shot in the head by some gun pointing lunatic...lets just ban the innocent bystander victim and put the dipstick who shot him up on a pedestal for hero worship....argggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!


----------



## 4F (3 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> typical of this warped car is king country...ban the bloody lorries !!!!!


 

Ban the lorries from A roads ? yeah good idea lets get them all travelling on B roads instead.


----------



## Ticktockmy (3 Jul 2013)

So sad that two people have died, and one has to feel sadden for their families. However, I think its best that the reasons and blames should be left until the results of the police investigation are complete, all to easy to place blame on either the lorry driver or the cyclists, when often it the road conditions which cause the problem, or something as simple as a cross wind.


----------



## ianjmcd (3 Jul 2013)

jefmcg said:


> http://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/fun....action?userUrl=mcmenigallwallace&isTeam=true


 

one of the few sensible posts ive seen in this thread RIP: to two fellow cyclists


----------



## mrandmrspoves (3 Jul 2013)

Absolutely awful and very sobering particularly for anyone who has ever considered or completed LEJOG/JOGLE.
think it's important to put this into perspective (NOT to trivialise the deaths) - many many people cycle along this road every year as part of their End to End and statistically this type of accident is still extremely rare. 

I have posted similar comments to my next comment before and been shot down in flames by some - but I will repeat it here.....

I am sadly fully qualified to express my opinion because I was involved in an accident as a cyclist when a driver drove straight into my Grandfather and me while we were cycling. He died at the scene and I sustained a smashed up knee that still causes me pain over 30 years later.
I have never felt anything except sympathy for the woman that hit us - she has to live with that fact for the rest of her life.

Despite the above experience and being a keen cyclist and therefore maybe more cycle aware than a non cyclist motorist, a couple of weeks ago while pulling out across the road from where I work I very nearly knocked a cyclist of his bike because I simply didn't see him. Maybe he was in my blind spot, maybe I wasn't paying as much attention as I thought I was.....maybe I was driving carefully enough because I saw him in time to avoid a collision.....maybe we were both just lucky.

Anyone on this site who wishes to condemn the lorry driver out of hand is probably someone who does not drive a car.
Any honest car driver will recognise that at some time or other their concentration has lapsed and they have had a near miss.

My thoughts are with ALL those involved.


----------



## srw (3 Jul 2013)

An honest post - I wish more people could be as honest with themselves as you are.


----------



## mrandmrspoves (3 Jul 2013)

srw said:


> An honest post - I wish more people could be as honest with themselves as you are.



Thanks ....I hope those that wish to delude themselves never have to be more honest.


----------



## ColinJ (4 Jul 2013)

mrandmrspoves said:


> Thanks ....I hope those that wish to delude themselves never have to be more honest.


A lot of motorists definitely need to think more and watch what they are doing.

Having said that ... I am a non-driver so I can't comment about not seeing cyclists when driving, but as a pedestrian I started to cross a quiet side-street in Hebden Bridge once and walked out in front of a car that I hadn't seen! I had looked towards it, but for some reason, it just didn't register in my brain. Fortunately, that driver _was_ paying attention! It was probably an example of this effect:


----------



## Accy cyclist (4 Jul 2013)

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/41...rathall-killed-cyclist-as-he-chatted-on-phone Another sad story about a !~@! with a total disregard for other road users and in particular,vulnerable road users!


----------



## nilling (4 Jul 2013)

RIP fellow cyclist, from my home city as well

This appear to be his defense "Wrathall, from Barnacre, Lancs, later told police Mr Fingleton had run into the side of him."  PC from accident unit "'There is a general consensus that driving and talking on the telephone do not mix. It causes distraction." Consensus?


----------



## Hobbio (4 Jul 2013)

One of the killed riders is a distant relative of mine, my Mother-in-Law's cousin. We met them last year, Andrew was a lovely bloke. His wife had only emailed my Mother-in-Law a few days ago, talking about him doing Le Jog and their plans for the summer. My wife was very upset last night (she only found out about this yesterday, and then found out about an hour later that a close colleague of hers had also passed away suddenly), especially thinking of his 2 daughters.

The other person was a colleague of his from America who was only over to ride Le Jog. Their firm has lost 2 top executives at once in horrible circumstances.

Awful tragedy, especially seen from up close.


----------



## fimm (4 Jul 2013)

I'm so sorry to hear that, Hobbio.
I also knew Andrew as he was a member of the triathlon club I'm in. He was a lovely friendly welcoming guy, and put a lot into the club as a coach and committee member.
R.I.P.


----------



## green1 (4 Jul 2013)

HLaB said:


> I think they did that with the A90 when a cyclist was killed (RIP) they introduced a bylaw banning cyclists.


Only in Edinburgh around the bridge.


----------



## snailracer (4 Jul 2013)

ColinJ said:


> A lot of motorists definitely need to think more and watch what they are doing.
> 
> Having said that ... I am a non-driver so I can't comment about not seeing cyclists when driving, but as a pedestrian I started to cross a quiet side-street in Hebden Bridge once and walked out in front of a car that I hadn't seen! I had looked towards it, but for some reason, it just didn't register in my brain....


