-
I agree with your sentiment 100% Bill but surely there is a need to educate cyclists of the danger they face now?
What harm in letting cyclists know that it's dangerous to be there?
Devil's advocate: every time someone undertakes a lorry, it reminds the driver to look out for cyclists doing that. If we teach most cyclists not to undertake, the lorry drivers forget, and the risk for the remainder goes up. With fewer people each facing a bigger risk, has the total risk gone up or down? I've no idea - I think either could happen.
Whilst we are having this debate, TfL is planning to give the local councils more money to spend on painting lines down the left-hand side of the road in London. This will be far more effective in influencing rider behaviour than anything we do.
So there will still be plenty of people undertaking. 'Don't Undertake Lorries' spoke cards will reach and improve the safety of a select few, and may backfire on the rest by shifting public and legal perception of cyclists' responsibilities.
Educating people about blind-spots feels less likely to backfire on the roads - accurate information should both help cyclists to stay visible and encourage lorry drivers to be more careful of those who aren't. People still undertake, but everyone sees the risks and remains vigilant to avoid accidents. But there is still the 'perception of responsibilities' problem.
-
Sure, but what I am saying is that I have doubts about the long-term effectiveness of this approach (I worry that it will make lorry operators complacent, and possibly lead to more negligent behaviour by lorry drivers), AND TfL is painting white lines all over the place encouraging cyclists to nip up the inside. Including at least 2 junctions where cyclist have been killed by left-turning HGVs.
I am not against trying to educate cyclists, but I have become more and more convinced that the cycle lanes are encouraging dangerous behaviour by both cyclists and drivers. So in my view, the most pressing things are:
Getting blind-spot mirrors fitted to trucks and getting the drivers trained to use them.
Trying to get bad cycle lanes removed.
Bill - your pressing items above seem quite medium to long term as both really rely on central government / local council endorsment. They're both notoriously slow to react and implement.
Surely this little campaign we're "brainstorming"(?) right here would help in the short term?
I still think the spoke card is a good idea if we concetrate on getting the message to other bike riders.
-
Fair point, but is a HGV likely ?
No but you need a barging position to get some leverage..
Per example.. I opted for a quiet night last Saturday and decided a nice meal and evening in for a change. Home at 10pm I realised I was in time for match of the day, so made the good lady a drink and started making plans for:
A: Cool beer
B: Smoke
C: Good seat to watch MOTD
D: Oral pleasuresOn returning from the shop to buy my own beer I enjoyed the remainder of MOTD.
Had i started my list with MOTD I would have ended up in the spare room tampering with my bike whilst the good lady watched some E4 shit. Given, this is a rough example but I think it demonstrates my point.She felt like she had won but I (kinda) got what I want, and it is now clear if its on I get to watch MOTD
So Lorries..
You will not remove HGVs from London but asking for that will prompt the question why, open debates and might force smaller changes, for example a compromise might be:- Inclusion of blind spot mirrors and clear messages on the back of each lorry
- Followed by Increased cycle awareness training for truck Drivers (pushed by firms then maybe gov)
- Followed by Increased cycle awareness training for truck Drivers (pushed by firms then maybe gov)
- Improvement of the worst offending cycle lanes
- Tougher punishments for Lorries/firms that cause death by ignorance
- Insurance payouts from haulage/delivery firms for the victims for cycle related accidents/deaths
The people that need pressing to make these changes are haulage firms, FTL, DoT and local councils (i.e. Holborn comes under Camden – Sam Monck is responsible for road safety and controls the budget for borough road spend – push him)
Making these changes will take a long time but there is no reason reminders couldn’t incorporated into monthly events like CM (print and hand out letters as well as cards)As regards to increasing the awareness to cyclists the campaign will lack a considerable amount of clout without the backing of a dead relative. Its how the news works, this backlash needs a cause, or it wont be a story!
To make a real difference you need to get to all London Cyclist in a consistent way, what do they all have in common?
Push consistent advice through cycle to work schemes and all major bike shops, London travel websites and big events.There are plenty of people here capable of creating something very cooler than your average handout?
