A Stroud HGV driver has shared dashcam footage of filtering cyclists near Temple Meads train station in Bristol and called for lorry firms to invite cyclists on ‘ride-alongs’ to appreciate the challenges presented by the vehicles’ blind spots.
The anonymous driver sent the footage to the Bristol Post in response to a video submitted by a cyclist who experienced three near misses in as many days.
While he agreed that the cyclist had suffered as a result of others’ poor driving, he said his video shows “the other side of the issue”. It shows cyclists filtering past his articulated lorry as he is about to pull away.
“It was a very, very near miss,” he said. “Because I’m much higher up, my blind spots are massive compared to car drivers.
“I couldn’t see the cyclists until they were in front of me. They should have waited or gone down the pavement.
“There is no audio on the footage but as you can imagine I did swear quite loudly, because I was just about to pull off.”
The man, who has been a professional driver for the last years, went on to say that he spends more time looking for cyclists “in silly places” than paying attention to oncoming traffic.
“The guys who wear racing gear are often the worst offenders. People on motorbikes do it as well. When you have 44 tonnes behind you, just trying to make sure you are safe is stressful enough.
“I don’t deny there are idiots in lorries. I know a few and I have worked with a few. But some cyclists are putting themselves and others in danger.”
A number of firms ask their HGV drivers to ride a bike on the roads for a period as part of their training, but the Stroud driver said he would also like to see firms invite cyclists on ‘ride-alongs’ so that they might better appreciate the challenges of driving large vehicles.
60 thoughts on “Lorry driver who shared footage of filtering cyclists says he’d like to see them invited on ‘ride-alongs’ to learn about blind spots”
Couldn’t agree more. Nobody
Couldn’t agree more. Nobody is perfect – fact.
oceandweller wrote:
You are the lorry driver! Who clearly is perfect.
Thank you for putting “fact” after the statement that nobody is perfect, otherwise I might have been tempted to doubt you. That was irony by the way.
It’s a fair comment by the
It’s a fair comment by the lorry driver, I doubt many people are aware of what driving an articulated lorry entails.
The dash cam is a fixed view
The dash cam is a fixed view device, showing only the view from the windscreen; the driver has mirrors and can move his head and eyes, so the footage is extremely misleading. All the cyclists featured have lights, and if the driver couldn’t see them in his mirrors, then the fault is his for not having properly adjusted mirrors.
The real question is why such dangerous vehicles are allowed on the road when they are clearly not safe.
burtthebike wrote:
I am a cyclist, I am a car driver, I am Motorcyclist, I am a HGV Class 1 driver, I am also a Senior Observer with IAM Roadsmart, I have seen utter madness in all forms of driving over my years and this includes lots of HGV drivers, but I also see stupidity by cyclists in and around HGV’s, I have 9 mirrors on my cab and even with 9 there are blind spots.
You clearly have never driven a HGV yet you are quick to lay fault, there is absolutely no doubt that some HGV accidents have been caused by negligence of the driver, but there are so many that could of been avoided, we all teach our kids how to cross the road, even when the pelican crossing lights go green we teach our kids to check the vehicles have stopped before stepping out, but god forbid you get on a bike, then it is OK to ride up the inside of a HGV turning left, it is everybody elses fault, we need some perspective and balance, even on a cycling forum.
HGV drivers have to be so careful, they are in control of a death machine, but also please please fellow cyclists, do not put yourself in danger, pick your moment to undertake carefully, we are constantly watching close overtake video’s on this web site, almost all of them are because drivers are impatient and overtake when the road isn’t clear, so lets not fall foul of the same impatience by riding up the inside of a HGV or running red lights., just wait !
bigbiker101 wrote:
I’ve never ridden up the inside of a truck or large vehicle,yet I’ve had plenty of those vehicles drive up my outside,overtake me at red lights,jumped red lights to get ahead,pushed through just ahead at pedestrian islands,squeezed past when there was no room or pulled along side me while im stopped and still turned left, so don’t lecture me about how I’m ‘part of the problem’ there.
And fwiw I have driven a truck,it scared the life out of me how easy manufacturers had made it to control such a large vehicle,my old mini had heavier steering and slower acceleration and it’ was a fraction of the size and weight.
bigbiker101 wrote:
Anyone can rode a bike, it doesn’t give the rider any more understanding of the problem than someone who is also a cyclist that gets on a bike once every year for a ride around centre parks!
