truckie overtakes cyclist and immediately puls left to squish fanny, truckies fault.
any other instance of cyclist and nearside of truck,cyclists fault for being a fanny…simple as that…if cyclists get on the nearside of a truck,then they get what they deserve.you cant educate them,same as you cant polish dung.if you see a herd of cows down a country road,do you 1,stay well out of their road,or 2, drive down amongst them,then wonder why your all dented and trampled…truck drivers have licences,pay tax,pedal jockeys have nothing.the country needs trucks,nobody needs cyclists other than as an irritating annoyance similar to Tosco and their rolling roadblocks when they can get past a farmer in a tractor doing a slower one.
Sidevalve:
Themoocher:
I would ban everything over 7.5 ton from the centre of London.With the special application to drive anything above 7.5 the same as abnormal loads.
Only if there is no other possible way to get the load to site. if can’t be broken down into smaller loads.D’you mind me asking mate; are you actually a lorry driver by trade?
If you’re not (and I don’t think you are judging by the sheer crassness of that post) then FYI a 7.5 tonne truck has a typical payload of 3 tonnes. Taking your post literally, that would mean that just one single 8-legger load of ballast for a construction site (and there are probably dozens if not hundreds every day in central London) would have to be sent in by six or seven lorries instead. Would you mind telling me how that would improve things?
I’d love the posh blonde haired Etonian tospot to slap a complete 24/7/365 lorry ban across all of London. Let the buggers have their lorry free city. Dave-the-renegade-sherry can then ditch his perv camera and start carrying 3/4 bricks around on his bicycle on a small pallet rack, or a few packs of that ■■■■■■■ covent garden soup to Tescos. It’ll be a long cycle from the RDC. He won’t mind though, he’ll have plenty of company with the 10 thousand other burks on bikes doing the same thing regretting the day they ever went on Woman’s hour with the idea.
I have been reading this thread with great interest but until now avoided the temptation to post.
I haven’t driven a truck through London in years, but I do ride through London by bike - but one with an engine. I see terrible driving from all parties, cars, vans, HGVs, PCVs, cyclists and of course motorcyclists.
I have seen terrible driving by HGV drivers who for some reason do not give vulnerable road users enough space. I have many theories of why this is happening but I’ll keep them to myself to avoid argument. But of course this thread is mainly about one type of incident - left turning HGVs and cyclists positioning themselves on the near side of the truck - usually in a blind spot.
The reason I thought I would contribute to this thread now is because when I got home last night my wife asked if I could help her friends son with an insurance problem. She gave me a pile of paperwork and pictures detailing an accident. Basically the young lad had been ‘run off the road’ by a truck. Months later his own insurance company had written to him and told him they were not prepared to pursue a claim against the truck and quoted one section of the highway code as the reason.
RULE 221
Large vehicles. These may need extra road space to turn or to deal with a hazard that you are not able to see. If you are following a large vehicle, such as a bus or articulated lorry, be aware that the driver may not be able to see you in the mirrors. Be prepared to stop and wait if it needs room or time to turn.
The gist of the various reports and letters was that the car driver had positioned himself on the nearside of an articulated vehicle whilst negotiating a corner in road works. There simply wasn’t room for both vehicles due to the extra room needed by the HGV and a collision occurred. The car drivers own insurance company used section 221 of the highway code to explain why the lad would be losing his NCB and having read through all these reports and the highway code last night I realise this is relevant to the cyclist issues being discussed here.
I am deeply saddened by the young ladies death that the OP refers to and I don’t know the full details but of most of the deaths in London this year have been where a cyclist placed themselves down the nearside of a truck that then turned left. Had some of these cyclists taken notice of rule 221 of the highway code then they would not have been where they were because they would have stopped and waited.
I may be wrong but I believe cyclists should be subject to the rules contained in the highway code when using the highway. A lot of cyclists may not be car/vehicle users and therefore may never have read the highway code which from my point of view Indicates that there is a need for compulsory training for cyclists and that they should be made aware of the contents of the highway code.
