The infrastructure is the main problem and it seems like an easy fix

There’s another, cheaper, simpler and immediately available fix.

There’s nothing to suggest the driver was on the phone. It’s the cyclist that’s put himself in danger here not the other way around.

Hence the 😉
It was debated YESTERDAY for 10 pages, hence I’m not taking the SAME opinions being recycled too seriously.

My AV just flagged that image up as dodgy btw.
It’s your AV that’s dodgy – it’s just a jpeg on globalautotransportation.com

That’s a fair assessment. Direct cause, indirect (latent) cause, contributing factors.

Still think that in that particular scenario there isn’t much the HGV driver could have done differently. And he is quite right about constantly being told not to pass on the left, even up here we know that. By the look of it victim realised he **** up when the adrenaline wire off. Camera prat just seems the militant type.

Bruce – we’re all cyclists here and that generally we’re siding with the big bad truck driver should tell you something.

There is absolutely positively nothing the driver could have done differently? In future if he finds himself in the same situation he should handle it in exactly the same way? There are no lessons for him and other drivers to learn from this incident?

This explains a lot about the standard of driving in the UK.

There’s another, cheaper, simpler and immediately available fix.

Keep things the same and wait for Darwin to sort it out?

Speeder – …filtering right and as such should have an expectation that there’s no-one to his left or if they are there illegally, they have the sense to have gotten out of the way.

Well this is the point that some of the people here are trying to make. The driver is surrounded by cyclists and should adjust his driving to suit, he couldn’t reasonably expect his left to be clear, he should be as sure as possible. He obviously didn’t adjust his driving and certainly backed that up with his ranting afterwards.

Well this is the point that some of the people here are trying to make. The driver is surrounded by cyclists and should adjust his driving to suit, he couldn’t reasonably expect his left to be clear, he should be as sure as possible. He obviously didn’t adjust his driving and certainly backed that up with his ranting afterwards.

So when can he expect his left to be clear? because even when he does get to the curb there could still be a cyclist right against his bumper.

So when can he expect his left to be clear? because even when he does get to the curb there could still be a cyclist right against his bumper.

Even though he was largely without blame if he finds himself in the same situation again then he could alter his behaviour by maintaining a constant speed through the pinch point rather than accelerating into it.

Or he can just keep accelerating into pinch points since there is nothing strictly speaking illegal about it

So when can he expect his left to be clear? because even when he does get to the curb there could still be a cyclist right against his bumper.

It’s not about where a cyclist *could* be, it’s about where they are LIKELY to be.

Cyclists are likely to be riding on the left by the curb, like they are on pretty much every single road in London. He’s driving a large lorry, he should be aware of this. Accelerating away from the junction and moving to the left, leaving no gap near the curb, is not good driving, especially when that’s where the blind spot of the lorry is.

Even if the cyclist wasn’t in the left turn lane acting like an idiot, there could be other cyclists there.

I can’t believe people think the blind spot has no effect here. Even if someone makes a mistake, you can’t just drive into them when you can see they are there, so removing the blind spots would have an effect in reducing accidents.

Haven’t read the whole thread, got the gist after page 1. The usual anti-cyclist stuff you see on here which is very peculiar for a cycling forum. Yes the cyclist was bloody stupid, but the truck driver knew there were loads of cyclists around (half a dozen of them cycling off in front of him), yet thought ‘sod’em, they’re not obeying the rules of the road, so I’m in the right and don’t have to care’. If I’m driving and there is a blind spot, I assume the worst and drive accordingly rather than piling on regardless, which is what the driver did here.

STATO – So when can he expect his left to be clear? because even when he does get to the curb there could still be a cyclist right against his bumper.

Do what the tipper driver is doing in the streetview link that Speeder so helpfully provided. Move over into the merging lane (slow to let the equally impatient motorists stream past on the right if necessary) to leave some space at the curb just in case. Rather than carry on regardless and *hope* that you aren’t going to grind a cyclist under your wheels.

Even though he was largely without blame if he finds himself in the same situation again then he could alter his behaviour by maintaining a constant speed through the pinch point rather than accelerating into it.

No he can’t …. in that same situation again he has cars on his right and behind as well.

The cars on his right can’t see the cyclists and the cyclists can’t see the cars on the right. The HGV driver has to consider the cyclists and cars on his right and cars coming in the opposite direction.

He doesn’t have the luxury of exclusively watching some cyclists …

Even though he was largely without blame if he finds himself in the same situation again then he could alter his behaviour by maintaining a constant speed through the pinch point rather than accelerating into it.

Yes but in the next time it could be a slower cyclist, so it would end exactly the same way.

There are only 2 alternatives.

1. Remove blind spot, they shouldnt be there. But they are, infact in modern cars they are getting pretty huge too for drivers that dont bother to move their heads.