I both drive and cycle. Even though I am mildly bike-militant and am more conscious of bikes than the average motorist, I can remember at least 3 occasions where I _almost_ hit a cyclist with my car because I didn't see them:

Driving along an unlit country road at night, the cyclist in this case had no rear light and I saw the reflector late. It was a twisty road - had it been a straighter one, I would probably have seen the bike from further back. I should point out that in this jurisdiction, riding with no rear light was entirely legal.
Driving up a hill with the sun in my eyes, I failed to see a cyclist in the (narrow) bike lane on my left until I was almost level with him. Luckily, the bike lane meant I was positioned further to the right than I would normally drive, otherwise I would have hit him.
Busy urban touristy area during the day, with lots of cars, pedestrians and other visual clutter. This place crawls with MAMILs/club racers, so one might expect that I would be aware of cyclists in the area, however the cyclist I failed to spot was dressed in normal clothes and riding quite slowly, so faded into the background of other pedestrians.
I guess my point is, even though I am bike-conscious and have a spotless driving record since I learned to drive nearly 30 years ago, I can see how it's possible to "not see" a cyclist.

For me, the practical outcome of these near-misses is that I cycle with a flashing front light on during the day, and a bright flashing rear blinky on the rear as well if there is a low sun.


----------



## ColinJ (4 Jul 2013)

snailracer said:


> For me, the practical outcome of these near-misses is that I cycle with a flashing front light on during the day, and a bright flashing rear blinky on the rear as well if there is a low sun.


Bromptonfb came on one of my forum rides with a very bright flashing rear light. It had a very distinctive 'burst-mode' flashing pattern which really caught one's attention. The light was bright enough to see from a mile away in bright sunlight! (He missed a turn and ended up a mile away, almost too far for me to make him out, but I could see his light flashing away.)

It was great in daylight but would need turning down at night or it would have dazzled anybody behind him.


----------



## Fubar (4 Jul 2013)

Totally tragic. For the past 7 years we have towed a caravan down to Cornwall and there are many long upward drags that slow HGV's down followed by steep downward slopes which advise towing vehicles to change gear and reduce speed - even towing a little caravan takes quite a bit of concentration. And in all that mix you have lorries, caravans, motorhomes (now mostly towing small cars), foreigners, cyclists, motorbikes, tractors pulling out of side-lanes, and slow moving/fast moving cars - whatever the causes/circumstances here I think I would personally avoid cycling on this road, as I would on much of the A9 for the same reason.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> typical of this warped car is king country...ban the bloody lorries !!!!!
> 
> ...oh sorry I got shot in the head by some gun pointing lunatic...lets just ban the innocent bystander victim and put the dipstick who shot him up on a pedestal for hero worship....argggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!


 

Well without the demand from cars and lorries we would not have the road network that we do today.

Incidentally, are Bianchi's delivered by teleporter or something?

***

The incident that has started this thread is indeed sad and I can't comment on the particulars of the accident as I was fortunately not there.

What does amaze me though is the risk that some people take when out cycling. Two things come to mind.

The first being that some roads are so obviously high risk that I question the judgement of the cyclists that I see on them. We all judge risk differently but on some of the local trunk roads up here there is no wide corridor on the LH side of the road to cycle in. I quite often see cyclists on these roads mixing it with fast traffic including lorries who create a huge draft as they go by. I'm not saying that all roads should not be made safe for cyclists but truth is they aren't so maybe they ought to be avoided.

Last year on the long North-bound drag up the bypass that overlooks Kendal I came upon 3 cyclists in freezing cold conditions cycling in torrential rain and who were virtually invisible until I was upon them - all had bright lights fitted and on but they made virtually no difference at all to their visibilty. For sure it was my responsibility to go slow enough to spot them (I was) but for christ *leeding sake if that was me I would have got off the bike and taken my chances walking across the adjacent farmers fields. It really was that stupid to be out on that road at that time.

Secondly when some authority does make a sensible decision by providing a cycle lane that obviously avoids problematic areas then why do some cyclists not use them? I know it's not compulsory and maybe it should be but they are there to provide a relatively safe route to cyclists. In fairness many cyclists do use them although the head down chain gang fraternity seem to avoid them like the plague - presumably a Strava brag is worth more than the higher risk of losing a life.

I think it's always easy to blame car, van & lorry drivers for everything dire that happens on the roads but sometimes people have to take some responsibility for their own actions even if, in an ideal world, we should all be able to cycle on any road in the country in reasonable safety.


----------



## Mo1959 (4 Jul 2013)

Fubar said:


> whatever the causes/circumstances here I think I would personally avoid cycling on this road, as I would on much of the A9 for the same reason.


Totally agree. My total experience of being on the A9 was for a few seconds to cross over it, ie. Greenloaning to Sheriffmuir, and Gask to Dunning. It terrifies me. I check it's clear both ways for hundreds of yards and scoot across as quick as I can. I can't even begin to imagine actually cycling on the carriageway.


----------



## Glow worm (4 Jul 2013)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Secondly when some authority does make a sensible decision by providing a cycle lane that obviously avoids problematic areas then *why do some cyclists not use them?* I know it's not compulsory and maybe it should be but they are there to provide a relatively safe route to cyclists.


 
Because they are normally crap and end abruptly, meaning you have to stop and give way to traffic before rejoining the road anyway. You also have to give way at every side street/ lane, house's drive or farm track, so making real progress is difficult and frustrating to say the least. They are also normally covered in glass and other crap, over-grown and poorly surfaced.

