Just this morning at Bank, another female cyclist has been killed by a tipper lorry. How can the message get across to drivers and cyclists?

 

Tom

Another family that will be devastated. London's roads certainly not cycle user friendly.

The tragic event will be on video this time, Bank is highly CCTV-ed.

Just this morning at Bank, another female cyclist has been killed by a tipper lorry. How can the message get across to drivers and cyclists?

 

Tom

it's hard to imagine a more nightmarish way to die

I watched one on the TV the other day. Again, it was a young woman run over by a truck in London. The truck had run over her pelvis and crushed it. She was concious and talking, but bleeding to death. They did a very rare procedure on her, never done at the roadside before. They inserted a device into her Aorta to stop the blood flowing to the lower part of her body, which bought them enough time to get her to to hospital and repair the arteries. Later, complications set in, so she lost her right leg, but at least she survived.

That's 8 London commuting cyclist deaths this year, 7 with HGVs, and 6 of those female cyclists, a factor I am so often posting about.

 

Women, who are just one fifth of the cycling commuters, simply seem to be ignoring the message and continue to cycle in the most dangerous positions relative to HGVs.

 

The four fifths who are men are not having that HGV problem, they got the message about HGV dangers after they suffered some deaths in much earlier years and successfully avoid that danger.

 

It's not a new problem, several years ago women formed every one the London cyclist HGV related deaths in a single year, and they are disproportionally represented every year.

.

Edited June 22, 201510 yr by flecc

Another family that will be devastated. London's roads certainly not cycle user friendly.

im not a daily male reader, but seeing their faces somehow brings home the realisation that they were just like oneself, not some anonymous strangers who were in the wrong place at the wrong time

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3135492/Pictured-Six-eight-cyclists-killed-London-s-roads-year-two-die-incidents-past-two-days.html

And once again all we get is ranting about the vehicles, one idiot even wanting to ban everything except buses, disregarding the fact that buses are among the HGVs that have been involved in these deaths.

 

Why does no-one comment on the obvious that I keep highlighting, that it's women* who are being killed by HGVs?

 

Patently HGV drivers in London's heavy traffic are not able to select out the one fifth cyclists who are women, simply to deliberately kill them while not harming the four-fifths male cyclists.

 

The start of solving any problem is knowing what the problem really is. It's obvious what it is on this case, and only acting on that can solve the problem.

 

* 7 HGV related deaths this year, 6 female, 1 male, women being about one fifth of the cyclist commuters.

.

isn't it true that none of the deaths involve an e-bike? then the answer should be that women cyclists must think of riding e-bikes, especially one that is equipped with an electric horn loud enough to be heard in noisy traffic (like the Big Bear).

Neither a horn or e-bike will help, the problem is solely one of women riders entering or staying in the blind zone danger area on the left on trucks.

 

When they stop doing that, the problem will be solved.

 

The four-fifths male cyclist commuters are not doing that, so they are not getting killed.

 

The problem has long been understood, but political correctness stops it being mentioned. Apparently it's better young women get killed than anyone dares risk offending them by saying they are doing anything foolish.

.

 

The four fifths who are men are not having that HGV problem, they got the message about HGV dangers after they suffered some deaths in much earlier years and successfully avoid that danger.

 

.

 

Have you got a source of stats going back far enough to illustrate this.

 

But try and argue it in any cycling forum with or without supporting data and you will be buried under accusations of a) sexism and b) victim blaming.

 

Ferdinand

Have you got a source of stats going back far enough to illustrate this.

 

But try and argue it in any cycling forum with or without supporting data and you will be buried under accusations of a) sexism and b) victim blaming.

 

Ferdinand

Flecc has posted here such statistics before, and quite recently this year after earlier female deaths. I completely agree with Flecc that it is political correctness that inhibits the media from highlighting the fact. Until women either stop going down the inside of stopped lorries and ending up in blind spots, or follow the change of practice that male cyclists adopted of getting in front of any vehicle at a controlled junction, these female deaths will continue.

Have you got a source of stats going back far enough to illustrate this.

 

Of course, I wouldn't post as such without the evidence, and as oriteroom has said above, I've posted it all before.

 

However, it's hardly necessary when the evidence is so obvious, this year 86% of the HGV related deaths sufferd by the circa 20% female commuting cyclists. In one of the previous years they achieved all of the HGV related deaths, and to the BBC's credit they did at least raise this problem back then.

 

There are also deaths related to cars etc, and this gender bias does not exist with those, the majority involving males as one would expect when they are the majority of cyclists.

 

Put the two together and clearly there is a specific problem related to female cyclists and HGVs. It's known what that is and TfL have stated as such.

