He didn’t deliberately clip him

Looks to me like he did. Yup, you shouldn’t go in a left turn only jnctn and go straight in any other city in the world! I can’t judge what happens in London! But, I reckon the driver knew they were there and either didn’t give a shit or was trying to prove a point.

It’s a weird one – notice the brake lights come on as soon as he makes contact (1:08), then he moves away from the kerb. No way he could’ve felt the contact. Braked when he heard the shouts? How did he know what they were shouting at? “OI! No!” could’ve been anything from anywhere… unless he knew…

But the lane he’s in goes right as the road goes from two lanes to one. Check out the junction on Google earth.Someone not trying to run a cyclist off the road would be moving right.

Aye, a car would probably swing right straight away but this is a HGV that’s considerably longer, he’s gotta think about a good few feet of trailer behind him so needs to go in a straight line for longer to make the slight turn without dragging his trailer through the right hand land too. Whilst watching the cars filtering from his right and the cyclist appearing from nowhere in front of him, a lot to consider.

The cyclists were riding with a sense of “I own the road” plain and simple. They shouldn’t have gone into the left lane but filtered up to the truck and waited behind it in the absence of a stop box, and saved their legs by drafting it. Trying to undercut a HGV like that is just beyond stupid, bordering on suicidal.

For all we know, there could have been a moped or another cyclist/s i.e. vulnerable user on his right.

It doesnt encourage you, its available for you. If you want to go left you can use it, if you want to go straight move across into the correct lane

Except that lane is full of traffic, and you have little idea about the left only lane until you’re in it – road goes from 1 lane to 3 back to 1 very quickly.

Ideally, cyclists should wait to merge back into the main line of traffic before the junction. I’ve seen that happen about zero times.

What usually happens is people that haven’t sprinted off the line wait in the no mans land in front of the left hand lane on the junction for a gap in the traffic.

The left hand lane is also very similar to a lot of “cyclist friendly” infrastructure in the capital where cyclists are sent up the inside of queuing traffic.

The junction design leaves much to be desired.

No winners here.
The person on the bike showed poor judgement, the driver shouldnt be expected to drive such an unsuitable vehicle and the road infrasture didnt provide space for both.

If the truck had a bin wagon style cab and the road had a cycle lane it wouldnt be possible.

Cyclist is a complete bellend there. Plain and simple.

the road infrasture didnt provide space for both.

It does though. The cyclists chose to ignore the ‘left tun only’ 🙄

What a bunch of bell ends.

Theres not much more to say about it than that, really

Funny that cyclist bloke leans into the truck as if he could push it away. I reckon riding up onto the pavement at that moment would’ve been more advisable 😆

binners – Member
What a bunch of bell ends.

Theres not much more to say about it than that, really

+1

It does though. The cyclists chose to ignore the ‘left tun only’

Well I for one couldn’t see any gaps that could have accommodated the number of cyclists at the front after it was clear that it was a left filter lane.

It’s shit road design. People being “wrong” because they can’t merge into stationary traffic en-masse doesn’t deserve a potential death penalty. Is it that difficult to understand?

It does though. The cyclists chose to ignore the ‘left tun only’

Again the issue here seems to be why a whole group of cyclists chose to ignore the left turn not specifically the one who got clipped.

The first one jumps the lights then the rest follow… even accepting the first couple might have (still wrongly) got ahead of the HGV it was pretty apparent they wouldn’t ALL get past.

I have no idea what they expected the driver to do ???
Step on the brakes and have people (including cyclists) who actually followed the rules run in the back… swerve into the opposite side of the road?

If I found myself by accident in a car in the left lane at the front I’d either wait or turn left anyway or possibly (and wrongly) out accelerate the HGV … I don’t see how that changes at all on a bike. If anything I’m more cautious as I’m not cocooned in a metal/airbagged vehicle???

However if I found myself the 3rd or 4th car in the left hand lane then the latter option isn’t even an option… its just suicide hoping the car in front accelerates fast enough…

Be this a cyclist or car I just fail to see how anyone but the cyclists as a group were to blame. “This is London” seems a particularly stupid excuse given how many cyclists get killed or injured in London doing exactly this.