You simpy can't try to shift the blame for these things onto cyclists, just because some drivers can't be arsed to drive properly .


----------



## SpokeyDokey (4 Jul 2013)

Glow worm said:


> Because they are normally crap and end abruptly, meaning you have to stop and give way to traffic before rejoining the road anyway. You also have to give way at every side street/ lane, house's drive or farm track, so making real progress is difficult and frustrating to say the least. They are also normally covered in glass and other crap, over-grown and poorly surfaced.
> 
> You simpy can't try to shift the blame for these things onto cyclists, just because some drivers can't be arsed to drive properly .


 

Well, not all cycle lanes/paths are crap. We have some very good paths here and I have noted quite a few on our various holiday destinations throughout the UK. We do have a few paths that have fallen into some disrepair but they are still rideable.

We clearly cycle on different paths you and I as I don't often have to do much stopping for driveways and farm tracks just a bit of slowing down. I also don't see stopping to rejoin the road when a path ends as too much of a hardship. Here the difference is that there are cyclists who are happy to cycle on safer roads at slightly slower speeds but with little risk and those who are desperate to maintain cadence at all costs. These cyclists do exist!

I'm not trying to shift all blame to cyclists I'm just saying that eg if a cyclist is hell bent on joining a fast and heavily populated by-pass then they are exposing themselves to needless risk.

I also think that whilst there is a duty of all drivers to be aware of other road users there is a reciprocal duty for cyclists not to be wilful minded and cycle where good sense tells them they ought not to. Witness 3 riders on the last Bank Holiday at Ings just outside Kendal. Decent cycle lane adjacent (I was riding it) but no, they had to be on the road didn't they. Whopping great frustrated queue behind them with drivers attempting to pass them. Not a great advert for cycling imo even though they have a right to be on said road. Definitely daft to increase risk when there was an alternative so close.

Sometimes just because you (legally) can doesn't mean you should.

I do think it is worth bearing in mind that many roads, particularly by-passes and trunk roads were never built for cyclists in the first place. They were constructed to shift large volumes of motorised traffic between and around towns and cities and across the country.They are not a natural home for cyclists and maybe if the powers that be imposed a minimum and sensible speed limit for _all_ traffic using these roads then maybe less cyclists would get killed simply because they are not allowed on these roads. Much like motorways really for which I am not aware of a large-scale campaign petitioning for the right for cyclists to use them.


----------



## Jefferson Meriwether (4 Jul 2013)

One of my planned cycle rides for this year was from my home to Penzance. My route was going to be the coast road to Exeter then the A30 from Exeter to Penzance. Having seen the news reports on this tragic accident I'm seriously thinking the A30 is a poor choice of route. I know that if I did go ahead with that particular bike ride my parents would be worried sick about me & my safety; I don't think I could put them through that.

I have sympathy for all involved in this incident.


----------



## Ticktockmy (4 Jul 2013)

We have in this thread, a subject, which has been discussed many times on many forums and as here is triggered by a tragic death. I read the pro's and con's,and for myself feel that as any other road user we have a responsibility for our own health and safety. As a cyclist I know that when I cycle on a major A road or indeed a minor road I know I have to consider the speed and volume of motorised traffic will present a major hazard to me.

As a ex HGV driver I understood that vulnerable traffic, cyclists, equestrian and pedestrians are likewise a major hazard for me, importantly both are unpredictable road users, no more so than motorised vehicles, but if I hit a car I was in most cases going to inflict less damage than if I hit a cyclist or equestrian or pedestrian. As we all know as a road user's we need to think and think before we make any positional move. As motorised vehicles users we often find ourselves in positions where we need to pass a cyclists, equestrian and pedestrian only to find that we are unable to move over to the right to pass safely because the other lane has traffic in it. Whilst in most cases its not a problem and you can pass safely. However now and again something happens which is beyond the control of all users, crosswinds, potholes, drain covers, cats eyes and various detritus which can have a effect on the actions of vulnerable road users.

All to often in these discussions, the anti-motorist road users jump on their soap boxes to lambaste the motorist and the anti- cyclist act likewise, both groups pointing out and blaming their pet hates, when all of us should be learning from each and every event to make the use of the roads that much safer, it is all to easy to point the finger of blame before knowing the full facts, and listening to hearsay


----------



## Fubar (5 Jul 2013)

Jefferson Meriwether said:


> One of my planned cycle rides for this year was from my home to Penzance. My route was going to be the coast road to Exeter then the A30 from Exeter to Penzance. Having seen the news reports on this tragic accident I'm seriously thinking the A30 is a poor choice of route. I know that if I did go ahead with that particular bike ride my parents would be worried sick about me & my safety; I don't think I could put them through that.
> 
> I have sympathy for all involved in this incident.


 
I doubt it would be very enjoyable either - pick a scenic (if longer) route and just enjoy riding your bike.


----------



## briantrumpet (5 Jul 2013)

Jefferson Meriwether said:


> One of my planned cycle rides for this year was from my home to Penzance. My route was going to be the coast road to Exeter then the A30 from Exeter to Penzance. Having seen the news reports on this tragic accident I'm seriously thinking the A30 is a poor choice of route. I know that if I did go ahead with that particular bike ride my parents would be worried sick about me & my safety; I don't think I could put them through that.