IF you were IAM then you would have a greater understanding of the problem HGV/LGV drivers pose and that they are factually the worst drivers by far on the roads when it comes to killing human beings. You’d also have a better understanding of who is at fault and who bears the massively greater responsibility. Your weasel words say otherwise frankly!
As a % of the number of vehicles compared to other types LGV drivers are FIVE times more likely to be involved in a fatality on minor roads and 1 in 5 fatal crashes on A roads, also 52% of all motorway fatalities are caused by LGV drivers, despite being only 10% of the number of vehicles on said road!
It’s not SOME, it’s MOST! Yes, many could be avoided IF the drivers actually drove to the correct standard and took responsibility given the extreme danger they propose to others, a known thing, not a suprise to anyone!
But please, please actually bother to look in your mirrors and monitors and consider putting your indicators on, please, please put your fucking phones down, stop watching TV/playing games, accessing social media, atop chatting shit on your hands free for hours at end and so become so engrossed you’re massively distracted by such.
Please, please stop trying to cut into a space that does not exist where cyclists are, please stop driving so fucking close when you overtake, please stop driving at the speed limit when overtaking because it’s not appropriate speed and caused a massive wake that destabilises people on bikes. Please don’t fucking pull out at roundabouts and junctions because you think you can use the might is right mode of driving because it fucking kills people … unlike cyclists who have killed FOUR people in 7 years and found at fault by a bent system that fails cyclists at every avenue and blames them for their demise!
Stop pushing the onus of responsibility onto the vulnerable … maybe you’ll be telling your daughter of mother or other female friend/relative not to get raped by walking down the wrong street wearing the wrong clothes!
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Anyone can rode a bike, it doesn’t give the rider any more understanding of the problem than someone who is also a cyclist that gets on a bike once every year for a ride around centre parks!
IF you were IAM then you would have a greater understanding of the problem HGV/LGV drivers pose and that they are factually the worst drivers by far on the roads when it comes to killing human beings. You’d also have a better understanding of who is at fault and who bears the massively greater responsibility. Your weasel words say otherwise frankly!
As a % of the number of vehicles compared to other types LGV drivers are FIVE times more likely to be involved in a fatality on minor roads and 1 in 5 fatal crashes on A roads, also 52% of all motorway fatalities are caused by LGV drivers, despite being only 10% of the number of vehicles on said road!
It’s not SOME, it’s MOST! Yes, many could be avoided IF the drivers actually drove to the correct standard and took responsibility given the extreme danger they propose to others, a known thing, not a suprise to anyone!
But please, please actually bother to look in your mirrors and monitors and consider putting your indicators on, please, please put your fucking phones down, stop watching TV/playing games, accessing social media, atop chatting shit on your hands free for hours at end and so become so engrossed you’re massively distracted by such.
Please, please stop trying to cut into a space that does not exist where cyclists are, please stop driving so fucking close when you overtake, please stop driving at the speed limit when overtaking because it’s not appropriate speed and caused a massive wake that destabilises people on bikes. Please don’t fucking pull out at roundabouts and junctions because you think you can use the might is right mode of driving because it fucking kills people … unlike cyclists who have killed FOUR people in 7 years and found at fault by a bent system that fails cyclists at every avenue and blames them for their demise!
Stop pushing the onus of responsibility onto the vulnerable … maybe you’ll be telling your daughter of mother or other female friend/relative not to get raped by walking down the wrong street wearing the wrong clothes!
[/quote]
HGV have the most fatality rate because they always win. You can blame. Always blame the driver. The road book tell tyou to stay away and give HGV. More space when your in a car on a bike I give them as much space I can. And. Try to always stay behind them. Never try to pass them when there making a right. Don’t care if he can see me I just want to live another day. You as a person cyclists. Have to take your safety into your own hands. Just as you do when at work home or driving your car. Give the big trucks space. There not purposely trying to kill you
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Idiotic response and this stupid attitude is the reason I won’t be commenting on here ever again. You add fuel to the “anti cyclist” w***ers of the world. You think your holier than thou and it’s everyone else at fault.
