Video: Cyclist & lorry driver experience Met's Exchanging Places scheme

Both come away with new understanding of the other's perspective

by Simon_MacMichael   December 6, 2013  

Exchanging Places video still

The Metropolitan Police has released a video showing a cyclist and a lorry driver taking part in one of its Exchanging Places events, aimed at fostering better understanding between the two types of road user.

The scheme, which last month won a Prince Michael International Road Safety Award, has been running since 2007 but the impetus for making the video is the deaths in the first half of November of six cyclists in London, all of them killed in collisions with lorries.

In the short film, cyclist Christopher and tipper truck driver Darren, accompanied by Sergeant Simon Castle from the Metropolitan Police’s Cycle Task Force, gain an appreciation of how things are from the other’s perspective.

Christopher, who cycles daily, says: “London traffic for me is the most intense traffic. I am extremely careful around trucks – it’s not a good mix, it’s not a good match.”

Darren, who’s been driving tipper lorries for about a decade, comments: “The limitations I have driving the lorry around London is that I’m very high up and the cyclists are very low down, and there’s lots of blind spots around the vehicle.”

Once Christopher is in the cab, and with Sergeant Castle moving around the vehicle with a bicycle, Derek explains when the cyclist can and can’t be seen.

With the camera also showing the driver’s point of view, it’s quite an eye-opener to learn just how easy it is for a bike rider to disappear from sight.

“In the moment it takes for him to look to his right to see if there’s any traffic, by the time he’s looked back, a cyclist could have come up along the side of the truck and be hidden,” says Christopher. “If you’re in that place, you’re in trouble.”

“My recommendation would be to a cyclist, number one, try to avoid at all costs going up the side of an HGV at lights, try and avoid coming up the inside of a lorry at these traffic lights especially if the lorry’s turning left,” adds Darren.

Later, Christopher says: “Having had this day, there’s certain things I could do which would be really easy. I definitely will be wearing a visible top – a truck driver’s going to pick you up, they know you’re there, you’re in a much better position.”

Darren reflects: “I’ve gained from this experience that you have to have a bit of teamwork, you have to have a bit of eye contact, you have to have a bit of hand manoeuvres between the cyclist and the lorry driver. You’ve both got to look out for each other.”

That sense of working together is something picked up on by Christopher, too, who says: ““It’s a team effort and that’s really clear to me now.”

Sergeant Castle explains the thinking behind the initiative: “The number one cause of serious crashes in London involving cyclists involves HGVs, heavy goods vehicles, and we know why – the lorry driver can’t see the cyclist, and the cyclist isn’t aware of what the lorry driver can and can’t see.

“What we do is we get the cyclists to sit in the cab of the lorry and explain how these crashes tend to happen and crucially, how to avoid them.”

While riding a bike along the road with Christopher and Derek, he points out: “The more space the lorry has left you, the more likely it is he’s going to turn left. The more tempting it looks, the more dangerous it is.”

A scheme that aims to enable lorry drivers and bike riders to get an insight into the other’s experience forms can only form part of trying to make conditions safer for cyclists when sharing the road with large vehicles.

Safety equipment such as mirrors, sensors and side guards, along with improvements to infrastructure such as early start traffic lights or proper provision for cyclists at junctions and enforcement of Advanced Stop Lines, are just some of the other measures that can reduce the danger.

But given that in some instances lorry drivers have been found guilty of causing deaths of cyclists in London, and that a recent Metropolitan Police road safety operation saw 15 out of 70 lorry drivers fined for a variety of offences, it’s perhaps wishful thinking when Sergeant Castle says: “My key message is that these crashes are avoidable.”

He adds: “We’re not talking about massive changes to the way we ride our bikes, we’re talking about a few sensible precautions.”

Forthcoming Exchanging Places events are scheduled for Wednesday 11 December from 0730-1000 at Factory Road E16 at the junction with North Woolwich Road, and on Friday 20 December from 0730-1000 at Kings Mews, Holborn, WC1.

Another London cyclist who has taken part in a similar scheme is road.cc’s own Sarah Barth, who attended one last year. Here’s what she had to say:

The opportunity to sit in the cab of an HGV is one of the most significant things I've done to improve my safety on the streets of London.

