Lorry driver who shared footage of filtering cyclists says he'd like to see them invited on 'ride-alongs' to learn about blind spots

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

Don't know why people are ragging on Shipley for 'only' commuting 6000kms a year. It's more than 99.9% of the population will ride. Take out weekends and days when you can't be arsed and it's plenty enough to have experienced idiocy and how to avoid it. 

More to the point, he didn't say "commuting 6000km" per year he said he rides 6000km per year, and how anybody can extrapolate and compare that to a 10km commute is beyond me. I do a little more mileage than Shipley, typically 2 rides per week of 75km average, with a minimum of 1000m climbing every time out.  It is laughable to compare that to a 10km commute,, either from the perspective of energy expended or indeed of experience of close proximity to dense traffic flows. This whole "mine is bigger than yours" argument is bollocks.

JJ

Griff500 wrote:

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

Don't know why people are ragging on Shipley for 'only' commuting 6000kms a year. It's more than 99.9% of the population will ride. Take out weekends and days when you can't be arsed and it's plenty enough to have experienced idiocy and how to avoid it. 

More to the point, he didn't say "commuting 6000km" per year he said he rides 6000km per year, and how anybody can extrapolate and compare that to a 10km commute is beyond me. I do a little more mileage than Shipley, typically 2 rides per week of 75km average, with a minimum of 1000m climbing every time out.  It is laughable to compare that to a 10km commute,, either from the perspective of energy expended or indeed of experience of close proximity to dense traffic flows. This whole "mine is bigger than yours" argument is bollocks.

 

Thank you both for some logic and common sense finallly. I don’t commute on a bike, we have cars for that. Glad I don’t, with everyone so angry !

antigee wrote:

 

Problem looks to me to to be parked cars? Why do we accept that public space is dedicated in this way? Especially when it endangers vulnerable road users – quick count says plenty of cyclists use the road.

 

Absolutely.  But the car-centric simply don't see such things.  The only moral agents involved, for them, are the cyclists, and only their  behaviour is considered as a variable.  Everything else is regarded as an unchangable fact-of-nature.

kittybag wrote:

Some of the responses to this post highlight for me what is a problem with the attitude of some cyclists who seem to believe that ensuring their saftey on the road is everyone's responsibility but their own. Yes cyclists are more vulnerable than motorists but does that mean they can just cycle anyway they want? Would the cyclist I saw yesterday cycling in the dark, dressed all in black and with no lights bear no responsibility if he (it's always a he in my experience) was hit by a car? Or what about the person (he again) who jumped a red light straight into a stream of oncoming traffic forcing cars to do an emergency stop. Was that justified because, after all, they did stop in time?

 

Some of the responses to this post highlight for me what is a problem with the attitude of some car-centric people who seem to believe that ensuring the saftey of vulnerable road users is everyone's responsibility but those whose presence causes the danger, and who utlimately have control over that danger.

There seems to be a lot of defential forlock-tugging going on in this thread.

Which is not to demonise HGV-drivers either [edit - I'm sure it's a very difficult job to do well, and while some of them have been appalling to a degree that makes one angry they were ever employed, I absolutely wouldn't paint them all with the same brush].  But they don't drive in a vaccum, there are political choices made that determine the context in which they drive.

kittybag wrote:

Some of the responses to this post highlight for me what is a problem with the attitude of some cyclists who seem to believe that ensuring their saftey on the road is everyone's responsibility but their own. Yes cyclists are more vulnerable than motorists but does that mean they can just cycle anyway they want? Would the cyclist I saw yesterday cycling in the dark, dressed all in black and with no lights bear no responsibility if he (it's always a he in my experience) was hit by a car? Or what about the person (he again) who jumped a red light straight into a stream of oncoming traffic forcing cars to do an emergency stop. Was that justified because, after all, they did stop in time?

It's one thing to point out that most accidents involving cyclists are caused by poor driving but quite another to then jump to the conclusion that not only are cyclists never to blame but somehow they never can be blamed becasue they are "vulnerable" and, in doing so, demonise all HGV drivers. As cyclists we quite rightly get irate when people try and make all of us responsible for those cyclists who jump red lights etc. - but that doesn't seem to apply when it comes to HGV drivers. Seemingly because some drive dangerously then they are all tarred with the same brush.

 Would anyone advise their children that they should just step out into the road without looking because  it's up to drivers to anticipate their every possible move and drive in such a way as to esnure they don't hit them? Of course not so why do some people apparently think it is so wrong to say that cyclists should equally take care and not put themselves into potentially dangerous situations?

