Lorries in London, it'd be alright if cyclists just saw their point of view.

Literally:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6240140.stm

Lorries highlight cycling danger

The dangers posed by lorries to cyclists and pedestrians are to be highlighted in a road safety event.

Two lorries will be parked in Trafalgar Square, central London, to allow other road users to see first hand how limited a lorry driver's vision is.

Metropolitan Police figures show that in 2006 nine cyclists were killed in London in accidents involving lorries.

The two-day event this week follows a campaign launched in March urging lorry drivers to look out for cyclists.

Ch Insp Mark Bird said: "Lots of people cycle in London and I'd encourage people to come along and see first hand just how easy the cause of these types of collisions can be and how easily avoidable they are.

"I have witnessed first hand the devastating affects that losing a loved one or family member can have, and we are determined to do all we can to reduce the risks to cyclists, and all road users."

In 2006 19 cyclists were killed in collisions - nine of which involved a goods vehicle.

The year before 21 cyclists were killed, nine involved lorries and in 2004 four of eight accidents in which cyclists were killed involved lorries.

You see? If we just understood how little visibility they have, we'd not be in their way. Why didn't I think of that? It's oh so obvious really.

I blame the victim myself.

It amazes me how cheap it would be just to put a webcam at the back of every lorry. All CAT vehicles have them and they are just for construction sites.

Do you know when this is going to be?

I guess it is more just to get people to think when they are riding on the road, I have seen people on bike do some really silly things when a lorry is trying to move out round parked cars (with good indication) e.t.c and trying to undertake and if it stops some people from doing that it is a good thing. I am not saying lorries are never at fault but like lotts of things it is six of one and half a dozen of the other. Both side need to take care.

just neve ever stay on the left of a lorry

Lets do this with cabbies. let them ride bikes as we drive there cabs in to them.

I dunno, most of the people I see on the road seem pretty oblivious to lorries. I'm paranoid enough of them that I tend to hang well back behind them until I'm sure they can't suddenly pull left/right, then go past on whichever side seems safer. I'm probably being overly cautious, but I wince when I see people squeezing past them with nary a glance at the rest of the road to work out what the lorry might do next...

But I'm beginning to see cars similarly too. After almost getting badly hurt a couple of times by w_nkers trying to run me off the road/hit me with blunt implements after I shared with them my thoughts on their driving, I've taken to just letting them get on with it and cycling more defensively.

you can't ever be too careful

Not wanting to play devils advocate but sometimes I wonder to what extent lorry/car drivers are at fault. From some of the videos I have seen on the 'tube' alot of messengers/fakengers etc are quite willing to ignore the road laws. If this the case then not to be harsh but its their fault they get hurt. I find it hypercritical that some cyclists comment on the ignorance of pedestrians and drivers when they travel the wrong way up roads, cycle on the pavement and run red lights. I know that time is money in the messenger business but simple common-sense has gotta play a part.

I have been called to the scenes of cycle vs car/lorry/bus/pedestrian incidents and the majority of the time the cyclist was at fault. I agree that drivers of lorries, taxis etc should be encouraged to be more aware of other road users but so should cyclists.

The tone of that article portrays cyclists as wanting to be killed by a lorry. Personally, whenever a lorry is near me I get the hell out of its way, fast.

Stef just neve ever stay on the left of a lorry

Exactly. You're asking to be killed if you do.

Photoben is totally right. How much does a webcam cost - £15? Moaning about visibility is pointless unless you do something about it.

They moan about fitting extra mirrors.. not much chance of getting webcams fitted.
You're also forgetting the webcam is hooked to an lcd monitor and has to be weather-proof/lorry-proof, ie. tough. Not much chance.

i was in front of a lorry, he saw me from miles off (well 200 yards) he still tried to squeeze between me and a traffic island doing 50mph. i try and keep as far away from them as possible, and those bendy buses.
it's not poor visibility it's just not looking while dialing the bookmakers number on the mobile.

I agree that sometime the cyclist is "at fault" - the point though, is that when the cyclist makes a mistake...
cyclist - he go squish! When lorry driver make mistake... cyclist - he go squish again!

Cyclists aint squishin no one, no how.
So...
Lorry drivers need to be the ones taking the extra extra care - over and above the normal cyclist/road user.
Especially with all those oh so safe green bits of paint on the left of lanes....

ride positively 3 -4 ft from kerb so they have to make a concerted effort to pass you and so they know you are there
plus mirrors if you can see their chubby l'il faces in their wing mirrors they can see you if you can't see them they won't see you, pass them with a wide berth and try and make eye contact and of course expect the unexpected my old man always said treat everyone else on the roads as if they were idiots and well most of them are
sorry about the stating the obvious

As far as the messenger-type riding goes, I occasionally have to get somewhere in a real hurry and I use their kind of tactics. But in my mind I keep the idea of percentages - i.e.: every 1000, or whatever, times you do a particular maneuver you will sustain an injury from it. Therefore the messenger who does it every time is most at risk, and I, who do it once a year, am less likely to die.