Combine that with Spoke cards, Ghost bikes, Road tagging, organised rides to block dangerous junctions and viral videos and you have made a story for the news…
- Inclusion of blind spot mirrors and clear messages on the back of each lorry
-
Although an occasional visitor to the forum, I've never posted anything. Some of you may know me as I present The Bike Show on ResonanceFM, a radio progamme about...erm...cycling.
Anyway, I've been over at the MT site talking about putting together a very simple note to give out at tomorrow's CM and to fix to as many bikes in London as possible. It's a more conventional approach than the spokecard, but I think they can work together.
Below is the current draft text, largely cribbed from Bill's writings on MT on the issue. I'd be grateful for:
- Suggestions on how to make it better.
- Confirmation if there's going to be a website devoted to this, and the URL.
- A volunteer to do layout - simple, easy-to-read, nothing fancy. I think A5 with a fold/staple option would be the simplest format.
- People who'd be willing to print / help dish them out.
As I'm aiming for CM as the start of this (and that's in less than 24 hours!) time is of the essence.
I sense a lot of motivation to do something on this and I know there are a lot of different courses of action. No one course ought to preclude others, rather they will reinforce eacother.
Chapeau!
Jack
Bicycles and Lorries
In the last week two London cyclists were killed as the result of collisions with lorries, and another was seriously injured. Unofficial figures collected by the London Cycling Campaign suggest that 10 cyclists have died so far this year in London as the result of collisions with lorries. A London Road Safety Unit study of London cyclist fatalities between 1999 & 2002 concluded that of the 49 collisions with lorries, more than half were the result of a left turn by the lorry.
The design of many of London's cycle lanes and advance stop lines (green boxes at traffic lights) lure cyclists into the most dangerous position at junctions: slightly in front of and to the left of lorries. At the two junctions where cyclists were recently killed by a left-turning lorries, Upper Thames Street junction with Queen Street Place, and Camley Street junction with Goods Way, there are advance stop lines, both with feeder cycle lanes from the left.
- A ban on very large lorries (HGVs) from the current Congestion Charge zone during Congestion Charge hours.
- Compulsory installation of ‘blind spot’ mirrors and more driver training on how to use them.
- Removal of dangerous cycle lanes.
- Tougher punishments for drivers and lorry companies convicted of negligent driving.
To make this happen, we need to tell the government officials responsible about the problem and demand that they take action. Write to:
- Your MP
- Your representative on the London Assembly
- Your local councillors
- Boris Johnson, Mayor of London
- The Secretary of State for Transport
- David Brown, Managing Director, Surface Transport, Transport for London
- Roger King, Chief Executive, Road Haulage Association
A very good way to find out who your elected representatives are and to write to them is via the non-profit website www.WriteToThem.com
Changing laws, removing dangerous cycle lanes, fitting better mirrors and training lorry drivers will take time. In the short term it is possible to take action to minimise, if not eliminate, the risk of conflict with a lorry. To do this, you need first of all to be aware of where they are, which means keeping an eye, or two if possible, on the road behind you. Second, having located them on the road, you need avoid crossing their path, or potential path. This means staying behind the rear axle when they are moving, if you are behind them, and keeping an eye on them when they are behind you, to make sure that if they over-take that they are giving you enough room.
The place you definitely don’t want to be is alongside, or slightly in front of, their front wheels at any time, but especially at junctions. This is because lorry drivers who have killed cyclists by left-turns, even if they signal, often fail to look in their left-hand mirrors to check for cyclists. Passing lorries and other long vehicles on the inside (left side) increases the risk of not being seen.
- Suggestions on how to make it better.
-
Sorry I wasn't very coherent earlier on, wanted to contribute to the debate but couldn't give it my whole attention.
Here is my objection to the spoke-cards as they stand.
Cyclists have an absolute right to be on the road. Lorries are only licensed to do so. Natural justice dictates that they, as the larger, more dangerous party, have a duty of care to smaller, more vulnerable vehicles.
Therefore I am wary of any message that reinforces the image of cyclists as 2nd class citizens of the road. I know that it wasn't intended as such, but the suicide zone version was particularly distasteful to me, as I know that none of the cyclists who have been killed by left-turning lorries intentionally put themselves in harm's way. I also have a problem with any literature that absolves lorry driver and the operators of their duty of care. Sure, good sense dictates that you want to avoid crossing paths with a larger vehicle, but on the other hand, that same good sense should dictate that the operators emphasise ABOVE ALL ELSE that they expect their drivers not to injure other road users.