Prove to me that people on bikes do not travel in a defensive manner every day, prove to me this is less than motorists and indeed pedestrians.
You could go down any road you like in a busy town or city and far from people on bikes acting dangerously, they are the ONLY ones that take account of pedestrians AND motorists, simply because they know they can be hurt.
Maybe you're totally unaware of pedestrians not looking for even a split second before walking out into the road, same with motorists pulling out and making moves that endanger life.

Funny how even when trying to build a dossier against cyclists for new laws to punish them, the government exposed (accidentally nodoubt) that pedestrians were 50% more at fault for their demise in RTCs with people on bikes. How many cyclists have killed motorists, none. How many motorists have been found at fault for cyclists deaths, the majority in collisions. That's despite the heinous and double standard police forces view of collisions with a vulnerable road user.
You only have to look at how they absolve speeding drivers recklesdly goung around bends they cannot possibly see to stop well within the distance they can see to be clear, and all other manner of bullshit excuses for motorists to divert the blame.

The way police assess Incidents involving bikes seems to kick in a whole different set of rules/laws not to mention bending the laws of physyics as well as morality standards that no-one else is held up to.
Despite all that they still can't pin the blame onto cyclists in collisions the majority of the time, thus proving cyclists DO indeed ride defensively and by definition take responsibility for safety more than any other road user.
HTH

bikezero wrote:

I too don't really get why he is complaining about cyclists overtaking him when stationary. I understand lorry drivers have much more limited visibility than car drivers and i too think his idea of showing cyclists by organising lorry trips sounds excellent. Just don't see the issue passing a lorry that isn't moving.

As far as I can tell, the issue is that the HGV driver didn't look properly before (presumably) he pulled away, and that that's the fault of the cyclists. Or something.

Shipley wrote:

Wow is piece has brought out some blithering idiots ! You’re on a bike - ride defensively and read the road ahead. In urban areas you are virtually the lowest in the food chain. Accept it and change your ways. It’s no coincidence that most of the fatalities in London are of cyclist who go up the inside of lorries at traffic lights. I’m an avid cyclist but assume everyone is out to kill me and ride accordingly. HGV drivers have a very tough responsibility these days. Some of you need to grow up a bit

I agree entirely. 

Realistically, driving is a necessity for many elderly, maybe slower responses, disabled, may have reduced flexibility. Although not driving HGV, some cyclists need to grow up a bit and preserve safety instead of challenging it. Some have lost all reason. It's why my car has a dash cam. I feel vulnerable.

As a cyclist I follow the highway code. I don't go through red lights and I never undertake. I even feel I'm breaking some unwritten law if I cycle up the inside in a traffic jam.

I live in Manchester and they are developing a lot of new cycling lanes but I did see a near miss on my way home driving behind a car last week, in the dark. The car in front could turn left as the light went to green, but a stream of cyclists coming down the relatively new cycle lane just kept on going, undercutting the left turning driver. The driver saw them and luckily braked, stopping the stream of cars that could now not get through the lights on green. Had the car continued the left turn and not had eyes in the back of his head, or had his mirror not been in exactly the right place, the driver could have turned across into the nonchalant cyclists that did not even slow down. 

We also have really wide cycle lanes to ensure cyclist safety end of the Mancunian Motorway, but many cyclists choose to squeeze between 3 lanes of traffic, often cycling INTO an 18 inch gap, them would complain the drivers have not left them enough space when they have to move off.

I think cyclists now should have a stricter highway code then everyone knows where they stand.

RGN007 wrote:

Shipley wrote:

Wow is piece has brought out some blithering idiots ! You’re on a bike - ride defensively and read the road ahead. In urban areas you are virtually the lowest in the food chain. Accept it and change your ways. It’s no coincidence that most of the fatalities in London are of cyclist who go up the inside of lorries at traffic lights. I’m an avid cyclist but assume everyone is out to kill me and ride accordingly. HGV drivers have a very tough responsibility these days. Some of you need to grow up a bit

 

I agree entirely. 

Realistically, driving is a necessity for many elderly, maybe slower responses, disabled, may have reduced flexibility. Although not driving HGV, some cyclists need to grow up a bit and preserve safety instead of challenging it. Some have lost all reason. It's why my car has a dash cam. I feel vulnerable.