They will do that every day and know that road well. They choose, on a daily basis, to use the wrong lane. On that day the choice had repercussions.

Unless, of course, they are all tourists and this was their first trip out in that there London

They will do that every day and know that road well. They choose, on a daily basis, to use the wrong lane. On that day the choice had repercussions.

+1

They will do that every day and know that road well. They choose, on a daily basis, to use the wrong lane. On that day the choice had repercussions.

True…. though I’d say On that day the choice had repercussions for one of them. It has repercussions on someone (the poor sod has to swerve/brake) every time just so they can arrive 20 seconds or a minute earlier…

However as per the thread this almost serious repercussions was about a whole group of cyclists all taking a gamble that would lead on of them into serious danger.

Had the bloke who got clipped been at the front he would have presumed he got away scot free… with no repercussions when in reality the repercussion was experienced by the HGV driver and the cyclists behind.

I’m not condoning the first rider ignoring the left turn only OR not waiting for the lights …. or the second or third who “got away with it today” but the stupidity for me simply increases as you go down the line and following the guy in front blindly.

I think we all agree that ideally the cyclists wouldn’t be doing this. But what is your solution to avoiding it?
I can detect people that are glad these naughty cyclists have got their come-uppance for slowing down the journeys of those poor motorists to the back of the next traffic jam. I wonder if they’d be so willing to express their joy if the guy had been killed or seriously injured.
Clearly the truck could have stayed further to the right. He KNEW there were cyclists going up his inside – he was trying to position to stop them but in the process clipped one of them.
The real question is though what can you realistically do to stop this type of incident happening? People are always going to do things wrong. Is your glee at someone getting hit by a **** truck going to stop people doing silly things?

Bus @ 1:00 surely jumped a red light, no?

What can you say?! All the cyclists were in a left hand turn lane. “Everyone does it, it’s London” is a stupid argument. Where is the sense of self-preservation (man in Lycra vs big heavy metal thing)? Sat here shaking my head at the cyclists.

But what is your solution to avoiding it?

Get in the correct lane. Note – May require waiting behind another road user.

Get in the correct lane. Note – May require waiting behind another road user.

Can you have a look at the video again and tell us what point in the video the cyclists should have merged with the stationary line of traffic?

Not having a go, genuinely interested.

The real question is though what can you realistically do to stop this type of incident happening?

You can expect people to not be stupid. If they carry on being stupid, Darwin will take over.

You can’t engineer out every opportunity for stupidity

Get in the correct lane. Note – May require waiting behind another road user.

+1

If they’d found some space to slot into further back in the queue it’d have cost them seconds in their ride, maybe a minute or two. I’d imagine the sort of person who thinks they should gamble with a lorry to save a few seconds is the sort of person who stands by the doors on a commuter train, pressing the “open door” button before the train has stopped.

Solution to avoid? Don’t horse up the inside of traffic, if you’re gonna be Billy big baws, overtake on the outside.

I’ve ridden that road countless times.

Merge at your leisure, really. Traffic is usually slow enough in the run up to the lights that you can move in comfortably. You may be two or three back from the lights, but surely that’s better than being under a truck?

Unless, of course you just HAVE to go faster than everyone else!

Can you have a look at the video again and tell us what point in the video the cyclists should have merged with the stationary line of traffic?

If they didn’t undertake in the left lane they wouldn’t need to merge in. If they were already at the front when the lights went red they should have moved out to dominate road position to prevent themselves being squeezed at the junction

… slowing down the journeys of those poor motorists to the back of the next traffic jam

same (slightly flawed) logic goes for the cyclists though doesn’t it? They all sat at the red light for a while too, so a brief delay wouldn’t have hurt them either

not read this thread, but the cyclists are mental on a few levels, who the hell goes up the side of an artic then actually waits at the left hand side of it, nuts. Next point, if you do that, make sure you are infront of it, and make eye contact with the driver. Next point if you are going to do that, make sure you are off like a whippet at the lights and well ahead clear of the road traffic, don’t bumble about like you own the road. and lastly if you are going to break the rules of the road, at least know you are breaking there, it was left turn only ffs. Last point, it’s london, is no excuse what so ever! 😆 .

lunacy on the cyclists parts, with a helath dose of self entitlement. Crazy, I don’t follow the rules of the road myself, but least i’m aware of my surroundings and place my safety as the number 1 priority(the only rule I follow tbh).