The cab is filled with mirrors, so it is possible to see the sides of the lorries from most angles, but it's not always easy.

A cyclist is just about visible coming up on the left -- but the improvement once you add a high-viz jacket is astonishing. If you've any sense though, you'd ride up the right, or go nowhere near.

There clearly are blind spots, and these are different on different vehicles, so you come away with the impression that the safest place to be is well out of the way.

And the safety features only work if the driver is using them - one can only imagine the dangers posed by a tired or distracted driver.

60 user comments

Latest 30 commentsNewest firstBest ratedAll

@Neil753 - From what I've read on Martin Porter QC's blog, among others, camera evidence is not enough for the police to take action against a dangerous driver. I don't think you would be able to establish speed from the footage either. A phone call to their boss could work, but that would rely on you catching them up later to take the details.

I feel like the overall standard of driving from HGV drivers is actually among the best of any road user group. It's just that there are dire consequences when either the HGV driver or another road user gets it wrong.

Expecting people's skills and behaviour to be perfect, all the time, with potentially fatal consequences for getting it wrong, has been designed out of pretty much every area of industry apart from jobs involving bomb disposal, surgery, and driving.

posted by Mr Agreeable [132 posts]
6th December 2013 - 15:43

like this
Like (921)

William Black wrote:
It's not victim blaming, it's just common fcuking sense

Part of me agrees.

But remember where people painted the cycle lanes and ASLs: right up the nearside of HGVs and across the front of them.

To many people, following the paint laid down by trained, experienced highway engineers is common sense.

The one truth that comes out of all of this is that if avoiding the blind spots of HGVs is to be called "common sense", it's not so common as to be common amongst the people who design and approve the roads we all use.

Bez's picture

posted by Bez [370 posts]
6th December 2013 - 15:46

like this
Like (912)

I never assume any driver has seen me, I don't bother wasting time playing get eye contact, I'm typically going too fast, it's dark or the sky is reflecting off of the windscreen.
I've had drivers look right at me and still not see me.

Instead I use a bright light, drivers would have to be blind not to see me coming with., I cycle in the middle of the lane or even further out which makes me more visible and gives me more time to respond if a car starts pulling out. I don't weave in and out of parked cars. I don't cycle in the door zone, ok, rarely - but slowly and cautiously, sometimes you get forced there by inconsiderate drivers coming the other way.

I do cycle down the left hand side of trucks but only when traffic is stopped, 3+ vehicles are stopped in front of the truck and there is a big gap which I can cycle down quickly. Otherwise I keep my distance.

posted by kie7077 [434 posts]
6th December 2013 - 16:37

like this
Like (913)

William Black wrote:
northstar wrote:
Victim blaming at it's most amazing it seems., re-design public highways - problem solved.

It's not victim blaming, it's just common fcuking sense: don't ride up the inside of a lorry, if you're in the bike box look back - if you can't see the lorry driver he can't see you, don't ride like a bellend.

Yes it is, next?

posted by northstar [1086 posts]
6th December 2013 - 16:37

like this
Like (912)

Neil753 wrote:
I strongly urge my fellow hgv drivers to hold back

Good man.

Quote:
it is just plain dumb to place yourself in the ASL zone unless you are specifically turning right. ASLs were never intended for cyclists who wish to go straight on or turn left.

Flawed as ASLs are, it's immaterial what they were intended for. Cyclists see them as safe havens that allow us to get ahead of the motor traffic and so reduce our risk. If you're going to ask us to compensate for the fact that pilot a health and safety nightmare around the streets, you can't really complain about us positioning ourselves so that we can safely get the heck out of your way.

Quote:
This mustn't be seen as one lorry driver slagging off cyclists; we should all be working together on this one, and the view from the cab is just as valid as the view from the saddle.

Up to a point; drivers are not the ones who wind up dead or on life support.

John Stevenson's picture

posted by John Stevenson [975 posts]
6th December 2013 - 17:09

like this
Like (916)

William Black wrote:
don't ride like a bellend.