Absolutely no need to go via the A30, which is why I find it baffling why so many LEJOGers do. There are so many delightful roads to choose from. Exeter to Penzance is quite easy for reasonably direct alternatives, including the old A30 which runs virtually parallel for many miles, and is almost deserted. I this route last year (other than the bit from St Ives to Penzance) and it was absolutely lovely. http://ridewithgps.com/routes/2807447


----------



## 400bhp (5 Jul 2013)

briantrumpet said:


> Absolutely no need to go via the A30, which is why I find it baffling why so many LEJOGers do. There are so many delightful roads to choose from. Exeter to Penzance is quite easy for reasonably direct alternatives, including the old A30 which runs virtually parallel for many miles, and is almost deserted. I this route last year (other than the bit from St Ives to Penzance) and it was absolutely lovely. http://ridewithgps.com/routes/2807447


 

I think it's because many cyclists think like car drivers when planning routes.


----------



## 400bhp (5 Jul 2013)

SpokeyDokey said:


> We clearly cycle on different paths you and I as I don't often have to do much stopping for driveways and farm tracks just a bit of slowing down. I also don't see stopping to rejoin the road when a path ends as too much of a hardship. Here the difference is that there are cyclists who are happy to cycle on safer roads at slightly slower speeds but with little risk and those who are desperate to maintain cadence at all costs. These cyclists do exist!
> 
> I'm not trying to shift all blame to cyclists I'm just saying that eg if a cyclist is hell bent on joining a fast and heavily populated by-pass then they are exposing themselves to needless risk.


 

I think you're using the extremes to illustrate your point.

I think what you are getting at is equating risk versus reward, in this case "reward" being able to cycle faster. I choose to use the road because I want to cycle faster (simplistic-it's more complicated than this). However, I don't choose to use such roads like the A30 as the risk (for me) far outweighs the reward (perhaps I can get to my destination a little quicker)

The key point is accepting the risk.

Large dose of Caveat....actually, my experience of many cycle lanes is that they can often be (feel?) more dangerous, because they have to cross side roads (within the side road and not in front of it like they do in, say France).


----------



## snorri (5 Jul 2013)

Fubar said:


> I doubt it would be very enjoyable either - pick a scenic (if longer) route and just enjoy riding your bike.


 It's difficult for some of us (me) to understand but the "enjoyment" for many seems to come from having covered the distance in less time than the the next person.


----------



## ColinJ (5 Jul 2013)

snorri said:


> It's difficult for some of us (me) to understand but the "enjoyment" for many seems to come from having covered the distance in less time than the the next person.


Given that the LEJOG records have been well under 2 days for many years now, most of us are never going to get close to the times of 'the next person'! 

If you can't break a record, then all you can do is set yourself a target, say 100 miles a day, and go for that. There is nothing to stop you doing those 100 miles on nice quiet roads rather than misnamed motorways!

I would prefer the element of choice to be taken away from us on these roads, subject to viable alternative routes being available, where 'viable' is defined in a way that is acceptable to most cyclists. If alternative routes are not available, then provide safe, high quality, segregated cycle lanes that are well-designed and maintained (including being swept clear of debris, and gritted in the winter). If there is not enough room to do that in places, then set low enough speed limits to make those sections of road safe and put speed cameras all along them, and ban drivers immediately for breaking those limits.

I am not blaming the 2 cyclists for choosing that route, and I have no idea what caused the driver to hit them. All that can be said is that these tragedies keep happening, traffic volumes are going to increase, so something needs to be done.


----------



## Globalti (5 Jul 2013)

What though Colin?

The attitude of the authorities in the UK is that cyclist deaths are another of the inevitable consequences of having one of the densest road network and traffic numbers in the world. Yet we can still congratulate ourselves on having one of the lowest accident rates in the world, possibly the lowest in terms of accidents per mile driven. Any futher reduction in what is already a relatively low rate would require an exponential effort, something as unthinkable as building an entire new road network for cyclists only, for example.


----------



## ColinJ (5 Jul 2013)

Globalti said:


> What though Colin?


See penultimate paragraph!

If you force drivers to do (say) 40 mph for short stretches of road that can't be made safe any other way, that might not have a huge impact on journey times. Vehicles can safely drive much closer together at low speeds so you could probably get the same number of vehicles through per hour as on the faster sections where there can often be jams caused by panic braking. 

I would almost be willing to bet that the average speed of traffic on heavily congested roads with a 40 mph limit is about the same as on a busy motorway because the traffic flow is smoother rather than stop-start all the time. That is assuming that speed limits are actually enforced!


----------



## briantrumpet (5 Jul 2013)

400bhp said:


> I think it's because many cyclists think like car drivers when planning routes.


And I find that baffling too. Surely one of the delights of cycling is using 'roads of yesteryear' - the ones that our grandparents used to amble along at 40mph in their Austin A40s. You don't have to go along bendy country lanes either - many of the roads round Devon I cycle now are the old main roads my parents used to take us on going from Bristol to Westward Ho! or Bude (and took half a day to get there), and they are mostly deserted. And darned pretty too.


----------



## PK99 (5 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2534616, member: 30090"]I think that for most people (myself included) the E2E is treated as a ride rather than a tour. And as such you want to try and get it done as quickly as possible which for me was eight days which means using the main roads.
.[/quote]

There are main roads and there are main roads - the A30 to and over Bodmin is to all intents and purposes a two (narrow) lane motorway with no hard shoulder and some pretty tough up hill sections. The first 40 miles from Lands end has 3000 feet of climbing.

