Sad to see another cyclist fighting for their life after an incident with a lorry in Camberwell Green.

Is it just me that thinks banning lorries at peak times would not really help? just concentrate them mid morning etc. Zero sum etc.

Surely, what kills cyclists (especially in cities) is bad driving, sometimes bad cycling and very rarely bad infrastructure. Until the Police and judicial authorities take drivers’ responsibilities more seriously cyclists will be in unnecessary danger.

Speeding, not indicating, not concentrating (eating etc), using mobile phones, not respecting ASLs etc is what causes the damage not the lack of curbed off paths and multi coloured tarmac.

Often it is bad infrastructure which encourages accidents – it’s easier to make driving errors if the road and path layouts are badly designed.

People will drive and cycle badly at times. That’s a given.

The role of good infrastructure is to help prevent deaths when people make mistakes.

And of course to encourage more people to cycle who are currently too intimidated by the roads to do so (understandably).

I think there is an argument to say lorries only between 10 and 3 in central areas.

The only long-term solution is to dedicated bike lanes completely separate from road traffic.

This country needs an attitude change. A driving licence is a privilege, not a right. As such, not everyone should be entitled and people shouldn’t act so hard done to if that privilege is removed. However, no power craving political party will weve make the suicide move of trying to implement that change.

Definitely not this….

The only long-term solution is to dedicated bike lanes completely separate from road traffic.

.
.
This….

This country needs an attitude change.

I think there is an argument to say lorries only between 10 and 3 in central areas.

I think there is a argument that if lorries, HGVs and tipper trucks really have the massive blind spots that they always go on about then they are simply not suitable to drive through any busy city centre where they are regularly surrounded by bikes, scooters, pedestrians, small cars and other things that they can’t see.

Definitely not this.

Why not? It works well in other countries.

make all drivers of large vehicles have one day a year cycling around London.

Make them undertake awareness training about the vunerabilities of other road users (include Company directors of haulage businesses…)

extend the definitions of HSAW to include other road users for those driving professionally

Another one? BBC breakfast news this morning said the woman injured at Denmark hill yesterday died over night. 🙁

I can’t think of any particularly poor road design on Denmark hill so doubt realistic infrastructure changes would have helped. Lorry design to improve visibility may have but I tend to agree with the OPs postulation, what is needed is a change of attitudes that makes drivers take responsibility. An accident that causes death or injury to a cyclist needs to have equally severe consequences for the driver, until then, far too many drivers fail to feel responsible and fail to drive as well as they should. I think we need strict liability to make/drive that step change in attitudes.

extend the definitions of HSAW to include other road users for those driving professionally

This.

When a truck is on a worksite it’ll be limited to 10mph or so and typically require at least one spotter in a flouro jacket walking around it while it is manoeuvring.

But as soon as it is leaves the gate it can join busy city traffic and mix it up with pedestrians and cyclists.

There is no other area, or line of work, or situation where a death or severe injury is treated so routinely as it is on our roads.

^ changing that is the beginning of everything.

I’ve posted many times on threads like this, but he more I think about it, the more I ponder, the more I believe it comes down to that.

Sadly we have let ourselves sleepwalk into a situation where we as a society accept that risk of death or severe injury and almost see it as ‘normal’ and it’s frankly bizarre that we do not question or fight this more than we do.

Why not? It works well in other countries.

100% segregated cycling and motor traffic, which countries? Getting the victims out the way is not the solution as there will always be a need to mix traffic (until we get hoverboards and teleporters). Some good suggestions above. It needs a change in attitude from drivers.

nickjb – Member
Definitely not this…. (separating bikes and vehicles)

have you been to the Netherlands?

it’s ****ing brilliant.

“we don’t have the space” is the argument against it.

which is of course, bollocks. If you’ve got room for cars, you’ve got room for bikes.

I can’t think of any particularly poor road design on Denmark hill so doubt realistic infrastructure changes would have helped.

What are “realistic infrastructure changes”? I don’t know the area or the incident, but presumably if the cyclist had been on a dedicated physically-segregated path then she wouldn’t have been struck by the truck. That’s the realistic approach that other countries take.

100% segregated cycling and motor traffic, which countries?

You’ll never get 100% segregation but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be used at all.
Countries with segregation have more cyclists and lower casualty rates – that isn’t a coincidence.

Getting the victims out the way is not the solution…

You’ve got it backwards. Good infrastructure gets the threats out of the way, not the victims.

There is no other area, or line of work, or situation where a death or severe injury is treated so routinely as it is on our roads.

This country needs an attitude change. A driving licence is a privilege, not a right. As such, not everyone should be entitled and people shouldn’t act so hard done to if that privilege is removed.

100% agree with these sentiments. A driving licence should be harder to obtain, harder to keep (regular retests) and way, way easier to lose IMO. There should also be much more serious penalties for those who knowingly drive unlicensed, uninsured, etc.