2. Slow significantly before he moved left, so that anything that had stayed in his blind spot was now moving much faster and travelling out of it (while also watching to make sure nothing went into it).

But of course ‘this is London’ so if he had slowed to move left you could expect the camera guy to dive up the inside and expect the driver to actually stop, or you would have had a load of cyclists going round his right side and then cutting infront.

The difference there is that the tipper driver is driving through the junction on green having come from a single file of traffic with a clear idea of what’s going on around him not starting off from the inside lane from a standstill with a gaggle of impatient & mostly invisible cyclists illegally situated next to him.

FFS I give up – sense obviously isn’t as common as I thought, even on here.

Radar – HGVs need radar – that’ll solve it.

we’re all cyclists here and that generally we’re siding with the big bad truck driver should tell you something.

that almost always happens on here.

What it tells me is that even cyclists are not sympathetic to cyclists.

Whether or not you criticise the HGV driver, I think most or even all of us think that the primary responsibility for the accident lies with the cyclist, and that the cyclists using the filter lane were all in the wrong.

Given that most of us are experienced cyclists, I wonder how we would behave in those circumstances, after a period of time commuting by bike in London:

a. Gradually copy the other cyclists because of the difficulty of going against the flow and herd mentality (but make damn sure to either be fast enough to outsprint the HGV well before the pinch point, or hold back in the junction until it had passed and then slot in behind it)
b. Ignore the other cyclists and always take primary position behind the artic
c. Go over to the cyclists and tell them that they should not use the filter lane to sidle alongside the artic.

I am fairly sure I would do b., because it’s clearly the safest option and I am an extremely cautious rider. I’d like to think I would do c., but I suspect that even if I did that the riders would ignore me and I would give up after one or two attempts.

If so many riders in London and elsewhere are cycling so dangerously, such that they are now no longer just a few bad apples but possibly the majority, how are they to be persuaded to change? The police probably do not have the resources to undertake major exercises on a large enough scale to influence enough of these riders to change. And the riders themselves do not appear to be receptive to being told they are in the wrong (Dunning Kruger effect?).

What it tells me is that even cyclists are not sympathetic to cyclists.

not sympathetic to stupid people…

I’m sympathetic to rucksack man, I’d hate to be in that position of being properly scared for my life but I’m objective enough to see that he brought it all upon himself.

Judging from his actions, attire, gear choice and general sense of awareness, he’s not a regular cycle commuter and this has probably put him off for life and that’s a shame. One can only hope he’s self aware enough to watch the video back and say “I f****ed up there” rather than “that truck driver tried to kill me”

I think most or even all of us think that the primary responsibility for the accident lies with the cyclist

No I think most of us think what the cyclist did was bloody stupid. The responsibility though always lies with the person who poses the biggest danger to others, which in this case is obviously the truck driver.

not sympathetic to stupid people…

So because he made a stupid decision he deserves to die and we shouldn’t be at all bothered about it? 😕

Cyclist all at fault – that’s a left only lane they were in. At least the girl had the sense to notice that there was a huge truck next to here and see the impending danger.

Remove blind spot, they shouldnt be there. But they are, infact in modern cars they are getting pretty huge too for drivers that dont bother to move their heads.

I just don’t think that would actually work for big HGV’s….
Assuming 90% of attention is on what’s in front a full set of 360 cameras and sensors the remaining attention is then spread pretty thin.

I might be wrong but I think it would simply be an information overload and possibly lead to more accidents with the driver checking various screens.

We teach children not to step out to cross the road from behind parked cars because it puts them in danger of getting flattened by a car/bus/truck that hasn’t seen them – this is just the same. The cyclist has wilfully ridden into the path of an oncoming vehicle from a position where he can’t be seen with no regard given for his own safety and I can’t fathom how anyone is apportioning blame to the driver. Other than the fact that he’s not the vulnerable party.

I can’t fathom how anyone is apportioning blame to the driver

He’s driving a massive truck, with lots of blind spots in an urban environment where he knows there are loads of cyclists around, yet he still sees fit to accelerate into a pinch point after seeing lots of other cyclists overtake him on the inside. You don’t think he maybe should have though that there might just be more, and slowed down to be sure? The fact that they are stupid and not obeying the rules is largely irrelevant.

Accelerating when the lights go green? Shocking behaviour!

No I think most of us think what the cyclist did was bloody stupid. The responsibility though always lies with the person who poses the biggest danger to others, which in this case is obviously the truck driver.

The truck driver is responsible in that he managed not to hit any cars or force them into an oncoming bus.

You are looking at this as if it was a 2 party accident.
The HGV driver doesn’t have that luxury… which is what a lot of people are missing. The HGV driver has to consider everyone else.

So because he made a stupid decision he deserves to die and we shouldn’t be at all bothered about it?

But does he deserve to live at the expense of a car full of kids on the other side of the road?