The driver and the bloke you responded to have a brain, maybe thats something you should look into.
Tim K wrote:
Thank god. I can’t stand people who don’t clip their quotes to a sensible length.
bigbiker101 wrote:
Well, it is a privilege and an honour to have such a highly qualified respondent.
Tell me, do you think that the footage from the dashcam was representative and valid, given that it showed only the view from the windscreen and the fixed field of view of the camera, and could not show the views in the mirrors?
Being so highly qualified, you’ll also be able to tell us whether a huge, dangerous vehicle which is more likely than others to kill innocent vulnerable road users should be allowed on the road when it has blind spots? If you haven’t worked it out, here’s a clue; no.
Stop blaming cyclists and put the blame where it belongs; on our complete ultra-shambles of a government and drivers who don’t care.
Such an experienced and qualified driver will also be able to tell us how many HGV drivers have been killed by cyclists, rather than the other way around. With power comes responsibility, and HGV drivers have all the power, and therefore the responsibility.
bigbiker101 wrote:
A point rather missed by the lorry driver I saw recently that was reading a newpaper spread over his steering wheel – I mainly noticed this, as he turned the page as I went past! Sadly, I was in the car with no dashcam – if I’d been on the bike, I would have had the bar cam on.
I’m seriously considering using the bar cam in the car!
LastBoyScout wrote:
And pulled some balletic wheelie?
burtthebike wrote:
This, because the problem is not just how LGVs/HGVs interact with cyclists.
Half the time, I’m not sure their drivers even see other motor vehicles. How many of us have driven on the motorway with a HGV about three feet off our car’s back bumper, which then pulls out, passes at about 1 foot per hour faster, then pulls in far too close? How many of us have had an overtaking HGV try and move over when our car is *right next to* their cab??
I can’t imagine that we’d would ever let HGVs be driven around an urban environment, if they were suddenly invented today… Pretty sure they’d be restricted to motorways (you know – the roads that *were* built for cars).
burtthebike wrote:
100% this. You can’t blame other people for being in a blind spot when it’s your blind spot.
If you hold the risk, you hold the responsibility.
burtthebike wrote:
Sounds like you need one of these “ride alongs” quite badly.
I just saw two cyclists
I just saw two cyclists “reading” the stationary traffic, and using a bit of space to progress … safely? Without causing obstruction?
That’s not saying I don’t see cyclists being crazily unaware of their own safety – Lord only knows how often another cyclist’s stupidity has scared the **** out of me.
It’s also NOT saying I don’t have immense sympathy for guys driving (incredibly badly designed?) trucks – and the way so many road-users (cyclists AND car drivers) take the inconsiderate mick.
[Speaking of which – the two guys who take to the pavement? Now THAT pisses me off! And as for the lit-up salmon at the end of the clip? Words fail me.]
But this clip? The other side of the story? Naaaaaaaah. Sorry, mate.
Good to see the driver of a
Good to see the driver of a large and potentially lethal vehicle taking his time and driving carefully around other road users.
He’s not wrong about ride alongs either. All road users should try and spend some time as a cyclist and some time in the cab of a HGV.
When the traffic was totally
When the traffic was totally stopped I can’t see the problem if there are no left turns up ahead. Obviously once it starts to move then stop sticking your bike up the inside of lorries.
The footage is nothing compared to everyday lunacy you see in London vids.
All I’m getting from the HGV
All I’m getting from the HGV drivers posting in this thread is that such vehicles fail, on a very basic level, to meet a design standard that is sufficient for them to mix with other road users without posing a lethal threat.
I mean, if these blind spots are as big as made out, drivers plain can’t see enough to operate the vehicle safely in dense traffic, no matter how skilled.
srchar wrote:
The irony to me is that he was able to “raise awareness” of these issues by the use of technology. The same technology that could be used to eliminate said blind spots…
I do try to laugh about it*, but I can never get over the vehicles that have the cyclists stay back or similar stickers right next to the sticker warning about recording cameras.
Haulage and other firms running these vehicles apparently find the cash to install cameras where the purpose is to exonerate them in the event of a collision, yet apparently installing similar cameras for safety purposes would be far too expensive.