On the drivers point, tbh difficult to tell if he’s actually thought all the cyclist had past or just said **** it. i’ll give him the benefit of the doubt there, I doubt very much he is out to spend time in jail for mowing down people.

I think we all agree that ideally the cyclists wouldn’t be doing this. But what is your solution to avoiding it?
I can detect people that are glad these naughty cyclists have got their come-uppance for slowing down the journeys of those poor motorists to the back of the next traffic jam. I wonder if they’d be so willing to express their joy if the guy had been killed or seriously injured.
Clearly the truck could have stayed further to the right. He KNEW there were cyclists going up his inside – he was trying to position to stop them but in the process clipped one of them.
The real question is though what can you realistically do to stop this type of incident happening? People are always going to do things wrong. Is your glee at someone getting hit by a **** truck going to stop people doing silly things?

I think you are mis-interpreting
I’m glad in some ways that this guy potentially learned a lesson without serious injury or dying…. and perhaps others might also see this and avoid injury or death to themselves or others.

I don’t think GLEE is correct…. it’s the sort of thing I’d like to happen to my kid in terms of realising how dangerous something actually is without a serious injury or death…

The solution is obvious… its what we say to drivers all the time.
“Its not worth an accident to be home 5 minutes earlier”

The problem is the sense of entitlement… had a car deliberately gone in the left hand left only lane and tried to pull in front of the HGV and failed I don’t think there would be any discussion.

I am pretty confident my car can out accelerate any HGV … “so just because I can” should I then use the left lane habitually and save myself 5 minutes?

Clearly the truck could have stayed further to the right. He KNEW there were cyclists going up his inside – he was trying to position to stop them but in the process clipped one of them.

How could he know…. and if he did know what is it you want him to do… drive into oncoming traffic on the wrong side of the road?

The cyclist started off in the wrong and it was completely in their power to turn left (as they should have) and not have an accident instead of guessing that the driver has seen them and can take evasive action.

Why didn’t the cyclist take evasive action instead… after all the driver is not going to be hurt by a bike hitting his HGV…

You can expect people to not be stupid. If they carry on being stupid, Darwin will take over.

You can’t engineer out every opportunity for stupidity
I suppose you’re right, that’s why Denmark, Germany and The Netherlands have these sort of incidents happening all the time.
I’m not saying what would you do – in a theoretical online world we would all be 100% safe in every way, and I genuinely don’t think I’d put myself in that position, but realistically, people are not doing that.
If you think they deserve therefore to die, which is what the comments regarding Darwin are saying, you are a bit of a ****, aren’t you?

How could he know…. and if he did know what is it you want him to do… drive into oncoming traffic on the wrong side of the road?

The cyclist that had come up his inside and ended up in front of him?
If he couldn’t move out, he could slow down and stop. Do you just plough into someone if they pull out in front of you? Is it that hard to accept that you should do what you can to avoid hitting people with a truck, even if they are “wrong”?

philjunior – Member
How could he know…. and if he did know what is it you want him to do… drive into oncoming traffic on the wrong side of the road?

The cyclist that had come up his inside and ended up in front of him?
If he couldn’t move out, he could slow down and stop. Do you just plough into someone if they pull out in front of you? Is it that hard to accept that you should do what you can to avoid hitting people with a truck, even if they are “wrong”?in fairness to the driver, as soon as contact is made he’s turned to the right and stopped. So you need to give him the benefit of the doubt that he thought all cyclists had passed, imo.

I’m not sure either party comes out of that video with any credit:

Cyclist has come up on the inside of the lorry in a turn-left only lane and then assumed he can move across – arguably breaking law/highway code, unquestionably unwise and certainly putting himself in danger.

