# Solution to truck deaths



## aberal (11 May 2012)

Interesting article picked up via Twitter. http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/cyc...when-solution-easy-mandatory-side-guards.html


----------



## PK99 (11 May 2012)

aberal said:


> Interesting article picked up via Twitter. http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/cyc...when-solution-easy-mandatory-side-guards.html


 
not a solution at all - not all deaths are from being dragged under the rear wheels.

Never position yourself to the side of a lorry in the same lane and you avoid the risk completly


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (11 May 2012)

PK99 said:


> not a solution at all - not all deaths are from being dragged under the rear wheels.
> 
> Never position yourself to the side of a lorry in the same lane and you avoid the risk completly


 
I'd say it is _a_ solution - one of many - not _the_ solution. IIRC, there are construction site vehicles that are exempt from having side guards. It would be worth examining just how spurious the justification for that is.


----------



## ufkacbln (12 May 2012)

PK99 said:


> not a solution at all - not all deaths are from being dragged under the rear wheels.
> 
> Never position yourself to the side of a lorry in the same lane and you avoid the risk completly


 
Many of the deaths have been caused by the lorry putting itself on the outside of the cyclists!


----------



## PK99 (12 May 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> Many of the deaths have been caused by the lorry putting itself on the outside of the cyclists!


 
.... after the cylclist pulled up on the left of the lane?

Follow the guidance of cyclecraft and stop in primary position, do not allow any vehicle to share the same lane alongside you


----------



## dellzeqq (12 May 2012)

PK99 said:


> .... after the cylclist pulled up on the left of the lane?


yes


----------



## ufkacbln (12 May 2012)

That is exactly what I mean.

It was suggested that this was one of the reasons why females were moe highly represented in the casualty figures. The theory was that male riders tended to ride in the primary and block an HGV taking the position to the right, and female riders kept to the kerb and hence the HGV could pull alongside.

It is not that simple, and there are lots of other factors, but both groups need to b aware of others.


----------



## Bromptonaut (12 May 2012)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I'd say it is _a_ solution - one of many - not _the_ solution. IIRC, there are construction site vehicles that are exempt from having side guards. It would be worth examining just how spurious the justification for that is.


 
I'm afraid there probably is a justification. Pass a couple of big construction sites on the commute and the rough ground the tippers traverse has to be seen to be believed. Must be same or more so where they go to drop off @ landfill.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (12 May 2012)

Bromptonaut said:


> I'm afraid there probably is a justification. Pass a couple of big construction sites on the commute and the rough ground the tippers traverse has to be seen to be believed. Must be same or more so where they go to drop off @ landfill.


In which case, I'd want to see what risks are involved on site and whether it's simply a question of exporting that risk to the public highways without having to improve safety, on or off road.


----------



## CopperCyclist (12 May 2012)

Bromptonaut said:


> I'm afraid there probably is a justification. Pass a couple of big construction sites on the commute and the rough ground the tippers traverse has to be seen to be believed. Must be same or more so where they go to drop off @ landfill.



It's probably simple to design a mechanism to draw up the side protection for off road use. Unfortunately like other life saving concepts its probably not financially viable enough for any private company to research and design it.


----------



## Bromptonaut (12 May 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> It's probably simple to design a mechanism to draw up the side protection for off road use. Unfortunately like other life saving concepts its probably not financially viable enough for any private company to research and design it.


 
Thinking about this some more the side protection on artics etc isn't there for ped/cyclist safety; they're tough enough to shove a car out of the way. Would be difficult to build that sort of strength into something retractable. In fact I've some doubt side protectors are any use at all in cycle accidents. I've seen the aftermath of a couple of the fatals in the last 6/7 years. Both were around Holborn and involved artics on supermarket or similar delivery.


----------



## dellzeqq (15 May 2012)

Bromptonaut said:


> I'm afraid there probably is a justification. Pass a couple of big construction sites on the commute and the rough ground the tippers traverse has to be seen to be believed. Must be same or more so where they go to drop off @ landfill.


while I accept CopperCyclist's greater wisdom on this - if Cemex can do it, why can't the others?


