Serious accident in Finchley. Another tipper-truck.

[Primal Scream]

I've seen graphics showing the blind-spots on artics when they are turning (quite sobering), but tipper trucks aren't articulated. I would imagine that the lateral blindspots, with well set up mirrors, are pretty much non-existant. Personally, when I hear a tipper truck anywhere near me, the adrenaline starts pumping. They tend to be driven a bit "briskly".

Keep well clear, I had an old cushion come off of one I was driving behind, scared the life out of me when it landed on the windscreen

 

[campbellab]

Can you clarify what a class IV mirror is for those of us that don't know.

The link from regulator:

http://www.costain.com/media/330025/wi part 26 safety kit v1.pdf

Guide 6/10 shows the mirror classes.

 

[slowmotion]

Would you like to step off the fence then Slowmo?

TMN, I really don't have any axe to grind on the matter of tipper trucks, so I have no preference for any side of whatever fence I am unaware that I am supposed to be on.

 

[simon.r]

I've only skimmed this thread, so apologies if it's already been linked, but this report (entitled Construction logistics and cyclist safety) may be of interest to you if you're not aware of it already:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/fr...gistics-and-cyclist-safety-summary-report.pdf

 

[slowmotion]

[QUOTE 2563460, member: 30090"]It's a contentious issue SM. A lot of people (rightly or wrongly) seem to post with thier heart rather than thier head.[/quote]

That's quite understandable given that those trucks seem to be responsible for a disproportionate number of cycling casualties. My personal view is that they are needed by the construction industry (in which I have no interests), that banning them in daylight is not realistic, and that some of them are very badly driven. Increase driver training, increase cyclist awareness of their risks, and get them fitted with side bars and proper mirrors. Yes, that's been going on for a while, but keep plugging away.

I don't want to get sucked into acrimony. Bye.

 

[martint235]

That's quite understandable given that those trucks seem to be responsible for a disproportionate number of cycling casualties. My personal view is that they are needed by the construction industry (in which I have no interests), that banning them in daylight is not realistic, and that some of them are very badly driven. Increase driver training, increase cyclist awareness of their risks, and get them fitted with side bars and proper mirrors. Yes, that's been going on for a while, but keep plugging away.

I don't want to get sucked into acrimony. Bye.

That all seems fairly sensible to me rather than acrimonious.

 

[Mallory]

What about side sensors?? The industry seems reluctant to install these due to cost. This is something TFL could enforce.

I also do wish even more education on both sides about the dangers of filtering up the inside of lorries.

Personally I think the time as come for shock tactics showing the aftermath. Obviously it would need the consent of the deceased family

 

[Mallory]

Bloody iPhone

 

[snailracer]

I've only skimmed this thread, so apologies if it's already been linked, but this report (entitled Construction logistics and cyclist safety) may be of interest to you if you're not aware of it already:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/fr...gistics-and-cyclist-safety-summary-report.pdf

Yebbut .... you forget that the TRL doesn't know what it's on about, 'cos some bloke in the internet says otherwise...

What about side sensors?? The industry seems reluctant to install these due to cost. This is something TFL could enforce...

Funny how the TRL report doesn't discuss sensors. Sure, they cost money, but very little, much less than redesigning trucks for better visibility, and require less driver workload than mirrors.

 

[Mallory]

Funny how the TRL report doesn't discuss sensors. Sure, they cost money, but very little, much less than redesigning trucks for better visibility, and require less driver workload than mirrors.

And TBH will cost a lot less money than potential lawsuits.

The technology exists and is proven and is at a reasonable cost , compared to the alternative so no real reason for not installing them

 

[StuartG]

One has to be careful of just willynilly adding aids. Especially if the driver is not fully utilising those already available. Sensory overload is a real danger - so many things to check, so little time.

Time may be an easier thing to manage. Piece rate payment is always going to encourage corner cutting (in all senses). The professional standard of the drivers is also relevant to these vehicles which is plainly lacking in some quarters. I am always astonished that we have so few problems with the potentially much more dangerous huge supermarket artics that use the same roads. It must be down to training and professional management - if only we could transfer the same standards to all tipper/construction vehicles.

We really ought to borrow some of the ideas used by the government to address other parts of a problematic industry. If they can put Hospitals with significantly above average death rates into special measures than we should be doing the same with transport companies and adding in vehicle/driver infringements too. Special measures could include being excluded during peak traffic times. This would give a heavy incentive to join the good guys. This would reverse the situation where the good guys are currently at a competitive disadvantage against the cowboy operators.

 

[benb]

[QUOTE 2563260, member: 30090"]The No they are not, this is hearsay and a common misconception unless you have proof?[/quote]


I already sent you proof, of load bonuses and time bonuses. You just don't want to hear it.

 

[benb]

[QUOTE 2563878, member: 30090"]I'm not disputing that they get a load bonus. I'm disputing that they get paid by the load which is not true.[/quote]


So a load bonus is not being paid by the load? What planet are you on?

 

[benb]

[QUOTE 2563883, member: 30090"]But they do not get paid by the load. Being paid an hourly rate and a load bonus is different to being paid by the load. Is this concept so hard to grasp?[/quote]


A load bonus means they are being partially paid by the load, so it's an incentive to cut corners.
It's you who can't grasp simple concepts.

 

[StuartG]

[QUOTE 2563890, member: 30090"]So you not admit that lorry drivers are now not solely paid by the load, an argument over nothing but we got there in the end.[/quote]

Does this forum software have an ignore poster button?
This guy is just trolling us away from a really serious issue ...