HGVs and cyclists

[Chris_Kn]

Hey, @classic33 fair points and I agree with you. HGV drivers do have to have a medical/mot though it's been like that from over 30 yrs ago. From a selfish cyclists point of view,the solution is simple drop the speed limit around town to a level that the average cyclist can maintain, which will allow us to take a better road position with traffic behind us. The best way to sort out HGV drivers would be to educate them. Given todays tech it would/should be very easy to incorporate some kind of simulation test that was all about bike awareness, if this was one of the mainstays of the test they would have to take more notice of it. Also make the road safety simulation an annual re-test as each year the roads change.

@shouldbeinbed But cycling only does all that if an individual accepts the personal challenge, if 'JoePublic' won't help himself it can do nothing for him, therefore it won't/can't add anything.
You can't force someone to cycle just because it's good for them and the country.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Nobody's going to force people to cycle. The large increase in commuting cyclists in London is largely due to a safer space having been provided by bus lanes. People will cycle when it's safe to do so. And our roads shouldn't be dangerous.

 

[Markymark]

Roads aren't dangerous. No road has ever killed anyone. People are dabgerous. Enforcing laws will help that.

Ban any driver caught on the phone. Make speeding 6 points and £2000. Make fiddling tacho instant ban.

Guess what will happen then.

Can't make people cycle but reallocate road space and make it safer and more will take it up.

 

[classic33]

@Chris_Kn, IF HGV drivers have to have a medical/MOT, is it every year and where is it done? If it is every year, then I know four drivers that shouldn't be on the road.

You can't decide to have one part of your vehicle tested in one place, another part somewhere else. Its all done in the one place, at the same time.

Retests should be done in real conditions, not a simulator, because then you can't enter with a false sense of security. Real conditions ensure that any mistakes made are there for all to see. And any damage caused will have to fixed, if possible. Leave the simulations to learning only, tests/retests realtime conditions.

 

[classic33]

So with changes to HGV design and being routed to be safer and longer in distance and time. Who is going to pay for all this??

Simple with regards the first one. If the vehicle fails to meet safety requirements, its removed from the road until suchtime as said defects have been fixed. Who meets the cost of bringing any vehicle upto minimum requirements? The owner normally.

 

[jayonabike]

@classic33 Over the age of 45 the medical is every 5 years, I had mine in July. Eye test, general health etc

 

[classic33]

@classic33 Over the age of 40 the medical is every 5 years, I had mine in July. Eye test, general health etc

Thought it was. An MOT would be every year though. The powerplant(engine) on a pedal cycle is the rider. Requiring the cyclist to have a yearly medical/MOT. Haulage industry fought against yearly medicals, now we've an individual wanting another class of road user to undergo extra testing compared to himself.
Who'll meet the cost I wonder?

 

[Chris_Kn]

Who'll meet the cost I wonder?

In my example that's the price the cyclist pays for getting the safety they need, the compromise.
I never said it was fair just that it might happen..


@classic33 the medical at the moment is when you apply for your license, then again at 40 then every 5 yrs after.
They are supposed to be done by your GP who has full access to ALL your medical history, but there are companies out there that offer them cheaper.
My opinion would be that DVLA be given full access and that they be done by an appointed body. DVLA had/have a medical centre in Liverpool. Also
the frequency should be yearly. As a persons heath can go downhill overnight

Realtime bike awareness testing could prove dangerous for the cyclist which is why I said a simulation. Also ultimately any added costs re
defects as you suggested will eventually be passed on to the end user which is 'You' the customer. Fuel price goes up it gets passed on,
same with any increase. Given the amount of 'foreign' HGV's on British roads how would you go about making Europe wide?

 

[shouldbeinbed]

@shouldbeinbed But cycling only does all that if an individual accepts the personal challenge, if 'JoePublic' won't help himself it can do nothing for him, therefore it won't/can't add anything.
You can't force someone to cycle just because it's good for them and the country.

Could you have another read of my post please because you've spectacularly missed the point.

 

[Markymark]

In my example that's the price the cyclist pays for getting the safety they need, the compromise.
I never said it was fair just that it might happen..


@classic33 the medical at the moment is when you apply for your license, then again at 40 then every 5 yrs after.
They are supposed to be done by your GP who has full access to ALL your medical history, but there are companies out there that offer them cheaper.
My opinion would be that DVLA be given full access and that they be done by an appointed body. DVLA had/have a medical centre in Liverpool. Also
the frequency should be yearly. As a persons heath can go downhill overnight

Realtime bike awareness testing could prove dangerous for the cyclist which is why I said a simulation. Also ultimately any added costs re
defects as you suggested will eventually be passed on to the end user which is 'You' the customer. Fuel price goes up it gets passed on,
same with any increase. Given the amount of 'foreign' HGV's on British roads how would you go about making Europe wide?

