R4 Woman's hour - Women cyclists killed by HGVs

[Origamist]

Just listened to this.

I found Jo Oakley's (MPS Head of Collision Investigation) comments about recent fatalities disturbing. I'm paraphrasing, but they went along these lines:

We've talked to some family members of recently deceased cyclists and they said [the victims] were slightly unsteady on two wheels and felt vulnerable at certain points on their route - and so maybe, at that point, they got a little bit shaky, or something along those lines.

To my mind, that's crass speculation.

 

[Wheeledweenie]

I've just listened to it. I found the whole thing a bit patronising frankly. 'Women won't wear helmets because they're sweaty and a bit gross'? I see many men on the roads without helmets but maybe they're being brave while women are just being wimpy and fashion conscious. Ridiculous.

When I first started out and hadn't got the confidence to stand up for myself I got pushed through red lights and up the sides of lorries by other cyclists all the time. I still get over- and undertaken frequently at very close quarters by idiot (mainly male) cyclists. You expect cars to forget you're there and it's obvious that lorries can't see you but better courtesy among the cycling community would go a long way to improving safety.

 

[Arch]

I listened, having heard it trailed yesterday and sent them an email in advance suggesting that the one message they could get across was not to ride up the inside of lorries.

I found the whole piece just lacked guts. The lady who lost her daughter had her point of view, and fair enough, but she was very much fixated on fixing the lorries, not promoting good cycling. It may be, I'm not up on the details, that her daugher was helpless and taken out by a left hooking lorry that was overtaking her. The police rep did seem to be trying to get across the idea of blind spots and giving trucks a wide berth, but in a rather limp way. Maybe, face to face with the mother, she didn't feel able to argue the opposite point strongly, or maybe she had to stick to a rather flaccid 'party line'.

I felt there were two things they could have said that would have made the whole thing worthwhile (and I'd said this in my email):

Never ride down the inside of a long vehicle

and

You can get adult cycle training! or at the very least, read Cyclecraft.

They do sometimes come back to stories with emails and letters, so I'll be listening out... It's annoying, if they do a piece on skin cancer, or any health issue, they always ask the expert "What can you do to prevent this...." - which they didn't with this issue.

Wheeledweenie - I seem to remember a while back a survey of women came up with a huge proportion who said they wouldn't cycle because a helmet would mess up their hair. I'm afraid it's not just a media perception, some women really are that stupid. Personally, I wear one sometimes, and my hair looks a mess whatever I do, so it's not an issue. The women they talked to in the intro slot didn't impress me much, but then I'm a bit of a tomboy, and cycling is how I define myself, whereas they seemed to just be women who happened to cycle to work.

 

[Wheeledweenie]

Wheeledweenie - I seem to remember a while back a survey of women came up with a huge proportion who said they wouldn't cycle because a helmet would mess up their hair. I'm afraid it's not just a media perception, some women really are that stupid.

They are indeed but I just get frustrated with the assumption that only women are that dumb. I know several men who won't wear helmets because they 'look silly', it's not a woman issue, it's a silly idiots of all genders issue.

 

[Arch]

They are indeed but I just get frustrated with the assumption that only women are that dumb. I know several men who won't wear helmets because they 'look silly', it's not a woman issue, it's a silly idiots of all genders issue.

But this was Woman's Hour. They didn't talk to any men, it's a woman's programme....

I think many men do a good enough job making themselves look stupid...

 

[Wheeledweenie]

Point conceded. I'm mystified though that women would worry about helmet hair when the tomato-red face and constant sweating are surely more pressing cosmetic issues.

I wear a helmet because I know someone who nearly killed himself after coming off on gravel, not going that fast and with no other vehicle involved. I'd rather look silly and have a bit more protection.

 

[Arch]

Point conceded. I'm mystified though that women would worry about helmet hair when the tomato-red face and constant sweating are surely more pressing cosmetic issues.

Ah, but you are thinking logically....

Of course, you don't have to ride in a way that causes you to be tomato faced and sweating, but whatever speed you ride at, a helmet is on your head, I suppose is the feeling.