I think there is a argument that if lorries, HGVs and tipper trucks really have the massive blind spots that they always go on about then they are simply not suitable to drive through any busy city centre where they are regularly surrounded by bikes, scooters, pedestrians, small cars and other things that they can’t see.

This is probably the simplest of the risks to mitigate. Granted there are some very unwise cyclists around but many drivers of HGVs repeatedly bleat about their blind spots as if this absolves them from any responsibility when steering their vehicles into shared use space they don’t know to be clear. There’s plenty of affordable technology available for overcoming blind spots but the transport lobby is resisting fitting it.

There is no other area, or line of work, or situation where a death or severe injury is treated so routinely as it is on our roads.

Quite. Anywhere else deaths are investigated intensively and changes enforced; on the roads we add a small “TP” button to the car radio so we can use different roads to avoid being inconvenienced by all the dead people.

Yerwhat?

Onzadog for PM!

Routine retests, regular short terms suspension of driving licenses for traffic offences, no excuses to avoid those bans. When you don’t have a license and it makes life difficult for you and your family, maybe you’ll be more careful about losing it?

And I mean no excuses. If you need to spend on taxis to get to work or family stuff, tough. If you have to use annual leave, or take unpaid leave if you can’t get to work, tough. Suck it up, dickheads.

… and did anyone hear You and Yours on Radio 4 the other day? The tin-top lobby were bleating on that cyclists should be licensed (again). Like CTC and others I’ve always thought it won’t work and is unnecessary. But I’ve had a change of heart. How about, no one “needs” to a have cycling license BUT if you want to apply for a provisional driving license (for a motor vehicle of any sort) then you need to take a basic road user standard test … on a bicycle … and make it tough but fair. Then one has to hold the basic user licence for 3 months before applying for anything motorised. 6 points on your motor licence and your bumped right down to the start. Not only would this improve driver awareness of vulnerable road users and more responsible driving but it would also put lots more bikes on the road!

The only trouble I see with that trailhound (apart for the usual objections to licensing) is that it reinforces the idea that cyclists are the bottom of the stack and that they can’t drive or can’t afford to.

I doubt if proper infrastructure will ever be built in the UK. I think we’re light years away from the sort of public demand that made it happen in the Netherlands.
Even if you get it on towns, what about all our rural road network? A lot of that is actually more dangerous for cyclists than urban areas.

I think driverless cars may be a more realistic solution in the medium term. If they become mainstream, insurance costs could force manual drivers off the road.

jambalaya – Member
I think there is an argument to say lorries only between 10 and 3 in central areas.

You’d better include evenings to early mornings to unless you want everything late. Also, many shops aren’t set up to receive their stock during peak shopping hours.

Having seen the standard of cycling in most city centres, I have a great deal of sympathy with the HGV drivers here, even as a cyclist. Most riders seem to ride without a care in the world. What’s so hard with reminding riders to take an attitude of ‘assume that no driver of any vehicle as has seen you, and stay the **** away from them, especially HGVs”? It’s worked for me for 30 years.

What’s so hard with reminding riders to take an attitude of ‘assume that no driver of any vehicle as has seen you, and stay the **** away from them, especially HGVs”? It’s worked for me for 30 years.

How do you manage to commute through a city centre and stay the **** away from other vehicles?? Especially at junctions where the majority of accidents are.

I think blaming cyclists is a massive insult to those who had no part in their own death other than being unfortunate enough to be there e.g. people struck from behind by vehicles.

This is what our neighbours have…just there over the North Sea

[video]http://vimeo.com/76207227[/video]

On the subject of lorry bans: Paris and Dublin both use schemes to restrict or ban HGV traffic.
http://www.seemesaveme.com/eliminate/safer_roads/lorry_ban/

Worth pointing out we don’t know the facts as to what has happened, even lorry drivers are innocent until proven guilty.

Any inquests completed on that awful spate of deaths in London a couple of winters ago?

I think that’s part of the problem. We don’t know the facts. A dead cyclist is so common place these days that it feels like the powers that be don’t think it worthy of asking the difficult questions that need to be asked.

Cycling well in traffic require more skill than driving in traffic IMO, but how many people have taken a bikability course?

Mate of mine is a hgv driver and cyclist, he says he doesn’t really understand how the things are allowed in city centres at peak time, quote “it’s impossible for them to be safe”

There’s not many situations where you can say “This thing’s a danger to those around it, therefore it’s everyone else’s responsibility to avoid it”, and everyday commuting traffic is a particularily weird place for it to happen imo.

This says it all to me:

“In 2011 HGVs amounted to only 4% of the traffic on London’s roads yet were involved in 53% of all cycle fatalities.”