IMHO, the A30 in that area is a main road to avoid.


----------



## sparkyman (6 Jul 2013)

The A30 has claimed far to many End to Enders in the last few years.

My thoughts are with their family's.


----------



## glenn forger (6 Jul 2013)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Secondly when some authority does make a sensible decision by providing a cycle lane that obviously avoids problematic areas then why do some cyclists not use them? I know it's not compulsory and maybe it should be but they are there to provide a relatively safe route to cyclists..


 
You're quite wrong, cycle lanes are more dangerous for cyclists than the roads are. You are blaming cyclists for taking measures to improve their safety.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (6 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> You're quite wrong, cycle lanes are more dangerous for cyclists than the roads are. You are blaming cyclists for taking measures to improve their safety.


 

How's that then?

And why all the campaigning for more cycle lanes and paths?

What are you suggesting - whenever a cycle lane is available it's best ignored?


----------



## glenn forger (6 Jul 2013)

SpokeyDokey said:


> How's that then?
> 
> And why all the campaigning for more cycle lanes and paths?
> 
> What are you suggesting - whenever a cycle lane is available it's best ignored?


 
I'm not campaigning for more cycle lanes, they are more dangerous, as I just said. I ignore them, as do most cyclists who aren't seven years old. It's just curious that you slag cyclists off for taking steps to improve their safety.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (6 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> I'm not campaigning for more cycle lanes, they are more dangerous, as I just said. I ignore them, as do most cyclists who aren't seven years old. It's just curious that you slag cyclists off for taking steps to improve their safety.


 

Well, if you class anything that I have said as slagging off then you are a very sensitive soul indeed.

I'll carry on using cycle lanes and you won't - we'll have to agree to disagree on their safeness. Nonetheless I wish you many safe miles of cycling. All the best.


----------



## lulubel (6 Jul 2013)

I haven't read the whole thread, but just wanted to post how sad this is for the families of the cyclists who died.

And for anyone who doesn't know what the A30 out of Cornwall is like, I lived in Cornwall for 3 years, and I wouldn't have cycled on it past Penzance if someone offered to make me an overnight millionaire in return. I drove it frequently between Okehampton and St Ives before I started cycling, and like many other drivers, thought nothing of driving at 90-100mph anywhere it was dual carriageway.

There are so many quiet, beautiful routes you can take out of Cornwall. Yes, they take longer, and there are more hills, but they're safer and so much more enjoyable than slogging along and smelling the fumes, with lorries thundering by you.


----------



## HLaB (8 Jul 2013)

green1 said:


> Only in Edinburgh around the bridge.


Yip, on the A90 section from the Bridge to Edinburgh; the bridge itself has always had a bye law. The relatively recently built new A68 bypass also bans cyclists from sections. 
Slighty OT, I was totally amazed when coming back from the Marmotte when we passed a cyclist on the 4 lane A2; at first I thought he was on the Motorway, then I realised it was an A class section in between  I hope he had a safe journey.


----------



## HLaB (8 Jul 2013)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Secondly when some authority does make a sensible decision by providing a cycle lane that obviously avoids problematic areas then why do some cyclists not use them? I know it's not compulsory and maybe it should be but they are there to provide a relatively safe route to cyclists. In fairness many cyclists do use them although the head down chain gang fraternity seem to avoid them like the plague - presumably a Strava brag is worth more than the higher risk of losing a life.


I agree with a lot of your OP, however its worth noting that cycle lanes may not always be safer for instance they tend to encourage cyclists to the left hand side (and potentially into a blind spot) of traffic which is particulary hazardous at junctions; they can place cyclists in the door zone (an opening car door at best would be painful but at worse would push a cyclist off under the wheels of a bus/artic). They also tend to delineate things creating a false sense of security and can encourage a driver to feel that its safe to drive closer and faster to the cyclist or make the cyclist feel they are safe in their own 'protected' lane (a white line doesn't stop an artic wheel!). The cycle lane can be littered with objects creating more obstacles which can cause a cyclist to lose control, etc in addition to the potentialy uncomfortable/inconvenient aspect. I could go on all day but just think before you use them.


----------



## StuartG (8 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> I'm not campaigning for more cycle lanes, they are more dangerous, as I just said. I ignore them, as do most cyclists who aren't seven years old.


 
Some, maybe most, UK cycle lanes and cycle paths increase danger for the experienced rider who wishes to make good progress.

Sometimes they can be better - and some other countries do know how to provide excellent cycle lanes and the majority do choose to use these. If you are not evaluating each piece of cycling infrastructure on its own merits then I would suggest it is you who may potentially be the dangerous rider. Albeit mostly to yourself. Blind prejudice is not confined to motoring circles.

I'm over seven (honest).


----------



## fimm (8 Jul 2013)

The other thing is that if you are in a part of the country with which you are not familiar you have no idea whether a cycle route is going to be any use at all or not. Some of them are good and some are useless and you don't know until you investigate - and if you want to go a long way fairly quickly you don't have time to investigate...