.

Of course, I wouldn't post as such without the evidence, and as oriteroom has said above, I've posted it all before.

 

However, it's hardly necessary when the evidence is so obvious, this year 86% of the HGV related deaths sufferd by the circa 20% female commuting cyclists. In one of the previous years they achieved all of the HGV related deaths, and to the BBC's credit they did at least raise this problem back then.

 

There are also deaths related to cars etc, and this gender bias does not exist with those, the majority involving males as one would expect when they are the majority of cyclists.

 

Put the two together and clearly there is a specific problem related to female cyclists and HGVs. It's known what that is and TfL have stated as such.

.

The part of your posting that Ferdinand was querying was this bit:

The four fifths who are men are not having that HGV problem, they got the message about HGV dangers after they suffered some deaths in much earlier years and successfully avoid that danger.

I don't think he's questioning the ratio of women to men being killed, but seeking evidence for men having learned the dangers and adopting a different approach to avoid it.

 

Michael

I'd only suggest that i cannot see male cyclists patiently holding back behind a lorry, especially seeing young women going up the inside. If they are not getting killed in a proportionate manner, male cyclists must be getting beyond the lorry driver's blind spot and in front of the lorry. The evidence in the reduction in male deaths over the years indicates something must havee changed in their manner of cycling concerning lorries. As Flecc has noted, the same disproportionate death rate is not manifest in accidents involving cars.

The part of your posting that Ferdinand was querying was this bit:

 

I don't think he's questioning the ratio of women to men being killed, but seeking evidence for men having learned the dangers and adopting a different approach to avoid it.

 

Michael

 

If that was the case Michael, oriteroom has answered it. The number of men getting killed this way has been reducing over the years, at a time when all London cycle commuting has been continuously increasing.

 

Here's my own observations from living, cycling and driving in London. Several years ago a small proportion of male cyclists tended to jump lights, often to cross alongside pedestrians crossing in the same direction during the pedestrian phase. The rest were fairly law abiding, stopping at traffic light stop lines, the danger area.

 

These days most men cross that stop line, mostly to wait ahead of it where they can be seen. When that area is a pedestrian crossing, they'll even go ahead of that to wait. Others continue to cross right over during pedestrian phases. A few like me are content to wait behind a truck at lights with a following left turn.

 

TfL have noted that women almost always abide by the law in stopping before the stop line in the danger zone. There is also evidence, including video, that they are much more prepared to cycle alongside in the danger zone or enter into it, even at the most dangerous points. It's clear in many cases that they seem unaware of the danger.

 

This is why the issue needs more publicity, with no pussyfooting. It's a female problem and that has to said loud and clear. Better to hurt feelings than kill.

.

Stop press.

 

At last tonight's BBC TV London News has highlighted this issue of female cyclist vulnerability. Sadly it took six female deaths this year to make them wake up

 

Not all good news though.

 

They quoted some irrelevant figures.

 

They had on a female Liberal MP from an outer constituency who completely missed the point by advocating a ban on trucks in the central area. Firstly that avoids the real nature of the problem, secondly it's impossible when the construction work is in that area!

 

And although Mayor Boris Johnson now acknowledged the true problem, he then stupidly went on to make the usual nonsensical suggestion to have forward low line lorry cabs. This is impossible for construction trucks which often have to cope with very uneven site ground.

.

Flecc, do you know who this female Liberal MP is?

I am quite willing to write to her

Mike

Flecc, do you know who this female Liberal MP is?

I am quite willing to write to her

Mike

 

I didn't take notice of her name Mike and didn't recognise her, I was just a bit annoyed at her comment.

 

So I just looked up the Liberal MPs now and found she isn't one! perhaps I misheard, or possibly she was an ex MP. I'll see what I can find out, if anything.

.

Stop the traffic protest at Bank junction this morning:

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/bank-protest-cyclists-stage-diein-at-junction-after-tragic-road-death-of-newlywed-26-10340987.html

If that was the case Michael, oriteroom has answered it. The number of men getting killed this way has been reducing over the years, at a time when all London cycle commuting has been continuously increasing.

 

Here's my own observations from living, cycling and driving in London. Several years ago a small proportion of male cyclists tended to jump lights, often to cross alongside pedestrians crossing in the same direction during the pedestrian phase. The rest were fairly law abiding, stopping at traffic light stop lines, the danger area.

 

These days most men cross that stop line, mostly to wait ahead of it where they can be seen. When that area is a pedestrian crossing, they'll even go ahead of that to wait. Others continue to cross right over during pedestrian phases. A few like me are content to wait behind a truck at lights with a following left turn.