I think that via schemes such as FORS and CLOCS and because old Boris is a cyclist there are some positive things going on within the haulage industry. None of it is doing any harm. Even the DCPC courses that get HGV drivers out on a bike are doing good. Yes ‘Boredwivdrivin’ is right that this has all been forced on the industry and most hauliers and drivers wouldn’t have done any of these things without it being forced on them but why does that matter. Steps are being taken amongst the haulage industry and that is good.
Unfortunately I don’t see much happening within the cycling world to try and change things. It is quite simple - rule 221 of the highway code tells us what cyclists should be doing. Stopping, waiting, holding back. I know there are training schemes for cyclists but the last figures I read suggest these schemes are reaching a miniscule section of the cycling world. Although ‘Boredwivdrivin’ doesn’t seem to see it - there needs to be compulsory training of all cyclists if they are to share the roads with other trained road users.
SOme of the DCPC courses I deliver have elements within them that cover vulnerable road users and the attitude of some drivers really is poor. Of course some of those drivers are also cyclists and at times we do get arguments between the two - just as has happened in this thread. During these sessions I preach that as ‘professional’ trained and qualified drivers we have a duty of care to those around us who are not trained and qualified and simply do not know any better. Regardless of right or wrong, who did this and who did that, as a trained and qualified vocational driver it is my responsibility to ensure the safety of others on the road. To take care of them as best I can. Give them room and be patient. Watch out for them.
The volume of cyclists is going to increase - especially in London. Until TFL get there fancy mini Holland initiative (proper cycle roads) in place we have an ongoing problem. Once better facilities exist for cyclists, that will take them and therefore more car drivers off the road leaving space for the essential road users - trucks. It’ll be a long time coming. Meanwhile both sides of the argument (commercial drivers and cyclists) need to adapt.
When I ride through London on my bike I set off trying to be a good rider and obey all the rules, be polite an courteous etc. After a very short time it turns into survival of the fittest and I seem to resort to being another motorcycling moron. I know much better but it happens. It becomes dog eat dog and for every example of poor driving I see - I respond in a similar manner. Thank god I don’t drive an HGV through these cities.
^^^^^^^Good post Shep! I think that cycling itself has changed over the past few years, at one time folk rode bikes to work because they were cheap transport/couldn’t drive a car/too young to drive but not especially to beat traffic queues. Therefore, in my memory at least, they didn’t dive through non existant gaps or take the risks that they do nowadays and not just in London. I cycled to work in the sixties but no way would I creep up the inside of any vehicle, I waited behind. I can perhaps understand non drivers making such a manouver but I guess that in London at least a lot of the cyclists have driving licenses so SHOULD be aware of the dangers of turning vehicles? 
Pete.
windrush:
^^^^^^^Good post Shep!
+1.
Now ‘all’ we have to do is change the mindset of the cyclist lobby and their idiotic supporters.Who are actually selectively reversing that rule by claiming ‘ownership’ of the road space in question and the idea of undertake and outrun trucks on entry into and across junctions etc. 
I’m in London all the time never have any problems with cyclists or cars not many around in the early hours 
Sup473:
I’m in London all the time never have any problems with cyclists or cars not many around in the early hours
No decent drivers do, It just seems to be the don’t drive/can’t drive contingent that have a problem.
Good news! I have just arrived home from my research mission at Manchester airport.
I have made some very interesting observations; I would also like to remind people that,
- Climbing over the fence is illegal.
- And dangerous.
Luckily for me, the air traffic controller’s all drive trucks and are keen cyclist’s and gave me permission to conduct the research.
I feel the need to explain the method of research. I wanted to know about blindspot’s and the effect of an approaching vehicle whilst cycling. I used a ladies cycle as my plum’s tend to hang either side of the crossbar on a gents, and they bash together like one of those ball bearing things on director’s desks.
One of the primary aims, was to see which commercial airliner has the best mirror’s for this practice.
