Lorry safety in London

Post Reply
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Lorry safety in London

Post by 661-Pete »

Today's the day that new legislation comes into force in London:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... f-cyclists

I suppose some people are becoming a bit blasé about all this: will this change help matters at all?

If the ban does bring about an improvement, what chances are there of extending it across the country?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
danhopgood
Posts: 102
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by danhopgood »

I think it'll help - a bit and every improvement in safety has to be a good thing. My view is that it will encourage a wider rollout across the country. Big firm lorry fleets that operate in London need the flexibility to work elsewhere - and it's better to standardise across the fleet - so the entire fleet gets built to the highest standard.

Treating the lorry hardware is only a small part of the problem though I reckon. What about the culture of the industry that puts tipper drivers at the bottom of the heap when it comes to status? That leads to an underpaid, unmotivated, tired, drugged, previously convicted workforce.

And what about the lack of training of cyclists to understand the hazards such they don't put themselves in vulnerable positions?

And what about the congested, unsuitable road conditions etc. etc.

Treating all these other issues is important - and more difficult. But we won't see a big improvement without tackling all the causes.
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by pjclinch »

danhopgood wrote:
And what about the lack of training of cyclists to understand the hazards such they don't put themselves in vulnerable positions?


You can get it if you want it, but if you don't realise you might need it you probably won't get it. However, putting the onus on cyclists to get Level 3 NS training takes us down the route of formal structures and blame trails for something where the beauty of it should be you just get on it and go.

danhopgood wrote:And what about the congested, unsuitable road conditions etc. etc.


See the infrastructure/Amsterdam thread for some festive tail-chasing there, with a scrap between going down the route of thinking the environment needs changing for the better, or down the route of that will only make it worse.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
GrumpyCyclist
Posts: 216
Joined: 7 Jul 2015, 9:05pm
Location: Bolton, UK

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by GrumpyCyclist »

Not to be picky but the "extra mirrors" that a lot of people (especially the news) seem to be making a big thing of have been required on most new trucks since 2007 under an EU directive. Boris is just arbitrarily extending it a bit.

As for the barriers and no left turn rubbish, well where's the responsibility on the cyclists who go up the near side of lorries - or other vehicles - turning left, even when they're indicating? I've seen it so I know it happens. Don't anyone get started on the "but that's victim blaming" argument either. Irresponsible cycling should be just as frowned upon as irresponsible driving.

As cyclists we use the roads and should follow the rules of the road as best we can or keep off them. That includes anticipation of other road users' actions. Would you drive a car up the near side of someone indicating left even if there was room? No of course not. Why? Because you could get side swiped. Why do some people believe that just because we're on two wheels and harder to spot that we should be exempt from common sense and abdicate all responsibility for our safety on the roads to other people?

Maybe it's just me, but I ride my bike in a manner most likely to keep me alive to the end of the day as best as I can manage. If that means hanging back at traffic lights and not creeping (or flying) up the near side of all of the cars and trucks waiting at the lights I'll do it. If I judge the light might change on my approach there is no way I'll try getting to the front just to get away quicker. I'll wait in the line for my turn. I never stop at lights in a position where I can't be seen by all relevant vehicles that might decide to turn left at the last minute. If that means waiting alongside the passenger window of the second or even third vehicle in line so I can be seen by them and in the mirrors of the first vehicle then that's what I do. If it's a truck, or even a van then I won't go anywhere near going up the near side.

And yes, all that includes junctions that have a cycle lane on the approach and an advanced stop line at the lights. Again, I know I'm in a minority here but I bet I'm also in a minority of being thanked by drivers for not putting them in the unenviable position of knocking me off the bike just because I felt an unassailable right to ride irresponsibly.

I've not been cycling again for long (two months maybe) but I've had no near passes - well, ok, one - but I've had thanks and smiles from drivers of vehicles big and small multiple times, and always been shown a good level of courtesy in return.

How long until the "ban all lorries from city centres to protect cyclists" calls start? Then after a few days, who'll be the first to ask the question "why are all the shops empty?"? Remember the fuel shortages of the late 90s and how low stocks got in the supermarkets? Some people might think lorries are the bane of human existence but ask yourselves this, how many vans or smaller vehicles would need to replace one lorry to deliver the products we all want to buy to the shops? How do you think that would affect overall city centre congestion? On the whole would that make cycling better or worse?

I expect to be shot down for these views, but it wouldn't be the first time.
Weight 8th July 2015 111.9Kg : Weight now 93.8Kg. Mostly due to cycling. Wish I'd started much sooner :( #LoveTheBike
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by Bicycler »

I understand what you are saying and education of cyclists does have a role to play. That said, I think you're wrong to put this down solely to irresponsible cycling.

You're making a lot of (IMO unwarranted) assumptions about people who have been injured or killed. Firstly, that they were riding irresponsibly. Secondly that the lorry was at the junction before the cyclist. Thirdly that the turning vehicles were indicating and the victims chose to ignore this. You have assumed a blame which cannot be assumed from the available information.

I've said many times before that if we could look at all serious cycling collisions and attribute them to silly cycling then we might have to think differently, but the simple fact is that the vast majority of collisions between bicycles and motor vehicles are found to be the fault of the driver.

Would you drive a car up the near side of someone indicating left even if there was room? No of course not.