 

TfL have noted that women almost always abide by the law in stopping before the stop line in the danger zone. There is also evidence, including video, that they are much more prepared to cycle alongside in the danger zone or enter into it, even at the most dangerous points. It's clear in many cases that they seem unaware of the danger.

 

This is why the issue needs more publicity, with no pussyfooting. It's a female problem and that has to said loud and clear. Better to hurt feelings than kill.

.

I sortof really agree, though I also think there's a big gulf between publicity/telling people what to do - and them actually translating that into awareness/changed behaviour. I have a dozy friend I like dearly, but who cycles much the way she walks and talks and lives generally - without much concentration. as a result she bumps into stuff and lives in a place that is permanently chaotic. no amount of talking will ever change it. I'm sure this has been suggested (so apologies and don't troll me for saying it) - but where I come from there used to be many accidents involving cars skidding into the rears of lorries and because the trucks are higher than the cars bonnet very serious injury as the cars crumple zones cannot absorb the impact - so they've changed trucks and given them lower rear barriers that cars can ram into (with injuries being much less severe as a result). I wonder, is there really no way of modifying a lorry so that cyclists wouldn't skid under the wheel in this kind of scenario?

Stop the traffic protest at Bank junction this morning:

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/bank-protest-cyclists-stage-diein-at-junction-after-tragic-road-death-of-newlywed-26-10340987.html

 

Pointless.

.

there used to be many accidents involving cars skidding into the rears of lorries and because the trucks are higher than the cars bonnet very serious injury as the cars crumple zones cannot absorb the impact - so they've changed trucks and given them lower rear barriers that cars can ram into (with injuries being much less severe as a result). I wonder, is there really no way of modifying a lorry so that cyclists wouldn't skid under the wheel in this kind of scenario?

 

That's one of the suggestions that I've had to reply to previously on the basis of impracticality.

 

The involved HGVs are the construction site trucks, usually 3 or 4 axle 20 or 30 tonners. When entering sites they often have to cover very uneven ground and this rules out both low forward cabs and deep side fences. Both would bottom out on undulating ground and leave the trucks either stranded or with buckled up and broken side fences.

 

Forgive me for saying it, I'm not having a go at you, but only those understanding the issue are in a position to comment realistically. I do since I've carried out exactly these deliveries in London.

 

The real problem is a gender one as I've demonstrated and TfL and others have commented. I agree about the odd female case you mention since I have a female friend who perfectly fits that description, but they are a minority. Most of those killed this year have been mostly young and obviously intelligent women, one was a research scientist so hardly likely to be scatty or unmethodical.

 

As I remarked earlier, the video evidence suggests they seem unaware of the potential danger of riding in the danger area. And as another member commented on a previous thread, there is a recognised issue of female spatial awareness. But I'm sure all these intelligent young women are easily capable of learning from well delivered information, which is why I think a correctly targetted campaign could make a very big difference and stop this unnecessary carnage.

 

That mean an end to comments on such irrelevancies as banning trucks, all traffic etc and concentration only on what the issue really is.

.

Anybody got the figures for other large UK cities?

Do they also show the same disproportion of male/female deaths?

I'd only suggest that i cannot see male cyclists patiently holding back behind a lorry, especially seeing young women going up the inside. If they are not getting killed in a proportionate manner, male cyclists must be getting beyond the lorry driver's blind spot and in front of the lorry. The evidence in the reduction in male deaths over the years indicates something must havee changed in their manner of cycling concerning lorries. As Flecc has noted, the same disproportionate death rate is not manifest in accidents involving cars.

 

I don't think it is to do with machismo, it is to do with confidence, knowledge and experience, and perhaps culture (women conditioned not to be assertive?) - and that male Cyclists seem to have whatever is needed to a greater degree.

 

I think this is mainly a London thing, though perhaps with work in other larger cities. I have only biked across London recently not commuted at rush hour.

 

Personally I would never cycle up the inside of a car at traffic lights, never mind a bus or a tipper truck - unless there was a +very+ good reason and an escape route. If I am cycling in busy slow moving traffic lines etc I treat myself as a car and stop in the middle of the lane so that I am seen and there isn't any space forna car to make the overtaking manoeuvre that will not help it anyway.

 

That might change in London but I would need to try it.

 

In slightly faster traffic on a wide enough to overtake road I would be about 1.5m from the kerb, moving out into a blocking position through each dangerously narrow pinch point as they arrive.

 

The reason I am putting a e-assist on my bike is so that when I need to I can be close enough to a 30 limit to not slow traffic significantly for a few miles, and get through dodgy A roads asnquickly as possible.

 

F