The test was split into 3 different measuring criteria. The first was to set off and undertake an airliner. (I had 2 traffic cones to replicate traffic lights). The second part of the test involved overtaking whilst the airliner was taxiing, and the third test was to see if the pilot would get out of his cockpit when I circled his plane with my helmet cam.
I chose runway 1 because it is the busiest and was more likely to represent a typical street in London.
I found that Boeing had better mirror’s than Airbus. I also found that pilot’s were no better than truck drivers with regard to loose,flailing straps. One particular plane’s loose cargo bay strap was hanging so low, that it actually caught on my front basket and ripped it straight off the handlebar’s!
In the undertake/traffic light test, ALL pilot’s performed poorly. Not one had their mirror’s set correctly and as a result, I had to ring my bell every time before they noticed me.
The ’ over take whilst airliner is taxiing ’ test provided mixed results. Turbo prop engine smaller plane’s performed best, as I found jamming a stick in the prop,s allowed me to pretty much do what I wanted, where as the larger more powerful jet engine’s simply blew me into the apron. However I had anticipated this and wore Lycra to keep injury’s at bay.
The third test was a real let down. After circling a Lufthansa 767’s cockpit for 10 minutes filming and provoking the pilot, he simply ignored me and took off. I hope my test has answered any issue’s that have arisen during this discussion.
eagerbeaver:
Good news! I have just arrived home from my research mission at Manchester airport.I have made some very interesting observations; I would also like to remind people that,
- Climbing over the fence is illegal.
- And dangerous.
Luckily for me, the air traffic controller’s all drive trucks and are keen cyclist’s and gave me permission to conduct the research.
I feel the need to explain the method of research. I wanted to know about blindspot’s and the effect of an approaching vehicle whilst cycling. I used a ladies cycle as my plum’s tend to hang either side of the crossbar on a gents, and they bash together like one of those ball bearing things on director’s desks.
One of the primary aims, was to see which commercial airliner has the best mirror’s for this practice.
The test was split into 3 different measuring criteria. The first was to set off and undertake an airliner. (I had 2 traffic cones to replicate traffic lights). The second part of the test involved overtaking whilst the airliner was taxiing, and the third test was to see if the pilot would get out of his cockpit when I circled his plane with my helmet cam.
I chose runway 1 because it is the busiest and was more likely to represent a typical street in London.
I found that Boeing had better mirror’s than Airbus. I also found that pilot’s were no better than truck drivers with regard to loose,flailing straps. One particular plane’s loose cargo bay strap was hanging so low, that it actually caught on my front basket and ripped it straight off the handlebar’s!
In the undertake/traffic light test, ALL pilot’s performed poorly. Not one had their mirror’s set correctly and as a result, I had to ring my bell every time before they noticed me.The ’ over take whilst airliner is taxiing ’ test provided mixed results. Turbo prop engine smaller plane’s performed best, as I found jamming a stick in the prop,s allowed me to pretty much do what I wanted, where as the larger more powerful jet engine’s simply blew me into the apron. However I had anticipated this and wore Lycra to keep injury’s at bay.
The third test was a real let down. After circling a Lufthansa 767’s cockpit for 10 minutes filming and provoking the pilot, he simply ignored me and took off. I hope my test has answered any issue’s that have arisen during this discussion.
I’m not sure this story is true, as I know the ladies bike you ride has tassles, and you make no mention of them here! 
Nice one eagerest of beavers.
I’ve just conducted similar research at a quaint little airstrip rather loyal to Her Majesty; I can confirm your findings regarding turbo prop aircraft, the new Airbus A400M has been fitted with Scania mirrors as requested by Boredwivdrivin, and has a “warning, aircraft taxiing left” device which permits it to land in Walthamstow, Peckham and other wartorn areas, subject to FORS accreditation. The C130 Hercules fleet are currently undergoing upgrades to remove Daf mirrors and a cuddly meerkat called Sergei from the cockpit window.
Furthermore, a Freedom of Misinformation Request was submitted, showing that the VC10 fleet were replaced with Airbus A320 “Airtankers” because the VC10s Ford Cargo mirrors aid stability when refueling but are not liked by Albion1971.