----------



## summerdays (15 May 2012)

PK99 said:


> Follow the guidance of cyclecraft and stop in primary position, do not allow any vehicle to share the same lane alongside you


 
My closest call with a lorry I was in primary in one lane (a bus lane) and the lorry moved left into the lane to park on double yellow lines. There was nothing else I could have done to increase my safety, luckily I was observant and hit the brakes and dived for the side of the road. The driver apologised.


PK99 said:


> Never position yourself to the side of a lorry in the same lane and you avoid the risk completly


 So it is impossible to avoid the risk entirely.


----------



## classic33 (21 May 2012)

Feasable or not, someone is looking at them.

*"3. Bodybuilders for N2/N3 vehicles (multi-stage build vehicles)*
Currently bodies can be added to chassis cabs and no additional approval is required before registration. From the date below, the entire vehicle including the body will be subject to approval. The body itself is not subject to a specific approval but certain aspects of it will be assessed - for example, lights mounted on it, rear and side under-run guards, whether it restricts the rear view mirror field of view and if it affects the overall dimensions of the vehicle."

Taken from the top of the 4th page
http://www.dft.gov.uk/vca/additiona...ties/secure-registration/n2-n3-transition.pdf


----------



## Melonfish (23 May 2012)

tbh i never travel up the left side of large vehicles full stop, regardless of moving traffic or lights or what. blind spots on those things are nasty. if you can overtake safely then fine if not sit behind it and draft!


----------



## NHS Biker (12 Aug 2012)

Anyone who travels up the inside of any vehicle whether it being at a left turn or traffic lights deserves to be side swipped. 

Far better to filter on the right hand side and then position your self in front of the vehicle, left of centre, so that way the driver can see you. However in terms of HGV's, if you are turning left, position yourself so you can see the left mirror of the lorry.

Better still get off the bike, walk on the path and rejoin on the left hand road you are wanting to take when safe to do so.


----------



## gavintc (12 Aug 2012)

This is a North American article where side under run guards are not obligatory.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Aug 2012)

NHS Biker said:


> Anyone who travels up the inside of any vehicle whether it being at a left turn or traffic lights deserves to be side swipped.
> 
> Far better to filter on the right hand side and then position your self in front of the vehicle, left of centre, so that way the driver can see you. However in terms of HGV's, if you are turning left, position yourself so you can see the left mirror of the lorry.
> 
> Better still get off the bike, walk on the path and rejoin on the left hand road you are wanting to take when safe to do so.



Best of all, don't filter such large, multi blind spotted vehicles at all. Sit on your bike in position in the queue if you can see a big beastie at the head of the line. Don't assume there is an ASL / it will be clear / the high up driving position will see you if you do get into it. 
How desperately do you need that extra handful of seconds.


----------



## benb (13 Aug 2012)

NHS Biker said:


> Anyone who travels up the inside of any vehicle whether it being at a left turn or traffic lights deserves to be side swipped.


 
That's rather callous, don't you think? Saying someone deserves to be injured or killed because they were not aware of cycling best practice?


----------



## Markymark (13 Aug 2012)

I've pointed it out a few times to cyclists I've seen edging up the tight inside of a stationery lorry that this is how most cyclists in London die in an effiort to try and stop them becoming a statistic.

I usually get some blank response like I should mind my own bsuiness.


----------



## dawesome (13 Aug 2012)

0-markymark-0 said:


> I've pointed it out a few times to cyclists I've seen edging up the tight inside of a stationery lorry that this is how most cyclists in London die


 
No, it isn't. Quite a few HGV fatalities have been the cyclist hit from behind, or by a drunk driver, one whose eyesight is poor and tacho's been fiddled, or a driver on a mobile.


----------



## dellzeqq (13 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> No, it isn't. Quite a few HGV fatalities have been the cyclist hit from behind, or by a drunk driver, one whose eyesight is poor and tacho's been fiddled, or a driver on a mobile.


thankyou. That needed saying - and not for the first time.