Like I said, a helmet probably improves the look of my hair 'style'.

The thing is, with any of these surveys into why people don't cycle, the reason given are often not reasons, but excuses. "I'm not fit enough" - you will be, after a week. "It's too dangerous" - only if you don't think about what you are doing and use some sense. "I need to wear a suit" - well wear a suit then, have you never heard of bike clips. "I need to carry stuff" - get panniers.... Ok, sometimes it really is that people haven't considered the issues properly, or really just don't realise what you can do on a bike, but some people just need to find excuse after excuse, when what they mean is "I can't be bothered/I don't want to". I've talked to people about this as a job, and with some you can see they are really learning and thinking "oh, maybe I can do that after all" and with some they just come out with barrier after barrier and you know that no matter how many solutions you come up with, it's them that is the problem, not cycling.

Anyway, sorry, I'm digressing a bit.

 

[mm101]

Be your own safety officer. Assume everyone else on the road is a fool. Don't assume other road users have the apittude to drive or ride in a controlled sensible and safe manner.

Be seen, be conspicuous. Get clued up with road sense and take NO risks.

 

[HJ]

I haven't been able to access the podcast for this :@( A s a lady commuter I find it worrying how many cyclists (not just ladies) feel the constant need to creep up the sides of lorries. They can't see you, hang back, delay yourself by a couple of minutes and live.

There is a link here for anyone who is interested

I thought the overall tone of the piece was, "They really shouldn't be on the road cycling but since we can't stop them..."

Questions were along the lines of, "What can cyclists do to understand the lorry driver's position?"

Sadly that is standard BBC line on these things, but if you follow the link about you can always e-mail your views...

I've just listened to it. I found the whole thing a bit patronising frankly. 'Women won't wear helmets because they're sweaty and a bit gross'? I see many men on the roads without helmets but maybe they're being brave while women are just being wimpy and fashion conscious. Ridiculous.

Helmets are a complete red herring, they don't improve road safety one bit, wearing a helmet will NOT stop you being hit by a lorry. There is however a multi-billion pound industry producing them with a lot of money to throw at PR, which likes to suggest otherwise...

When I first started out and hadn't got the confidence to stand up for myself I got pushed through red lights and up the sides of lorries by other cyclists all the time. I still get over- and undertaken frequently at very close quarters by idiot (mainly male) cyclists. You expect cars to forget you're there and it's obvious that lorries can't see you but better courtesy among the cycling community would go a long way to improving safety.

Agreed, there is a need for greater courtesy and respect for others among all road users...


The reason that more women that men are left hooked, is because they are more likely to kerb hug. Most drivers have a very poor field of view when driving because they don't look far enough ahead and the don't look from side to side. If you cycle in a submissive way next to the kerb, then drivers will not see you when the overtake and that is when you get left hooked...

The best way to improve road safety for cyclist, improve training for all road users and get more people out on their bikes. The more cyclist there are on the roads, the more like they are to be seen and the more likely drivers are to be cyclist as well and understand the need to look around more when driving...

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

Unfortunately many cyclists ride cycles as they have never been in a position to drive a motor vehicle or even obtain a licence due to money restrictions or just lack of interest. This puts them at a severe disadvantage , they have no experience to call on , many seem to think that as they can see the car coming towards them in the dark the driver can see them although they are wearing black with no lights ( they have never had to look through a rainy wind screen with very bright lights coming towards them hiding a cyclist) lots think nothing of going up the inside of buses/HGV’s even when they are clearly indicating that they are turning left as they have never seen the sort of damages these vehicle can do even in a minor collision. I would say that most cyclists have never driven a large vehicle so have no idea about poisoning a large vehicle to make a turn.

I think that cyclist education is the main problem here, I have to say that in my experience cyclists are there own worse enemy, jumping red lights, having no lights ,wearing dark clothing ( a problem many serious cyclists seem not to care about) Jumping off pavements without looking, wearing headphones ,the list is much longer than this. But how do you educate those that don’t wish to know? Serious cyclists already think of safety as a general rule so no need to educate them. The best way would be to be able to show them the results of some of there actions, shock tactics. As someone suggested make various short films showing a HGV running over a cyclist (not a real one of course) a head on collision in the dark with a cyclist with no lights and dark clothing and then the same situation where a cyclist is clearly visible due to using lights and wearing the right clothing. But again how do you get the ones who need the education to watch them?

