Today another cyclist was crushed under a truck at Holborn, London, the bike a crumpled tangle of tubes under the truck still as I type. That's six deaths so far this year, but horrifically the third one in London in just two weeks.

 

These truck drivers are not chasing down cyclists with murderous intent, I'm sure they are totally shattered by such an event in their working life. The evidence is that almost all of these accidents was totally under the control of the cyclist and could easily have been avoided by them.

 

So please, please , please, wherever you are, keep your wits about you, watch out for trucks, recognise the limitations of the drivers vision and stay well clear of them, particularly on their blind left hand side. Your life is in your hands, not theirs.

 

I have to say I find Flecc's attitude on this matter absolutely sickening. I cycle ten miles a day in central London as I have done for 20 years; the behaviour of many lorry drivers is disgraceful. They almost always ignore advance stop lines and the numerous arguments I've had with them when they've passed me so close to have threatened my life indicate they all too often don't give a damn. There have been two fatalities near me. One the driver of a skip lorry crushed a woman against railings 18 inches on the pavement side of the kerb. He was using a mobile whilst turning left at a roundabout. In Dalston a driver crushed another cyclist; he did not have the correct mirrors fitted and encroached on the advanced stop line - the cyclist was there first! In both cases the drivers got off......no wonder they exhibit such indifference to our safety - unless they are drunk they never get convicted!

 

My opinion is that if you operate a lethal piece of machinery in a public place you take responsibility for any consequential death and injury; in this country you don't, which, combined with the reticence of authorities to provide segregated space as they have in some other northern European countries, explains much towards why we have such carnage on our roads. Unfortunately there are too many people with Flecc-type attutudes in this country who find it easier to blame the victim.

 

Flecc, you're a pedelec sage, and I take my hat off to you for that, but what you come out with on this subject matter beggars belief.

 

Andy Clarke

no wonder they exhibit such indifference to our safety - unless they are drunk they never get convicted!

 

....you've certainly got that right.

...before someone misinterperets my post I'd just like to make it clear that I was refering to the single phrase I quoted and not Andy's total post.

I have to say I find Flecc's attitude on this matter absolutely sickening. -----------------------------------------

 

Flecc, you're a pedelec sage, and I take my hat off to you for that, but what you come out with on this subject matter beggars belief.

 

Andy Clarke

 

I think most have understood my thread, 10 likes posted for example, but you clearly haven't Andy. I'm well aware that there are truck drivers who behave in the manner you describe, after all I cycle in London like you, but I'm also well aware the majority are not like that.

 

But in this thread I'm not concerned with guilt, only with doing my little bit to try and prevent any more cyclists being killed, especially by the trucks they are so vulnerable to. That's the primary objective, stopping the deaths, and the simplest way to achieve that is to stop cyclists putting themselves in potentially dangerous positions. Ranting about truck drivers isn't going to stop the deaths as the history shows. And London cyclists are are hardly a picture of innocence on the roads, many of them I see doing incredibly stupid things. In my opinion and experience the percentage of irresponsible behaviour by cyclists in London is higher than that for truck drivers.

 

I have no bias in this subject since as well as being a cyclist I've had years of truck driving experience.

I have every sympathy for those affected by the death of any cyclist who is killed on our roads, and I'm not in any way seeking to excuse bad driving of any kind, but ...

 

Is it not the case that in the real world, any cyclist finding themselves on the nearside of any vehicle at a junction should expect it to turn left?

 

You can talk about segregating traffic till the cows come home, but except in isolated cases it just is not going to happen any time soon. For the time being, we have to make the best of things, and in my book, that means having your wits about you at all times and always expecting the unexpected.

I have been doing a steady 15-20 miles a night around london this week(new wheels and sun yay), just about to head out to do another 20 or so today. This next clip might disturb you but it is how I view 95% of other cyclists on the road, it took me just a few seconds to find on youtube. Some are hilarious to watch, they record themself being an utter moron and then shouting at a motorist who really wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary.