----------



## dawesome (13 Aug 2012)

In more than 75% of vehicle/cyclist collisions it is the driver who is at fault, either, we need to get away from this victim-blaming, there is NOTHING to suggest the cyclist did anything wrong.

John Forester says of _The Times_ Cities Fit For Cycling campaign:
_The whole agenda is nothing more than a mix of half-baked ideas. … Consider the emphasis on HGVs. Fit them up to prevent “cyclists from being thrown under the wheels”._​ 

Eilidh Cairns, an experienced commuter cyclist, was killed in February 2009, when a tipper truck driven by Joao Lopes ploughed over her from behind. Lopes was fined £200 for driving with defective vision, but the death was ruled “accidental” and he was free to kill again. 

Catriona Patel, an experienced commuter cyclist, was killed in the Monday morning rush hour in June 2009. Pulling away from the Advanced Stop Line as the lights turned green outside Oval Station, a 32-tonne tipper lorry driven by Dennis Putz accelerated into her. Witnesses had to bang on the side of the truck before the oblivious Putz stopped. Putz was a serial dangerous driver, was hung-over — 40% over the limit — and talking on his mobile phone. He denied a charge of causing death by dangerous driving, but was sentenced to 7 years for it. Brian Dorling, an experienced commuter cyclist and motorcyclist, was killed in the morning rush hour in October last year. A tipper truck turned across his path at the Bow Intersection. They had to use his dental records to identify him. 

Deep Lee was struck by a lorry from behind as the lights turned green;

Svitlana Tereschenko was killed by a tipper truck whose distracted driver failed to indicate before turning and driving over her. 

Daniel Cox was run over by a truck which did not have the correct mirrors and whose driver had pulled into the ASL on a red light and was indicating in the opposite direction to which he turned. 

Try telling Ian McNicoll that his son Andrew, well versed in cyclecraft as a road and commuter cyclist, should have known better than to throw himself under the wheels of the articulated lorry that side-swiped while overtaking him in Edinburgh. 

Try telling Debbie Dorling that her cycle and motorcycle-trained husband should have behaved differently at Bow. 

Try telling Allister Carey that the death of his daughter Eleanor under the wheels of a lorry in Tower Bridge Road was her own fault.









The cycling “community” in this country might not always agree about the most appropriate or desirable method for reducing exposure to danger and its role as a barrier to cycling, but I think at least one thing can unite us: anyone who, knowing little about the world says that the problem here is all cyclists’ own fault for throwing themselves under the wheels of trucks, is an **** who can keep his discredited half-baked ideas to himself."

http://waronthemotorist.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/john-forester-is-an-peanut/


----------



## dellzeqq (13 Aug 2012)

to which one could add Christelle Browne run over from behind at Vallance Road


----------



## dawesome (13 Aug 2012)

Or the truly horrible death of Tony Spink:

http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/forum/soapbox/tony-spink-killed---resurrected/32895.html


----------



## GrasB (13 Aug 2012)

It may well be a start but even for turning on a cyclists that has gone up the inside those guard rails aren't close to being fool proof. Once a person is on the ground it only needs 3-4" or so of ground clearance for the vehicle to be able to roll over it's victim.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (19 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> Or the truly horrible death of Tony Spink:
> 
> http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/forum/soapbox/tony-spink-killed---resurrected/32895.html


I remember this and not to minimise the tragedy; it is clear from reports at the time; this incident was caused by a cyclist filtering from significantly (20-30 secs) behind the truck and stopping in its forward blind spot; I guess not realising the extent of an HGV's forward blind spot from 12 odd feet in the air behind a big dashboard, or simply assuming the driver was somehow aware or expecting that he'd filtered a narrow gap on his heavily laden bike.
Notwithstanding the despicable actions of the driver in the miles after when he eventually did respond to the fact that he'd run someone over; by simply removing & discarding the bike brfore driving on; harsh as it may come across I cannot see this collision in the quite same way as those you quote of the entirely innocent/unfortunate cyclists who were already there when the trucks came at them.

