Please DON'T do this!

[Origamist]

It's just shame that girl who got killed at Elephant & Castle yesterday hadn't heeded the warnings.

Witnesses say she tried to undertake the lorry as it turned the corner and got crushed against the railings. Pictures in todays Standard say it all.

Now is not the time for conjecture and victim blaming.

 

[HJ]

This is why there is a need for better training of ALL road users and why Rule 63 of the Highway Code should be revoked with immediate effect...

 

[MacB]

I showed that video to my wife, her response, 'what the hell was the cyclist thinking of?', from a non-cyclist, kind of sums it up for me

 

[fossyant]

Pretty obvious what the driver was intending.......

Have seen it before

 

[rog]

so, if there had been a collision...who's fault would it have been?

 

[Tynan]

somewhere near 50:50 for me but piss all use if you're dead

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Cyclist. What an arse. And a suicidal one at that. Sometimes with a big vehicle you can't avoid putting your wheels in the cycle lane, and the driver was indicating clearly enough. There's no way in a million years I'd have done what that cyclist did. peanut.

 

[thomas]

Lee, was the second one a cyclist too?

 

[Will1985]

Cyclists who stop literally right behind a bus or lorry. For goodness sakes, if you think the driver can't see you, and if for some reason they reverse.....

That's an interesting point - I've noticed in the past couple of years that lorries are increasingly being fitted with small cameras at the back presumably for the driver to check that nothing is behind when reversing. Are these active all the time or just when the driver shifts it into reverse?

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I wouldn't say that a lorry would just reverse when out on the road and certainly not whilst waiting at some traffic lights.
In answer to your question, you can have the camera on all the time or only when you put the vehicle in reverse.

Yes, an unlikely manoevre. And if it was necessary, I for one would get out and check behind first. But usually, when we reverse we've got a pretty good idea of what is directly behind.

 

[Will1985]

Obviously not out on the road - weren't they a reaction to several yard/depot related accidents where somebody was standing behind?

 

[purplepolly]

It may be a broken line but the highway code is pretty clear on the matter, advising other vehicles only to use it if it is unavoidable. It was avoidable. From your video you can clearly see the driver has a few inches to spare in that lane. Even if he couldn't make it without going a bit into the cycle lane he could have gained a few inches giving the cyclist and the cycle lane more room. It's just plain lazy driving. The only thing in the bus driver's favour is the lane is narrow and he did indicate very clearly sometime before. It's a classic of example of why cycle lanes are bad - limited space, poor driving by the bus driver and insane undertake and overeliance on cycle lanes. Even if none of that was true what Tynan has written would apply.

Maybe he deliberately blocked the cycle lane in order to prevent a cyclist from riding down the side of the bus and getting squished as he turned left. If anything he needed to be further to the left.

 

[marinyork]

Maybe he deliberately blocked the cycle lane in order to prevent a cyclist from riding down the side of the bus and getting squished as he turned left. If anything he needed to be further to the left.

That's a sensible course of action but would make the driver even more culpable. The issue is the cycle lane and sorts of actions it makes people do - in this case make both a cyclist and bus driver behave in a highly irresponsible manner. If there was no cycle lane then it would be entirely the cyclist's fault. As there is a cycle lane there's a no ifs and buts case that the bus driver should not enter the lane in that position so in an accident it would partially be their fault and perhaps even be prosecuted for bad driving.

No cycle lane in that place would be best really. As there is one it's upto the bus driver to behave; they didn't.

 

[Dan B]

Stationary at a set of lights, hardly room either side but he had to scoot up the inside. I just gave it full left hand lock so he had nowhere to go because the n/s tyre was in his way and sure enough he went up onto the pavement just as the lights went green.

I'm slightly unsure what outcome you were expecting from that action. "Hey, I see you're about to do something stupid and dangerous, let me help you by making it more so"

 

[Crankarm]

That's a sensible course of action but would make the driver even more culpable. The issue is the cycle lane and sorts of actions it makes people do - in this case make both a cyclist and bus driver behave in a highly irresponsible manner. If there was no cycle lane then it would be entirely the cyclist's fault. As there is a cycle lane there's a no ifs and buts case that the bus driver should not enter the lane in that position so in an accident it would partially be their fault and perhaps even be prosecuted for bad driving.

No cycle lane in that place would be best really. As there is one it's upto the bus driver to behave; they didn't.

No, that cyclist clearly had a death wish. Cycle lane or not you don't steam up the nearside of a slow moving or stationary vehicle such as a bus or an HGV which is infront of you. The fact that the incident was captured on camera shows that the reasonable and prudent cyclist who captured it held back. When I used to cycle in London following buses or an HGV along the nearside kerb I would always hang back but remaining in the view of the driver's mirrors. However, lots of IDIOT cyclists would frequently push by me and ride up the inside of a bus or an HGV only inches from the kerb or one approaching a left junction where the vehicle would more than likely turn left risking crushing the cyclist. On several occasions I had to bang on buses as they started to turn as these IDIOTs had yet to clear the rear wheels of the vehicle. Absolute nutters. Very frightening to watch.


Viewing the link in the first post the bus driver was definitely not at fault. How can he be the cyclist came tearing up from behind on the nearside where there was not sufficient space to get by? There seems to be a need for a public campaign to educate these cyclists whether they be in experienced or just IDIOTS plain and simple that they will more than likely die or be seriously injured if they cycle up the nearside of large vehicle where space is very limited or there is a likelihood that a vehicle will turn. A right turning 40 footer HGV can be just as hazardous as a left turning one as the rear end of the trailer behind the rear wheels will swing out to the left so any space to pass on the nearside will rapidly disappear. Simply saying that because a cycle lane is there whether it has solid line borders or broken and the cyclist has a right to occupy it is irrelevant really and fatuous. You should ride with due care and if a huge vehicle is in front you are more careful if you have to pass it. Otherwise hang back. It is terribly sad when cyclists are killed or seriously injured in these instances but in many instances they have directly contributed to the collision. Think how hard it is to drive a double decker bus or HGV with cyclist nutters steaming past you on all sides. In any collision the cyclist is always going to come off worse.

Have just seen a re-run of that Top Gear programme race across London to CityAirport. Have to say that the guy on the bike was riding recklessly in quite a few instances. Plus he may have had cover from the camera car for the programme which he might not otherwise have had. But you would be nuts to ride through traffic at the speed he did in your normal riding. Not a good advert for cycling really. Especially all his aggression and hostility toward other vehicles in slow moving traffic.