 

[video=youtube;IR3AoLUZ-Go]

 

The reality of it is this... both the guy with the headcam and the guy he is following are both winning darwin awards soon, going onto the other side of the road to overtake, taking tiny gaps and then after having almost died jumping the lights just before the video ends. Not to mention the 2nd guy in blue who you see take the same gap before the lucky survivor has even made it out.

This next clip might disturb you but it is how I view 95% of other cyclists on the road

 

Whilst I have no recent experience riding a bike in London, I had to drive round various parts of it often enough in the 12 years to 2010. And I wouldn't mind a crisp tenner for the number of times I've seen exactly that sort of stupidity.

 

My particular favourites were always the faux cycle messengers with the backwards cycling caps doing track stands on their fixies ahead of the bike box at lights, trying to look übercool whilst looking around in the hope that they had an audience.

 

I've always thought that with the number of muppets riding like in that video, it's no wonder so many motorists in town see cyclists as a major PITA.

Whilst I have no recent experience riding a bike in London, I had to drive round various parts of it often enough in the 12 years to 2010. And I wouldn't mind a crisp tenner for the number of times I've seen exactly that sort of stupidity.

 

My particular favourites were always the faux cycle messengers with the backwards cycling caps doing track stands on their fixies ahead of the bike box at lights, trying to look übercool whilst looking around in the hope that they had an audience.

 

I've always thought that with the number of muppets riding like in that video, it's no wonder so many motorists in town see cyclists as a major PITA.

 

I totally agree. There are a huge number of idiotic cyclists, particularly in London. Youngsters, seeing this think that is normal and emulate them.

Strangely though, the idiots seem to survive, it is the careful ones, mainly women who get killed.

"The evidence is that almost all of these accidents was totally under the control of the cyclist and could easily have been avoided by them." Where is this evidence? Did not the latest stats on cycle accident reveal 68% of KSI collisions were the fault of the driver?

That video shows an extreme version of London cyclists or courier types who actually don't often get killed. The accidents I cited were normal commuters who were well aware of the dangers of lorries and were correctly positioned at the place of the accident.

 

People like Flecc always want to believe it's the cyclists fault. The stats do not support that view.

"The evidence is that almost all of these accidents was totally under the control of the cyclist and could easily have been avoided by them." Where is this evidence? Did not the latest stats on cycle accident reveal 68% of KSI collisions were the fault of the driver?

 

The evidence I mention is very clear and has been very widely and repeatedly reported. A very high proportion of these deaths over several years resulted from the cyclist being in the blind left spot of a truck at a junction.

 

The two things you state are disparate so not relevant. By avoiding a position of danger a cyclist can avoid an accident that would have been the fault of someone else if it had occurred. I've been successfully doing it all my cycling life.

 

Therefore those accidents were under the control of the cyclists and could have been avoided! The message is clear:

 

Avoid riding alongside the nearside of trucks at junctions.

The evidence I mention is very clear and has been very widely and repeatedly reported. A very high proportion of these deaths over several years resulted from the cyclist being in the blind left spot of a truck at a junction.

 

The two things you state are disparate so not relevant. By avoiding a position of danger a cyclist can avoid an accident that would have been the fault of someone else if it had occurred. I've been successfully doing it all my cycling life.

 

Therefore those accidents were under the control of the cyclists and could have been avoided! The message is clear:

 

Avoid riding alongside the nearside of trucks at junctions.

 

In both of the cases I mentioned, and in many other cases, The cyclists arrived at the junction first - that means the cyclists did not ride along the nearside of the trucks. In both cases they were left hooked. In the first case the driver was on his mobile, in the second he crossed into the advanced stop line long after the light had gone red 'to get a better view of the junction' according to his lawyer. The driver admitted he entered the ASL after it had turned red and hadn't noticed the cyclist therein, and that he had substandard mirrors. 'Death by misadventure' were the recorded verdicts. Would Flecc's advice had saved them? I think not. It is quite wrong to assume that when this happens it was the cyclist putting themselves in harm's way....as most media (and some cyclists) do.