@GrasB +lots. It's a case of be careful what you wish for. There was a fatal incident in Manchester recently when a pedestrian trying to get across the road as the lights were on the turn got caught out and pulled under a bumper to road gap of a few inches on a Dutch articulated lorry. Sadly she was trapped in the gap and dragged/pushed along the ground for some distance before finally rolling under and out the back of the truck.
Bad road surfaces and traffic calming means there will always have to be that gap between heavy vehicle and road and it really isn't a place I'd like to find myself pinned in.


----------



## PK99 (19 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> Or the truly horrible death of Tony Spink:
> 
> http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/forum/soapbox/tony-spink-killed---resurrected/32895.html


 
Tragic though that story is, and contemptible as the drivers actions were: Would you advise any cyclist to repeat the maneuver executed by Tony Spink?

I woud advise them to follow the guidance of the London Cycling Campaign : http://lcc.org.uk/articles/four-steps-for-cyclists-to-stay-out-of-the-lorry-slash-hgv-danger-zone


----------



## dawesome (20 Aug 2012)

> Our Tony was an experienced cyclist who had cycled thousands of miles throughout Britain and even in America.
> 
> 
> There is no way he would have undertaken a moving lorry that was indicating left at traffic lights in front of him, nor a stationary lorry indicating left either. He was faced with a stationary line of traffic at a set of traffic lights and a lorry that gave no indication it was about to turn left. Knowing my brother as I do our Tony deemed the traffic in front of him safe enough to cycle to the front of the traffic lights and secure a safe position for setting off.


----------



## dellzeqq (21 Aug 2012)

PK99 said:


> Tragic though that story is, and contemptible as the drivers actions were: Would you advise any cyclist to repeat the maneuver executed by Tony Spink?
> 
> I woud advise them to follow the guidance of the London Cycling Campaign : http://lcc.org.uk/articles/four-steps-for-cyclists-to-stay-out-of-the-lorry-slash-hgv-danger-zone


I wouldn't advise them to repeat it, but let's be clear - he was hit by a truck coming from behind and turning left in to him. He probably got to where he was by filtering, but he was in front of the truck when he was run over. And we all find ourselves ahead of trucks from time to time.


----------



## ozzage (1 Sep 2012)

I sometimes think that only the "fit, smart and strong" are deemed worthy of cyling in the UK by many people.

Do you think a child is reliably going to take primary in front of an HGV? A ditzy teenage girl who is more worried about the fact that she's got a text message? A grandma who is perhaps a bit hard of hearing, a bit wobbly and is frankly scared of the trucks?

The roads need to be engineered so that mistakes don't cost lives. It's done in other countries and can be done in the UK. All this emphasis on trying to get people to ride "perfectly" 100% of the time is a diversion. It's never going to happen and if cycling ever does actually take off here and move into other demographics, then it's even LESS likely to happen.

Road engineering is the only answer. Most people will never be reliable, consistently good, vehicular cyclists. They shouldn't die due to that failure.


----------



## ufkacbln (1 Sep 2012)

NHS Biker said:


> Anyone who travels up the inside of any vehicle whether it being at a left turn or traffic lights deserves to be side swipped.
> 
> Far better to filter on the right hand side and then position your self in front of the vehicle, left of centre, so that way the driver can see you. However in terms of HGV's, if you are turning left, position yourself so you can see the left mirror of the lorry.
> 
> Better still get off the bike, walk on the path and rejoin on the left hand road you are wanting to take when safe to do so.


 
The basic point that in the majority of these cases the cyclist is in the right position and it has been caused by the vehicle overtaking the cyclist....

The only time I have had issues have been overtakes and left hooks. So despite taking the primary and observing all the rules I "deserve" to be knocked off by someone who is simply impatient and with no concern with other road users?

Or do I simply walk at all of the thirty junctions just in case?


