albion1971:
What about waiting till the road ahead is clear before overtaking as I do if I am driving a truck.
After all that is what you should do.
Trouble is lack of patience with most drivers.
Read your post because it does not say a lot for professional drivers.
Attitude makes a big difference with both lorry drivers and cyclists.
Too many bad attitudes in my opinion.
Woah easy cowboy
Why dont you read my post again. I said quite clearly your supposed to wait till theres a big enough gap in on coming traffic. Its just the human element about being on the wrong side of the road. Rightly or wrongly,its there.
I meerly stated what I thought was the reason behind it. Whether it says a lot for professional drivers or not is by the by.
Your right,attitude makes a big difference and there are too many bad ones.
From BOTH sides.
I always give cyclists adequate room but plenty cyclists overtake too close in situations such as queuing traffic and ive had my wing mirror removed by one before. (Incidentally he didnt stop. Well,he cant be traced can he. If only there was some way to identify who a bike belongs too…)
Some dont help their cause by ignoring red lights,steaming up the inside of a lorry with its left indicator on,texting,using no hands,wearing all dark clothing at night,not using lights,taking car wing mirrors off as they fly past and dont stop but still giving it large with “drivers need to take more care for our safety”.
The problem is that when ever theres an accident involving a driver making an error towards a cyclist it ends in a much worse incident than when a cyclist makes an error towards a vehicle.
Both sides have idiots but the problem is each tries to “stick up for” their own preferred mode of transport by slinging blame at the other side.
Its like politicians chucking muck at the opposition in the run up to an election. They by pass their own failings they focus on the other side.
And as long as both sides stick to the “We’re right,you’re wrong” mantra then it’ll be a never ending slagging match
Apologies if I misunderstood your post. I am afraid I do not hace the same patience when reading posts as when I am driving!
You are quite correct what you say.
Lol
No worries mate.
I know what you mean about posting in haste. Ive made a ■■■ of myself on more than one occasion through not reading a post properly before replying!
I saw someone riding fairly far out in the road near Woodstock earlier when there was a lovely wide cycle path, I know they are allowed to do so but it’s a bit ignorant in busy traffic. Glad I did give him a wide berth because as I passed he turned and pointed to helmet cam on his head, the ■■■■ was blatantly fishing for youtube fodder.
There it is again.
Its a dull yet incessant whining drone. Kind of like that sound thats heard when the neighbour 4 doors away’s dog is yapping non stop.
Check this video. You need subtitles turned on to understand what’s going on. Works in the YouTube app but I don’t now how you gets subtitles if viewing it in a browser.
It great to see kids taught about the ‘dead zone’ where drivers cannot see them and to hear an 8 year old child say “You should have respect for a truck”. “You should respect the fact it can kill you”. “You can jump off the bike and stand on the sidewalk or wait behind the truck”. That’s an 8 year old speaking wise words.
It claims over 60,000 children have received this Training from Volvo in Denmark. I reckon that’s more cyclist than have received training in London.
boredwivdrivin:
And by the age of 12 he will have learnt to stand up to bullies .
There’s an excellent example by Volvo to address the issue and have an educational campaign aimed at the very vulnerable group and all you have is a flippant dismissive remark - what a ■■■ you really are. Just shows, as usual, your completely brain dead to anything that’s outside your bizarre tunnel vision on the subject
Check this video. You need subtitles turned on to understand what’s going on. Works in the YouTube app but I don’t now how you gets subtitles if viewing it in a browser.
It great to see kids taught about the ‘dead zone’ where drivers cannot see them and to hear an 8 year old child say “You should have respect for a truck”. “You should respect the fact it can kill you”. “You can jump off the bike and stand on the sidewalk or wait behind the truck”. That’s an 8 year old speaking wise words.
It claims over 60,000 children have received this Training from Volvo in Denmark. I reckon that’s more cyclist than have received training in London.
Its things like this that are needed. Cycle profficancy is fine but to teach kids how to manouvre round some cones isnt really making them road savvy. It might actually give them a false sense of how well equipped they are to deal with being out on the road. Some parents arn’t much better and think this is all thats needed to make them skilled enough to be allowed out on the road on a bike.
But courses like this will give them some perspective of what its like in the real world with traffic etc.
Id also extend this course to apply to adults who want to cycle. get them to sit in a truck and see just how hard it is to see when they have stuck their bike on your nearside.
Education from a young age upwards and continuing. Not a quick test at 10 years old (of which its impossible to fail and everyone gets a “certificate”) and then made to think thats all thats required.
unfortunately cyclist getting killed is no longer news 9x out of 10 it is always someone elses fault but being a pedestrian and a cyclist requires no training so there lies the problem
When I was watching that little video showing Volvo’s attempts at creating safer roads last night my wife thought it was brilliant. She works in a school and thought it would be a great idea to have a truck come along and try to educate the kids. Help them have a little respect for big things that just might kill them, help them understand the issues.
She asked why this isn’t happening in the UK. I reminded her that about 10 maybe 12 years ago I approached Oldham council with a view to doing exactly the same thing at schools around the Oldham area. We wanted to take a big clean shiny truck along and let the kids sit in it, check out the mirrors etc etc. I thought it was a great idea for road safety, great idea for encouraging the next lot of HGV drivers and a great idea for advertising for the company (big green trucks in the Oldham area).
Unfortunately Oldham council refused to let it happen on health & safety grounds. They wanted all the staff to be CRB checked in case they might fiddle with the boys and girls, they were concerned at how high the cab was and could we fit harnesses or safety gates, they were concerned the truck may have sharp edges or bits that could hurt the children and of course they asked did we have staff who could speak ‘other’ languages (these are schools in Oldham so you know what I mean!).