In both of the cases I mentioned, and in many other cases, The cyclists arrived at the junction first - that means the cyclists did not ride along the nearside of the trucks. In both cases they were left hooked ... It is quite wrong to assume that when this happens it was the cyclist putting themselves in harm's way

 

Let us say that you are stationary at the lights, having got there first, and a wagon pulls up alongside you on your right.

 

The lights change.

 

If you keep yourself out of harm's way by keeping that wagon ahead of you until it's clear of the junction, how can it squash you if it turns left?

And during the time the truck gets moving, either straight ahead or turning left, other vehicles following are now alongside the cyclist. Probably get hollered at for obstructing the lane.

And during the time the truck gets moving, either straight ahead or turning left, other vehicles following are now alongside the cyclist. Probably get hollered at for obstructing the lane.

You can personally shout at me until you are blue in the face for me standing still at a green light so long as you don't hit me with a truck or a bus.

 

Went on a 20 mile bike ride today out from streatham to croydon almost and along to hayes. Found the roads a little more narrow in places so had to stop behind the odd parked car to let traffic pass, yes I could argue that it's my right to take up the single lane but pulling out infront of a land rover to gain a couple of seconds just isn't how I get my kicks.

Strict Liability

 

As I have said before, the principle of "Strict Liability" should be adopted by Britain. For a balanced argument on the subject, follow the link below.

 

STRICT LIABILITY

Who, me?

 

They can personally shout at me until they are blue in the face for me standing still at a green light so long as they don't hit me with a truck or a bus.

 

I am a cyclist, I do not "shout" at other road users.

In both of the cases I mentioned, and in many other cases, The cyclists arrived at the junction first - that means the cyclists did not ride along the nearside of the trucks. In both cases they were left hooked. In the first case the driver was on his mobile, in the second he crossed into the advanced stop line long after the light had gone red 'to get a better view of the junction' according to his lawyer. The driver admitted he entered the ASL after it had turned red and hadn't noticed the cyclist therein, and that he had substandard mirrors. 'Death by misadventure' were the recorded verdicts. Would Flecc's advice had saved them? I think not. It is quite wrong to assume that when this happens it was the cyclist putting themselves in harm's way....as most media (and some cyclists) do.

 

Of course my advice would save them, after all, I'm still here at 77 years old!

 

As others have remarked, if finding oneself in that position, don't move forward, just let the truck go first. Trucks cannot drive sideways, you can only get crushed if you ride off alongside them.

 

Once again Andy, this is not about blame, it's about preventing unnecessary deaths.

 

Who is right or wrong doesn't matter where safety is concerned. There's an old rhyme about the collision regulations at sea which illustrates this in it's last two lines:

 

"He was right, dead right, as he sailed along

but he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".

Of course my advice would save them, after all, I'm still here at 77 years old!

 

As others have remarked, if finding oneself in that position, don't move forward, just let the truck go first. Trucks cannot drive sideways, you can only get crushed if you ride off alongside them.

 

Once again Andy, this is not about blame, it's about preventing unnecessary deaths.

 

Who is right or wrong doesn't matter where safety is concerned. There's an old rhyme about the collision regulations at sea which illustrates this in it's last two lines:

 

"He was right, dead right, as he sailed along

but he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".

 

Now who's presenting disparate facts 'I'm 77 so I must be right.'

 

Articulated vehicles do move sideways. In both cases the victims were dragged round the corner from the stop line by the lorries until in one case the cyclist was crushed against the railings - 18inches from the curb on the pavement side and in the other case by the rotation of the trailer. Do you not think ignoring the advance stop line, using a mobile and having defective mirrors were factors? What happened to them could happen to any of us. They didn't choose to have irresponsible lorry drivers pull up next to them. They didn't move; they had no chance. I find your attitude arrogant and shocking.

Now who's presenting disparate facts 'I'm 77 so I must be right.'

 

Articulated vehicles do move sideways. In both cases the victims were dragged round the corner from the stop line by the lorries until in one case the cyclist was crushed against the railings - 18inches from the curb on the pavement side and in the other case by the rotation of the trailer. Do you not think ignoring the advance stop line, using a mobile and having defective mirrors were factors? What happened to them could happen to any of us. They didn't choose to have irresponsible lorry drivers pull up next to them. They didn't move; they had no chance. I find your attitude arrogant and shocking.

