Blood on the streets

Velocio, you are kind of describing a system TfL have brought in which looks at the hardware (the vehicles) and their operator skills. The addition that you suggest is the tech solution of stopping offenders with ANPR. Some companies don't fit in HGV category such as tipper lorries.

But still most incidents with people out of cars are with private car drivers not lorries.The lorry ones are worse and grab headlines more. Ped and driver casualties are hardly reported so the view of cycling risk is skewed

Maintain FORS silver - maintain both their FORS bronze and silver certification

Promoting FORS standards - provide evidence of actively promoting the FORS standards to their supply chain in accordance with their silver written plan

Staff training - implement their silver level plan for enhanced training and development of drivers and line managers emphasising work related road safety, environmental awareness and operational efficiency

Performance measurement - make meaningful improvements against the FORS Silver baseline data in the following performance indicators:

Fuel usage and by distances travelled
Transport related CO2 output and by distance travelled
Total incident and collision data and costs involving personal injury, vehicle or property damage
Total transport related fines and charges
Close proximity safety equipment - fit the entire heavy goods vehicle fleet with a close proximity 'blind-spot' warning system (such as a sensor or camera). This requirement is only applicable for heavy goods over 18t GVW vehicles travelling in urban areas

Driver licence verification - ensure that the driving licences of all own and agency drivers are both verified with the Driver and Vehicle Licence Agency (DVLA), and assessed against an agreed risk rating scale

Published case study - produce and publish a case study that describes the progression from FORS registration to the attainment of gold and demonstrates the improvements against all performance indicators

Agree with the 20mph thing, it's appalling how many drivers are so used to 30mph being the norm that they don't acknowledge lower limits.

Not sure how many of London's cycling fatalities are the result of speeding though, I'd guess about zero.

Well maybe, but as I said it certainly creates the impression that it's OK (or even right) to break the rules depending on the norms that happen to be accepted in the driver 'community'. The same seems to be true of RLJing (which drivers do much more than cyclists) if the red light has been 'only' on for less than five seconds. Indeed, I often have the temptation to RLJ myself (which I never do--irrespective of whether I'm driving or riding) simply because I fear that the car behind me expects me to RLJ and is therefore going to crash on me if I stop.

Foreign trucks go in and out of ferry ports. Fine them (or confiscate their vehicle) at that point. Educate them on the ferries coming in.

We're an island, it's not like we have porous borders and no way to intercept all foreign HGVs fairly efficiently.

And this idea that foreign drivers don't know the UK rules... how many of the incidents are attributable to foreign vehicles? From what I can see, most are domestic.

Which would never happen, and that's kind of my point- what you are talking about doing, because it only applies domestically would distort the market- if it's significantly more onerous for UK trucks to come into London then jobs will be bid for by foreign registered companies which don't have to jump through all the hoops.

Because it doesn't tackle the issue (vehicles which are unsafe by design to be driven safely in high density traffic, being driven in high density traffic) your solution just changes the flavour of the problem, it doesn't solve it.

...Because I fear that the car behind me expects me to RLJ and is therefore going to crash on me if I stop.

This is a strong point. The pressure drivers put on other drivers not to keep to speed limits etc is almost as much as the pressure drivers put on riders to move out of the way into the gutter. Unfortunately in this climate it takes nerve for cyclists (and even some law abiding drivers like tenderoni) to hold their line. Which is why there is such a pressure to separate modes.

Well maybe, but as I said it certainly creates the impression that it's OK (or even right) to break the rules depending on the norms that happen to be accepted in the driver 'community'.

Pretty much like using the phone while driving which is legal nowadays.

Pretty much like using the phone while driving which is legal nowadays.

The cops do fuck all about this imo.

Not really the right message, but i stopped commuting by bike this summer after 4 years religiously riding in all weather (Finsbury > Camberwell), because of too many unavoidable close calls. I got fed up with my life being in the hands of the people behind the wheel. Taking an assertive line and riding with your head can only do so much.
I was gearing up to upgrade my bike and start again this week, but now i feel like why bother taking the gamble, as that is all i feel like it is, a massive gamble with foolish drivers who have no idea the of the damage they can cause.

My missus is moving to a new office and wants to start riding herself, this fills me with dread.

hycct?
(Cycle training)

every fuckers on the phone.
What is so important that cant wait till you get out of your vehicle ? Nothing.
It's pure selfishness.

And the cops dont do enough about it.