A good friend of mine saw the crash that put Mary Bowers in a coma that she's still in over a year later. She was not riding like a bellend.

Unfortunately the boss has forbidden me from suggesting what you should do with your victim-blaming. It involves one of those Anglo-Saxon monosyllables you seem to think support your point though, and the phrase "yourself with it".

John Stevenson's picture

posted by John Stevenson [975 posts]
6th December 2013 - 17:20

like this
Like (912)

John Stevenson wrote:
Neil753 wrote:

Even though there may be a filter lane, enticing you into danger, the golden rule is "keep back".

Are you HGV drivers going to start doing your bit by stopping far enough behind the ASL stop line that you can see everyone in it? You know where your blind spots are, surely it's incumbent on you to compensate for them, not cyclists?

That depends who got there first? Once an HGV or any other vehicle for that matter has come to a halt behind the ASL, if a cyclist chooses to place him/herself in dangerous proximity, adjacent to or in front of the vehicle, either through arrogance or ignorance, it is the cyclist who is in the wrong.

Hopefully he/she gets away without paying the ultimate price for such a stupid error but if not, the cyclist has no one to blame but him/herself.

http://youtu.be/leW8Mx1GciE

As for victim blaming, if a person throws himself under a tube train, who is the victim? The jumper or the poor train driver who killed someone through no fault of his own?

Same goes on the road. To use the mot du jour, if you get yourself killed while riding like a bellend, you are not the victim. The poor driver who could have done nothing to avoid you is the victim.

So William Black is correct IMO. Don't ride like a bellend.

And it really ought to go without saying, but I will say it loud and clear so there can be no mistake:

Just because some cyclists are killed/injured on the road, in part or wholly because they were riding like bellends, it does not in anyway imply that all or even anything approaching a majority of cycling fatalities are caused by bellend cycling. Far from it.

Never in a hurry on a bicycle.

posted by GoingRoundInCycles [134 posts]
6th December 2013 - 18:03

like this
Like (562)

@Mr Agreeable - I agree, the Police may not take action. But get the registration number, and film the near miss if you can, and approach the transport firm. They're all well aware of this issue, and don't want the adverse publicity. You may not get a prosecution, but you can be sure they will know who the driver is, and give him or her a bit of "advice". They may even be on a bonus scheme that rewards careful drivers, as an incentive to not drive like a tw*t. Either way, reporting the incident to the firm is something your fellow cyclists will appreciate. But equally, if you see an exemplary piece of driving, please don't hesitate to report it too. Other drivers get to hear about it, maybe in the company magazine, and it encourages their colleagues to improve their driving too.

@kie7077 - your "3 vehicle" rule of thumb is quite a good one.

@ John Stevenson - ASLs are flawed, as you say, and the filter lanes that feed into them encourage cyclists to do just that, but we're getting to the point, certainly in London, where crowded ASL zones are becoming a real problem. I would suggest that, rightly or wrongly, the typical jockying for position witnessed at many junctions, far from being being a way to "get the heck out the way", put the cyclist back into the firing line at the next pinch point or row of parked cars. Apart from the risk of collision, there's no guarantee that the driver behind you isn't going to dish out a punishment pass. I certainly believe that the safest place to be is behind a truck, not in front of it, especially since (as you rightly point out) the cyclist always comes off worse.

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
6th December 2013 - 19:56

like this
Like (913)

John Stevenson wrote:
William Black wrote:
don't ride like a bellend.

A good friend of mine saw the crash that put Mary Bowers in a coma that she's still in over a year later. She was not riding like a bellend.

Unfortunately the boss has forbidden me from suggesting what you should do with your victim-blaming. It involves one of those Anglo-Saxon monosyllables you seem to think support your point though, and the phrase "yourself with it".

I didn't suggest Mary Bowers was riding like a bellend, you seem to have randomly plucked an anecdotal incident from thin air to support whatever point it was you were rather badly trying to make.

On the other had riding up the inside of a lorry is riding a bellend, it's not victim blaming whatever fuzzy logic you try to spin on it. Putting yourself at risk by riding your bike into a lethal position is quite simply retarded.