As a cyclist I follow the highway code. I don't go through red lights and I never undertake. I even feel I'm breaking some unwritten law if I cycle up the inside in a traffic jam.

I live in Manchester and they are developing a lot of new cycling lanes but I did see a near miss on my way home driving behind a car last week, in the dark. The car in front could turn left as the light went to green, but a stream of cyclists coming down the relatively new cycle lane just kept on going, undercutting the left turning driver. The driver saw them and luckily braked, stopping the stream of cars that could now not get through the lights on green. Had the car continued the left turn and not had eyes in the back of his head, or had his mirror not been in exactly the right place, the driver could have turned across into the nonchalant cyclists that did not even slow down. 

We also have really wide cycle lanes to ensure cyclist safety end of the Mancunian Motorway, but many cyclists choose to squeeze between 3 lanes of traffic, often cycling INTO an 18 inch gap, them would complain the drivers have not left them enough space when they have to move off.

I think cyclists now should have a stricter highway code then everyone knows where they stand.

But if your anecdotal cyclists were riding in a cycle lane, even a new one, then they weren't doing anything wrong and the onus is on the motorists to look and, yes, maybe even wait before turning left across another lane of traffic.

RGN007 wrote:

Shipley wrote:

Wow is piece has brought out some blithering idiots ! You’re on a bike - ride defensively and read the road ahead. In urban areas you are virtually the lowest in the food chain. Accept it and change your ways. It’s no coincidence that most of the fatalities in London are of cyclist who go up the inside of lorries at traffic lights. I’m an avid cyclist but assume everyone is out to kill me and ride accordingly. HGV drivers have a very tough responsibility these days. Some of you need to grow up a bit

I agree entirely. 

Realistically, driving is a necessity for many elderly, maybe slower responses, disabled, may have reduced flexibility. Although not driving HGV, some cyclists need to grow up a bit and preserve safety instead of challenging it. Some have lost all reason. It's why my car has a dash cam. I feel vulnerable.

As a cyclist I follow the highway code. I don't go through red lights and I never undertake. I even feel I'm breaking some unwritten law if I cycle up the inside in a traffic jam.

I live in Manchester and they are developing a lot of new cycling lanes but I did see a near miss on my way home driving behind a car last week, in the dark. The car in front could turn left as the light went to green, but a stream of cyclists coming down the relatively new cycle lane just kept on going, undercutting the left turning driver. The driver saw them and luckily braked, stopping the stream of cars that could now not get through the lights on green. Had the car continued the left turn and not had eyes in the back of his head, or had his mirror not been in exactly the right place, the driver could have turned across into the nonchalant cyclists that did not even slow down. 

We also have really wide cycle lanes to ensure cyclist safety end of the Mancunian Motorway, but many cyclists choose to squeeze between 3 lanes of traffic, often cycling INTO an 18 inch gap, them would complain the drivers have not left them enough space when they have to move off.

I think cyclists now should have a stricter highway code then everyone knows where they stand.

I'm surprised you feel vulnerable in a car, but having a dash cam is a good idea - you have good evidence in the event of any collision whether with another car or a cyclist.

You must be in a minority to be a cyclist that doesn't undertake if you cycle in traffic a lot, but you should do what you feel more comfortable doing (I'm a keen undertaker, but appreciate that there are risks).

That cycle lane in Manchester sounds to be badly designed. Does the cycle lane continue through the junction or does it stop and then continue after the junction? If it continues (which I think is less common) then the cars turning left should wait until it is safe to do so, but when the lane stops, then the cyclists should beware of indicating cars and slow to avoid any issues (I would aim to drift right across the rear of the left turner and overtake it as it turns).

When cyclists opt to not use a cycle lane, it's often because the cycle lane is not suitable for them - it could be poorly maintained or it doesn't go where the cyclist wants to go. Good quality cycle lanes will be used if they're superior to using the road, so what I try to do is figure out why the cycle lane is not being used and how it could be improved.

With regards the Highway Code, I'd prefer the rules to be relaxed for cyclists (I'm biased). I'd like it to explicity allow going the wrong way up one-way streets (but cedeing priority to the oncoming traffic) and also turning left on red traffic lights when safe to do so. The problem with tightening cyclists' rules is the difficulty of enforcing them (which isn't necessarily a reason to not do it) and more importantly, as a society we want to get more people cycling and thus improve the nation's health.