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jul 2013)

HLaB said:


> I agree with a lot of your OP, however its worth noting that cycle lanes may not always be safer for instance they tend to encourage cyclists to the left hand side (and potentially into a blind spot) of traffic which is particulary hazardous at junctions; they can place cyclists in the door zone (an opening car door at best would be painful but at worse would push a cyclist off under the wheels of a bus/artic). They also tend to delineate things creating a false sense of security and can encourage a driver to feel that its safe to drive closer and faster to the cyclist or make the cyclist feel they are safe in their own 'protected' lane (a white line doesn't stop an artic wheel!). The cycle lane can be littered with objects creating more obstacles which can cause a cyclist to lose control, etc in addition to the potentialy uncomfortable/inconvenient aspect. I could go on all day but just think before you use them.


 

Yes, I can see the sense in what you are saying there. I guess it just comes down to weighing up risk as ever.

I guess there is also a distinction between lanes and paths too ie lane being part of the road and a path being something separate but parallel to the road? (I do realise that many paths are nowhere near a road.)

Pretty tough staying safe out there at times!


----------



## SpokeyDokey (8 Jul 2013)

HLaB said:


> Yip, on the A90 section from the Bridge to Edinburgh; the bridge itself has always had a bye law. The relatively recently built new A68 bypass also bans cyclists from sections.
> Slighty OT, I was totally amazed when coming back from the Marmotte when we passed a cyclist on the 4 lane A2; at first I thought he was on the Motorway, then I realised it was an A class section in between  I hope he had a safe journey.


 

We had a similar observation on the A34.

Three Fridays back we were making the long haul from Cumbria down to see our friends in Poole.

On the long tedious run-in to Southampton there is a wide fast stretch of A road that follows a huge incline before re-ascending. There are fast feeder lanes coming in from the left. I'm not quite sure of their exact location on the map but those more familiar with the area will no doubt know where I am talking about.

It was _very_ busy with lots of fast moving traffic shunting from high to low speed in an instant. All lanes were choked and it was really a keep your wits about you situation. Anyway as we approached the feeder lanes there was a heavily laden tourer (panniers F & R + rucksack and bar bag) being ridden down into the V where the feeders meet the main road. We (wife & I) were aghast and could not fathom how on earth he was going to cope with crossing the long feeder stretch of road. I'm not slagging him off btw but I honestly question his judgement as to why he would put himself into that situation in the first place.


----------



## JohnC60 (14 May 2014)

It appears that the lorry driver didn't learn from these deaths, he has been charged on two counts of causing death by dangerous driving and, wait for it, less than 3 months after the incident, another charge of dangerous driving following another crash on the A30!
http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...s-deaths-A30/story-21093210-detail/story.html


----------



## glenn forger (15 May 2014)

You'd think killing two people would make one cautious behind the wheel. It guess this creature is still driving round?


----------



## briantrumpet (17 May 2014)

lulubel said:


> I haven't read the whole thread, but just wanted to post how sad this is for the families of the cyclists who died.
> 
> And for anyone who doesn't know what the A30 out of Cornwall is like, I lived in Cornwall for 3 years, and I wouldn't have cycled on it past Penzance if someone offered to make me an overnight millionaire in return. I drove it frequently between Okehampton and St Ives before I started cycling, and like many other drivers, thought nothing of driving at 90-100mph anywhere it was dual carriageway.
> 
> There are so many quiet, beautiful routes you can take out of Cornwall. Yes, they take longer, and there are more hills, but they're safer and so much more enjoyable than slogging along and smelling the fumes, with lorries thundering by you.



If anyone still needs convincing that the A30 is a bad choice, here's a video I did today, mid-afternoon:


----------



## MattyKo (18 May 2014)

The fact remains that only motorways are prohibited road for cyclists. 
The fact probably exists that commercial drivers account for more road accidents than social domestic and commuters.
Why attribute blame on the cyclists for their choice of route, when the driver is charged with further separate dangerous driving offences within three months of this accident.


----------



## ufkacbln (18 May 2014)

SpokeyDokey said:


> Secondly when some authority does make a _*sensible*_ decision by providing a cycle lane that obviously avoids problematic areas then why do some cyclists not use them? I know it's not compulsory and maybe it should be but they are there to provide a relatively safe route to cyclists. In fairness many cyclists do use them although the head down chain gang fraternity seem to avoid them like the plague - presumably a Strava brag is worth more than the higher risk of losing a life.



Therein lies the point

I commute along a dual carriageway each day

It has a cyclepath, which I avoid like the plague

On the way into work there is a long complex detour to access it, involving a difficult roundabout, as opposed to a few yards on a dual carriageway. Then to the bonus, the path stops dead half way along the carriageway and you then have to cross four lanes of fast moving traffic, and cycle along the same dual carriageway

The higher risk in my case is using the cycle facility!


----------



## ufkacbln (18 May 2014)

briantrumpet said:


> If anyone still needs convincing that the A30 is a bad choice, here's a video I did today, mid-afternoon:




The "hard shoulder" is wider than some cyclepaths I have seen!


----------



## marzjennings (18 May 2014)

briantrumpet said:


> If anyone still needs convincing that the A30 is a bad choice, here's a video I did today, mid-afternoon:




I don't see the problem, I grew up cycling the A30 from Redruth, to Camborne, all the way to Penzance with a few rides up to Newquay and beyond. Hundreds of miles without a problem. It was the small back roads where the hot hatch nutters liked to play and WVM wanted to own, where most of my near misses occurred.