It’s been said many times, but in any other area of work, the HS&E would rightly have a fit if reasonable and proportionate action was not taken to address identified and serious safety issues. If 1 driver can’t monitor the vehicle and it’s surroundings safely (whether with mirrors, cameras, whatever) then have a second person as a look out. Why is this not mandatory in any urban/built up enviroment?
The simple fact is that society has decided that the economic interest of commerical companies to run HGVs pretty much as cheaply as possible outweighs safety. And yes, I know I’m preaching to the choir, and I know it’ll not change anytime soon. But it should.
* where I reach my limit are the transits and even smaller vans with those cyclists stay back stickers…
To be honest, I would
To be honest, I would undertake a lorry along that road but be wary when the traffic ahead of it starts to move (i.e. signalling that the lorry is about to move).
That road is usually backed up with traffic from the roundabout at the end of it, so a cyclist would be expecting slow/stationary traffic and be looking to undertake. To my mind, the lorry is stuck in traffic and has little chance of making it to the roundabout before the lights turn red again, so there’s no detriment to the lorry taking its time to start moving. However that last cyclist looked to have left it a bit late to undertake – I’d probably have let the truck pull ahead first and then undertook it 30m down the road.
It does worry me about lorries having these blind spots – maybe there need to be more stringent standards on how much visibility is required.
I think as an awareness then
I think as an awareness then the lorry driver has every right to post this.
However, the behaviour is massively gammon like when in response to close pass videos “Johnny had his eyes open during prayers miss”.
This is not “the other side of the issue”. One issue is that thousands of cyclists are close passed every day and their life put in danger due to road users being distracted, lazy, aggressive, self-entitled etc. Another issue is that these lorries he has confirmed are not of a standard to drive on the roads. The third problem is that he is annoyed that some people on bikes filter ast him. Lastly, the odd cyclist may put themselves in danger…
All I saw was poor driving by
All I saw was poor driving by the HGV driver. Why on earth was he so close to the parked car and possibly over the central white line… and why the hell did he keep inching forwards when there was no option to progress past the parked car? Until the traffic clear, just wait! …and then check it is safe to move off by checking your mirrors and blindspots, if you can’t see enough then don’t drive. Simples.
I’m not sure what to make of
I’m not sure what to make of all this.
One of the riders did not do well on hazard perception and should have realised the driver would move forward when traffic ahead was moving, so going up the inside was not a good choice.
On the other hand lorries are clearly not suited to these dense environments and cyclists have been killed unnecessarily – there was that one at the end of last year where the cyclist was dragged under a tipper truck as the driver had not seen the cyclist had come off on the very muddy road.
hirsute wrote:
There: thats the point. HGVs are *not* suited to a dense urban environment – TBH, if their blind spots are so bad then they should not be sharing the roads with anything smaller than them!
What we really need for long distance freight transport is some sort of dedicated network for carrying freight, where the vehicles are not sharing their environment with something smaller than them and don’t have to worry about manoeuvering. We could call them, “railways”.
That final mile, or whatever you want to call it, could be dealt with by much smaller vehicles, which don’t have these blind spots (just dumb drivers, but we can fix that).
brooksby wrote:
There: thats the point. HGVs are *not* suited to a dense urban environment – TBH, if their blind spots are so bad then they should not be sharing the roads with anything smaller than them!
What we really need for long distance freight transport is some sort of dedicated network for carrying freight, where the vehicles are not sharing their environment with something smaller than them and don’t have to worry about manoeuvering. We could call them, “railways”.
That final mile, or whatever you want to call it, could be dealt with by much smaller vehicles, which don’t have these blind spots (just dumb drivers, but we can fix that).— hirsute
Ah yes good idea every cyclists friend, the van driver! lets get more delivery vans in cities, they are far more considerate to other road users.
peted76 wrote:
I was looking at it from the pov of “removing HGVs”, to be honest.
And, the smaller vans *don’t* have the blind spots and are therefore less dangerous (if we do something about the twunts behind the wheel).
If long distance freight was carried by train instead of HGVs, how would you suggest then getting it from that depot to the actual shops or businesses? Smaller vehicles, with better regulation and possibly with electric motors, seems reasonable IMO.
brooksby wrote:
Cargo bike!
hirsute wrote:
I’m pretty sure the technology exists to prevent accidents like this.