Therefore the only message that I would be comfortable with would be something a bit more provocative like
Look out for them, they aren't looking out for you. LORRIES KILL CYCLISTS.
Something that besmirches the reputations of the operators, and would make them cross enough to get in touch, and engage with us, rather than something less anodyne which feeds their complacency.
I would also like to remind you that there are two conflicting accounts of the collision last week. One from a cop which suggested that cyclist was lane-splitting between two lorries.
The other of a CCTV footage which showed the cyclist swerving to avoid a pot-hole in the bike lane, and being run over from behind. Neither are reliable, but I know which one I find more credible.So of the two fatalities, a left-turning lorry was only a factor in one.
Also, is anyone up for painting the road at fatal collision sites? Or doing ghost bikes? I want to reclaim those streets...
-
Jack's proposal is a good one, btw. Forza Jacques!
-
I can do it now.
Fantastic!
I favour Bill's LORRIES KILL CYCLISTS as a pretty direct and accurate headline. The text is deliberately sensible & non-confrontational so I think it's OK to have a blunt headline to draw people in.
I don't know if it's possible to fit all the text on one side of the flyer leaving the other side (the side that will be visible when it's folded in half) free for a graphic.
I think a massive lorry graphic & a cyclist graphic would work, with LORRIES KILL CYCLISTS as the text.
But I'm no designer....
-
Also, is anyone up for painting the road at fatal collision sites? Or doing ghost bikes? I want to reclaim those streets...
Genius! it shall be an organised night ride
-
what about something along the lines of/aping the cigarette warning labels? Done better of course.
Good idea, but get a bicycle symbol on there somewhere (and possibly the universal skull/crossbones?)
-
I like Jack's proposal as well. I've got no particular skills but let me know if I can help? I can certainly do a batch of prints on the company printer (don't tell the company) and bring them on the night, for eg.
-
On another note, I think the viral video is a fantastic way to get more coverage. I like the spoke card idea and will distribute - but I think an attention grabing viral video would reach far more people.
JB
-
Thanks to pipwish & wools here is a slightly revised text. pipwish has done a great two-column layout with a very prominent and striking headline.
**Lorries Killing Cyclists **
In the last week two London cyclists were killed in collisions with lorries and another was seriously injured. A London Road Safety Unit study of London cyclist fatalities between 1999 and 2002 concluded that, of the 49 collisions with lorries, more than half were the result of a left turn by the lorry.
The design of many of London’s cycle lanes and advance stop lines (green boxes at traffic lights) lure cyclists into the most dangerous position at junctions: slightly in front of and to the left of lorries. At the two junctions where cyclists were recently killed by left-turning lorries (Upper Thames Street junction with Queen Street Place, and Camley Street junction with Goods Way) there are advance stop lines, both with feeder cycle lanes from the left.
What is needed:
- A ban on very large lorries (HGVs) from the current Congestion Charge zone during Congestion Charge hours.
- Compulsory installation of the latest ‘blind spot’ mirrors and more training for drivers on how to use them.
- Removal of dangerous cycle lanes.
- Tougher punishments for drivers and lorry companies convicted of negligent driving.
To make this happen, we need to tell the government officials and the lorry companies about the problem and demand that they take action.
Write to:
- Your MP
- Boris Johnson, Mayor of London
- Your representative on the London Assembly
- Your local councillors
- The Secretary of State for Transport
- David Brown, Managing Director, Surface Transport, Transport for London
- Roger King, Chief Executive, Road Haulage Association
Find out who your elected representatives are and how to write to them by visiting www.WriteToThem.com
Changing laws, removing dangerous cycle lanes, fitting better mirrors and training lorry drivers will take time. In the short term it is possible to take action when riding to minimise, if not eliminate, the risk of conflict with a lorry.
Be aware of where they are. This means keeping an eye on the road behind you.
Avoid crossing their path, or potential path. If you are behind them, this means staying behind the rear axle when they are moving. If you are in front, this means keeping an eye on them to make sure that if they overtake they are giving you enough room.