Finally, there's the harm reduction philosophy whereby we want to get as many idiots as possible to ride bikes rather than driving and thus mistakes have literally less impact. Everytime you see a cyclist doing something foolish, appreciate how much worse it would be if they were driving an HGV or car.

RGN007 wrote:

 

As a cyclist I follow the highway code. I don't go through red lights and I never undertake. I even feel I'm breaking some unwritten law if I cycle up the inside in a traffic jam.

I live in Manchester and they are developing a lot of new cycling lanes but I did see a near miss on my way home driving behind a car last week, in the dark. The car in front could turn left as the light went to green, but a stream of cyclists coming down the relatively new cycle lane just kept on going, undercutting the left turning driver. The driver saw them and luckily braked, stopping the stream of cars that could now not get through the lights on green. Had the car continued the left turn and not had eyes in the back of his head, or had his mirror not been in exactly the right place, the driver could have turned across into the nonchalant cyclists that did not even slow down. 

We also have really wide cycle lanes to ensure cyclist safety end of the Mancunian Motorway, but many cyclists choose to squeeze between 3 lanes of traffic, often cycling INTO an 18 inch gap, them would complain the drivers have not left them enough space when they have to move off.

I think cyclists now should have a stricter highway code then everyone knows where they stand.

I don't believe you've ever done any cycle commuting, unless you are able to follow cycle paths for your whole route.

Who wants to sit in a queue of traffic breathing in noxious exhaust fumes that your vehicle hasn't produced?  In cities often the reason people cycle is because it's often quicker than driving.  It wouldn't be if you still got delayed by all the traffic jams.

The "undercutting" by the cyclists you describe is perfectly legal. 

It's exactly the same situation for drivers when there's been a hold-up on a motorway and the inside lanes start to move again before the outside lanes. 

Drivers wishing to move back to the inside lanes need to make sure those lanes are clear before doing so.  Drivers in the inside lanes may choose to let them move back in but they aren't obliged to do so!

Shipley wrote:

Wow is piece has brought out some blithering idiots ! You’re on a bike - ride defensively and read the road ahead. In urban areas you are virtually the lowest in the food chain. Accept it and change your ways. It’s no coincidence that most of the fatalities in London are of cyclist who go up the inside of lorries at traffic lights. I’m an avid cyclist but assume everyone is out to kill me and ride accordingly. HGV drivers have a very tough responsibility these days. Some of you need to grow up a bit

cyclists DO ride defensively ... , they are more defensive than any other type of road user INCLUDING pedestrians!. Yet this does not protect you when you have some distracted or don't give a fuck type who think they can bully their way in front or coming toward you, from the side or wherever operating a massive machine that can end you in a split second!

People like you need to wake the fuck up and stop pushing the onus of responsibility onto the vulnerable because this never ever works to increase their safety, it just creates yet more victim blaming. All the whhilst removing freedoms to go about ones lawful business (by forcing people off the roads which the increased dangers from unenforced dangerous motorists has done everywhere around the globe!) and threats of punishments for not wearing so called 'safety' PPE, which as we know does sweet FA yet countries governments including the EU road safety comission and indeed as of yesterday the HC twatterratti keep pushing so they can sit back and do nothing!

You need to grow up and actually understand what the fuck is going on and how going the route you and other blithering idiots leads to less safety and worse scenarios for people on bikes (and foot0 everywhere!

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Shipley wrote:

Wow is piece has brought out some blithering idiots ! You’re on a bike - ride defensively and read the road ahead. In urban areas you are virtually the lowest in the food chain. Accept it and change your ways. It’s no coincidence that most of the fatalities in London are of cyclist who go up the inside of lorries at traffic lights. I’m an avid cyclist but assume everyone is out to kill me and ride accordingly. HGV drivers have a very tough responsibility these days. Some of you need to grow up a bit

cyclists DO ride defensively ... , they are more defensive than any other type of road user INCLUDING pedestrians!. Yet this does not protect you when you have some distracted or don't give a fuck type who think they can bully their way in front or coming toward you, from the side or wherever operating a massive machine that can end you in a split second!

People like you need to wake the fuck up and stop pushing the onus of responsibility onto the vulnerable because this never ever works to increase their safety, it just creates yet more victim blaming. All the whhilst removing freedoms to go about ones lawful business (by forcing people off the roads which the increased dangers from unenforced dangerous motorists has done everywhere around the globe!) and threats of punishments for not wearing so called 'safety' PPE, which as we know does sweet FA yet countries governments including the EU road safety comission and indeed as of yesterday the HC twatterratti keep pushing so they can sit back and do nothing!