----------



## classic33 (11 Dec 2013)

dawesome said:


> In more than 75% of vehicle/cyclist collisions it is the driver who is at fault, either, we need to get away from this victim-blaming, there is NOTHING to suggest the cyclist did anything wrong.
> 
> John Forester says of _The Times_ Cities Fit For Cycling campaign:
> _The whole agenda is nothing more than a mix of half-baked ideas. … Consider the emphasis on HGVs. Fit them up to prevent “cyclists from being thrown under the wheels”._​
> ...


 Whist available, Commercial and Motor,(Current edition) are giving the drivers side of the incident and the measures taken by the company since the death of Eleanor Carey. Three page article on the incident. Including the effect it had on the driver.
Posted here as a search for the name of the person killed throw this up in results.
There are some out there who are activley trying to do something, after such an incident.


----------



## Linford (11 Dec 2013)

I rode my motorbike up the m5 tonight, i passed 2 hgvs in the crawler lane tailgating with about 15ft between them. They were being overtaken by another 2 hgvs , the rear one was also tailgating and there was about 10ft between them....standards are very poor. They should all regularly go on simulators to show how hard they would hit the lorry in front if the other stopped quickly or had a blowout.


----------



## classic33 (11 Dec 2013)

I picked up that magazine because of the cover story. I'm hoping to get someone from the magazine to come on and try and explain the issues raised from their side.
Hopefully a better response than the RHA or FTA!


----------



## porteous (12 Dec 2013)

Patience would help, a driving/cycling asset that seems in very short supply these days.
Combine that with driver/cyclist compliance of the law applying to road users and just a little mutual respect and we could even end up enjoying our travel in safety.

As well as being a cyclist I have a full cat D bus licence and cat D truck licence. Driving in London is, frankly, a nightmare and I avoid it. Safety is every road users responsibility. Changing the current levels of road danger will probably depend on real enforcement of traffic law to all road users while we learn to control irritation, anger,aggression and thoughtlessness; all of which are out of place on the roads and can lead to the ruin or loss of other folks lives..


----------



## oldstrath (12 Dec 2013)

classic33 said:


> Whist available, Commercial and Motor,(Current edition) are giving the drivers side of the incident and the measures taken by the company since the death of Eleanor Carey. Three page article on the incident. Including the effect it had on the driver.
> Posted here as a search for the name of the person killed throw this up in results.
> There are some out there who are activley trying to do something, after such an incident.




Fine bit of special pleading from the company, but two months ago at least one of their drivers was hardly helping their case:
http://road.cc/content/news/100358-haulage-magazine-puts-lorry-firms-view-cyclists-death-video


Hard to think of a good excuse for his behaviour, or a way to blame the cyclist he overtook if the incident had happened.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (12 Dec 2013)

I came out of work a couple of years ago and saw bedlam at the end of the road from the industrial estate.
Two of my work colleagues had been going home, one turning left, the other right.
A skip truck from a neighbouring company was turning left too. He was so busy whooping and hollering at the breasts of the girl in the car to his right, he forgot there was car in front of him.
He only stopped shunting that car down the road when he thought the truck was felling sluggish and stopped.
If you can't see a Fiat Bravo from one of these things then what hope does a cyclist have?


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

Can I just say that I'm looking at this from the point of view of a cylist that ended up under the trailer of an articulated lorry.
Due only to the driver of the vehicle. He saw me on the road, but still pulled out onto the road. 
Whilst able to stop to avoid running into the side of it, I didn't have time to avoid what he did next, that being to tighten his turn, bringing the trailer into me & then over me. This done at a speed that left no time to react to what was happenning.
Turned out that the driver was foreign, with no licence to drive in this country & who couldn't care about what he'd done. He was late & I was just something in his way. He wasn't even aware of the fact that traffic on the road had right of way, over his rights
I came out between the rear wheels of the trailer.


----------



## oldstrath (12 Dec 2013)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> I came out of work a couple of years ago and saw bedlam at the end of the road from the industrial estate.
> Two of my work colleagues had been going home, one turning left, the other right.
> A skip truck from a neighbouring company was turning left too. He was so busy whooping and hollering at the breasts of the girl in the car to his right, he forgot there was car in front of him.
> He only stopped shunting that car down the road when he thought the truck was felling sluggish and stopped.
> If you can't see a Fiat Bravo from one of these things then what hope does a cyclist have?




