Left turn alarm on lorries

[Mugshot]

I'm trying to work out who else has/had the same style of posting as roadrider48. And not for the first time either.

Rough cost for the equipment to become compulsory if Labour win the next General Election.
Figures given for typical 18-tonner.
Reversing Alarm: £130.
Rear-view Camera: £450.
Flashing Lights & Beacons: £650.
Daytime Running Lights: £350.
Class VI(Cyclops) Mirror: £25.
Rear Warning Signs For Cyclists: £3
The above to be fitted within a month of the election, the following by December 2017.
Side Underrun Guards: N/A.
Blind Spot Elimination Devices: £450.
Audible Warning For Cyclists: £130.
Comes to about £2,200.
An Artic would cost disproportionately more & Tipper Operators can add a further £2,500 for Side Underrun Bars & Sheeting System.

Uncertainty yet as to wether the beacons will be required to be on at all times. If so what about vehicles already oblliged to have these fitted & in operation when on the road.

Are these manifesto pledges?

 

[ianrauk]

Keep to the topic in hand people.
No more tit for tat personal insults or thread bans will ensue.

 

[ufkacbln]

Shouldn't be wearing bl...y headphones at all. All senses should be at best level when riding. The buzzer/warning thing is probably automatic and an extension of the wanings when trucks/buses are reversing. If you don't hear that because of some stupid song blasting away in headphones, then a darwin award possibly awaits, along with removal of the sense of immortality!

Does the Darwin Award also go to any driver who closes their windows?

 

[ufkacbln]

This is not the answer that is needed!

I personally find that the respsonsible companies and drivers are fine, yet these are the ones fitting the mirrors, cameras, audible devices etc.

What we need is a way to tackle the cowboy outfits and poor drivers who are the real issue for me

 

[classic33]

Are these manifesto pledges?

Yes. Its been broken down into what will be required, and the cost of doing so, at present prices. If you can remember the cost of the humble warning device designed to be fitted to a bicycle, the bell, before the change in the law(49p) to after(£4.50), same shop, same bell. Whats to stop the same happening here, if its brought in?

Gives them something else to have a go at cyclists for.

 

[classic33]

Have I missed something or have posts been deleted?
Can you explain how you quote someone who has died?

I don't know, did you miss something?
I am not obliged to explain anything to you. You are another of these "usual suspects"[/quote]
Explain how you get a quote from a dead person? Very simple question, although getting it answered is proving hard.

 

[ufkacbln]

If you don't ride up the inside of HGV's you won't get squashed. What part of that don't you get?

The problem for many of those who died and for those of us who ride the roads every day is the HGVs that overtake us.

I am "in correspondence" with a firm that demonstrates this fully

I am on a main road, approaching a central island, I look, and there is nothing for a hundred yards, so I signal and pull out to the Primary

About 50 yards from the island an HGV decides that there is space between me and the island and he can force his way through

I am now in exactly the situation that kills so many each year. On th inside of an HGV that is on a converging course and a narrowing space for me.

Luckily I managed to avoid the HGV by going up on the pavement, but had there been a railing, I would have been in real danger

THAT is what is not being understood

All too many cyclists are injured or killed because of this standard of driving

 

[ufkacbln]

Ha ha ha ha! Like it. You believe I'm wrong, but I don't! It's always the same here, the same little band of brothers that all clique together when some one has a different opinion. You all brown nose each other all the time anyway.

That is more to do with being too close to the rear, nothing to do with overtaking

 

[Roadrider48]

The problem for many of those who died and for those of us who ride the roads every day is the HGVs that overtake us.

I am "in correspondence" with a firm that demonstrates this fully

I am on a main road, approaching a central island, I look, and there is nothing for a hundred yards, so I signal and pull out to the Primary

About 50 yards from the island an HGV decides that there is space between me and the island and he can force his way through

I am now in exactly the situation that kills so many each year. On th inside of an HGV that is on a converging course and a narrowing space for me.

Luckily I managed to avoid the HGV by going up on the pavement, but had there been a railing, I would have been in real danger

THAT is what is not being understood

All too many cyclists are injured or killed because of this standard of driving

I agree about the left hooking side of things with HGV's. Good post!

 

[Roadrider48]

That is more to do with being too close to the rear, nothing to do with overtaking

Again, I agree. I was saying about filtering up the inside. But as usual all other scenarios come into play.
It happens a lot here; someone makes a comment or statement and is set upon by the same half dozen people.
Mt original post was about the filtering up the inside bit it suddenly turns into a witch hunt saying that I am disrespecting all the dead cyclists and their families, and a whole load of other crap too.
You are not one of the dirty dozen, you make good posts and make sense. I admit that sometimes I have a habit of not backing down, but saying one thing and then being made a scapegoat for others is another matter.
I agree with you about the overtaking lorry thing. That wasn't what I was saying to begin with.
Maybe it's just me, but I ride every single day, including weekends. And I never really have any major issues with anyone.

 

[theclaud]

I agree with you about the overtaking lorry thing. That wasn't what I was saying to begin with.

What you were saying consisted of victim-blaming lies.

 

[Roadrider48]

[QUOTE 2833482, member: 45"]You know this isn't true. You know it's provocative. Why did you post it?[/quote]
Because my original point, if you bother to read it....is true. I am not being deliberately provocative to anyone.
If anything, you lot are. You come back at me saying all of these comments about me being disrespectful and provocative. My original point was about filtering up the inside of lorries. I am not saying accidents don't happen in other secenarios.
But as usual here you get pounced on by the group of good ol' boys who take everything you say totally out of context.

 

[Roadrider48]

What you were saying consisted of victim-blaming lies.

If you filter up the inside of an HGV, you are asking for trouble. How is that a lie? That was my original point.
But you like the other few, choose to make more of it and open up every other accident scenario known to man.

 

[theclaud]

If you filter up the inside of an HGV, you are asking for trouble. How is that a lie? That was my original point.

Those injured in the past. 9 times out of 10 have themselves to blame.

A straightforward victim-blaming lie. Which you have refused to withdraw.

 

[MontyVeda]

Because my original point, if you bother to read it....is true. ...

if it's true, then prove it... 9 out of 10 have themselves to blame. It can't be hard to prove if it's the fact you claim it to be.