It was a brilliant idea shot down by the powers that be. And here lies some of the issues - the powers that be. They haven’t got a clue. We need compulsory safety training for cyclists in the same way they have made vulnerable road user training a compulsory part of DCPC. We need the pavements opening up to cyclists wherever possible until we have dedicated separate cycling paths/roads where cyclists and vehicles can be separated. yes there will be issues cycling on pavements but at least the cyclist has a choice and it can’t be as bad as a cyclist and a truck colliding.
shep532:
It was a brilliant idea shot down by the powers that be. And here lies some of the issues - the powers that be. They haven’t got a clue. We need compulsory safety training for cyclists in the same way they have made vulnerable road user training a compulsory part of DCPC. We need the pavements opening up to cyclists wherever possible until we have dedicated separate cycling paths/roads where cyclists and vehicles can be separated. yes there will be issues cycling on pavements but at least the cyclist has a choice and it can’t be as bad as a cyclist and a truck colliding.
^This.
However it is probably more a case of deliberate anti road transport policy at all levels than ‘haven’t got a clue’.IE to put it simply the general message,indoctrinated from the earliest point possible,is that trucks are a bad thing to be tolerated on the basis that they must give ground to ‘vulnerable road users’ like cyclists.But certainly not to be co operated with.
As opposed to trains which are good and you must do everything possible to ensure your own safety around them.
shep532:
When I was watching that little video showing Volvo’s attempts at creating safer roads last night my wife thought it was brilliant. She works in a school and thought it would be a great idea to have a truck come along and try to educate the kids. Help them have a little respect for big things that just might kill them, help them understand the issues.
She asked why this isn’t happening in the UK. I reminded her that about 10 maybe 12 years ago I approached Oldham council with a view to doing exactly the same thing at schools around the Oldham area. We wanted to take a big clean shiny truck along and let the kids sit in it, check out the mirrors etc etc. I thought it was a great idea for road safety, great idea for encouraging the next lot of HGV drivers and a great idea for advertising for the company (big green trucks in the Oldham area).
Unfortunately Oldham council refused to let it happen on health & safety grounds. They wanted all the staff to be CRB checked in case they might fiddle with the boys and girls, they were concerned at how high the cab was and could we fit harnesses or safety gates, they were concerned the truck may have sharp edges or bits that could hurt the children and of course they asked did we have staff who could speak ‘other’ languages (these are schools in Oldham so you know what I mean!).
It was a brilliant idea shot down by the powers that be. And here lies some of the issues - the powers that be. They haven’t got a clue. We need compulsory safety training for cyclists in the same way they have made vulnerable road user training a compulsory part of DCPC. We need the pavements opening up to cyclists wherever possible until we have dedicated separate cycling paths/roads where cyclists and vehicles can be separated. yes there will be issues cycling on pavements but at least the cyclist has a choice and it can’t be as bad as a cyclist and a truck colliding.
A good idea, but sadly a waste of time.
The kids grow up to be adults who ride bikes on the road and don’t give a sh*t.
Once a month our driver trainer takes one of our motors and an empty fridge and visits schools in Lincolnshire (this is all prearranged of course, he’s not some kind of weirdo! ) where they actually set up a classroom for the kids in the trailer, there’s a slideshow, some videos and a Q & A session. The kids also get to sit in the truck (their parents too) and get to see firsthand the visibility limitations of an artic.
Our depot doesn’t receive any funding for this but it goes ahead as all involved are very passionate about it.
Bugger all to do with cyclists in London I grant you, but I think this sort of thing taught to school level kids may just pay dividends in the future. As the old saying goes; if it saves one life…
shep532:
about 10 maybe 12 years ago I approached Oldham council with a view to doing exactly the same thing at schools around the Oldham area. We wanted to take a big clean shiny truck along and let the kids sit in it, check out the mirrors etc etc. I thought it was a great idea for road safety, great idea for encouraging the next lot of HGV drivers and a great idea for advertising for the company (big green trucks in the Oldham area).
Unfortunately Oldham council refused to let it happen on health & safety grounds. They wanted all the staff to be CRB checked in case they might fiddle with the boys and girls, they were concerned at how high the cab was and could we fit harnesses or safety gates, they were concerned the truck may have sharp edges or bits that could hurt the children and of course they asked did we have staff who could speak ‘other’ languages (these are schools in Oldham so you know what I mean!).
It was a brilliant idea shot down by the powers that be.
Typical. They get a chance to teach kids road safety from a young age and they are more concerned about possible sharp edges. The chance to get kids used to the size of other vehicles BEFORE coming across them on the road and letting them know first hand the limited view of the driver to their position and it gets ■■■-pooed.
It seems they think it too dangerous to deal with a lorry sitting stationary but its perfectly fine to give kids a pass certificate for negotiating a few cones and being perfectly happy to let them cycle on the road.
Although in the councils defence,the way some parents behave now a days they are probably terrified of getting sued should precious Timmy accidentely hurt himself.
eagerbeaver:
No, you didn’t read it right. I was already about to overtake them, and rather than dither I booted it.
The car behind me hung back and the ■■■’s went about there business. Namely crashing into each other.
Fair enough, I’ll hold my hand up and admit I misread your post. From what you’ve written there and in other posts, your attitude to cyclists is appalling.
No he cant .thats a mode of transport called walking .
If thats cycling safety advice might as well get his mum to drive him and bike in car , cause then he will enjoy better visibility and protection from cars airbags .
