What I can see in my NS truck mirrors.

[Arch]

Yes, because if there should always be anticipation that that could happen. Legally, the responsibility is with the driver. SMIDSY, YWIMBS etc are no mitigation. And when you go down the road you're going, it's not long before you get insurance companies trying to blame pedestrians who get run over for not wearing hi-viz.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-multi-million-pound-compensation-battle.html

Really, think about it, should HGV's really be driven blindly around PEOPLE? - it's really stupid.

Nothing should be driven BLINDLY, no. If people stay out of the blindspots, then vehicles aren't being driven blindly are they?

All vehicles have blindspots. Good drivers know it, and make efforts to lessen them, but if you want to get rid of all blindspots you have to ban all cars, and have all bikes fitted with mirrors...

 

[Arch]

But

we don't demand they are delivered in a way that puts our lives at risk. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that these vehicles are banned from our streets. In fact it would be quite sensible.

Yes, it would be sensible. But until it happens, it makes sense to act in whatever way lessens the risk to yourself. ]]

 

[Sara_H]

[QUOTE 2639680, member: 9609"]Lots of things that are stupid are legal.
In the example I originally gave LINK i was doing 15 - 20 mph


We all must take responsibility for our own safety, and I am merely trying to be helpful by saying that the nearside of a big lorry is an incredibly dangerous place to go on a bike. Yes it is probably legal to do so, it may well even be legal to hold a tea party half way round a blind bend, but both would be stupid things to do.[/quote]
Stupid, or maybe just thet they didn't realise hoew dangerous it was.

I gave they example earlier of my son, on his way home from school one evening walking across the driveway of our local Co-Op in front of a HGV. The HGV strated to pull out when he was half way across. He had no idea that he was in the drivers blind spot. As a nine year old child he had no idea tha HGV's had blind spots. Why would he? I suspect the general public at large don't know. Why would they? Why should they? The onus is on the operaters not to be driving them blindly, and if that isn't possible and there isn't a safe solution, then they should be on our roads mingling with people.

 

[mark st1]

What makes it dangerous?

Driver.

 

[mark st1]

Yep

Solution ?

 

[Sara_H]

Nothing should be driven BLINDLY, no. If people stay out of the blindspots, then vehicles aren't being driven blindly are they?

All vehicles have blindspots. Good drivers know it, and make efforts to lessen them, but if you want to get rid of all blindspots you have to ban all cars, and have all bikes fitted with mirrors...

Do you know what Arch? As someone who's spent 15 years of my professional life working in paediatric Intensive Care units, and has seen first hand what cars do to our delicate bodies, you wouldn't get many arguments from me for that suggestion.

 

[mark st1]

Do you know what Arch? As someone who's spent 15 years of my professional life working in paediatric Intensive Care units, and has seen first hand what cars do to our delicate bodies, you wouldn't get many arguments from me for that suggestion.

I agree with some of what you have said. I just hope you stand by your own argument and don't drive a car don't shop in any major supermarket (or your local co-op) or buy clothes from main retailers don't post letters or order anything off the internet or live in a house built of bricks or sleep in a bed sit on a sofa watch a tv etc etc. The transport industry does have its pro's as well as its cons unfortunately.

 

[Brandane]

Yes that is how it is but is that how we would want it to be?

No; and that is also the view of most HGV drivers. I would be more than happy to get paid for trundling up and down the motorway listening to Radio 2 (apart from Vine and Mayo ), rather than battling through town centre traffic. Unfortunately, it is the bean counters who ultimately make these decisions.
Believe it or not, if they thought they could save a few pence by sending vans, they would. An artic typically gets about 7 or 8 mpg.. That is why they are used to their full capacity wherever possible. They aren't used to "deliver a couple of boxes of frocks to Jigsaw". They might well do that, but they will have left their depot with somewhere near 26 tonnes of freight for distribution to various points along their route.

 

[Sara_H]

I agree with some of what you have said. I just hope you stand by your own argument and don't drive a car don't shop in any major supermarket (or your local co-op) or buy clothes from main retailers don't post letters or order anything off the internet or live in a house built of bricks or sleep in a bed sit on a sofa watch a tv etc etc. The transport industry does have its pro's as well as its cons unfortunately.

Of course I don't, because there's no choice. We've become totally dependant on cars/vehicles.

But this is killing us and it's really important that there's a debate about safer ways to move freight/goods/people around.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Robot lorries.

will bring a whole new meaning to blue screen of death when it randomly crashes (in both senses of the word)

 

[Brandane]

But we don't demand they are delivered in a way that puts our lives at risk. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that these vehicles are banned from our streets. In fact it would be quite sensible.

If we go down the line of banning everything that presents a risk, then life is going to get very, very dull. You wouldn't want to leave your house. In fact, you wouldn't want to stay INSIDE it either. Is it not statistically proven that most accidents occur in the home? Aeroplanes occasionally crash, ban them. Same with trains. Hold on; bicycles are quite often involved in accidents where nothing else is involved. Do we ban them too?

 

[mark st1]

There are more ways than one to achieve all those things, and causing injury and death is not a price worth paying, surely you're not suggesting as much.

There is but as said at a financial cost to us all. And erm no not sure where you get that from but im not surprised to have something twisted around to be made to look like a bad point.

I drive a big dirty lorry for a living have done for 9 years been lucky enough not to have had an accident. It is a shoot living i don't particularly enjoy but its a job that keeps me and family from sponging of the government. Ive met peanut drivers who i don't think should be driving ive met good drivers (believe it or not). Simply saying ban them all helps no one making them as safe as possible is the only option as they are here to stay is the only point i was trying to make.

 

[Sara_H]

If we go down the line of banning everything that presents a risk, then life is going to get very, very dull. You wouldn't want to leave your house. In fact, you wouldn't want to stay INSIDE it either. Is it not statistically proven that most accidents occur in the home? Aeroplanes occasionally crash, ban them. Same with trains. Hold on; bicycles are quite often involved in accidents where nothing else is involved. Do we ban them too?

Is that a good argument for not looking at introducing realistic measures to reduce the massive risk that these vehicles currently pose to people?

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Will there be more instances of this than the current failure rate?

dunno

 

[classic33]

As someone else has already said, I fail to see the difference between:
- an HGV driver attempting to prevent dangerous actions by other road users by staying close to the kerb under certain circumstances
- a cyclist attempting to prevent dangerous actions by other road users by staying in primary under certain circumstances

If a driver of an HGV/LGV purposely parks his vehicle on the left, when he intends to turn left, then he is sending out misleading information to other road users.
The longer vehicle requires a larger turning circle, so its not uncommon to see it taking up space in another lane in order to get that turning circle. Placing one inside that turning circle will only make a bad situation worse. The only way out of that situation is either to mount the pavement, force the vehicle to take the turn(does wonders for the road surface!) or overshoot slightly to compensate for not allowing the room to turn. This last one can often put them into oncoming traffic, causing problems for all involved.