 

Andy, you continue to stubbornly ignore the stated purpose of this thread, to save lives, just in order to continue your rant against lorry drivers. I don't disagree with everything you've said about those drivers, but this thread is not about that. If you want a discussion about irresponsible lorry drivers, please start a thread about that subject.

 

Meanwhile, if trying to save lives is arrogant and shocking, then that's what I'll continue to be.

 

Perhaps the strangest aspect of your stance is that you've clearly been acting in accordance with my advice in avoiding positions of danger during your years of London commuting.

.

Edited July 21, 201312 yr by flecc

Of course my advice would save them, after all, I'm still here at 77 years old!

 

As others have remarked, if finding oneself in that position, don't move forward, just let the truck go first. Trucks cannot drive sideways, you can only get crushed if you ride off alongside them.

 

Once again Andy, this is not about blame, it's about preventing unnecessary deaths.

 

Who is right or wrong doesn't matter where safety is concerned. There's an old rhyme about the collision regulations at sea which illustrates this in it's last two lines:

 

"He was right, dead right, as he sailed along

but he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".

 

Or. "There are old pilots and there are bold pilots however there are no old, bold pilots"

 

Change a few words and you have the idea.

As I have said before, the principle of "Strict Liability" should be adopted by Britain. For a balanced argument on the subject, follow the link below.

 

STRICT LIABILITY

 

Aha; so, accordion to that, if I mow a cyclist down tomorrow, or get mowed down in turn, it would really make not a jot of difference.

 

I am a cyclist, I do not "shout" at other road users.

Quite; one merely raises ones voice in a gentlemanly manner.

Edited July 21, 201312 yr by Scimitar

Flecc, I'm not ranting about lorry drivers, I'm ranting against the commonly held opinion that accidents involving lorries and cyclists are invariably the cyclist's fault. You know none of the details of the recent tragedies, yet rant on about them as if they're without doubt another example of 'your advice' not being heeded.

Flecc, I'm not ranting about lorry drivers, I'm ranting against the commonly held opinion that accidents involving lorries and cyclists are invariably the cyclist's fault. You know none of the details of the recent tragedies, yet rant on about them as if they're without doubt another example of 'your advice' not being heeded.

 

That's certainly not my opinion Andy, and I haven't said it is in this thread or elsewhere. Indeed I posted strongly about poor truck drivers in this forum not long ago (and was criticised for it!). And I certainly do know of the details of the accidents you've referred to, it's why I've posted a new thread in here at the time of almost every death to draw attention to it. I've watched CCTV video of one of the accidents and watched each of the programs on this subject on the BBC and ITV London region and their regular news reports on them, because I have this special interest in the subject.

 

But it is a widely acknowledged fact that many of the accidents were avoidable if cyclists tried to avoid the nearside of trucks at junctions. That's not to say it was the cyclists fault, only that they could have avoided the accidents. It is a fact that the majority of the victims have been female, despite the majority of cyclists being male, which alone proves that the existence of the accidents was affected by the cyclists.

 

Driving behaviour is another issue which needs to be addressed, and I support you in that. There's also an urgent issue about the commercial management of trucks on our roads. But these aren't what this thread is about, it's about saving lives, not blame. Post a different thread on those if you wish and you'll get plenty of support, including from me.

.

Edited July 22, 201312 yr by flecc

...it is a widely acknowledged fact that many of the accidents were avoidable if cyclists tried to avoid the nearside of trucks at junctions. That's not to say it was the cyclists fault, only that they could have avoided the accidents. It is a fact that the majority of the victims have been female, despite the majority of cyclists being male, which alone proves that the existence of the accidents was affected by the cyclists.

 

Anybody going to quibble about the omission of "almost certainly" before "could" in the second sentence?

 

Or do we just accept that very rarely is this particular nail hit so well on the head on a cycling forum?