'Cause it's the cyclists that need educating...

What goes through his head?
Soon a couple of bus wheels?

Tiswas,
I have been dealing with the aftermath of collisions for almost 29 years involving pedestrians, cyclists, all manner of motor vehicles and in one case a First Great Western HST and a parked car at Ufton Nervert. You seem to have jumped up on a horse of some considerable height. My post was not aimed at cyclists but all road users. Do you know what? It's been a long day and I have now lost the will to live, you are right. Carry on.

I'm with Tiswas. Your post sounded very confused, contradictory and was definitely aimed at cyclists.

If you choose to be on the inside of a turning vehicle or have that position thrust upon you then no amount of bitching and whingeing is going to mend your bike or bones.

That is not a situation peds or cars/trucks/etc ever encounter. You also start by arguing that people think they know the law and therefore ride unsafely fast or without regard to their surroundings. Likewise, you finish by saying that people should ride slower in order to be safer. However, when you 'have that position thrust upon you' then that has nothing at all to do with how slowly or defensively you were riding. You got to a junction, a big lorry pulled up alongside and proceeded to run you over before you knew what was going on. What responsibility could that cyclist have taken for the fact that some lorry was about to run them over?

If you have some safety tips gleaned from analysing so many accidents then please do share them. But saying you should be responsible for the vehicle that is about to kill you by riding slower does not make sense.

The cycling lawyer has a good post on this subject today.

I'm not sure how I feel about these poster campaigns. Obviously there's a need for more cyclist education about undertaking. But if I was new to cycling I would find these posters (especially the City one below) very offputting. They also tend to perpetuate what seems to be a widely held view that cyclists are irresponsible and often to be blamed when they are involved in collisions.

When tfl etc say that the priority is cyclist education are they really saying that that's easier and cheaper than making lorries safer? Why is it acceptable to have such inherently dangerous vehicles on the road? They may be indispensible to London's economy, but they could be made much safer with inexpensive modifications (mirrors, sidebars, sensors) and driver training.

Better cycle lane design would of course make a huge difference.

Hmm, I like the version of the poster with the cycle lane drawn in. It does rather point out the contradictory policies going on here!

There is a Low Emission Zone scheme in operation in various parts of London. This is similar to the congestion charge except that it only affects HGVs, busses, etc. which do not meet certain emissions regulations. Also, the charge is much higher - £200/day with up to £1500 penalty for non-payment. The idea is that it slowly forces businesses to update their transport fleets to more modern, greener vehicles. In turn, this also pushes manufacturers into making greener vehicles in the first place on the assumption that such regulations are only going to get stricter.

Surely it must be possible to do something similar for blind spot problems? Any vehicle that does not have blind spot mirrors gets charged. Maybe a sliding scale to ease introduction - £5/day this year, £50/day next year, £500/day the year after. Then do the same for proximity sensors, driver training, etc. There definitely needs to be something to force such upgrades and to push manufacturers into designing better visibility from the outset.

Hmm, I like the version of the poster with the cycle lane drawn in. It does rather point out the contradictory policies going on here!

There is a Low Emission Zone scheme in operation in various parts of London. This is similar to the congestion charge except that it only affects HGVs, busses, etc. which do not meet certain emissions regulations. Also, the charge is much higher - £200/day with up to £1500 penalty for non-payment. The idea is that it slowly forces businesses to update their transport fleets to more modern, greener vehicles. In turn, this also pushes manufacturers into making greener vehicles in the first place on the assumption that such regulations are only going to get stricter.

Surely it must be possible to do something similar for blind spot problems? Any vehicle that does not have blind spot mirrors gets charged. Maybe a sliding scale to ease introduction - £5/day this year, £50/day next year, £500/day the year after. Then do the same for proximity sensors, driver training, etc. There definitely needs to be something to force such upgrades and to push manufacturers into designing better visibility from the outset.

Commercial fleets aren't effected at all by the low emmissions zone is just idiots like me that have older vans and trucks and busses.

Still a good idea to tie it in with the LEZ as the infrastructure for enforcement (ANPR) is already in place. I wonder how much resistance there would be from the industry? Not good PR to resist too much?

On the subject of emissions has anyone noticed how some red buses smell like shallots? No other diesel vehicles do. I find it disturbing but oddly satisfying. Or is it just me?

Still a good idea to tie it in with the LEZ as the infrastructure for enforcement (ANPR) is already in place. I wonder how much resistance there would be from the industry? Not good PR to resist too much?

On the subject of emissions has anyone noticed how some red buses smell like shallots? No other diesel vehicles do. I find it disturbing but oddly satisfying. Or is it just me?

