# Sorry



## HeartAttack (19 Aug 2009)

I know this area is all about HGV's etc and cyclists, and from what I have ficked through many seem to be talking and urging for more education to drivers, yes this in my mind will help matters....


BUT


If a cyclist is stupid enough to ride up the inside of a lorry then its their own bloody fault, even if there is a dedicated cycle area there is no way I would ride up the inside of a lorry PERIOD!!

So maybe the emphasis should be on educating cyclists first and foremost, they are the ones riding up the inside.


----------



## purplepolly (19 Aug 2009)

HeartAttack said:


> If a cyclist is stupid enough to ride up the inside of a lorry then its their own bloody fault, even if there is a dedicated cycle area there is no way I would ride up the inside of a lorry PERIOD!!
> 
> So maybe the emphasis should be on educating cyclists first and foremost, they are the ones riding up the inside.



Yes, when the cyclist _has_ cycled up the side of a lorry that is indeed stupid.

But often it's the other way round, HGV pulls up alongside cyclist and then turns left. Or cyclist is moving in a foward direction and HGV cuts through them to turn left. In both of these cases it's the driver that needs educating and possibly a brain transplant or an eye test.


----------



## HeartAttack (19 Aug 2009)

purplepolly said:


> Yes, when the cyclist _has_ cycled up the side of a lorry that is indeed stupid.
> 
> But often it's the other way round, HGV pulls up alongside cyclist and then turns left. Or cyclist is moving in a foward direction and HGV cuts through them to turn left. In both of these cases it's the driver that needs educating and possibly a brain transplant or an eye test.



I agree if the lorry turns across the rider then yes they need educating, but if a lorry pulls along side a cyclist at lights, they both move forward and then the lorry turns left, well I sort of agree the driver is at fault, but so is the cyclist as although the lights may have turned green, its their call if its safe to move off or wait a few seconds.


----------



## ttcycle (19 Aug 2009)

It's a two way process HA - it's good to focus on both as a few sources correctly point out that even when it is not the fault of the cyclist the way news is reported automatically blames the cyclist in language used and that's why it needs to be more than just cyclists need to not undertake as sometimes this allows for undue apportioning of blame even when a cyclist hasn't undertaken. It's about educating both HGV drivers and cyclists. It's covered a bit in the thread -time for action - though it's a hefty number of pages.


----------



## ianrauk (19 Aug 2009)

What is even more annoying is when you are waiting behind a large vehicle at a junction for the very reasons you outline, you then get a complete and utter twat of cyclist decide that it's no danger and squeeze past you and up the side of the vehicle..it's madness,


----------



## Origamist (19 Aug 2009)

HeartAttack said:


> I know this area is all about HGV's etc and cyclists, and from what I have ficked through many seem to be talking and urging for more education to drivers, yes this in my mind will help matters....
> 
> 
> BUT
> ...



There is a common misconception that the overwhelming majority of HGV/cyclist collisions are the consequence of a cyclist undertaking on the left. This is not the case, despite the posts/myths/memes propagated on cycling fora. 

At the most recent HGV working group TFL were proposing the fitting of side guards to HGVs - the LCC then pointed out that this was only addressing part of the problem as a number of cyclists were hit by the front of the HGV. 

The critical combination of circumstances is different in each collision and you do the victim and their family a disservice by generalising that cyclists "are the ones riding up the inside".


----------



## Origamist (19 Aug 2009)

HeartAttack said:


> I agree if the lorry turns across the rider then yes they need educating, but if a lorry pulls along side a cyclist at lights, they both move forward and then the lorry turns left, well I sort of agree the driver is at fault, but so is the cyclist as although the lights may have turned green, its their call if its safe to move off or wait a few seconds.



You might be in the HGV's swept path if you "wait a few seconds". If you can't get eye contact with the driver, get the **** out of the way before the lights turn green - do not put your safety in the hands of someone who has put you in a vulnerable position.


----------



## purplepolly (19 Aug 2009)

HeartAttack said:


> but if a lorry pulls along side a cyclist at lights, they both move forward and then the lorry turns left, well I sort of agree the driver is at fault, but so is the cyclist as although the lights may have turned green, its their call if its safe to move off or wait a few seconds.



And what happens to a cyclist who waits? Gets caught by the back of the vehicle as it cuts the corner. 