Hardly that he couldn''t see the Fiat, more that he couldn't be bothered looking. i suspect 'poor visibility from the cab', although a poor excuse, is sometimes offered up in place of the accurate 'I could not be bothered'.


----------



## steveindenmark (12 Dec 2013)

There is a company truck called CEMEX who is involved in all sorts of cycling initiatives and who are fitting their fleet with all manner of devices to keep cyclists safe. It is only a drop in the ocean but they are to be congratulated for at least trying to sort the problem out.

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/artic...ors-to-keep-vulnerable-road-users-safe-28547/

Steve


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

Travis Perkins are doing something similar,


----------



## steveindenmark (12 Dec 2013)

User, you do not "shame" a multi million pound company into doing anything. I know the Cynthia Barlow story very well and she has done an excellent job of getting Cemex on board. But Cemex have taken up the baton when they could have quite easily have fobbed her off. 

They are now working with other groups off their own backs. Credit where crédit is due.

Steve


----------



## RedRider (12 Dec 2013)

CopperCyclist said:


> It's probably simple to design a mechanism to draw up the side protection for off road use. Unfortunately like other life saving concepts its probably not financially viable enough for any private company to research and design it.


It's financially viable if they were fined heavily enough for not doing it.


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

RedRider said:


> It's financially viable if they were fined heavily enough for not doing it.


Given that the right equipment is already there, but the reluctance to fit it prevents is use. Compulsory fitting of them is meeting with a similar reluctance.
What do you suggest now?


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

2818722 said:


> Compulsion


 Compulsory fitting is meeting with similar opposistion as voluntary fitting.


----------



## RedRider (12 Dec 2013)

classic33 said:


> Given that the right equipment is already there, but the reluctance to fit it prevents is use. Compulsory fitting of them is meeting with a similar reluctance.
> What do you suggest now?


A law which would ban HGVs from our roads unless this and other safety features are fitted. Sit-up-and-take-notice fines for those who break it.


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

RedRider said:


> A law which would ban HGVs from our roads unless this and other safety features are fitted. Sit-up-and-take-notice fines for those who break it.


 Thats whats been suggested by the drivers, of us.


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

2818735 said:


> So?


 And!


----------



## RedRider (12 Dec 2013)

classic33 said:


> Thats whats been suggested by the drivers, of us.


Yes, by some. But what's your point?


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

2818749 said:


> You seem to be suggesting that people have to agree to be compelled to do something.


Suggest something else then. Bearing in mind that we as cyclists put very litte back into the coffers, no VED or fuel duty. We also carry little more than ourselves on our bikes. We, as cyclists, have less of a voice in this argument. So!


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

RedRider said:


> Yes, by some. But what's your point?


 From both sides, the arguments are nearly the same. They would prefer if we as cyclists under some mandatory training & that we be seperated from the main flow of traffic. Also that some routes should be cycle free. #
Hasn't the same arguments been made for truck drivers & fleet owners, on here?


----------



## RedRider (12 Dec 2013)

classic33 said:


> From both sides, the arguments are nearly the same. They would prefer if we as cyclists under some mandatory training & that we be seperated from the main flow of traffic. Also that some routes should be cycle free. #
> Hasn't the same arguments been made for truck drivers & fleet owners, on here?


Of course. People disagree about all sorts. It's a battlefield!


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

2818770 said:


> What a load of nonsense.


 How much in fuel duty did you pay in the last year then. As a cyclist?
We have to realise that money talks better than either the written or spoken word.


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

RedRider said:


> Of course. People disagree about all sorts. It's a battlefield!


So whats your suggestion for a ceasefire, that all sides can agree on & not feel as though they've been singled out?


----------



## RedRider (12 Dec 2013)

classic33 said:


> So whats your suggestion for a ceasefire, that all sides can agree on & not feel as though they've been singled out?