The place you definitely don’t want to be at any time is alongside, or slightly in front of, a lorry’s front wheels. Especially at junctions. This is because lorry drivers who have killed cyclists by left-turns, even if they signal, often fail to look in their left-hand mirrors to check for cyclists.
Passing lorries and other long vehicles on the inside (left side) increases the risk of not being seen.
www.cyclesafelondon.com - 26 September 2008
- A ban on very large lorries (HGVs) from the current Congestion Charge zone during Congestion Charge hours.
-
Ok i am going to be contreversial here and say that calling for a ban on HGV's of any sort is bull, and is probably going to result in any sort of campaign looking as though it is coming from pipe dreamers rather than realists. HGV's are the life blood of retail London.
Lorries dont kill people, badly trained driivers do, same as in a car, on a motorbike or on a bicycle, whats needed is better road education
As a former goods driver, i can tell you that any sort of spoke cadr saying Lorries Kill is going to do a lot more worse than good, it will antagonise the drivers more than anything else.
Half the problem with road safety campaigns is they always appear to come from the lunatic fringe of cyclists to the general public, and as such get dismissed as irelevant or to far fetched, and calling for a ban on HGV's is the same shit.
I still maintain that we should take steps to educate our community to better understand the risks of the road, rather than point the blame at others - too many cyclists put them selves in these positions without being aware of what kind of danger they are in - you should never ever move up the inside of a moving HGV or similar, you are playing with fire, getting that message across is a step in itself
We live in a city that is hopelessly outdated for all forms of transport, from pedestrians, to cyclists, to cars to HGV,s to public transport, everything is far from adequate, but this is because we live in a city that has grown and evolved over 2000 years, and was never designed to be traveled in as it is today.
All forms of transport need to work together, too often one policy is implemented to the benefit of one group of users that disadvantages another, for example the use of Motorbikes in Bus Lanes that has become a farce.
I think the spoke card idea is great, a great deal of good will exists on this forum to make things happen, and i feel like a dampner is being put on that now.
Bill, i know we have had words before, and i have the utmost respect for all you have done and your wealth of knowledge, and whilst i agree with the majority of what you have said, i have to disagree with your sentiments on the spoke card - as some of you know i build custom motorbikes in my spare time, and within that community we are very active at producing leaflets, flyers etc and distributing them round at events, meets, drinks etc - and guess what when you are talking to a fellow biker rather than a cop or public servant the message tends to get across, and is listened to and taken on board - the motorcycle community is very good at looking after itself, making sure that people who ride like twats know it, and helping those who need a hint or two.
I think a spreading of the word at ground level could do a world of good, and the spoke card initiative seems a great way of doing this.
-
Been following this thread on and off, just wanted to say great work by all involved. So impressed by the effort that's going into this and hope I can help out in any way.
I'm definitely available for distributing cards and info as I work outdoors most days in different parts of London.
Keep up the good work .......
-
Ok i am going to be contreversial here and say that calling for a ban on HGV's of any sort is bull, and is probably going to result in any sort of campaign looking as though it is coming from pipe dreamers rather than realists. HGV's are the life blood of retail London.
Lorries dont kill people, badly trained driivers do, same as in a car, on a motorbike or on a bicycle, whats needed is better road education
As a former goods driver, i can tell you that any sort of spoke cadr saying Lorries Kill is going to do a lot more worse than good, it will antagonise the drivers more than anything else.
Half the problem with road safety campaigns is they always appear to come from the lunatic fringe of cyclists to the general public, and as such get dismissed as irelevant or to far fetched, and calling for a ban on HGV's is the same shit.
I can see your point. The 'ask' in this text is essentially the same as what the LBMA asked for, starting in 2004. I for one couldn't tell you if these are the top 4 priorities for safer lorry-cyclist interaction. I have to defer to Bill on this as he's the cyclist with the most knowledge on this issue that I know.
As to the HGV ban, I realise that sometimes asking for something too much risks being unrealistic, but I think Bill is right that it's a good strategy to aim high and then compromise. I really don't think it's too much to consider. There are other cities that don't allow 16 wheelers to come hammering through the city centre. A big ask also gets more media attention, if that's a consideration.