Should the driver divert all attention to a possible cyclist when he has cars on the outside and then potentially swerve and knock one into the path of an oncoming bus?

Does the driver of the car behind deserve to die because they are too close if the HGV slams on the airbrakes?

dazh – Member
You don’t think he maybe should have though that there might just be more, and slowed down to be sure?

No.

I do get where you’re coming from but it was the cyclist’s accident to avoid. There are 9 other cyclists who managed to avoid putting themselves in that situation either by getting in front or hanging back (or filming) only this guy persisted in staying in the blindspot and then riding into the path of the truck.

There are 9 other cyclists who managed to avoid putting themselves in that situation either by getting in front or hanging back (or filming) only this guy persisted in staying in the blindspot and then riding into the path of the truck.

The bloke filming was a bawhair from a similar collision, its only in light of the utter stupidity of the guy in front that his riding doesn’t look so bad. This makes his cry of “I’ve got that all on camera” particularly pathetic.

No I think most of us think what the cyclist did was bloody stupid. The responsibility though always lies with the person who poses the biggest danger to others, which in this case is obviously the truck driver.

Which is cobblers. Ultimately, what governs the rights and responsibilities of all road users is the law and the Highway Code, which exists to tell people what they may and may not do, and so make the roads safer by making people’s actions compatible and predictable.

At the end of the day, it is the justice system that is the ultimate arbiter of responsibility under the law, and neither your nor my opinion will count (unless you work for the CPS, or one of us is on a jury). If that accident had resulted in the cyclist being killed, I very much doubt that the driver would have been prosecuted, because it would have been deemed the cyclist’s fault.

The fact that they are stupid and not obeying the rules is largely irrelevant.

That is childish logic. Indeed you seem to want to apply parent and child standards of responsibility for behaviour to road users: children are unpredictable and can run out into the road, and parents are responsible for them and have to prevent that and protect them. Grown ups have autonomy and can make their own decisions, but they also have to take responsibility for those decisions and enjoy or suffer the consequences as applicable.

I do get where you’re coming from but it was the cyclist’s accident to avoid. There are 9 other cyclists who managed to avoid putting themselves in that situation either by getting in front or hanging back (or filming) only this guy persisted in staying in the blindspot and then riding into the path of the truck.

completely agree – the truck driver would have known that the other cyclists were there but can only assume that they would be smart enough to stay back from the impending danger, like that lady.

I just don’t think that would actually work for big HGV’s….
Assuming 90% of attention is on what’s in front a full set of 360 cameras and sensors the remaining attention is then spread pretty thin.

I might be wrong but I think it would simply be an information overload and possibly lead to more accidents with the driver checking various screens.

Current situtation – driver looks forward and has to check 8 (?) mirrors.

Future situation – driver looks forward and checks one screen (with mirrors in case the system fails).

What is more likely to result in “information overload”?

FWIW… this is the sort of thing I am talking about
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dGFNiTivZo[/video]

So a drone for every truck then?

I do get where you’re coming from but it was the cyclist’s accident to avoid.

Completely agree but IMO drivers of trucks in conditions like that should operate at a higher level of skill, awareness and responsibility. The way he accelerated into the pinch point I wouldn’t have done in my car, let alone a truck. I can understand the truck drivers reaction but I would argue that if a truck driver couldn’t deal with that situation without hitting a cyclist then they probably shouldn’t be driving a truck in a difficult urban environment.

The way he accelerated into the pinch point I wouldn’t have done in my car,

He doesn’t. Our hero with the camera brakes. It the frame of reference that makes the truck look like its accelerated

It’s London mate…

Utterly ridiculous.

So a drone for every truck then?

It’s not a drone. It’s a reprojection of fisheye images from cameras mounted on the front, sides and rear of the car/truck onto the ground plane.

It doesn’t need electronic devices to fix the blind spot issue just a cab at the height of other road users.

Although I would probably suggest that that size of vehicle should be in the centre of a city either.

He doesn’t. Our hero with the camera brakes. It the frame of reference that makes the truck look like its accelerated

Unless the guy who got hit also brakes at the exact same time as the guy with the camera then no, the driver accelerated into the pinch point.

Most likely he was doing that because he had a line of cars accelerating like mad to get to the traffic island before him and cut him off.

Which they were doing because the road design is **** stupid. One lane for straight ahead and a full size filter lane would have meant that this probably wouldn’t have happened.

Im amazed that people are saying the driver is at all at fault.

typical of todays society imo. Ive hurt myself and it must be someone elses fault….

So in the spirit of accepting I might be wrong, I watched it again a few times. This time with the sound on. Seems to the following exchange is very illustrative of the driver’s mindset:

cyclist with camera: ‘Mate you knew there were cyclists there’.
Driver: ‘I don’t give a ****, you were in the wrong lane’.

Can’t say I’ve changed my mind.

Ah but the driver was accelerating.

From a standstill. Whodathunkit? 🙄