Let's flip this on its head shall we? Would you ever be driving car down a road and be expected to give way to a vehicle in an adjacent lane to your right which wished to turn left across your path? No of course not and we wouldn't design a road layout which put car drivers in that position because it is blatantly dangerous. Why is it acceptable to route cyclists travelling along a road up the inside of left turning vehicles? As is often the case with poor cycling infrastructure, cyclists are put in a position which presents an unacceptably high level of danger and requires a level of caution which would not be expected of other road users.

I've not been cycling again for long (two months maybe) but I've had no near passes - well, ok, one - but I've had thanks and smiles from drivers of vehicles big and small multiple times, and always been shown a good level of courtesy in return.

I'm glad you're having a good time, long may it continue :D Sometimes the (understandable) focus upon scary incidents hides the fact that the vast majority of our interactions with other road users are positive. I wouldn't read too much into your lack of negative experiences. It is probably more a matter of good fortune than having discovered a magic solution to close passes which has somehow evaded legions of much more experienced cyclists :wink: I'd also be wary of assuming drivers to be good judges of good cycling practice. I was forever being criticised by colleagues for riding away from the kerb, with a gutter-riding co-worker cited as an example I should have followed (even after the second time she got knocked off :shock: ).
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by pjclinch »

You're also judging every potential cyclist by the standards of driving adults: would we do this in a car? So, if our cyclist is riding to their first week at Big School, how does their nonexistent driving experience help? What about training? That's Level 3 stuff, and even if it's on their school curriculum they may not have got to it yet (most school training is Level 2, level 3 aimed at 12+).

Should cycling in busy cities really be limited to those mature enough to understand complex road interactions with HGVs? Or perhaps (as noted by Chris Boardman, we should look to change the environment to one more benign for potential cyclists including young school children, at least if we think having them cycle for transport is a Good Idea.

The idea further extends to other older non-drivers with relatively little active road experience. Driving has a whole pile of overheads for learning imposed because the driver is manoeuvring a potentially lethal weapon about the place, cycling not really the case. If you add the requirement that everyone needs driving levels of road craft to ride a bike in town you're unlikely to get safe, pleasant and popular cycling.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by reohn2 »

Another Chris Boardman quote (I paraphrase) "If there's someone roaming the streets with a shotgun,you don't issue everyone with bulletproof vests.You disarm the gunman"

GrumpyCyclist
What is wrong with removing HGV's and the majority of other vehicles too FTM,during the most busy times ie;between say 8am and 7pm,so people can move about city and town centres either using public transport,bicycles or walking leaving cars in satalite car parks with park and ride facilities?
People using those towns and cities would suffer less local air pollution and a quieter more pleasant,stress free environment.
HGV's can work outside those time just as well,in fact better when the roads aren't clogged with people,driving would be less stressful for drivers too.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by Psamathe »

danhopgood wrote:I think it'll help - a bit and every improvement in safety has to be a good thing....

My worry about politicians and small improvements is that they do a small improvement and stop there considering they have sorted the problem. Loads of campaigning for big stuff then politician does small stuff considering it "problem solved" and campaigning back to square one except now they also have to convince politician(s) that what they have just done is nowhere near enough. And the worry is that there will be more fatalities before politicians start to listen.

But maybe I'm too cynical about politicians ?

Ian
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by bovlomov »

Is it HGVs that are dangerous or is it tipper trucks coming and going from construction projects? Most of the accidents I hear about (in London) are in the latter category. I rarely hear about supermarket or general delivery lorries.

Any stats on that?

I'm not saying that improvements could not be made across the board, but if a large proportion of accidents are from a small subset, perhaps it would be more effective to narrow the focus. In the case of construction traffic, that might mean checks on paperwork, more training and realistic scheduling.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by reohn2 »

Psamathe wrote:
danhopgood wrote:I think it'll help - a bit and every improvement in safety has to be a good thing....

My worry about politicians and small improvements is that they do a small improvement and stop there considering they have sorted the problem. Loads of campaigning for big stuff then politician does small stuff considering it "problem solved" and campaigning back to square one except now they also have to convince politician(s) that what they have just done is nowhere near enough. And the worry is that there will be more fatalities before politicians start to listen.

Spot on!

But maybe I'm too cynical about politicians ?

Ian


I'd say not cynical enough! :wink:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Lorry safety in London

Post by reohn2 »

bovlomov wrote:Is it HGVs that are dangerous or is it tipper trucks coming and going from construction projects? Most of the accidents I hear about (in London) are in the latter category. I rarely hear about supermarket or general delivery lorries.

Any stats on that?

I'm not saying that improvements could not be made across the board, but if a large proportion of accidents are from a small subset, perhaps it would be more effective to narrow the focus. In the case of construction traffic, that might mean checks on paperwork, more training and realistic scheduling.


I'd agree in fact there's a diabolical disregard for the law by some tipper firms,I believe two of the last few incidents where cyclists were killed,the drivers weren't even licensed to drive such vehicles!!!!!

That said,incrementally over the years,city and town centres have become more busy with more pedestrians,bicycles and motorised traffic of all sizes.
IMHO it's time to remove the most dangerous vehicles from the equation at the busiest times as I mentioned up thread this would provide a cleaner healthier and stress free environment in which to live,movearound,and work.
I also believe diesel transport should be phased out rapidly and replaced with electric powered public transport.
City centre roads and streets are clogged up with parked cars,and stinking dirty buses belching fumes as they go,it's time for a rethink of how we live in towns and cities IMHO.

EDITED for typos
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Post Reply