The majority of the time I ride very defensively and have not had a serious accident yet.

MrSmith i was in front of a lorry, he saw me from miles off (well 200 yards) he still tried to squeeze between me and a traffic island doing 50mph. i try and keep as far away from them as possible, and those bendy buses.

I was hit by a van the other day. I passed him and then 100m later he passed me as we turned a corner. He tightened up on the corner and I had to choose wire fence or van.. I chose van and slid along the side of his brown vehicle.
I chased him after the contact and yelled through his window a barrage of choice words.. he was apologetic "what, after the red light?" "fscking yes!" "oh, i'm sorry" SMIDSY alert!!! Fscking moron. He knew I was there and still managed to veer into me.. end rant.

hippy [quote]MrSmith i was in front of a lorry, he saw me from miles off (well 200 yards) he still tried to squeeze between me and a traffic island doing 50mph. i try and keep as far away from them as possible, and those bendy buses.

I was hit by a van the other day. I passed him and then 100m later he passed me as we turned a corner. He tightened up on the corner and I had to choose wire fence or van.. I chose van and slid along the side of his brown vehicle.
I chased him after the contact and yelled through his window a barrage of choice words.. he was apologetic "what, after the red light?" "fscking yes!" "oh, i'm sorry" SMIDSY alert!!! Fscking moron. He knew I was there and still managed to veer into me.. end rant.[/quote]

key time!

TheDude

I have been called to the scenes of cycle vs car/lorry/bus/pedestrian incidents and the majority of the time the cyclist was at fault.

This is a quite extraordinary statement, which doesn't chime with the evidence that I have seen. Please elaborate.

dicki ( julian ) if you can see their chubby l'il faces in their wing mirrors they can see you

Having seen a lot of evidence from lorry/cyclist collisions, the caveat to this is that they have to be looking in the mirror to see you. It's not enough to assume that if you can see them, they have seen you.

Just to add to the discussion on 'cyclists asking to be killed'. Cyclist was killed in Greenwich park last night.

Very sad. Go through there most days and have had a few scares on my way down the hill as cars come up the middle of the road forcing me off. One car overtaking another, hit a cyclist. Pound to a penny the cyclist was comming down and the car was overtaking on the way up. Next time the coppers stop me in there and ask me to turn down my light ill remind them why i have to use it.

Riding defensively is all well and good. But when there are such cocks around what can you do. Maybe ken will divert some of his bleeding heart sentiments from palestine and iraq for a few moments to campaign a little more strongly for the safety of cyclists (though I do admit it has got better under his tenure). Cruel irony that he was on the telly last night talking about the closure of the embankment for a day in September to promote cycling. Good. But the message it sent to me was that you have to get rid of the traffic to make cycling enjoyable or safe. Of course the peice was ended with the inimitable london cabbie stating that he couldnt see why people should be allowed to cycle along the embankment as its there main route east to west innit.

Oh. Start of the etape in greenwich park on sunday. should be interesting.

sad.

Buffalo Bill [quote]dicki ( julian ) if you can see their chubby l'il faces in their wing mirrors they can see you

Having seen a lot of evidence from lorry/cyclist collisions, the caveat to this is that they have to be looking in the mirror to see you. It's not enough to assume that if you can see them, they have seen you.[/quote]

I've got no evidence but here's my 2 cents (pence?). By virtue of the fact that we don't need a licence, don't need a helmet, don't need training, and also that two wheels is inherently more dangerous than four,i think on average cyclists are probably equally culpable in most road accidents. It's all very well us forumers discussing it, but remember most cyclists out there are not bike enthusiasts. There are some right fucking idiots on bikes, too.

I was handed my flyer at the Admiralty Arch entrance to Trafalgar Square this morning. Never seen so many rozzers in one place.

I don't think this is aimed at regular long-term cyclists who think as they ride. It's aimed at these daft gits riding in their suits (or perhaps flip flops) on Bromptons (or horrible hybrids with the seat 6 inches too low) with handbags, umbrellas etc. draped over the bars and iPods plugged into both ears at full volume. Most of the dreadful road positioning is by new or occasional cyclists. They annoy the hell out of me when I'm driving (although admittedly my car is a tad smaller than a lorry...)

As an aside one of the other cyclists asked the assembled fuzzery why they didn't do anything about the motorbikes and scooters in the bike box at the front of the lane. "We do". My ass you do.

us coming down from the top of highgate hill through hampstead village !! gaps just wider than handlebars

I see a heck of a lot of cyclists on the road these days who shouldn't be allowed there - for their own safety. The ones who ride oblivious with their eyes locked straight ahead and don't even slow down at a red light, let alone check that it's safe to go through*. My guess is that it's more because they're inexperienced and nervous than anything else.

When I was a kid we all did cycling proficency tests and training. It's possible I still have the certificate to prove it! I'm not saying that sort of thing should be compulsory but it would be good to have training available and encouraged for all the newbies out there.

*note I am skirting politely away from the traffic light should/shouldn't debate.

I got a Nigerian fraudster to sit my cycling proficency test.