HGVs in towns and cities

[dondare]

But just think for a moment of the practicalities of that approach. It would mean many hundreds more transit vans on the roads, which would arguably lead to more cyclist deaths and injuries. Quite apart from the need to tranship goods onto smaller vehicles every trip, thereby wiping out the already precarious profits of a significant chunk of UK employers.

Ah... profits.

 

[dondare]

We're not actually trying to score points here, are we? It would be a shame if this thread degenerated into a tit for tat "my mode of transprot is better than yours" type thread. No one has ever denied that sometimes the lorry driver is to blame. The important thing is, what can we do to reduce the frequency of such incidents?

I'm not really trying to score points, just refute this one:

Absolute BS, go and look at some of the articles on HGV's turning left and killing a cyclist, and see where the cyclist was.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Ah... profits.

Now you're cherry picking. How about addressing the other points about hundreds more transit vans on the roads? I'm guessing from the amount of WVM threads in commuting that these are at least as big a problem for cyclists ... multiply that problem by a few hundred and then tell me that lots of smaller vehicles is the way forward.
Besides, if a firm doesn't make a profit, it can't employ anyone. In the haulage industry the margins are small enough for having to tranship goods to smaller vehicles to put many small firms out of business.

 

[dondare]

Vehicles much larger than transit vans can be used safely if the driver has a clear view of that part of the road where his wheels are going to go.

 

[gavintc]

Profits and business go hand in hand. We need profit to make a successful country. For many, success and profit making is a dirty word, but the transport industry operates on slim profits and are very much the stem that supports the flower that is British industry.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Vehicles much larger than transit vans can be used safely if the driver has a clear view of that part of the road where his wheels are going to go.

Well, yes. And most of the time artic drivers do. But there are some blind spots in an artic's mirrors and always will be. Why you are unable to see that it would be easier and more practical and quicker to save lives by educating cyclists to keep out of a truck's blindspots, rather than redesigning every one of the thousands of trucks in the country (thereby making them less safe on the motorways), I'm at a loss to understand.
The daft thing is, I think we're both arguing for the same ultimate goal, that of seeing fewer cyclists squashed by lorries.

 

[dondare]

Well, yes. And most of the time artic drivers do. But there are some blind spots in an artic's mirrors and always will be. Why you are unable to see that it would be easier and more practical and quicker to save lives by educating cyclists to keep out of a truck's blindspots, rather than redesigning every one of the thousands of trucks in the country (thereby making them less safe on the motorways), I'm at a loss to understand.
The daft thing is, I think we're both arguing for the same ultimate goal, that of seeing fewer cyclists squashed by lorries.

Educating all cyclists is not practicable. Can you think how it might be done?
Motorways are very safe roads with no roundabouts, crossroads, T-junctions, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings or cyclists. Why design a vehicle to be used on such a road if it then can't be used safely elsewhere? How would extra vision panels on doors, for example, make lorries less safe on motorways?

 

[ComedyPilot]

Educating all cyclists is not practicable. Can you think how it might be done?

Easy, Government Information Films.

They've been on the go for decades, we just need one highlighting the dangers of large (not just heavy goods) vehicles turning left.

Also pointing out that, whilst railings at such junctions provide some protection for pedestrians, they act as a trap for cyclists.

Move this debate onto a CTC, British Cycling (lots of political clout since Peking) or similar forum and get it lobbied at parliament. We all know what the problem is, so let's get politicians to do their f*cking job instead and get the message out to the people.

 

[dondare]

Shouldn't the aim of designers and legislators be to make the roads safer for everyone rather than give road-users survival tips?
If pedestrian barriers were removed it will probably save the lives of some cyclists, but will it allow more pedestrians to get themselves killed?

 

[ComedyPilot]

Educating all cyclists is not practicable. Can you think how it might be done?

Right, here you asked a question. Note writing in red.

Easy, Government Information Films.

They've been on the go for decades, we just need one highlighting the dangers of large (not just heavy goods) vehicles turning left.

Also pointing out that, whilst railings at such junctions provide some protection for pedestrians, they act as a trap for cyclists.

Move this debate onto a CTC, British Cycling (lots of political clout since Peking) or similar forum and get it lobbied at parliament. We all know what the problem is, so let's get politicians to do their f*cking job instead and get the message out to the people.

I fully answer your question in a manner that is both legible, feasible and realistic.

Shouldn't the aim of designers and legislators be to make the roads safer for everyone rather than give road-users survival tips?
If pedestrian barriers were removed it will probably save the lives of some cyclists, but will it allow more pedestrians to get themselves killed?

Yet your reply has nothing to do with the educational task you set in your original question??????

If you wanted a reply on road design and safety, you should have posed such a question. Asking one thing, getting a valid reply, then complaining that it wasn't the reply you wanted, even though it was valid for the initial question posed does bring into question your intelect and perception.

If that wasn't bad enough, the 'rather than give road-users survival tips' comment flies totally in the face of the original question posed.

And as for the barriers being removed? At what point was it suggested they should be taken down? I certainly didn't.

Please read the posts before replying, saves smart-arsed replies. Better still, make your mind up what question you want to ask, and stick to it.

 

[dondare]

Whoops! That's telling me off.

Here's another non-sequitur, (it relates to an earlier discussion on this thread).

I saw two petrol tankers yesterday, or possibly the same one twice. On the M25.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Whoops! That's telling me off.

Well, don't do it again!

 

[dondare]

They were valid points, tho'.

 

[Origamist]

Let's hope the Panorama doc gets commissioned.

 

[HF2300]

Let's hope the Panorama doc gets commissioned.

I don't know, the film referred to in the Op was rather scattergun, this thread's finally calming down and getting to the point after 400 odd replies, and Panorama's pretty prime time and sensationalist these days - will it do the required job?