Cyclists Beware: The cancer is spreading

[mjr]

[QUOTE 4495644, member: 259"]Ok, that's a no then.[/QUOTE]
It's a pointer for everyone who cares to read their website and make their own minds up - I feel it's pretty clear that they're RoSPA-like (RoSPish?) - and I notice there's still no evidence to support the claim that started this subthread, that any cycling safety organisations were involved in the stickers:
[QUOTE 4495239, member: 259"]They are part of a national campaign in NL called Velilig op de weg (Safe on the roads) which is run by cycling safety and trucking industry organisations.[/QUOTE]

 

[Littgull]

Nobody is suggesting that there aren't some idiot cyclists out there but in the majority of KSI cases in London in recent years there has been clear evidence that the cyclist was not to blame - indeed they have often been using the farcilities that encourage them into dangerous places

Let's be honest - these signs are not about educating cyclists (and pedestrians - as they're now getting targeted by these stupid signs) but about trying to shift the blame and CYA for drivers and their employers.

KSI? CYA?

 

[Tim Hall]

KSI? CYA?

KSI is killed or seriously injured. Used in measuring road casualties.
CYA is Cover Your Arse.

 

[Littgull]

KSI is killed or seriously injured. Used in measuring road casualties.
CYA is Cover Your Arse.

Many thanks for the clarification, TH.

 

[Brandane]

Mmm.......on the one hand big lorries shouldn't go cutting across and driving into cyclists which is the key problem, but yes, there are some daft cyclists who undertake lorries.

Provide that lorry drivers still get proper instruction about their driving standards to deal with being around cyclists, and more importantly, there's still pressure brought on them to have better designed cabs, so they can see out better, then the stickers on the back don't really matter. Hopefully the majority of cyclists don't undertake, but if it stops even just one person doing it, because they'd not thought about the issues before, then that's good. But in the same way a car driver decides to jump a red light, so certain people will ignore a sticker.

Obviously I can't speak for all lorry drivers, but IMHO this current call for lorries with better nearside visibility is something of a red herring.
Currently there are mirrors to cover blind spots. The problem is that drivers only have one set of eyes. When turning left, we obviously check mirrors on the left side, BUT, the last observation before you move is always going to be to the right (when turning left), as that is the direction from which traffic is coming. You do the same when driving a car or riding a bike. In that fraction of a second since checking your left hand mirrors, a cyclist can come up your inside, especially as when turning left in a lorry you normally have to go wide and leave a bigger gap up the left.

All the mirrors, cameras, and windows in the world aren't going to make any difference to the safety of cyclists if a driver is looking elsewhere - which he must be, when turning left. Yes he is going to have another check or two in his left mirrors (and everywhere else he needs to look) during the turn, but by then it's too late for the cyclist. Just do not go up the nearside of a vehicle, big or small, it might not end well. The stickers are very good advice.

 

[Tim Hall]

The stickers that are good advice are the ones suggesting it is a bad idea to go up the inside when the vehicle is turning.

I saw one of those yesterday. Words to the effect "Warningo not pass on THIS side of the lorry when it's turning left." The message was somewhat diluted by the sticker being positioned smack in the middle of the rear of the lorry.

 

[Pete Owens]

Our Continental cousins - particularly the Dutch - had appeared immune to this idiocy but it seems that they have begun to succumb to the victim blaming and CYA culture than blights the UK road haulage industry.

If you don't understand why undertaking trucks is such a bad idea I suggest you enrol on a Bikability course.

However, if these signs are on Dutch trucks driving on UK roads they would probably be on the wrong side - though I think even in Cambridge the number of cyclists capable of reading Dutch would be too small to matter.

 

[Cuchilo]

Even the circus have joined in

 

[mjr]

Yes he is going to have another check or two in his left mirrors (and everywhere else he needs to look) during the turn, but by then it's too late for the cyclist.

It's heck of a lot quicker just to look out the window than to check the mirrors, isn't it? And direct-vision cabs also let drivers spot cyclists ahead of the cab more easily, which is a distressingly common impact point.

I just passed a flatbed lorry which had a painted sign on a plate on the rear wheel arch. It read "Cyclists do not pass this point".
It was stopped about five vehicles back from a red light in a right turn lane. Was it wrong of me to undertake it in the straight on lane?

No. I overtook a load of lorries on the left (it's not fornicating undertaking - evil term) this morning by using the left lane when they were going straight ahead, completely disobeying their bigoted highway-code-flouting stickers. I probably should get some of the road.cc cyclists stay awesome stickers to cover them. At the moment, I just feel like hurling abuse at the driver and giving offensive hand gestures as I overtake, although I know it's really probably the fault of whatever company owns the trailer.

 

[theclaud]

Obviously I can't speak for all lorry drivers, but IMHO this current call for lorries with better nearside visibility is something of a red herring.
Currently there are mirrors to cover blind spots. The problem is that drivers only have one set of eyes. When turning left, we obviously check mirrors on the left side, BUT, the last observation before you move is always going to be to the right (when turning left), as that is the direction from which traffic is coming. You do the same when driving a car or riding a bike. In that fraction of a second since checking your left hand mirrors, a cyclist can come up your inside, especially as when turning left in a lorry you normally have to go wide and leave a bigger gap up the left.

All the mirrors, cameras, and windows in the world aren't going to make any difference to the safety of cyclists if a driver is looking elsewhere - which he must be, when turning left. Yes he is going to have another check or two in his left mirrors (and everywhere else he needs to look) during the turn, but by then it's too late for the cyclist.

So, essentially, you are saying that such a vehicle with a single operator is not capable of being driven safely, and therefore should not be on the road.

 

[Brandane]

So, essentially, you are saying that such a vehicle with a single operator is not capable of being driven safely, and therefore should not be on the road.

No, I am saying it can be driven safely if other road users use a bit of common sense.

 

[hatler]

No, I am saying it can be driven safely if other road users use a bit of common sense.

But if it isn't (driven safely), is it reasonable that the person who made a slight error pays for it with their life ?

 

[atbman]

I'm somewhat baffled by the objections to this sign on the back of lorries/buses, etc. Cyclists do undertake - done it myself, but most experienced riders only do so when they decide the the risk is non-existent. However, it does act as a reminder (and not victim blaming) that it's generally unwise to do so. and there are many cyclists who don't understand how extensive the blind area are on may lorries. They therefore assume that the driver can see them in his mirrors. The majority of KSI by trucks are the fault of the driver, but this means that some are the fault of the rider. Reminders are good.

 

[Markymark]

I'm somewhat baffled by the objections to this sign on the back of lorries/buses, etc. Cyclists do undertake - done it myself, but most experienced riders only do so when they decide the the risk is non-existent. However, it does act as a reminder (and not victim blaming) that it's generally unwise to do so. and there are many cyclists who don't understand how extensive the blind area are on may lorries. They therefore assume that the driver can see them in his mirrors. The majority of KSI by trucks are the fault of the driver, but this means that some are the fault of the rider. Reminders are good.

But what happens when it is used as victim blaming?

 

[Brandane]

It's not the responsibility of other road users to ensure that a vehicle is driven safely - it's the responsibility of the driver of that vehicle. Theirs - and theirs alone.

I assume you have the same thought when it comes to cyclists?