You need to grow up and actually understand what the fuck is going on and how going the route you and other blithering idiots leads to less safety and worse scenarios for people on bikes (and foot0 everywhere!

Thank you BTBS for your eloquence and sense.  I understand you frequent the city of Bristol, and if ever you feel thirsty, I'll happily quench your thirst in the Drapers Arms; just let me know when.

Shipley wrote:

Wow is piece has brought out some blithering idiots ! You’re on a bike - ride defensively and read the road ahead. In urban areas you are virtually the lowest in the food chain. Accept it and change your ways. It’s no coincidence that most of the fatalities in London are of cyclist who go up the inside of lorries at traffic lights. I’m an avid cyclist but assume everyone is out to kill me and ride accordingly. HGV drivers have a very tough responsibility these days. Some of you need to grow up a bit

 No you're not. HTH.

don simon fbpe wrote:

 No you're not. HTH.

6000km per annum proves my point but I’m also a realist and don’t believe that anything will change in our favour. The ‘powers that be’ can fix nothing these days and that will extend to road management. The fact that everyone in this country seems to be angry doesn’t help either. So rather than blame everyone else, it might make more sense to take control of your own destiny and ride accordingly.

or....you could just shake your fist and swear at everyone you take offence at because that’ll make all the difference.

Shipley wrote:

don simon fbpe wrote:

 No you're not. HTH.

6000km per annum proves my point but I’m also a realist and don’t believe that anything will change in our favour. The ‘powers that be’ can fix nothing these days and that will extend to road management. The fact that everyone in this country seems to be angry doesn’t help either. So rather than blame everyone else, it might make more sense to take control of your own destiny and ride accordingly.

 

or....you could just shake your fist and swear at everyone you take offence at because that’ll make all the difference.

That's not avid, I did over 35,000km on the bike last year and never once felt like backing down to the motoring overlords. I equally haven't been hit by any drivers either, strange that, innit? I don't wear a helmet, but do wear that rather flattering Castelli black kit. That's proof for you!

Shipley wrote:

6000km per annum proves my point but I’m also a realist and don’t believe that anything will change in our favour. The ‘powers that be’ can fix nothing these days and that will extend to road management. The fact that everyone in this country seems to be angry doesn’t help either. So rather than blame everyone else, it might make more sense to take control of your own destiny and ride accordingly.

 

or....you could just shake your fist and swear at everyone you take offence at because that’ll make all the difference.

Is there a typo there?  That's about 10 miles a day, which isn't much.  Just one short commuter journey of 5 miles each way, and pretty much nothing else - if that's 'avid', what would a non-avid cyclist do?  I walk almost as much as that and I wouldn't call myself an 'avid walker'

Now if you were doing, say, five times that, then you could probably use the word 'avid'.

More to the point though, if you 'never undertake' how do you get anywhere?  You just sit there in the cycle lane waiting for the stationary traffic jam next to you to move a few yards?  If that's the case I'm not surprised you only manage 10 miles a day.

As for 'take control of your own destiny' I think that's the key to the delusion you suffer from.  You think that if you always defer to power, you'll be safe and 'in control of your destiny'.  Because it's only the non-deferential who get punished.

You won't be, you know.  Cyclists who obey the rules still get killed, because it's not, in fact, under your control, it's down to the people in the fast-moving metal boxes.

The only way to get any such control is through politics, by campaigning and demanding better from those in power.  Not through being deferential.

I disagree with that general attitude, quite apart from the specific issue of cycling.  It's the essence of conservatism.

That you also like berating others for not being as deferential as you are makes it much worse.    Your problem even has a name, it's called 'the just world fallacy'.

But as you don't seem to cycle very much anyway  I have a suspicion that's not really the problem, the _real_ problem may be that you are speaking as a motorist.

Shipley wrote:

don simon fbpe wrote:

 No you're not. HTH.

...it might make more sense to take control of your own destiny and ride accordingly.

 

or....you could just shake your fist and swear at everyone you take offence at because that’ll make all the difference.

Actually, the logical conclusion to your argument is that everyone should drive a hgv to ensure they get to where they are going safely, after all it's in their hands... But that really doesn't solve any problems and would create many, many more!

You're argument proposes that cyclist are often killing and maiming themselves on the roads, the statistics show a very different picture. Probably makes more sense to go with the facts than your opinion and that of the other (motor-vehicle has priority) blithering idiots