— http://www.cyclelaw.co.uk/cyclists-and-hgvs

Germany has lots of separated cycle lanes in towns and out in the countryside.

i’ve been knocked off by a car pulling out across the bike path in town (ironically) so that he could what was coming. if didn’t cross the bike path he would still be sat at the junction. poor design.

i’ve almost run cyclists over when turning either right or left (across traffic) as the cycle lanes are separated (usually by a line of parked cars) you do not see the cyclist until they are right on the junction. this is worse at night. poor design.

i do not think that the HGV drivers are not aware how many blind spots they have.

the problem lies for the most poart with the cyclist, IMO. cyclists who are new and unaware are more likely to be a problem than the HGV drivers. trying to squeeze up the inside of the truck to get to the front of the queue at the lights.

I can’t think of any particularly poor road design on Denmark hill so doubt realistic infrastructure changes would have helped.
What are “realistic infrastructure changes”? I don’t know the area or the incident, but presumably if the cyclist had been on a dedicated physically-segregated path then she wouldn’t have been struck by the truck. That’s the realistic approach that other countries take.

Denmark hill is a normal street in south london. which mens its busy and congrsted in parts (the camberwell green end and past kings college hspital) and wider, more free flowing in parts (as it becomes residential past ruskin park and on to Herne Hill) I don’t know where yesterday’s sad incident was. if it were the busy camberwell end as I assume then canges to easy congestion and make traffic flow are long overdue, but that requires demolishing shops, flats and hospital buildings to widen the road. Realistically that sort of qork is needed across most of south london – the ‘trunk’ roads are woefully inadequate, virtually no dual carriageway exists. However, if it won’t happen where the economic argument for free flowing traffic exists, it won’t happen for cyclists either. I’m not saying I accept that, but realistically the political will and economic case isn’t there. On the flip side, the congestion does mean motor vehicle traffic is generally slow moving and in some ways it is safer to navigate the congested stretch than some other roads nearby.
if the accident occured at the herne hill end I’m surprised. the road here is much wider, it already has a bus lane on both sides of the road for a good length, including the hill itself where cyclists would be slower. this should have seperated the cycle from a lorry. if i thought further physical seperation was needed here then I’d argue strongly that it was possible, there is the space for it, but i don’t see a case unless its part of an entirely transformed cycle network in south london – i.e. this stretch of road doesn’t seem a priority to me.

BTW I know the road as I live a few miles south but commute daily to central london. although I don’t commute on this road normally I have regularly cycled, driven and bused along it, an ex lived in a side road off it too.

I agree with the statements about no excuses, change attitudes by making drivers responsible in law. lorries are a particular problem, and while I like the idea of using the HSAW act for professionals I wonder if that would lead to continued leniency for ‘non-professional drivers’ when that would be wrong….your purpose for being on the road does not absolve you from taking responsibility for your actions.

We don’t know the facts. A dead cyclist is so common place these days that it feels like the powers that be don’t think it worthy of asking the difficult questions that need to be asked.

Dead cyclists are – I believe – less common than dead pedestrians, and deaths in vehicle collisions are investigated thoroughly so that a coroner can hold an inquest, and the Police/CPS can decide if there is a need for a prosecution.

While we regularly disagree with the latter, presumably inquests are held where the circumstances of the accidents are made public, and I would be interested to see what patterns – if any – are emerging.

If lorry drivers are not seeing cyclists due to blind spots, it needs to be addressed. If cyclists are taking risks in busy traffic, that also needs to be addressed. Without the facts, we don’t know, we can’t judge, we can’t solve the problem.

I’m not victim blaming, I’m not driver blaming, I want to know some facts so that I can then try and make a point from a position with some knowledge.

just to remind all of the current ‘lenient’ situation, only a fortnight ago a lorry driver in court for running a red light and cruushing/killing a cyclist at holburn last year, banned from driving and uninsured at the time, banned multiple times before, and flouted several of those bans…. jailed for a mere 3.5 years for that total disregard for the safety of others which led to loss of life

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32740736

sat here as I type I just heard london tonight news say 2 cyclists have died in london traffic accidents in the last 24 hours. 🙁

@alpin there is an element of this but the problem is that in very busy traffic it is not always easy for many cyclists to avoid hgvs. It nessicseraly people filtering up the inside it has also been hgvs overtaking and turning. People at traffic lights in front but the HGV not seeing them.

I,ve been overtaken on a straight two lane section of road in London and as traffic slows lorries cutting in. One guy caught my jacket on his curtain sided ratchets straps. I had a go and he did not even realise he was any where near me. So many other things for him to try and look at he did not know I was there even though I had been in front of him!

I have HGV licence so do have an idea of driving these lorries, I,m also religouse about shoulder checks etc when riding. Driving a big lorry when it is megga busy it is very very very tough to keep track of all blind spot, it is not cyclist fault but it is hard for the driver as so much going on.

http://lcc.org.uk/articles/lorry-driver-serial-killer-of-london-cyclist-and-pedestrian-pleads-guilty

This is a terrible example of someone who has killed two people. Both times doing illegal act and allowed to drive again.