I don't think there is one. The Berlin Wall fell, apartheid South Africa crumbled. It's not a great leap for lorries to wear skirts.


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

Complete the following. Its viewed from the industry side of things, but you can still affect the outcome. The more cyclists that answer the better the chance of getting something done.
www.commercialmotor.com/truckingbritain



2818795 said:


> This is all utterly irrelevant.To demonstrate this, do HGV operators buy more rights than owners of the more fuel efficient vehicles that equally pay no VED and much less fuel taxes etc?


 That part was never said by me. We have less chance of being heard, because we are seen as not contributing anything, when compared to HGV's/LGV's.
How much did you pay in fuel duty last year, as a cyclist, though. Simple enough question.
As I said money talks


----------



## classic33 (12 Dec 2013)

RedRider said:


> I don't think there is one. *The Berlin Wall* fell, apartheid South Africa crumbled. It's not a great leap for lorries to wear skirts.


http://brigade.rb-test.co.uk/whats-new/safety-devices-vital-to-prevent-cyclist-fatalities
And closer to home, we have an 800 year old problem of a similar nature to those you mention. Whats your point. Keep on long enough & something will happen?
_"171 people were killed or died attempting to escape at the Berlin Wall between August 13, 1961 and November 9, 1989."_


----------



## steveindenmark (12 Dec 2013)

Legislation is the only way this could be implemented. But it would need to be EU legislation. Even then it would probably only apply to new vehicles as trying to do retrospectively would be a massive undertaking.

Steve


----------



## Ganymede (13 Dec 2013)

classic33 said:


> Complete the following. Its viewed from the industry side of things, but you can still affect the outcome. The more cyclists that answer the better the chance of getting something done.
> www.commercialmotor.com/truckingbritain



I tried filling this out but it's aimed at truck operators so it's really impossible to fill in without making up your own trucking company. Even as a small business owner I couldn't make it fit.



classic33 said:


> That part was never said by me. We have less chance of being heard, because we are seen as not contributing anything, when compared to HGV's/LGV's.
> How much did you pay in fuel duty last year, as a cyclist, though. Simple enough question.
> As I said money talks



I'd like to think votes count too, though I'm afraid you have a point about more taxes equalling more influence. But cyclists are in a minority of voters too. Pedestrians... well, there are quite a lot of them, but they're (we're) not organised.


----------



## classic33 (13 Dec 2013)

With regards the survey, do what I did on those questions. Put N/A, it,ll let you complete it and you'll get the chance to say your answering as a cyclist.


----------



## classic33 (13 Dec 2013)

steveindenmark said:


> Legislation is the only way this could be implemented. But it would need to be EU legislation. Even then it would probably only apply to new vehicles as trying to do retrospectively would be a massive undertaking.
> 
> Steve


Coming in 2015 & further measures in by 2019. In the meantime, we sit & wait?


----------



## steveindenmark (13 Dec 2013)

User said:


> How to re-write history...
> 
> Cynthia got the company on board by buying shares, turning up at the AGM and telling her story. RMC/Cemex would not have made the changes they have without Cynthia's actons - and she has still had to push them...



We know the story but they still did not have to do anything had they not chosen to do so. They are now involved ia all sorts of cycle safety schemes and talks, which they have initiated themselves.

That is what they deserve credit for.

Steve


----------



## redfalo (13 Dec 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> to which one could add Christelle Browne run over from behind at Vallance Road



And Brian Holt, who died in November on Mile End Road. run over http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24823771


----------



## classic33 (17 Dec 2013)

CopperCyclist said:


> It's probably simple to design a mechanism to draw up the side protection for off road use. Unfortunately like other life saving concepts its probably not financially viable enough for any private company to research and design it.


 It cost Cemex £1700 per vehicle, to fit to 3,000 vehicle's. 
System activated on the correct side, nt use of the indicators. Given that many vehicles have crash cams already fitted, what would it cost to fit the proximity alarms?


----------