Parking sensors are activated automatically when putting a vehicle into reverse. Wouldn’t it be possible for ones on trucks to be activated whenever the handbrake is released or the footbrake released after being held down for more than a few seconds?
Most of these HGV drivers are
Most of these HGV drivers are foreign types.
The problem, as with all problems, will dissappear after Brexit.
#takebackcontrol
wibble.
^^ I have actually given this
^^ I have actually given this some thought and despite my sarky tone, do appreciate what you suggest on removing HGV’s from shitty centres..
However I concluded that that simply wouldn’t work, businesses need to have heavy goods delivered far larger than a cargo bike could manage despite what a beardy hip type in Shoreditch might say. My one idea for this would be to allow HGV’s into cities between the hours of 19:00 to 06:00hrs. Of course this isn’t very practical either as the additional ‘people cost’ to businesses could mean some businesses would suffer, BUT on the flip side, it might just expand a subculture of night time workers, 24hour businesses and better timed and organised deliveries (which almost seems quite modern and exciting for consumers).
^^ I agree it wouldn’t be a
^^ I agree it wouldn’t be a complete solution – although I know at least one local company that uses electrically assisted cargo trikes to transport pretty substantial loads (their website claims up to 250kg). I guess the optimal solution would be a hierarchy – cargo bikes/trikes are used if possible, if not possible then small vans (ideally electric), and HGVs only if absolutely necessary, and with sensible restrictions about exactly where and when they can go.
Wow is piece has brought out
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
Shipley wrote:
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:
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.— Shipley
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:
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.— Shipley
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:
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:
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:
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!— Shipley
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:
No you’re not. HTH.
don simon fbpe 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.
Shipley wrote:
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:
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:
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
I remember a piece in the
I remember a piece in the Guardian I think, where a lady who took over a transport company in London was sick of the cycling accidents that were assumed to be inevitable and installed blind spot monitoring and reduced accidents to nil in that company. Tried to find it but could only find https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/aug/02/hgv-lorries-cycling-campaign.
I don’t know what it is like in the UK but bad road design doesn’t help, eg having advanced stop boxes at lights but no way to get there but to filter through traffic.
The lorry driver’s making a
The lorry driver’s making a reasonable point here. We can do our bit to give someone driving a HGV every chance of seeing us, and the best possible chance of avoiding us if we’re beyond his line of sight.
Quote:
I too don’t really get why he
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.
bikezero wrote:
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.
Some of the responses to this
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?
kittybag wrote:
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:
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
While he agreed that the
While he agreed that the cyclist had suffered as a result of others’ poor driving, he said his video shows “the other side of the issue”
“He says he is put in danger by cyclists on a daily basis, pointing to a dashcam video shot on the A37 near Bristol Temple Meads train station.”
Nope he is not “put in danger” and there is only “the other side of the issue” if you look at it from a roads are for vehicles perspective…..
Looking at the video – here are some questions that can’t really be answered by cyclists changing their behaviour :
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.
“Rush hour(s)” Why is a HGV on an inner city road at a busy time? What urgent supplies are being rushed where?
“Rush hour(s)” How many of those cars causing the tail back are single occupant occupying a lot of space?
“Rush hour(s)” with flexible working / home working / rentable office space / zero hours contracts / extended business hours etc etc why do we have them?
2m of road space – not a lot but why can’t it be delivered for cyclists?
ok some cyclists may need a little education but it doesn’t fix the problem.
antigee wrote:
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.
I actually don’t feel
I actually don’t feel condemnatory of the hgv driver that started this, even though I ultimately disagree with him, I can see why he came to feel that way. It’s the comments of the posters supporting him here [most of whom seem to be new posters, for some reason] that have me irate.
Don’t know why people are
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.
A lot also depends on your route. My route is mostly b-roads so it’s rarer to get close passed but when I do it’s fairly high speed. I don’t really do any undertaking as I’d never really get to any lights until I get back home. Other people’s commute will all traffic weaving and low speed dodging.
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
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.
Griff500 wrote:
JJ
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.
— Yorkshire wallet
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 !
Sorry Burt, not a Brissie
Sorry Burt, not a Brissie resident, but thanks for the offer.