Simple fact is the lorries do the killing. The only study taken shows the driver is 3 times more likely to be at fault than the cyclist. Google Westminster cycle fault study to see.

The problem lies with badly driven cars and lorries. Fix that and the issue will be massively improved. Your resistance tells me everything I need to know about the mindset of the haulage industry.

'Dangerous roads'. Ffs.

 

[classic33]

In my example that's the price the cyclist pays for getting the safety they need, the compromise.
I never said it was fair just that it might happen..


@classic33 the medical at the moment is when you apply for your license, then again at 40 then every 5 yrs after.
They are supposed to be done by your GP who has full access to ALL your medical history, but there are companies out there that offer them cheaper.
My opinion would be that DVLA be given full access and that they be done by an appointed body. DVLA had/have a medical centre in Liverpool. Also
the frequency should be yearly. As a persons heath can go downhill overnight

Realtime bike awareness testing could prove dangerous for the cyclist which is why I said a simulation. Also ultimately any added costs re
defects as you suggested will eventually be passed on to the end user which is 'You' the customer. Fuel price goes up it gets passed on,
same with any increase. Given the amount of 'foreign' HGV's on British roads how would you go about making Europe wide?

Yet you'd be happy for cyclists to be tested every year, seperate from the vehicle they'd be powering. Does an MOT currently allow multiple test points for different parts of the vehicle?

Why should retesting, in realtime conditions be dangerous for cyclists? Currently living near a test centre and cycle on the same roads. Would those being retested present any special hazard because of their driving.

Why should the cost of fixing vehicle defects be passed onto a third party. If the vehicle fails to meet minimum standards and remains on the roads, then is it not on the road illegally? Why should this be allowed, when there are many that keep there's legal in order to use the roads.

 

[subaqua]

Simple fact is the lorries do the killing. The only study taken shows the driver is 3 times more likely to be at fault than the cyclist. Google Westminster cycle fault study to see.

The problem lies with badly driven cars and lorries. Fix that and the issue will be massively improved. Your resistance tells me everything I need to know about the mindset of the haulage industry.

'Dangerous roads'. Ffs.

Roads aren't dangerous. No road has ever killed anyone. People are dabgerous. Enforcing laws will help that.

Ban any driver caught on the phone. Make speeding 6 points and £2000. Make fiddling tacho instant ban.

Guess what will happen then.

Can't make people cycle but reallocate road space and make it safer and more will take it up.

So a road can't kill , but another inanimate object can . Make your mind up .

The point you made about people is the salient point here.

My father drove lorries for 30 years and it never killed anybody, neither did he for that matter. Seriously injuring himself in the process of not killing somebody by not following the guidelines of " stay in a straight line wherever possible under heavy braking"

I drove back from Wales today. I am of the understanding that a round sign with a Red border is a prohibitive sign. So if a cycle symbol is on such a sign then us cyclists shouldn't be there . Apparently if you are a member of a cycle club in the midlands and have all the gear and not a frickin clue , you can ignore these signs and mix it with rather large vehicles with impunity.

I did stop in a layby and make a 999 call .

 

[classic33]

Mickle I'll ignore being called a muppet for now at least, but all that will happen is. Pressure groups will push and push. something will get done but here will be a cost. See you can't have the cake and eat it in this world. In the case of cycling safety,

1/ Everyone will have to pass a test.
2/ All bikes will have to be MOT'd
3/ Cyclists will need a compulsory insurance
4/ All bikes will need some kind of registration number
5/ New rules will come on law to say what you can and can't do.
6/ Finally as a road user you will pay some kind of duty

It doesn't matter if the new system would be workable, it would just create problems for everyone..

But you will get the safer bike friendly HGV's and town centers.

Also go do some research and see how much money the haulage industry puts into the coffers of the treasury,
then go see how much cycling puts in. Money does seem to a have a lot of influence when it comes down to the
bottom line.

As for my attitude I just speak from experience @mickle I guess I went past 1,000,000 miles more than a few years ago.

Yes things need to change I don't disagree, yes there are lots of drivers that are just unaware of the danger they pose to cyclists
and also probably a % that don't care. All I did was not put forward a cycling biased opinion. You being the narrow minded person
you are couldn't see past that. It wasn't posted to score points or gain favour or make me feel good.

