HGVs in towns and cities

[BADGER.BRAD]

“HGVs could be designed to operate safely in the city in the same way that London buses are; that would make sense. Continuing to run the most dangerous vehicles and suggesting that cyclists should be trained for their own survival does not.”


First off I think you will find that per mile travelled HGV'S are much safer than buses every year in the the Dudley Wolverhampton Birmingham area there are at least a couple of people run over and killed by buses normally old people, and then others injured.


Unfortunately the good old days of horse and cart deliveries are gone so HGV's are here to stay. With better planning from Shops and industry deliveries could be reduced by quite a large level , the amount of times I've been sent out with a 45 foot trailer with one or two pallets is amazing only to be sent to the same place the following day again with one or two pallets ( the super markets being the worst for this) Better street planning would help as would better lorry design. but for you to suggest that Cyclists wouldn't benefit from training is like saying we won't bother teaching children the green cross code as it's the cars that are running them over !!! Your digging a bigger hole for yourself with every post Dondare !
You need to look at the problem from a real life prospective, not just how you would like life to be.


P.s if the text was too small for you to read I suggest that you should have gone to Spec savers.

 

[dondare]

Thanks for the big writing.

Specsavers are shite.

 

[gavintc]

I read somewhere that a Victorian town and road planner calculated that as a result of planned developments, within 100 yrs, London would be buried under 6 feet of horse manure. Thankfully, the diesel engine arrived in time.

 

[dondare]

“HGVs could be designed to operate safely in the city in the same way that London buses are; that would make sense. Continuing to run the most dangerous vehicles and suggesting that cyclists should be trained for their own survival does not.”


First off I think you will find that per mile travelled HGV'S are much safer than buses every year in the the Dudley Wolverhampton Birmingham area there are at least a couple of people run over and killed by buses normally old people, and then others injured.


Unfortunately the good old days of horse and cart deliveries are gone so HGV's are here to stay. With better planning from Shops and industry deliveries could be reduced by quite a large level , the amount of times I've been sent out with a 45 foot trailer with one or two pallets is amazing only to be sent to the same place the following day again with one or two pallets ( the super markets being the worst for this) Better street planning would help as would better lorry design. but for you to suggest that Cyclists wouldn't benefit from training is like saying we won't bother teaching children the green cross code as it's the cars that are running them over !!! Your digging a bigger hole for yourself with every post Dondare !
You need to look at the problem from a real life prospective, not just how you would like life to be.


P.s if the text was too small for you to read I suggest that you should have gone to Spec savers.

Roads are designed by people, not random forces of nature; vehicles are designed by people and driven by people and laws are made by people: what is wrong with demanding that the result of this is a safe environment?

 

[zimzum42]

cos you won't think it's a safe environment until everyone is pootling around on pashleys

even as a cyclist, i think this is an impractical way forward.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

... vehicles are designed by people and driven by people and laws are made by people: what is wrong with demanding that the result of this is a safe environment?

the problem with demanding that the "result of this is a safe environment" is exactly what you've put in the sentence I've quoted above: "vehicles are ... driven by people". And people sometimes make mistakes and always will.

 

[dondare]

cos you won't think it's a safe environment until everyone is pootling around on pashleys

even as a cyclist, i think this is an impractical way forward.

I'd say a safe environment was one where someone could pootle along on a Pashley without running the risk of being mashed up against a pedestrian barrier because the driver was unable to see either the cyclist or the barrier.

 

[dondare]

the problem with demanding that the "result of this is a safe environment" is exactly what you've put in the sentence I've quoted above: "vehicles are ... driven by people". And people sometimes make mistakes and always will.

People do make mistakes but that's a reason for attempting to make vehicles and roads safer, not excusing the fact that they're not safe enough. Smaller, more manoeverable vehicles with cabs that give the driver a better view of the road would reduce the number of mistakes and the likelihood of a mistake leading to a fatality.

 

[col]

It would be a lot safer if you kept away from large vehicles at junctions,whats so difficult about that,is it hard to hang back or something?

 

[dondare]

First off I think you will find that per mile travelled HGV'S are much safer than buses every year in the the Dudley Wolverhampton Birmingham area there are at least a couple of people run over and killed by buses normally old people, and then others injured.

If this is the case then it's because lorries clock up huge milages on motorways which are roads with all the hazards removed, no pedestrians and no cyclists. I do not believe that buses (possibly excluding bendys) kill anything like the number of cyclists in London as lorries do.

 

[dondare]

It would be a lot safer if you kept away from large vehicles at junctions,whats so difficult about that,is it hard to hang back or something?

Obviously some cyclists are unaware of the risks, but that does not mean that they deserve to die. But the same situation arises if the cyclist reaches the junction first and the driver doesn't think to hang back; again it's the cyclist that gets killed.

 

[col]

Obviously some cyclists are unaware of the risks, but that does not mean that they deserve to die. But the same situation arises if the cyclist reaches the junction first and the driver doesn't think to hang back; again it's the cyclist that gets killed.

No one deserves to die,but the risks of not being seen,which seems to be the biggest cause is certainly minimised by hanging back,as for the cyclist getting there first,at least they probably will have been seen,again minimising the risk.

 

[Origamist]

If this is the case then it's because lorries clock up huge milages on motorways which are roads with all the hazards removed, no pedestrians and no cyclists. I do not believe that buses (possibly excluding bendys) kill anything like the number of cyclists in London as lorries do.

So far, bendy buses have not killed a cyclist in London, but the Mayor is determined to get rid of them.

 

[Origamist]

It would be a lot safer if you kept away from large vehicles at junctions,whats so difficult about that,is it hard to hang back or something?

That's easier said than done sometimes. Do you cycle much in very dense traffic, with dozens and dozens of junctions where large numbers of HGVs operate? Sometimes staying out of HGVs blind spots is not that simple - particularly when you get overtaken on the approach to a junction and can be obscured by other vehicles.

 

[Origamist]

I understand what you are saying, but I've never been caught out.

The bit in bold I don't really follow, could you expand on it please.

I refer you back to:

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=421762&postcount=144