Sorry, the fault is the drivers. In what possible circumstances could it be correct to pull up on the right of someone if you want to turn left? It's a completely and utterly stupid postion to take up and anyone who hasn't got the sense to wait behind shouldn't be driving a go-cart let alone a HGV.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Aug 2009)

Origamist has it right. Undertaking is daft, but that isn't how cyclists have been killed.


----------



## CopperBrompton (20 Aug 2009)

What's the source of your info, Dellzegg? I haven't seen any breakdown of the number caused by cyclists riding up the inside of HGVs vs those caused by HGVs overtaking cyclists then turning left. It would be very useful to have this info.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Aug 2009)

my recollection of the accounts of each of the accidents, and a lecture from Tom Bogdanovich of the LCC. Prompted, in part by the one thing that most have in common - construction traffic.

But - to repeat - undertaking is daft. Don't do it.


----------



## Origamist (20 Aug 2009)

Ben Lovejoy said:


> What's the source of your info, Dellzegg? I haven't seen any breakdown of the number caused by cyclists riding up the inside of HGVs vs those caused by HGVs overtaking cyclists then turning left. It would be very useful to have this info.



Causative analyses of the sort that you are looking for are difficult to come by... 

In London, The London Road Safety Unit holds detailed collision investigation reports that cover cyclist fatalites. I have not contacted them for a long time (post-FOI) so it is worth submitting a request. The Met's Traffic Operational Command Unit and the CofL Police equivalent also have collision investigation reports, the LCC have detailed briefing documents on the issue, and of course, there are coroners' inquest reports. 

The LRSU do release general casualty and collision reports which give some info relating to the cause of the collision involving a pedal cyclist (the last report was released earlier this year), but not a huge amount can be gleaned from these documents as the two most commonly listed contributory factors in cycle fatalities were "vehicle turns left across path of cyclist" and "vehicle runs into the rear" of cyclist.


----------



## CopperBrompton (20 Aug 2009)

Origamist said:


> Causative analyses of the sort that you are looking for are difficult to come by...


Indeed, which was why I was surprised to see a confident assertion ruling out a cause ...



> the two most commonly listed contributory factors in cycle fatalities were "vehicle turns left across path of cyclist" and "vehicle runs into the rear" of cyclist.


The latter surprises me greatly, as this is the one type of accident novice cyclists tend to worry about (especially when you try to explain when and why to ride in primary) and yet I'd always understood it to be vanishingly rare.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Aug 2009)

I think there are shades. The young woman who was killed on the Pentonville Road was hit by the front of a lorry turning left from the right hand lane (that sounds bonkers, but the road design had something to do with it). The Tavistock Square death was caused again by a lorry turning left from the right hand lane. I think the one at Streatham Hill (a Tesco lorry) came about because the driver didn't see her on the left hand side - but she hadn't passed him by on the left. The woman killed on the A102 slip was crushed by a truck (still not located) overtaking her.

In general, though, Ben, I have to agree that the worst place to be on the road is on the left hand side of a truck, whether it be following you, overtaking you, or (heaven forfend) you are undertaking the truck.

Has any of us ever said anything to a rider undertaking? I have. It's a bit hit and miss.


----------



## Origamist (20 Aug 2009)

Ben Lovejoy said:


> The latter surprises me greatly, as this is the one type of accident novice cyclists tend to worry about (especially when you try to explain when and why to ride in primary) and yet I'd always understood it to be vanishingly rare.



Context: I'm quoting the 2007 cyclist fatality figures for London. According to LRSU there were 15 cyclist fatalities - 3 of those deaths included cyclists who were hit from behind (20%).


----------



## HLaB (20 Aug 2009)

As folk say some cyclists need education but some drivers need education too. I avoid undertaking a HGV but the only close incidents I've had with them is when they've overtook and immediatelly left hooked. The incident that scared me was when I was in a middle of a bus lane and a HGV overtook in the normal lane only to see it was blocked and started to drift into the bus lane and there were guard railings on my left. Thankfully he stopped pretty sharply when I started banging on his cab and was quite rational when I explained why.


----------



## CopperBrompton (21 Aug 2009)

I've had a quiet word with a few people I've seen do it. Pretty much 50/50 light dawning + thanks / shrugs.


----------



## albal (5 Oct 2009)

HLaB said:


> As folk say some cyclists need education but some drivers need education too. I avoid undertaking a HGV but the only close incidents I've had with them is when they've overtook and immediatelly left hooked. The incident that scared me was when I was in a middle of a bus lane and a HGV overtook in the normal lane only to see it was blocked and started to drift into the bus lane and there were guard railings on my left. Thankfully he stopped pretty sharply when I started banging on his cab and was quite rational when I explained why.