Bio fuel ?

Can I rant? Tough I will.

Everyone should learn to ride a bike, learn to ride a motorbike, learn to drive a car, learn to drive larger vehicles to see how they behave.

Oh and driving is a fucking privileged not a fucking right.

Yes thought of biofuel as I posted it. Will have to look for some other biofuel vehicles to sniff at...

I think some sort of cycling proficiency course as part of the driving test would massively increase the standard of driving (and cycling). In countries like Holland where everyone cycles cars are so much better around bicycles.

The legal system does seem to treat driving as a right - hence all the drivers around with more than 12 points as a licence is 'essential to their way of life/employment etc'

I think we have been through all the issues around these posters before, somebody will find the link with lots of clever improvements to the images. Basically the images are crap. The city of London one is crass photochop aimed to scare people while providing no useful information.

There is already a de-facto link to the LEZ controls, because of the LEZ older lorries, on the road before about 1997-8 stay away from London or need expensive modifications. Any lorry on the road since 2000 now needs upgraded class II IV & V mirrors (but not class VI), so only a few lorries with old style mirrors remain. So why the f**k did TfL's media people choose one of those trucks for the photo and video?

Not only has the truck got pre 2000 mirrors and no class VI mirror showing the front of the lorry, the wide angle mirror on the left side is wrongly adjusted (see the video). The imaging is further distorted by showing the lorry having started to turn, moving some of the cyclists out of view of the class II mirror, in the real world a driver would look before doing that, if he swung right to start with then the mirror view would sweep across all the cyclists. If the driver hit any of these cyclists I would think he should be prosecuted, even jailed for having a wrongly adjusted class VI mirror. The poster lies, most of the cyclists are in full view of the driver's mirrors the others will be partially in view.

The poster fails to show the two most dangerous positions for a cyclist; just in front of the lorry where a class VI forward mirror should show them; and way out on the left, say 2metres away, where the cyclist thinks the lorry is going straight on but as it slows and turns sharply across their path there is no escape - as someone put it - having "that position thrust upon you".

Also have a look at the 'blind spot' from the Cycle Show in Earl's Court;

What does it remind you of?

Their advice was ridiculous, they tell everyone not to get in front or beside a lorry, but when someone ask what if the cyclists was there in the first place, they're stumped.

What particularly bugs me about the TfL poster is that the terms used for the two different road users are inconsistant; 'driver' but 'bikes'.

Should either be lorry & bikes or, better, driver and **cyclists. **Cos on the poster there are people shown riding the bikes and everything.

More on these images here:
http://www.lfgss.com/thread46710.html

I like Tynan's version here:
http://www.lfgss.com/post1510666-28.html

"I think some sort of cycling proficiency course as part of the driving test would massively increase the standard of driving (and cycling). In countries like Holland where everyone cycles cars are so much better around bicycles."

+1

If anything, I found it hard to get used to NOT fearing for my life on the roads...drivers slowing/ stopping and checking for cyclists BEFORE swerving off the main road???? It was surreal, but beautiful.

"I think some sort of cycling proficiency course as part of the driving test would massively increase the standard of driving (and cycling). In countries like Holland where everyone cycles cars are so much better around bicycles."

Cycle Training rather than Cycling Proficiency, which is essentially like a theory test that last 5 minutes, telling drivers what they already know, expect to watch out for bicyclists.

Personally, all there is to do is simply get driving instructor to included how to work with bicyclists as part of their lesson, previously they didn't, I should know since I took a driving test in 2005 and after finishing the lesson, no mention of bicyclists at all let alone how to work with them.

If anything, I found it hard to get used to NOT fearing for my life on the roads...drivers slowing/ stopping and checking for cyclists BEFORE swerving off the main road???? It was surreal, but beautiful.

Yes me too! Until I get used to it I stick to London defensive habits and slow/give way to cars even when I have right of way...then feel like a plum as various natives cycle blithely past without looking or slowing down.

Cycle Training rather than Cycling Proficiency, which is essentially like a theory test that last 5 minutes, telling drivers what they already know, expect to watch out for bicyclists.

Personally, all there is to do is simply get driving instructor to included how to work with bicyclists as part of their lesson, previously they didn't, I should know since I took a driving test in 2005 and after finishing the lesson, no mention of bicyclists at all let alone how to work with them.

That would be great. In my ideal world though the driving course would involve a bit of cycling on the roads so that drivers can see things from the cyclist's point of view. Lots of drivers don't seem to realise/care how intimidating tailgating or passing too close can be.