Lorry drive has already seen more than one cyclist appear in front of him from the left hand side, and has taken no action to allow for the fact that there may be more coming from a known blind-spot on his vehicle – hardly qualifies as good driving and whether or not he may be theoretically “in the right” he would have contributed to a potential death scenario.

Both of them need to have a long hard think.

Good track-standing by the guy in Mapei kit 😀

Cheers, Rich

2 things that are apparent – on a cycling forum, and the quorum believe the cyclists to be mainly at fault tells a story, and once the guy who had the escape calmed down a bit, he says to just leave it. Once the adrenaline goes, he knew he was wrong, and a **** lucky boy.

I’m not sure either party comes out of that video with any credit:

I totally agree, but neither are being unusually bad, so the junction should be ripped up and made safe.

Can you have a look at the video again and tell us what point in the video the cyclists should have merged with the stationary line of traffic?

Not having a go, genuinely interested.

Behind the black taxi at 18 seconds? Granted you would have to know the junction and know there was no ASL. Or the other way of looking at it – you should never go beyond the black taxi at 18 seconds unless you know the junction and know there is somewhere to go if you continue filtering beyond your line of sight.

Yeah, but did he get the KOM on the “Up the left hand lane past the lights – SPRINT” segment? That’s what I want to know.

The level of bellendery I see every day on my London commute beggars belief. This doesn’t surprise me at all.

Over time I have built up a selection of alternate routes home that mostly avoids main roads and cycle arteries.

Really can’t be arsed to comment on the obvious, thought some of you (and possibly that cyclist) might like to read about what actually happens when it all goes wrong:

Having just returned back to active duty with
the Cycle Response Unit (CRU) after one year
away, my first week back was to be a gentle
one. The morning of day one was spent preparing my
CRU Paramedic kit (always unnerving as you really
have to slim your equipment down to the bare minimum
after having had the space of an ambulance vehicle to
stow all the equipment you could ever need) and the rest
of the week I was to be lead instructor on a EMS Cyclist
course.

On the morning of the final day of our course, we
gathered our students together and proposed that, prior
to their assessments later in the day, they decide if they
wanted a final practice on the cone course or road
riding, whichever was their weaker area. I had one
student opt for the road ride, so whilst the rest went to
revisit the cones with my co-instructor and an assistant,
I took one student out for an observed road ride.

It was overcast with sunny spells, a warm springtime
morning during which visibility was good and traffic
density was moderate (for the City of London). My
student was a Team Leader (my superior at other times)
and we had a good ride during which we took a few
stops to observe and reflect upon various traffic issues;
particularly, filtering through stationary traffic with the
intent of making a left turn (UK roads, so think right
turn in USA and Europe). We discussed the pros and
cons of overtaking or using the cycle lane on the
approach, the cycle box at the junction, plus safe lines
to use and where hazards may arise. This is a subject I’d
highlighted with some concern during a classroom
presentation earlier in the course as it is the most
common cause of cyclist fatality in London.

As we were returning to base, a pedestrian standing at a
bus stop hailed me and informed me that a cyclist was
under a lorry further along the road (you seem to get a vibe
about jobs and this one was “bad”). I called to my student,
informed him of a possible running call, and instructed him
to follow me. Blue lights went on (we are currently
working on a cyclists blue light protocol and course here in
London) and big ring was engaged. I had traffic on my
side backing up (a confirmation of “bad”) so took to the
other side of the road to make progress. It
was initially empty but after a short
distance I encountered an oncoming van.
I made firm eye contact with the driver
and by using hand signals, instructed him
to stop, allowing me and my student a safe
passage past. After a brief sprint we came
to a traffic light controlled crossroads
where a four wheel steer cement mixing
lorry was stationary mid-left turn (UK
roads) and at the back wheels, a cyclist’s
supine torso was protruding out.

