15 cm from death

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

pshore

Well-Known Member
Hardly anybody these days drives with enough space in front to stop if there is a hazard. In that video the second lorry had a 4 second gap which is not that much time to react. You see plenty of lorries with way less gap than that and how many drivers follow the 2 second rule now ?

If I think about 'was the driver in the wrong', I have mixed feelings. Sure there was not enough room to stop, but almost everybody drives like that now.

Avoid any trunk road, at the very least they are very unpleasant places to cycle.
 
Which driver do you mean? The driver of the Hargreaves artic who found himself in a sandwich between a cyclist and an overtaking vehicle. Or the driver of the overtaking vehicle who, if the cyclist had been visible to him, could have anticipated the Hargreaves artic would require to pull into the right hand lane, and should have held back until the cyclist had been overtaken.
The safety factor for cyclists is low on a road like that.

Hmmm. Ok, you've made me think deeper about this. It is certainly true that the HGV is hindered in it's ability to move out due to the flatbed.

There are two main questions:

1) Was the HGV driver able to see the cyclist from far enough back that he was able to adjust his speed (slow down) such that he could give the cyclist more room?

I don't think you can blame the flatbed driver from the evidence, as we have no idea how far back he was in that position. It is entirely possible that he was next to the HGV for some time. That would likely hinder his view of the cyclist, though we can't be sure of that.
General visibility looks good, and the gap between the Hargreeves HGV and the one in front was about 4 or 5 seconds. The HGV in front, did pull out before it reached the cyclist (not enough) but that suggests that it pulled out to some extent, probably 8-9 seconds before the Hargreeves HGV passed the cyclist (I would expect probably more). Therefore, there is some suggestion 8-9 seconds at least before the HGV in question passed the cyclist there was some indication that there was a hazard up ahead for the HGV to negotiate.
Of course it is possible, and perhaps likely that there was more time than this. Is this enough time for the driver to negotiate the hazard safely?

It would be important to get the drivers response to this, ideally before he saw the video. If he suggested that, 'I gave the cyclist plenty of room', then books could be thrown, if however, he said, 'damn flatbed cut out just at the wrong moment, and I tried to compensate but couldn't', then it's a little less clear.

2) If this is a road that has cycle lane leading up to this, then the road is set up to encourage cyclists. Thus cyclists should be expected. Thus drivers should be expected to be aware of this and drive accordingly. Therefore, were the speeds of the vehicles appropriate? What is the speed limit on that road and were they above or below it? etc.

This is a difficult one for us to answer here without more information on the road etc. Of course it could be argued that if the road is fast, and space is tight, then cyclists should be prevented from using it for their own safety.

Going through this thought process makes me realise that my first reply was a little hasty, so thanks for questioning me Snorri. Mmm. It will be interesting to hear how this progresses.....
 
From the video description, it seems that there is a (probably substandard) cycle path along this road, which then disappears.

That's pretty negligent, given that it effectively encourages cyclists to progress along a road, and then leaves them facing this kind of situation.

That is very true. If the council actively encourages cyclists to enter a road like this, then I wonder if the council could be found complicit in an accident that occurs where driver fault was not indicated. Interesting...
 
That is very true. If the council actively encourages cyclists to enter a road like this, then I wonder if the council could be found complicit in an accident that occurs where driver fault was not indicated. Interesting...

A bit OT when Fife Council upgraded the Dunfermline to Kirkcaldy section of the A92 they put up signs warning drivers of cyclists; the road is a akin a motorway no one in the right mind I believe would actually cycle it anyway; the signs were subsequently removed, perhaps for the reason you suggest.
 

400bhp

Guru
The responsibility is with the HGV driver, not with the vehicle who was in the outside lane.

Potentially the flatbed driver could/should have been more vigilant (we don't know on the circumstances) and helped the situation.

See Magnatom's post - don't have enough info.
 

Amanda P

Legendary Member
No question that the second HGV driver was going too fast, and way too close to the first lorry.

Could he have stopped within the distance he could see to be clear? No - because he was too close behind the first HGV, and was going too fast.

He probably couldn't see the cyclist until it was too late because he was too close behind the first HGV.

Since he had no chance of stopping, or even of slowing enough to avoid hitting the cyclist, his only remaining option was to move out to pass - but he couldn't do that either because another vehicle was in the outside lane.

A driver should be expecting to enounter a cyclist, or pedestrian, or horse-drawn vehicle on any road (except a motorway) - whether there's a sign telling him to expect them or not.
 
If a vehicle above couldn't react because vehicles in front didn't indicate... you are too close - I have personally witnessed this being 3rd in the line of 1st non-indicator 2nd tailgator being suprised.

You have to judge the overtake yourself, not the person in front - else we have the dangerous sheep overtaking situations which are apparent and have killed motorists and cyclists in the past.





Hardly anybody these days drives with enough space in front to stop if there is a hazard. In that video the second lorry had a 4 second gap which is not that much time to react. You see plenty of lorries with way less gap than that and how many drivers follow the 2 second rule now ?

If I think about 'was the driver in the wrong', I have mixed feelings. Sure there was not enough room to stop, but almost everybody drives like that now.

Avoid any trunk road, at the very least they are very unpleasant places to cycle.

Tailgating is rife, and you cannot do much about it - even myself who tends to do a "good" 60 get the odd muppet that doesn't understand that by tailgating me I am actually going to drive slower. Which I do, if it doesn't get better, foot off the pedal, and coast down to speed, until stopped if needed. It's the only safe way, granted some people tailgate so close and overtake in a rush at bad moments whilst you are slowing so its a hard call still...

And people seem to think that 2 seconds is okay because cars are newer - considering that 2 seconds is the minimum and should be more, specially in wet conditions which man people don't even double their original small distance.

Holding on brakes sometimes makes people back off, which I will do, but only once... after that it's the above. It's not safe to start dropping anchors. In a queue keeping your distance from thus in front is a must.

Not that we should having to stop to let people overtake just because they are impatient or cannot drive safetly.
 

Tynan

Veteran
Location
e4
the second truck is actually cutting in as it passes surely? it actually gets its wheels over the line along the side of the road

I too wouldn't dream of riding along that road, I saw someone trundling along the North Circ two weeks ago, in the dark and the rain, at the point where there's five lanes and cars etc all chopping lanes

he had half decent lights but in all that excitement and with everyone else's lights he wasn't easy to spot, some people must have a very different view of the world, fairly sure bikes aren;t allowed on the North Circ
 

Dan B

Disengaged member
fairly sure bikes aren;t allowed on the North Circ
Really? As far as I know it's a dual carriageway like any other, and for much of its length there isn't really a parallel alternative route for cyclists and unpowered vehicles either.


Not that I'd choose to cycle on it, but I'd be surprised to get pulled for it if I did
 

the snail

Guru
Location
Chippenham
If only :sad:
image022.jpg
 
Top Bottom