William Black's picture

posted by William Black [196 posts]
6th December 2013 - 20:19

like this
Like (908)

There's an ASL in Bath that has a 'Keep Clear' area behind it, about 8m of it. And then the stop line for vehicles. Never felt safer in an ASL than I do in that one. You know everyone can see you, and it's not a race to go because you're already a decent distance in front.

always makes me wonder: why aren't they all like that? The keep clear is for vehicles to go through on one phase, but it'd be easy to rework 90% of ASLs like that.

on the subject of bellends, if you stop your vehicle, especially a big one, at an ASL that you know will fill with cyclists, and you stop in a position that means you can't see them, then that's driving like a bellend. Just because you can't go past the line, that doesn't mean you *have* to drive right up to it. have some common sense, eh, since that's what we're expecting of cyclists, who stand only to lose from their actions.

Dave Atkinson's picture

posted by Dave Atkinson [7259 posts]
6th December 2013 - 22:01

like this
Like (920)

from my experiences commuting in London for many years, the design of ASL is seriously flawed and needs an urgent redesign

the ASL leading strip on many of the junctions' left kerbs draws cyclists up the inside of vehicles already parked at the ASL stop line

in some instances the ASL leading strip sits in the middle of lane 1 and 2 in a 2/3 lane wide road, leading cyclists between 2 lanes of cars to get to the ASL.

Woe betide any cyclist using this when the lights suddenly change...

Considering these road markings are placed by governmental authorities, there are serious grounds for a legal action brought about by any cyclist involved in a RTC following the "marked advise" of this signage

posted by hampstead_bandit [122 posts]
6th December 2013 - 22:18

like this
Like (911)

Dave Atkinson wrote:
on the subject of bellends, if you stop your vehicle, especially a big one, at an ASL that you know will fill with cyclists, and you stop in a position that means you can't see them, then that's driving like a bellend.

No it really isn't. It is the job of the overtaker to carry out the manoeuvre safely and there is no excuse for getting it wrong especially when overtaking a stationary vehicle.

The Highway Code states that "before overtaking you should make sure there is a suitable gap in front of the road user you plan to overtake". So it is up to the cyclist to decide whether or not there is sufficient room ahead of the large vehicle to take up a safe position after the overtake.

Simply do not do it. It is totally unnecessary. If a large vehicle is first in the queue, take the primary position behind it and keep that position through the junction until you do not need it any more. If there are three large vehicles, sit behind the third one.

ASLs are there to make it easier for cyclists to execute right turns at difficult junctions. They should not be viewed IMO as a means to facilitate queue jumping.

Never in a hurry on a bicycle.

posted by GoingRoundInCycles [134 posts]
6th December 2013 - 23:22

like this
Like (572)

GoingRoundInCycles wrote:

No it really isn't. It is the job of the overtaker to carry out the manoeuvre safely and there is no excuse for getting it wrong especially when overtaking a stationary vehicle.

you seem to be a bit fixated about cyclists undertaking lorries. a lot of the time cyclists are in front of large vehicles as they approach a red light, and the large vehicles stop right on the line (or in front of it) meaning they can't see the cyclists. that's what i'm talking about.

Dave Atkinson's picture

posted by Dave Atkinson [7259 posts]
6th December 2013 - 23:34

like this
Like (925)

GoingRoundInCycles wrote:
ASLs are there to make it easier for cyclists to execute right turns at difficult junctions.

Is that something you've unilaterally decided? I can't see any mention of it in road laws or the highway code.

Dave Atkinson's picture

posted by Dave Atkinson [7259 posts]
6th December 2013 - 23:37

like this
Like (907)

GoingRoundInCycles wrote:
Dave Atkinson wrote:
on the subject of bellends, if you stop your vehicle, especially a big one, at an ASL that you know will fill with cyclists, and you stop in a position that means you can't see them, then that's driving like a bellend.

No it really isn't. It is the job of the overtaker to carry out the manoeuvre safely and there is no excuse for getting it wrong especially when overtaking a stationary vehicle.