Chris..

Reverse that question and ask how much does the haulage industry take out of of the coffers. Road maintenance, wider roads, stronger roads, to take weights they were never designed for, bigger vehicles on the way. Bypass routes, built to keep the running costs down, by missing out busy town centres. Subsidised fuel. Special parking areas.

 

[Chris_Kn]

OK guys, you don't like being told things you don't like even though they might be very extreme hypothetical ideas.

The problem is from what I can gather class 2/3 short bodied tipper/construction vehicles.

Other than the area directly behind the vehicle. Plus in line with the door/windscreen pillars.
THERE ARE NO BLIND SPOTS ON THAT TYPE OF VEHICLE lets get that straight. The cab has a minimum of three mirrors
on the near side one looking down over the top of the front wheel, the other two looking down the side of the vehicle, a long one
to give full view down the side and to the rear, the smaller one is a wide angle one which is intended to do just what it says. These
three mirrors do just that give the driver a good view down the nearside, remember this is not on a vehicle that is articulated in any
way.
Adding more mirrors cameras won't improve anything if the driver doesn't use them, ( calm down guys and stop cheering) At present
the large % of this type of vehicle is open sided, eg you can see all the chassis. If it is filled in by rails as you find on Class1 vehicles
to prevent someone falling under them, all that will happen is the victim will end up on the floor and roll under the gap that there has
to be, to allow the vehicle ground clearance. Before someone says make them into a skirt that will just push the victim along the floor.
You will also find the odd "cyclists" up the inside leaning on the rails, please don't say it won't happen.

Is there a solution, yes but only through education, I know @classic33 doesn't believe in simulators but you can't put a person there in real
life on the test as someone would get killed. From an articular I read yesterday it seems that this type of accident in London killed 5 women.
Now before anyone says anything lets make this clear, if someone is nervous in heavy traffic, then that is NOT the place for them. They are
male/female an accident waiting to happen. Some people don't like driving there car on a motorway and therefore don't, some don't like
driving at night and likewise don't. Surely if a situation makes you feel bad don't do. That is not picking on anyone nor is it trying to deflect anything
just stating the obvious.

HGV's don't kill cyclists, just the same as guns don't kill people, bad drivers kill cyclists.

 

[Markymark]

OK guys, you don't like being told things you don't like even though they might be very extreme hypothetical ideas.

The problem is from what I can gather class 2/3 short bodied tipper/construction vehicles.

Other than the area directly behind the vehicle. Plus in line with the door/windscreen pillars.
THERE ARE NO BLIND SPOTS ON THAT TYPE OF VEHICLE lets get that straight. The cab has a minimum of three mirrors
on the near side one looking down over the top of the front wheel, the other two looking down the side of the vehicle, a long one
to give full view down the side and to the rear, the smaller one is a wide angle one which is intended to do just what it says. These
three mirrors do just that give the driver a good view down the nearside, remember this is not on a vehicle that is articulated in any
way.
Adding more mirrors cameras won't improve anything if the driver doesn't use them, ( calm down guys and stop cheering) At present
the large % of this type of vehicle is open sided, eg you can see all the chassis. If it is filled in by rails as you find on Class1 vehicles
to prevent someone falling under them, all that will happen is the victim will end up on the floor and roll under the gap that there has
to be, to allow the vehicle ground clearance. Before someone says make them into a skirt that will just push the victim along the floor.
You will also find the odd "cyclists" up the inside leaning on the rails, please don't say it won't happen.

Is there a solution, yes but only through education, I know @classic33 doesn't believe in simulators but you can't put a person there in real
life on the test as someone would get killed. From an articular I read yesterday it seems that this type of accident in London killed 5 women.
Now before anyone says anything lets make this clear, if someone is nervous in heavy traffic, then that is NOT the place for them. They are
male/female an accident waiting to happen. Some people don't like driving there car on a motorway and therefore don't, some don't like
driving at night and likewise don't. Surely if a situation makes you feel bad don't do. That is not picking on anyone nor is it trying to deflect anything
just stating the obvious.

HGV's don't kill cyclists, just the same as guns don't kill people, bad drivers kill cyclists.

Correct, bad drivers do. The law breaking amongst hgv drivers is staggering. Given how much danger they pose any law breaking should result in s ban. Sadly the operators employ people who have been banned multiple times and go on to kill. Fiddling tacho meters is rife. So is talking on the mobile.
I would want to see instant lifetime ban given the potential seriousness of la breaking.