This seems common, in my limited experience 22 yrs driving LGV.
ALL lorrys have 'idiot' mirrors fitted & have done since 1987. Trouble is few drivers use them.
They are fitted to passenger door facing downwards, ie, where a stationary cyclist should be at lights etc.(if positioned correctly)
If i approach a lorry i sit on its back doors, far enough so a car/ any vehicle cant shove me into the gutter. Common sense i call it.


----------



## PK99 (6 Oct 2009)

purplepolly said:


> Yes, when the cyclist _has_ cycled up the side of a lorry that is indeed stupid.
> 
> But often it's the other way round, HGV pulls up alongside cyclist and then turns left..




The cyclist should not stop adjacent the kerb. They should stop in the middle of the lane


----------



## Rhythm Thief (6 Oct 2009)

User3143 said:


> Granted there are idiot drivers out it, I have read and seen them as I am sure you all have, BUT this is far outweighed IMO by the amount of cyclists that are either just plain ignorant or lack the necessary skills to ride on the road - or both.



This is my experience too, from behind the wheel of a truck. I had a bloke in Cardiff a few weeks back wobbling between pedestrian railings and the left hand side of my trailer as the traffic lights turned green - all this while I was indicating left and about to move off. If I hadn't already known he was there, having overtaken him half a mile or so back, I probably wouldn't have been able to see him. On the other hand, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of incidents I had with trucks left hooking me when I was commuting nearly 100 urban miles every week.


----------



## Origamist (6 Oct 2009)

PK99 said:


> The cyclist should not stop adjacent the kerb. They should stop in the middle of the lane



Yes, that's right. However, multiple and often narrow lanes at junctions with tight corner radii mean that HGVs/LGVs can still pull along side you, even if you take the centre the of the lane. They take this wide line in order to negotiate the corner - this puts cyclists already at the junction (to their left) in danger. In such situations, keep an eye out behind you. 

Thankfully, most HGV drivers wait behind cyclists in this situation - it's just a few you need to watch out for.


----------



## Amanda P (6 Oct 2009)

PK99 said:


> The cyclist should not stop adjacent the kerb. They should stop in the middle of the lane



We know that. 

But bike lane markings are usually designed to guide you carefully up the gutter. Who can blame an occasional cyclist for following the official markings on the road?


----------



## DavieB (28 Jun 2010)

albal said:


> This seems common, in my limited experience 22 yrs driving LGV.
> ALL lorrys have 'idiot' mirrors fitted & have done since 1987. Trouble is few drivers use them.
> They are fitted to passenger door facing downwards, ie, where a stationary cyclist should be at lights etc.(if positioned correctly)
> If i approach a lorry i sit on its back doors, far enough so a car/ any vehicle cant shove me into the gutter. Common sense i call it.



The design on smaller LGV is a better one, Iveco and Renault fit lower door glasses leyland road runners used to have them, some utility vehicles do to. But in my experience drivers fill the footwell up with sh*t and you cant see out them.


----------



## RoundWight (25 Jul 2010)

HLaB said:


> As folk say some cyclists need education but some drivers need education too. I avoid undertaking a HGV but the only close incidents I've had with them is when they've overtook and immediatelly left hooked. The incident that scared me was when I was in a middle of a bus lane and a HGV overtook in the normal lane only to see it was blocked and started to drift into the bus lane and there were guard railings on my left. Thankfully he stopped pretty sharply when I started banging on his cab and was quite rational when I explained why.



I'm not sure it's really either cyclists or drivers who need education. It won't solve the problem. The vehicles are incompatible.


----------



## summerdays (25 Jul 2010)

PK99 said:


> The cyclist should not stop adjacent the kerb. They should stop in the middle of the lane



Problem is that loads of cyclists don't - for the consultation that I replied to recently I went up and took photos of the traffic and this was typical of what I have seen at this junction:







All cyclists were stopping on the left even the one who arrives in the ASL before the cars do and didn't have to filter to the front. Watching it even made me start to question my positioning - because I wasn't doing what every one else was and was putting myself in the middle of the lane. I have been left hooked at that junction but it was a chav who objected to my position not being in gutter and they pulled into the ASL beside me.