The Vulcan has an exemption to fly for a further two years with heavily modified Hillman Avenger mirrors, in tribute to the late Patrick Macnee, RIP.
PMSL Muckster. I heard the Vulcan was being stood down because it " HAS lived long, but not prospered ".
Some say that Boris Johnson’s attempt to move Heathrow Airport to the Thames estuary is all part of his plans to turn all of West London and whatever he can get of Surrey into a recreational cycling theme park and choice of routes.These plans are already well underway in Surrey since it was given Olympic level cycling status by its County Council to please London’s cycling lobby.
In the interim period Boris has instructed the CAA that any attempt to make an emergency landing outside the airport’s boundaries can only be considered when the pilot can absolutely guarantee the safety of any cyclists in the vicinity of where the plane might land.While numerous air transport operators have disputed this on grounds of costs of the equipment needed to see the cyclists from 2,000 feet high.With Boris arguing that a decent sized hole in the floor of the cockpit forward of the nose landing gear and some binoculars should be more than sufficient.Having reiterated that absolutely no aircraft will be allowed to operate into or out of Heathrow unless that condition is met.
eagerbeaver:
PMSL Muckster. I heard the Vulcan was being stood down because it " HAS lived long, but not prospered ".
Sounds like Rover cars.
I always enjoy children’s hour.
BillyHunt:
I always enjoy children’s hour.
It makes a nice change from Womens’ hour on here.
As with Shep532, I to, have been reading this thread with interest and until now have also avoided the temptation to post.
I agree with Shep532 but would like to add
That it strikes me that the one thing that cyclists have over most other road users is lack of accountability, it has been widely suggested that training, licensing and insurance should be introduced for cyclists. The reality is that to implement legislation and enforce it on such a diverse section of the population would I believe not be viable.
How about changing the law so that your driving license is affected in the same way for traffic offences regardless of the mod of transport you are operating. A child riding to school or student on his way to collage, cycling over a zebra crossing while a pedestrian is crossing and not having a driving license for instance, could be forgiven for not fully appreciating the infringement, whereas someone with a driving license would have proof of training and therefore the penalty would be the same as if they had driven through. Depending on the infringement the relevant points and or fines applied. I would suggest that would focus the mind of most road users regardless of their mode of transport.
It’s all very well coming up with various ways of preventing these deaths, some good some bad some ridiculous, but they always leave out one essential thing, the human element. Regardless of how many laws, rules or codes road users have, how much safety equipment is fitted or worn, you cannot remove the human element. Drivers & cyclists alike will flout the rules to try to get ahead, it’s as simple as that. No amount of lessons, teaching, testing, taxing, registration or anything else will prevent cycling deaths. That is the simple truth.
BillyHunt:
It’s all very well coming up with various ways of preventing these deaths, some good some bad some ridiculous, but they always leave out one essential thing, the human element. Regardless of how many laws, rules or codes road users have, how much safety equipment is fitted or worn, you cannot remove the human element. Drivers & cyclists alike will flout the rules to try to get ahead, it’s as simple as that. No amount of lessons, teaching, testing, taxing, registration or anything else will prevent cycling deaths. That is the simple truth.
The fact is every form of transport carries a risk factor.In general road transport in all its forms is probably as good if not better on the basis of casualties per road traffic/journey.While in the specific case of left turning trucks/vehicles taking out cyclists on the nearside the key 4 points which would help to reduce the statistics are all here if anyone wants to take note of them.Those being cyclists adhering to the rules in the highway code regards giving vehicles,especially large vehicles,road space as opposed to viewing the space in question as a cyclist owned right.Correctly designed mirrors and correctly adjusted mirrors and correct use of mirrors.
The point being that some cyclists don’t do the former and some truckers don’t have or do the latter thereby creating these incidents, only a very small percentage of which are fatal. Nobody, and I mean nobody, follows the rules of the road 100% of the time, accidents will happen, sometimes people will die.