----------



## steveindenmark (19 May 2014)

BigonaBianchi said:


> yep...totally.



That sounds ridiculous.

Cyclists also make mistakes and sometimes do some really stupid things, just look on Youtube. If they come into contact with a lorry due to their own negligence, how can the lorry driver be at fault?

This does not refer to these 2 guys. RIP

Steve


----------



## Leodis (19 May 2014)

I cycle Leeds outer ring road everyday, well 4 miles of it, I feel safer on there with cars doing 60 than I do in rush hour traffic with school run, slow moving traffic, door zones, zombie peds and pot holes. In fact I take a longer route to join a better road with half decent "cycle path/white lines" and lots of big bus lanes.


----------



## briantrumpet (4 Jun 2014)

Let's hope justice is served: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co....cycle-deaths/story-21186597-detail/story.html


----------



## Pumpkin the robot (14 Jun 2014)

marzjennings said:


> I don't see the problem, I grew up cycling the A30 from Redruth, to Camborne, all the way to Penzance with a few rides up to Newquay and beyond. Hundreds of miles without a problem. It was the small back roads where the hot hatch nutters liked to play and WVM wanted to own, where most of my near misses occurred.



The A30 of today is a different beast to what it was even 10 years ago. I used to cycle the A30 from just North of Truro down to Cambourne as my daily commute and at times it was terrifying. In the end I used a different route. 
These days a lot more of the A30 is dual carriageway than it used to be and the roads are far busier, especially in the summmer, with people that dont know the roads very well. When I cycled down there a couple of years ago while on holiday I avoided it like the plague, but the back roads are just as bad as you say. People treat them like motorways and drive at speed not knowing how narrow they are, or how tight some of the blind bends are.


----------



## recumbentpanda (15 Jun 2014)

> I drove it frequently between Okehampton and St Ives before I started cycling, and like many other drivers, thought nothing of driving at 90-100mph anywhere it was dual carriageway


...

Soo lulubel, when are you flying back from Spain to hand yourself over to the UK police for multiple offences?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (1 Jul 2014)

The lorry driver has now pled guilty to two charges of causing death by dangerous driving and will be sentenced later. He also pled guilty to a third charge of dangerous driving on the A30 a few months after the fatal collision.

Full story on the BBC.

GC


----------



## fimm (2 Jul 2014)

I hope they take his licence away, and don't listen to any pleas that he needs to carry on driving HGVs. This man needs to continue to work as a driver like Rolf Harris needs continued access to children because he's always worked as a children's entertainer...


----------



## DCLane (2 Jul 2014)

fimm said:


> I hope they take his licence away, and don't listen to any pleas that he needs to carry on driving HGVs.


 
+1 Three similar offences over a short period should mean no chance to drive HGV's again.


----------



## vernon (3 Jul 2014)

fimm said:


> I hope they take his licence away, and don't listen to any pleas that he needs to carry on driving HGVs. This man needs to continue to work as a driver like Rolf Harris needs continued access to children because he's always worked as a children's entertainer...



A bit off key....


----------



## steveindenmark (6 Jul 2014)

The fact that he has continued to drive like a dickhead AFTER killing 2 men is astounding and I hope that really goes against him when they sentence him.

Steve


----------



## Crankarm (6 Jul 2014)

We all know the severity of sentence this git should get but in reality he won't. Sentencing for drivers who kill and those that kill cyclists and pedestrians is pathetic. He should be facing a life time driving ban and a prison sentence 8-10 years given the nature of his offending and this is not an isolated offence. And he must serve 8-10 years not 40% of this which in all likelihood he will serve for pleading guilty in advance.

Terrible, terrible.

Why doesn't Dave make a statement in Parliament that he will instruct courts to give much tougher sentences to drivers who kill or seriously injure cyclists and peds? If he thought it would win him votes he might ………. It would act as a deterrent to drivers who think they can intimidate and bully other road users, driving dangerously around cyclists and peds with little fear of being caught and if caught joke sentences that are an inconvenience rather than a punishment.


----------



## Beebo (1 Sep 2014)

7 and half years, plus an extra year for the other offence committed whilst on bail.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-28983049


----------



## fimm (1 Sep 2014)

"_Prosecutors said Palmer had not had enough rest periods between shifts at work and had falsified rest records.
As a result, the cyclists were "mown down", they said.
Palmer had pleaded guilty at a previous hearing to two counts of causing death by dangerous driving. He was sentenced to seven-and-a-half years for each count, to be served concurrently.
Palmer had also admitted a charge of dangerous driving in relation to a crash on the A30 at Whiddon Down near Okehampton, Devon, which happened in September 2013, 11 weeks after the fatal collision. 
The court heard he had been on bail while police were investigating the cyclists' deaths at the time of the second crash.
He was sentenced to one year for that offence, to be served consecutively"_
He was also banned from driving for - wait for it - 10 years. The rules are that the ban starts from now, not from the point he is released from prison.


----------



## Crankarm (2 Sep 2014)

fimm said:


> "_Prosecutors said Palmer had not had enough rest periods between shifts at work and had falsified rest records.
> As a result, the cyclists were "mown down", they said.
> Palmer had pleaded guilty at a previous hearing to two counts of causing death by dangerous driving. He was sentenced to seven-and-a-half years for each count, to be served concurrently.
> Palmer had also admitted a charge of dangerous driving in relation to a crash on the A30 at Whiddon Down near Okehampton, Devon, which happened in September 2013, 11 weeks after the fatal collision.
> ...



