What an HGV sees of you

[SquareDaff]

I might... maybe change the text to something like, don't put yourself where these cyclists are.

I wouldn't. There aren't blue people or such a thing as Minions either but no-one complains about those!! It's an Avatar. If you like it then keep it!

 

[SquareDaff]

Seem to remember reading something about a low ride height cab being introduced for lorries. Any of our HGV drivers have a view on this? I can imagine it'd cause problems for you with other aspects of the job but, in your view, would it help you with visiblity to other traffic?

 

[Mugshot]

There aren't blue people or such a thing as Minions either but no-one complains about those!!

Noooooooooooooooooooo

 

[SquareDaff]

Noooooooooooooooooooo

I'll refrain from mentioning Father Christmas then!

 

[Shaun]

Please, let's not dilute the discussion by nit-picking and winding each other up; you've made your points and there may be some merit to what some of you are saying, but the essence of the message is what's important and most people will "get" it - regardless of any technical inconsistencies.

Any positive action - aimed at drivers, cyclists, or both - that helps to avoid further injury or death has got to be applauded, surely?

 

[SquareDaff]

In an attempt to get this back onto something like topic......There are obviously some cyclists on here that are also HGV drivers. What steps do you think could be taken to make you more aware of our presence? Either by cyclists or HGV drivers.

 

[Shaun]

I appreciate that you don't like this but our right to use the roads without unnecessary fear is the topic.

Really, I thought it was about keeping us all safe and (any) measures that might help to achieve that?

 

[Brandane]

In an attempt to get this back onto something like topic......There are obviously some cyclists on here that are also HGV drivers. What steps do you think could be taken to make you more aware of our presence? Either by cyclists or HGV drivers.

That's fairly simple:

Cyclists - make yourselves visible to HGV drivers, bearing in mind that there MAY be the odd blind spot particularly when they are turning. Don't go up the nearside of an HGV if there is ANY chance that they might be turning left. Use lights in poor visibility (not just at night; fog or rain too), and wear something that doesn't blend into the background (so not necessarily hi-viz then, but maybe bright colours where appropriate).

HGV drivers - be observant and look out for other road users. As 99.99999% already do. Use indicators - as 99.99999% already do, unlike car drivers.

 

[SquareDaff]

OK - all of that I do 99.9% of the time and I imagine the vast majority of people on here do too. As an immediate solution they're common sense. Any thoughts on how to help detect mistakes that will eventually be made by both sides. For instance, I know of the system that uses some sort of chip to alert an HGV driver of cyclist proximity even if they can't see them. I believe it's being trialed in York!?!?! I'd like to read the thoughts of anyone that's been involved in that. There's the lower cab heights proposal that I believe is being trialed (in London?) Would a lower cab height really help eliminate blind spots or would it just relocate them? I don't drive a HGV so can't answer. Are there others?

 

[XRHYSX]

The lower cab, like most dust carts and busses is perfect for town driving, but in relllaty its down to the length of the vehicle,
they put the cab on top of the engine so you can get the full length trailer on the back, this is why we don't have american style bonneted trucks

 

[theclaud]

That's fairly simple:

Cyclists - make yourselves visible to HGV drivers, bearing in mind that there MAY be the odd blind spot particularly when they are turning. Don't go up the nearside of an HGV if there is ANY chance that they might be turning left. Use lights in poor visibility (not just at night; fog or rain too), and wear something that doesn't blend into the background (so not necessarily hi-viz then, but maybe bright colours where appropriate).

HGV drivers - be observant and look out for other road users. As 99.99999% already do. Use indicators - as 99.99999% already do, unlike car drivers.

How about simply staffing dangerous vehicles with enough people to operate them safely?

 

[SquareDaff]

The lower cab, like most dust carts and busses is perfect for town driving, but in relllaty its down to the length of the vehicle,
they put the cab on top of the engine so you can get the full length trailer on the back, this is why we don't have american style bonneted trucks

I don't understand that one. How can the cab height have an effect on trailer length? I'm assuming this is due to a lack of knowledge about HGVs on my part. Can you explain please? (btw: this is a genuine question not a dig)

 

[XRHYSX]

my lorry is a day cab (I go home every night) I sit next to my engine which brings the hight of my cab down,
but a lot of lorry drivers live in there cabs weeks on end so to save them having to climb all over the place they give them a flat floor which starts at the top of the engine hence being so high

 

[Brandane]

How about simply staffing dangerous vehicles with enough people to operate them safely?

1. They are not dangerous vehicles when operated properly by the one person already paid to operate them; i.e the driver. I think that has been covered in the last 9 pages.

2. Was it you who proposed a co-driver/observer to be paid to sit in the passenger seat? This is not a practical solution if you think about it. Might be OK for lorries that operate solely in London or other big cities, but they are few and far between.
Just as an example; I can't see W.H. Malcolm of Linwood (outside Glasgow) sending a truck to London with an observer being paid to sit and do nothing other than keep an eye out for cyclists on left turns once the lorry gets to London.
Let's not get into using the second driver on double manned runs for this task. Then you are breaking all sorts of tachograph regulations as the second driver should be resting (i.e. sleeping) when not driving.

 

[theclaud]

1. They are not dangerous vehicles when operated properly by the one person already paid to operate them; i.e the driver. I think that has been covered in the last 9 pages.

2. Was it you who proposed a co-driver/observer to be paid to sit in the passenger seat? This is not a practical solution if you think about it. Might be OK for lorries that operate solely in London or other big cities, but they are few and far between.
Just as an example; I can't see W.H. Malcolm of Linwood (outside Glasgow) sending a truck to London with an observer being paid to sit and do nothing other than keep an eye out for cyclists on left turns once the lorry gets to London.
Let's not get into using the second driver on double manned runs for this task. Then you are breaking all sorts of tachograph regulations as the second driver should be resting (i.e. sleeping) when not driving.

1. I'm afraid it hasn't. They are killing pedestrians and cyclists, so either improper operation is endemic, or the one person paid to operate them is simply not enough, however properly he does it.

2. Yes it was me, and I have thought about it quite a lot, thanks. When you say, "not practical", do you actually mean that operators are simply not willing to pay the costs or handle the logistics of controlling the danger they bring to the roads?