I remember when Greenpeace were campaigning for a £25 congestion charge for SUVs. 'They've got no chance', I thought to myself. Had it not been for Ken's latter day sleazing, then it could have happened.
My point is this. What seems like a big ask now, is not necessarily so crazy later. Remember after Dunblane, they went and banned handguns. They'd never have considered it before. I think some people on this forum and elsewhere - and i count myself among them - think that this week something of a Dunbane moment in relation to lorries on London streets. A moment when things change, a window of opportunity.
Maybe that's too much to hope for, but then again, there are a lot of people who have a desire to get up and do something in response to these deaths.
Is there any way to settle this HGV ban question on the forum?
As to the Lorries Kill message, pipwish cleverly recast it as
Lorries Killing Cyclists
which is a statement of fact, rather than a slightly more scaremongering 'Lorries Kill Cyclists'. It's a subtle change I know, but I think a good one.
-
I hear you on the re-wording, it makes all the difference - the restriction of HGV's in central London at certain time makes sens too, but i feel it is the Retail industry that needs to be convinced on this more than anyone else - personally i have always thought that the west end should be pedestrianised with trams, and cycle lanes, and retail deliveries overnight - the pedastrianising of the area and the resulting up lift in footfall = more shoppers for retailers,would outwiegh the inconvenience of having to do deliveries at the dead of night
We need to find a souloution that is beneficial to us, but not outrageous to others
-
From the BBC
"According to Home Office figures, there were 59 firearms-related homicides in the whole of the UK in 2006-07 compared with 49 in the previous year"
From Moving Target
The number of London cyclists killed by HGVs is going up. 29 London cyclists were killed by HGVs in 2000/3, or just over 7 a year, and 9 were killed by HGVs in the year ending June 2006.
From The BMJ
** Deaths of cyclists in London 1985-92: the hazards of road traffic **K Gilbert, M McCarthy [SIZE=-1]Public Health, Camden and Islington Health Authority, London NW1 2LJ Correspondence to: Dr McCarthy.[/SIZE]
**Abstract**** Objective **: To determine the characteristics of cyclists and vehicles involved in fatal cycling accidents.
** Design **: Analysis of data routinely collected by police for each accident from January 1985 to December 1992 and held in a national master file (Stats 19) by the Department of Transport.
** Setting **: Greater London, which comprises inner London (12 boroughs and the City of London) and outer London (20 boroughs).
** Subjects **: 178 cyclists who died (78 in inner London and 100 in outer London; age range 3-88).
** Main outcome measures **: Associations between characteristics of cyclists, type of vehicle involved, and place of accident.
** Results **: Motor vehicles were involved in 173 deaths. Heavy goods vehicles were involved in 75 deaths (30/100 (30%) in outer London and 45/78 (58%) in inner London); cars in 74 (54/100) (54%) in outer London and 20/78 (26%) in inner London); light goods vehicles in 12/178 (7%); and buses in 6/178 (3%). Thirty five of the people who died were children aged <=16. Female cyclists were especially at risk from heavy goods vehicles in inner London (22 deaths), while male cyclists were especially at risk from cars in outer London (50 deaths).
** Discussion : Cyclists who died in urban areas are more likely to be adults than children. In inner London, in relation to their traffic volume, heavy goods vehicles are estimated to cause 30 times as many cyclists' deaths as cars and five times as many as buses. Until the factors leading to this excess risk are understood, a ban on heavy goods vehicles in urban areas should be considered. **
jaygee
moth
_Zed_
Greasy_Slag
JackT
Buffalo_Bill
pipwish
stevo_com
jbcommuter
deleted
justMouse
vinylvillain
alockett
madillness-
Post a reply
About
Awareness Raising Spoke Cards Campaign Project?
Posted by
@BringMeMyFix
This is all good and adds an extra dimension that I'm sure many of us haven't really considered. But even with this additional knowledge would it not also be of benefit to remind cyclists to simply be extra aware around lorries and avoid undertaking?
Perhaps it isn't a long-term answer in itself but just a part of the greater plan. One cyclist who avoids an untimely death from being more aware is campaign job done as far as I'm concerned.