 

[clarion]

I think the problem is that only cyclist education is being considered. But a decent number of the women killed (six out of the seven deaths this year) have been experienced cyclists, and not likely to be wobbling, whatever that Police Officer reckons.

Yes, we can sit in lorry cabs and see how much of a blind spot there is. I know. So why don't we make them fit better mirrors? Or try to keep those huge artics off the streets of very old city centres?

The incident I know about happened a short way from my work at Elephant & Castle. She was crushed by a lorry cutting the corner off the roundabout into Borough High Street. She didn't come up from behind a static lorry; it ploughed into her. No amount of cyclist education is going to save you from that. Mind you, no amount of mirrors helps if the cyclist is in front of you and you just don't bloody look.

I was also present at a situation where gods know how it wasn't a fatality. A fast rider in the bus lane; truck goes past, and, as soon as the rider isn't directly visible, he's forgotten about, and the left hook happened. He got away with a broken pelvis after the truck went over his legs, and his head was missed by millimetres.

At least Lambeth are insisting on their drivers learning about a cyclist's perspective.

 

[MacB]

Yes, we can sit in lorry cabs and see how much of a blind spot there is. I know. So why don't we make them fit better mirrors? Or try to keep those huge artics off the streets of very old city centres?

That is a very good point

 

[Origamist]

I think the problem is that only cyclist education is being considered. But a decent number of the women killed (six out of the seven deaths this year) have been experienced cyclists, and not likely to be wobbling, whatever that Police Officer reckons.

I was shocked by the police officer's comment. In these situations, collision investigators look at a "critical combination of circumstances" - the suggestion that "maybe" some of the victims got a little bit shaky is speculative and offensive.

Check out the Met Police Vid - Exchanging Places in Campaigning.

Yes, we can sit in lorry cabs and see how much of a blind spot there is. I know. So why don't we make them fit better mirrors? Or try to keep those huge artics off the streets of very old city centres? .

Proximity sensors are £500 (according to RoadPeace) and these might also make a difference if deployed. However, they will not replace driver observation and hazard perception.

The delay in fitting class VI mirrors to HGVs borders on the negligent.

The incident I know about happened a short way from my work at Elephant & Castle. She was crushed by a lorry cutting the corner off the roundabout into Borough High Street. She didn't come up from behind a static lorry; it ploughed into her. No amount of cyclist education is going to save you from that. Mind you, no amount of mirrors helps if the cyclist is in front of you and you just don't bloody look.

At least Lambeth are insisting on their drivers learning about a cyclist's perspective.

I think there is a misconception that the overwhelming majority of HGV/cyclist collisions are the consequence of undertaking on the left. The LCC who have seen the collision investigation reports suggest that this is only one factor amongst others.

Lambeth should be lauded for their efforts - hopefully the other boroughs will follow suit.

 

[Wheeledweenie]

The reason that more women that men are left hooked, is because they are more likely to kerb hug.

I'd agree with this. Again it's about attitude, drivers will quite often swear and insist you 'get over' as will nippier cyclists behind but you have to stand your ground. I've never driven so asked a lot of driver friends for advice on staying visible before I got on the road. My dad also gave me advice from his motorcycling days. His advice on left turn/straight-ahead lanes was to 'think like a car'. Get in a position where people can't nip round and turn left in front of you, make sure you're clearly visible to all concerned and if people give you stick for being in the middle of the lane shrug it off.

 

[Brahan]

Do you think there would be an improvement in drivers' attitudes to cyclists and therefore better saftey, if as part of obtaining a driving license included cycling for 3 months? I have no idea how it could be enforced but it's just a thought.

Leading on from that, is there any edivence that would suggest that drivers who cycle regularly are involved in fewer accidents with cyclists than drivers who never cycle? Obviously this would need to be calculated per 'mile on the road'.

Come on you Statos!