HGVs in towns and cities

[Andy 71]

No it isn't. If the cyclist makes a mistake, the cyclist gets killed. If the driver makes a mistake, the cyclist gets killed.

Fundamental rule of nature - when a 10-tonne steel box collides with a 15 kilo steel frame on wheels, the latter will always come off the worst.

HGV drivers (including my most of the male members of my family) are routinely taught that their vehicles have different characteristics to other vehicles, what the dangers are and that their driving technique must be adjusted in this regard. The British LGV licence is the most expensive and difficult to attain. A don't think that you can just pass your test, and someone will just employ you.

Equally, as cyclists, our characteristics are that we are less audible and visible than others, but in urban environments, can sometimes travel as fast as motorised traffic.

It is a true, but unfair fact of life that the road haulage business is very competitive and cutthroat these days, and there are some tossers out there - some drivers will show impatience in order to keep up with overloaded schedules and to finish the job within their permitted hours.

British drivers, are no exception to this - they are fighting for business against the thousands of (untaxed) foreign HGVs on British roads, many of whom when stopped by the Police show excessive hours being driven on their tachograph, as well as having often unroadworthy (LHD) vehicles which add to the danger. Often, British companies are behind this, having outsourced to cheaper Polish or Romanian haulage firms.

Yes, of course there should be ironclad enforcement but due to the demise of rail freight and the effect of globalisation, we have many thousands of lorries on our roads, day and night. The Police just don't have the resources.

It's a complex problem - For the meantime, it would be be better, if possible, to avoid them in the first place.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Lorries make up 2.5% of motor traffic and account for 25% of cycling fatalities. So, are lorry drivers 10 times as criminally incompetent as other motorists or are they driving a vehicle ten times as dangerous as anything else on the roads?

Or are some of that 25% of cyclist casualties caused by the cyclist in question not knowing enough to keep out of the danger zone? I don't know, just pointing out that such a statistic means very little as a bare figure.

 

[dondare]

Cause of the weight involved 44 ton truck against a 75kg cyclist plus bike....

I'd give the lack of visibility from the cab as being the main cause of these accidents, and the weight of the vehicle as being the main cause of the seriousness of them. But it doesn't have to be 44 tons, a cement lorry or tipper truck is just as lethal if the driver hasn't noticed you.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

But it doesn't have to be 44 tons, a cement lorry or tipper truck is just as lethal if the driver hasn't noticed you.

Or a car. Or a motorbike. Or even another cyclist or a pedestrian.

 

[dondare]

Or are some of that 25% of cyclist casualties caused by the cyclist in question not knowing enough to keep out of the danger zone? I don't know, just pointing out that such a statistic means very little as a bare figure.

Clearly many cyclists don't appreciate the danger, and every day there are more inexperienced cyclists on the roads who don't appreciate the danger. With no training or testing required how can they?

 

[BentMikey]

Apparently most of the deaths involve either cement lorries or tippers, and much less so other types of HGV.

 

[dondare]

Or a car. Or a motorbike. Or even another cyclist or a pedestrian.

Not really. Lorries are the most lethal. You can say that the statistics mean nothing but they do back up common sense here; a lorry can crush you to death under it's wheels or against a barrier, and that's often exactly how they kill.

 

[dondare]

Surely this is down to the cyclist though. If I had only started cycling I would have to be pretty thick/ignorant/naive to think that I could commute with ease through rush hour traffic without any problems.

Either cut short the distance that you travel, lock your bike up and get the bus/train. Or ride at the weekends building your knowledge/road sense, or read cyclecraft.

Unfortunately many novice cyclists just don't know what to do in order to survive. They'll disregard the law and ride on the pavements believing that to be safer, they'll jump red lights because they think that that's what cyclists do and might have heard that it's also safer (remember that debate?) or they'll carefully obey the law, fit lights, wear a yellow tabbard and a helmet and follow the advice given in the HC about cycle lanes which will lead them right up the inside of the traffic waiting at the lights and right into the "execution zone" as BM's most recent video shows.

 

[dondare]

why are you even there to be crushed?

Just cycling to work/school/shops /&c.

 

[dondare]

Yeah o.k...we have concluded why you was on a bike in the first place, but why are you on the nearside of a truck..?

Because cyclists ride closer to the kerb than motor vehicles.

 

[dondare]

Surely this is down to the cyclist though. If I had only started cycling I would have to be pretty thick/ignorant/naive to think that I could commute with ease through rush hour traffic without any problems.

Either cut short the distance that you travel, lock your bike up and get the bus/train. Or ride at the weekends building your knowledge/road sense, or read cyclecraft.

Many cyclists are children and are inexperienced and naive. But most of the incidents that I've read about involved adult cyclists who weren't doing anything illegal or stupid or dangerous, it was simply a case of the driver not seeing them.

 

[dondare]

Yeah...but why are you down the nearside of a truck?

Both approaching the lights, lights are red, both stop and wait, lights turn green, lorry turns left, road turns red.

 

[dondare]

Hmmm...what about the other advice in the highway code though? You know the rule of giving a hgv plenty of room? You are cherry picking dondare.

73
Pay particular attention to long vehicles which need a lot of room to manoeuvre at corners. Be aware that drivers may not see you. They may have to move over to the right before turning left. Wait until they have completed the manoeuvre because the rear wheels come very close to the kerb while turning. Do not be tempted to ride in the space between them and the kerb.


Needs to be given more prominence. Rule 73? If I was writing the HC I'd make it rule number 1 for cyclists and also scrub any mention of cycle lanes.

Here's a couple of other rules that tend to be ignored:

211
It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are coming up from behind, coming out of junctions, at roundabouts, overtaking you or filtering through traffic. Always look out for them before you emerge from a junction; they could be approaching faster than you think. When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing. Be especially careful when turning, and when changing direction or lane. Be sure to check mirrors and blind spots carefully.
212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162-167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.

 

[dondare]

Both approaching lights, lights turn red, (but I have read the highway code), I wait behind the truck or go about 2 or 3 yards in front of the vehicle establishing eye contact with the driver.

71
You MUST NOT cross the stop line when the traffic lights are red.

And that's the law, not just advice. But you've already said that you habitually run reds so what's the law to you?

 

[BentMikey]

2 or 3 yards in front of an HGV? That's 'kin stupidly close, probably in a blind spot. Establishing eye contact is not something to rely on for your life..