I haven't commuted (Hither Green to Hampstead) since July, when I had my accident.

All this is making it very difficult for me to talk myself back onto the bike.

(that and the fact all that bedrest has made me MAJORLY unfit)

Which would never happen

It's true.

It only works if there is the will to make it work.

And this whole issue... there is no will to solve it. None.

The costs of these deaths are not externalised enough for it to be of economic value, and the issue isn't one that wins or loses votes.

There is no will to resolve it. More people will need to die.

it's inevitable;
We will all end up like this;

Re: banning HGV's in rush hour - I've said exactly the same thing to 2 or 3 people in the last 24 hours.

Also, Alkali and danstuff repped for talking sense.

It's true.

It only works if there is the will to make it work.

And this whole issue... there is no will to solve it. None.

The costs of these deaths are not externalised enough for it to be of economic value, and the issue isn't one that wins or loses votes.

There is no will to resolve it. More people will need to die.

It would be interesting to examine the economics of the whole situation.

I imagine that a huge part of the inertia which is observable in any attempt to achieve change is due to the perceived costs of doing something.

Perhaps articulating the costs of not doing something (financial impact per death, basically) would provide a counterpoint that would be useful?

i.e. "It would cost £4,000,000 to fix this", could be answered with "At the current accident rate it will cost an avoidable £2,000,000 per year until it's fixed".

There is no will to resolve it. More people will need to die.

yes more will die but for how long? It is a transitional stage though. I am not such a pessimist. (and driverless cars...)

The cops do fuck all about this imo.

Hence mobile phone is legal nowadays.

I haven't commuted (Hither Green to Hampstead) since July, when I had my accident.

All this is making it very difficult for me to talk myself back onto the bike.

(that and the fact all that bedrest has made me MAJORLY unfit)

I've just come back to commuting this year after 3 years of walking to work. I honestly don't think it's less safe than before - but there are a LOT more cyclists on the road. To be really honest I am more worried about them than I am about drivers 99% of the time. The reckless and stupid things I see people do on a daily basis are quite shocking - and for no real reason either (jumping a red in traffic to shave 30 seconds off your commute, wriggling down the side of an HGV at lights just to make sure you are first to pull away etc...).

I am not a pessimist either.

But I look at the way the world works, and I see that those with the ability to sign the cheques or make the orders to achieve change are only influenced by their interests. And their interests are "Is this costing me?" or "Is this benefiting me?".

And those costs and benefits are measured in sterling and votes.

Who pays (in votes or money) when a cyclist dies? Pretty much no-one.

Not the politicians, not the insurers (it's less than a blip) and frequently not even the person who was in control of the vehicle.

The non-pessimistic but very realistic read is that as no-one pays... there is little cost. Why fix something that has only a negligible cost?

And sure, you could argue about the cost savings to the NHS of a healthy populace, the benefits to local businesses, etc, whatever... but... it's irrelevant, they aren't hitting the bottom-line (sterling or votes).

Ed joked up above that it will change when an MP dies. But MPs mostly drive. And so do others who control things.

More people need to die for the costs as they are measured today to add up.

Just try not to be one of the stats until the tipping point comes... because this week is not the tipping point.

Couldn't you ban deliveries/collections during the time periods rather than the vehicles themselves? Would be much easier to implement and would have the dual effect of reducing traffic (no point driving in if you can't stop) and clearing up roads (no vans/lorries/etc stopped all over the place).

Fucking plebs.

Ed joked up above that it will change when an MP dies. But MPs mostly drive. And so do others who control things.

I'm serious, the only way it'll dramatically changed overnight is for an MP/MP relatives to die while riding a bicycle.

Much like how some anti-homosexual politician whom changed overnight the moment they learnt that their relatives is one, like Bush.

Just try not to be one of the stats until the tipping point comes... .

The flip side (without wishing to victim-blame) is your point. Perhaps it is easier for the cycling community to help cyclists understand how to avoid becoming one of the stats with some massive dissemination of some Top Tips for cyclists. Top tips for drivers would be better but perhaps less easily communicated and accepted

Purple and orange- those most comfortable of bedfellows.

Hence mobile phone is legal nowadays.

What ?
Oh is that your sarcasm ?

^^^ @ skydancer If this this true:

68% of cyclist injuries are the fault of the driver, so drivers are mainly the problem.

then you are correct as it still leaves room for improvement.

But it's interesting reading a thread that seems to be offering up solutions have more solutions rather than the usual blame-game rants.