The London Fire Brigade (LFB) were
already on scene, but since UK Fire &
Rescue service are not EMT or Paramedic trained, my
student and I found ourselves as first EMS on scene. Our
first impression was of an open pelvis fracture and
probable thoracic trauma with head injury (no helmet
worn). The patient was pulseless, so we got to work on the
airway whilst our collegues in the LFB performed chest
compressions. Within a minute, a solo LAS Rapid
Response Paramedic Unit (car) arrived to back us up and it
was manned that day by the familiar face of a Team Leader
and CRU member of staff who had just recently finished a
one year secondment to the CRU. Our patient was in a
workable cardiac rhythm (PEA), so all possible traumatic
causes were reversed as far as our skill levels allow;
airway protection was initially impossible due to trismus
(jaw locked shut), but intubation was achieved after it
subsided; we were now backed up by plenty of other LAS
staff, drug therapy commenced and we looked at
extrication. The initial LFB report was that the patient’s
legs were entwined with the axle and that the vehicle
would have to be raised. This would mean all our
rescusitation efforts would have to cease as the area would
not be safe to work in until the vehicle was stabilised with
blocks and raised, but after cutting up the cyclist’s bicycle
and removing it from underneath the vehicle, we were able
to extricate and immobilise the patient and remove them to
an ambulance for conveying to hospital.

In London we have one Helicopter Emergency Medical
Service staffed by a BASICS doctor and a Paramedic. As
we gave our report on arrival we were informed it was on
another call, so a BASICS doctor was activated froma central London hospital, arriving by car
just in time to convey with the patient to
the nearest multi-trauma unit.

A police traffic officer who attended the
scene of the fatality commented on the
hazard of frontal four wheel steer vehicles’ ability to “suck
cyclists in” under their turning wheels once contact has
been made.

Myself and my student then returned to base, debriefed and
completed paperwork over a cup of tea and
then got back to the course assessments (he
passed!).

The job reaffirmed to me how recognisable
the CRU are now in London. It also
reminded me how much closer you are to
members of the public when you are on a
bicycle, and that you are far more easy to
wave down for aid — I doubt a motorised
vehicle would have seen the pedestrian who
waved me to a halt. It showed how
adaptable and flexible we can be, and how
quickly and easily we can respond, offering
vital pre-hospital care to those in need to a
standard that equals or exceeds that available by a
motorised vehicle.

I was glad to have been with a clinical lead (Team Leader)
at the time of the incident and happy to see another
familiar CRU face arrive (by car this time) so promptly
and give so much to our efforts as did all the emergency
services who attended. This incident highlighted that as
EMSCIs, we should always be prepared to deal with the
worst at the most unlikely of times, and the importance of
carrying full operational kit at all times.

Unfortunately, it also showed how vulnerable cyclists can
be when they don’t act or get treated as legitimate road
users, so take care, it is a jungle out there. Ride safe, and
be prepared.

Hopefully a sobering account.

In summary: don’t be a dick.

I think the HGV accelerated a lot quicker than I would normally expect. Possibly everyone expected to be half way down the road before he’d gotten above 10 mph. Certainly the cyclist who got hit looked like he thought he’d made a breakaway before he was hit from behind.

The cyclist that had come up his inside and ended up in front of him?
If he couldn’t move out, he could slow down and stop.

Do you just plough into someone if they pull out in front of you?

Perhaps it depends on the alternatives…. however the cyclist that got hit wasn’t in front…the driver made a reasonable assumption that a cyclist who is already in the wrong is not stupid enough to try and push a HGV out of the way or relay on the driver seeing them.

Is it that hard to accept that you should do what you can to avoid hitting people with a truck, even if they are “wrong”?

It’s not about who was right vs wrong…. driving a HGV ploughing into a car can be fatal…. even supposing he knew the cyclist was there (which I don’t believe was the case from the drivers obvious shock) the cyclist could have just turned left or just gone on the pavement… slamming on air-brakes would have had a very very high probability of seriously injuring anyone behind the HGV…

If I was driving a HGV I’d make a call that the cyclist can avoid the collision but the cars/cyclists on the other side or behind can’t. (This is not even taking into account the cyclist was in the wrong )

In this case I very much doubt the driver knew he was there and risking an accident because of what you can’t see vs what you can see is a no brainer.