----------



## Norm (25 Jul 2010)

HeartAttack said:


> If a cyclist is stupid enough to ride up the inside of a lorry then its their own bloody fault, even if there is a dedicated cycle area there is no way I would ride up the inside of a lorry PERIOD!!


Whilst I agree with the sentiment and I don't even go up the inside of vans, there are far worse crimes than cycling up the inside (especially if encouraged to do so by a marked cycle lane) and none of them come with the death penalty.


----------



## TwoInTow (11 May 2011)

Does 'undertaking' mean overtaking on the LHS?

And (I'm ashamed to say here now I've been reading this) it has never occurred to me to move outside a cycle lane and plant myself in the middle of the car lane when I stop at the lights. So what's the drill with this?

Do you always move into the car lane as you approach traffic lights? What if there are a whole lot of cars stopped (no lorries) and the cycle lane is clear? Do you go right up the front, and then move past the stop line and put yourself in the middle in front of the cars? Or do you give up the advantage of the cycle lane and hang back in the middle of the car lane as soon as you can see stopped traffic ahead? 

What are the safety rules here?


----------



## dellzeqq (11 May 2011)

TwoInTow said:


> Does 'undertaking' mean overtaking on the LHS?
> 
> And (I'm ashamed to say here now I've been reading this) it has never occurred to me to move outside a cycle lane and plant myself in the middle of the car lane when I stop at the lights. So what's the drill with this?
> 
> ...


in answer to your first question - yes

other than that it's difficult to generalise. When I'm on my own I might pass on the left or the right of the traffic and go in to the ASL if (and only if) I'm sure I've got time. Rhythm Thief's post upthread is really instructive - if you're making your way to the front at a red light, don't start what you can't finish.

If I'm in company I'll usually just take my place in the queue, moving right as the traffic slows (although I spend a good deal of time in the 'primary' position.

But, then again, I've been doing this stuff for forty years. I might have grown wiser with experience, or I might have been lucky. My suggestion would be to learn on the road - watching those cyclists of a similar speed to yourself who strike you as knowing what they're doing.


----------



## summerdays (11 May 2011)

TwoInTow said:


> Does 'undertaking' mean overtaking on the LHS?
> 
> And (I'm ashamed to say here now I've been reading this) it has never occurred to me to move outside a cycle lane and plant myself in the middle of the car lane when I stop at the lights. So what's the drill with this?
> 
> ...



I don't bother trying to filter to the front if I don't know the lights or are unsure of how long they have been red. In that situation it is generally better to sit behind the last car in the queue. If you know the light sequence then it becomes easier to make the decision as whether to filter forward.

For example the set of lights where I join the main road has about a 1 minute wait between green phase for the side road - so I filter to the front unless I can see the cars stopping at the set of lights further along the road (they are in sequence but a gap before my side road changes). Another set of lights I know that unless I have reached the bit where it divides into lanes that I won't make it through the lights on that green phase, and approaching the same set of lights from the opposite direction - if I let a gap open between the car in front and myself it will change to red before I reach it. I always filter to the front at that set if I can.

As for which side to filter on ... every situation is different ... how much space is on each side, do passengers tend jump out whilst waiting at that set of lights ... how big is the gap in the middle, has one car pulled over one way to block you etc.


----------



## Tommi (23 May 2011)

TwoInTow said:


> Does 'undertaking' mean overtaking on the LHS?
> 
> And (I'm ashamed to say here now I've been reading this) it has never occurred to me to move outside a cycle lane and plant myself in the middle of the car lane when I stop at the lights. So what's the drill with this?
> 
> ...


IMO the fact that you have to question when you are better off _ignoring_ the infrastructure and that it's complicated enough to not have simple answer is a very clear sign that the infrastructure is failing horribly. For some reason I doubt such substandard infrastructure for cars would last that long.

Anyway, it depends, but as a rule of thumb I move up on cars only when I'm certain that car has no chance of starting to move before I've passed it completely. In case they're indicating I'm more likely to try to move to the opposite side, or take my place in the queue behind the car. In case the car does start moving I'll fall back behind it.

If there's a clear cycle lane and the road is wide enough after the junction then I'd probably stay in the cycle lane (or more likely on the right edge of the lane given the generous lack of space) but if there's parked car or bus or other obstruction, I'd get in the middle of the lane. Basically I figure out where I want to be after the junction and position myself accordingly before it so that I'll be going in a straight predictable line. (Though I do try to be mindful of faster traffic so if I feel I can safely let a number of cars get through the junction before I have to get back into the lane, I let them.)


----------