Sentencing of these dangerous feckers is a joke.


----------



## glenn forger (2 Sep 2014)

Corporate manslaughter for the firm bosses, they knew he had no sleep and sent him out in the lorry.


----------



## Garethgas (2 Sep 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Corporate manslaughter for the firm bosses, they knew he had no sleep and sent him out in the lorry.



This I find quite staggering that there is no mention of the employers too.
Whilst the driver has now been dealt with, I can't believe that his employees weren't complicit in this.


----------



## fimm (2 Sep 2014)

http://road.cc/content/news/128916-lorry-driver-jailed-8-12-years-killing-lejog-charity-riders
This time you should read the comments, as someone who knows what they are talking about (or appears to, at any rate) is saying some useful things.

The other case that was in the news recently was the man who killed a cyclist while looking at photos on his mobile phone. He pleaded not guilty, was found guilty and was given a 5 year sentence with a 10 year ban. So Palmer, who pleaded guilty, and was given 7.5 years per death plus a 10 year ban, appears to have been sentenced as harshly as the judge is allowed to, if I'm understanding the person on the road.cc thread correctly (and they are correct in what they are saying).

I feel less angry now. Given some sentaces that have been handed out, that actually is not too bad, especially as he pleaded guilty and is entitled to a reduction to his sentence for that (I don't make the rules, and I may or may not agree with them, but that is the rule).


----------



## srw (2 Sep 2014)

Crankarm said:


> Sentencing of these dangerous feckers is a joke.


I had a private bet with myself. I won.

As the comments @fimm linked to point out, in the context of English law this is a _very_ harsh sentence. I've just had a quick scan through the sentencing guidelines (http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/) on the CPS website, which puts it into context.

As it happens, I think we tend to sentence too harshly - in an underfunded criminal justice system nothing is served by locking people away except to turn them into better criminals - but within current guidelines this driver has got a sentence commensurate with the crime. As do most people sentenced.


----------



## benb (2 Sep 2014)

The custodial sentence seems OK, but I do wonder what people need to do to receive a lifetime driving ban.


----------



## Tommy2 (2 Sep 2014)

2 sentences to be served side by side? So he's only serving one sentence? What's the point in that?

Why not give him seven years but serve all seven consecutively so he's only in for 1 year?

Or am I missing something, should it not be added to the end?


----------



## jefmcg (8 Sep 2014)

Tommy2 said:


> 2 sentences to be served side by side? So he's only serving one sentence? What's the point in that?
> 
> Why not give him seven years but serve all seven consecutively so he's only in for 1 year?
> 
> Or am I missing something, should it not be added to the end?



this makes sense to me: one act lead to two crimes being committed. He was sentenced for the act. The judge decided that 7 1/2 years was the proper sentence for the act, and obviously both crimes should carry the same sentence. If it was 3 1/4 years for each, consecutively, then someone who committed the same offence in every way but only happened to kill one person would only get half the sentence.


----------



## fimm (8 Sep 2014)

Here's "The Cycling Silk" on the subject:
http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/further-court-update-r-v-robert-palmer.html
and here, perhaps more interestingly, is the CTC on the subject of the employer's responsibilities:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/blog/rhiaweston/lorry-driver-sentenced-spotlight-needed-operators

From the CTC article:
"_The company Palmer worked for – Frys Logistics – had its operating licence revoked in December 2013, six months after the fatal collision on the A30. CTC suspects the decision to withdraw the licence was in large part based on the involvement of the company in the incident in which Andrew McMenigall and Toby Wallace were killed. In order to continue after the operating licence had been rescinded, the company’s owners set up a new company with a tenuously different name – Frys Transport. It seems all a company has to do to carry on business as usual when it loses its operating licence is to set itself up again under a different name._"
Which is pretty apalling, IMHO.


----------



## glenn forger (17 Nov 2015)

http://www.ctc.org.uk/news/20151117...ety?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter



> *Rogue operators licence finally revoked*
> 
> "By far the worst case I have seen since I started as a Traffic Commissioner in 2007," were the words used yesterday by Traffic Commissioner Sarah Bell as she revoked the HGV operator's licence for Frys Logistics Limited, whose lack of regard to the rules she believed "contributed to the death of Andrew McMenigall and Toby Wallace".
> 
> ...


----------



## steveindenmark (17 Nov 2015)

I have a friend who is a serving crown court judge and another friend is a retired crown court judge.

We have had discussions where you can see the rage coming out of their ears because their hands are so tied when it comes to sentencing.


----------



## benb (18 Nov 2015)

Desperately sad.
What sort of person would put the livelihood of their company above people's lives?


----------



## fimm (18 Nov 2015)

It is at least good news that the Traffic Commissioner has imposed a long period of disqualification on the company and Mr Fry.
Edited to add: but the whole article linked to above is quite depressing in terms of the time taken and the slowness of responses from Traffic Commissioners.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Nov 2015)

It's the same as the firm that employed Barry Meyer, exact same tactics, raise a legal objection then don't even bother attending or sending representation. There must be some kind of manual you get if you set up a lethally dodgy road freight firm.


----------