The Highway Code states that "before overtaking you should make sure there is a suitable gap in front of the road user you plan to overtake". So it is up to the cyclist to decide whether or not there is sufficient room ahead of the large vehicle to take up a safe position after the overtake.

Simply do not do it. It is totally unnecessary. If a large vehicle is first in the queue, take the primary position behind it and keep that position through the junction until you do not need it any more. If there are three large vehicles, sit behind the third one.

ASLs are there to make it easier for cyclists to execute right turns at difficult junctions. They should not be viewed IMO as a means to facilitate queue jumping.

If you can't filter, you might as well take a bus. If I filter to the front and there's either some vehicle in the ASL or a HGV parked with it's nose to the ASL then I will move forward until I consider myself to be in a safe position where-ever that may be.

Sit behind the vehicle - How? in that 30cm between the HGV and the car behind, get real.

posted by kie7077 [434 posts]
7th December 2013 - 0:03

like this
Like (911)

Neil753 wrote:
John Stevenson wrote:
Neil753 wrote:

Even though there may be a filter lane, enticing you into danger, the golden rule is "keep back".

Are you HGV drivers going to start doing your bit by stopping far enough behind the ASL stop line that you can see everyone in it? You know where your blind spots are, surely it's incumbent on you to compensate for them, not cyclists?


I do, and I strongly urge my fellow hgv drivers to hold back, leaving a gap behind the ASL, driving with care, making effective use of mirrors, and anticipating dangerous situations.

As I see it, there are two many risky drivers out there, partly because the current system encourages speed (pay per load, time restrictions, impatient transport managers, etc).

But I also see two types of dangerous cyclist. Inexperienced riders who are simply unaware of the dangers they face, and a sizeable hardcore of more experienced riders who feel confident enough to put themselves in dangerous situations in order to reduce their journey times.

The "keep back" message is easy for both groups to interpret. And frankly, it is just plain dumb to place yourself in the ASL zone unless you are specifically turning right. ASLs were never intended for cyclists who wish to go straight on or turn left.

This mustn't be seen as one lorry driver slagging off cyclists; we should all be working together on this one, and the view from the cab is just as valid as the view from the saddle.

I like this sort of dialogue between HGV drivers and all other road users (particularly us cyclists amongst the most vulnerable) and just want to flag it in a positive light. We need to work together on this and embarass government officials who continue to procrastinate, blame the dead and critically injured and generally look to do anything so long as the motorist isn't even remotely hindered by it.

For me getting anywhere near an HGV is a no no. I wasn't taught this as a kid who took up cycling, it just seemed a no brainer so I do struggle to understand why people place themselves in a position more likely to end very badly.

As for safety amongst companies and HGV operators my wife works for a large British Petroleum group Wink and I have been very impressed by the active safety measures that company takes to promote road safety. They really do try to make an effort and other companies would do well to adopt a similar level of responsibility.

Any member of staff found using a mobile to, during or from their place of work faces dismissal on a gross misconduct charge. They choose at a greater cost to the company to operate their own fleet of lorries in order to maintain greater safety standards and accountability.

Even working at head office and not out on the roads she receives regular updates on road safety and is offered advanced driver training in some situations if appropriate to the job. This stuff counts and I wonder how many other companies make such efforts to ensure their employees are acting responsibly whilst on the roads.

Lets keep the talking going and foster good relationships that keep us all safer.

Hating our selfish and ignorant car culture

posted by ironmancole [116 posts]
7th December 2013 - 0:25

like this
Like (909)

Having watched the vid I was struck by the words at the very end as recommendations by the Metropolitan Police. It finishes with:

'For everyone - obey the rules of the road'

And here lies the real problem does it not? However, what do we see our MPs doing about this...absolutely nothing.

They do want to encourage cycling though and ensure we all feel safe to hit urban and rural roads Laughing

Shambolic.

Hating our selfish and ignorant car culture

posted by ironmancole [116 posts]
7th December 2013 - 0:33

like this
Like (913)

Daft cyclists taking on a lorry without an ounce of sense that the driver won't stop with his right of way especially if he can't/didn't see you.

posted by dogcc [98 posts]
7th December 2013 - 18:23

like this
Like (904)

Neil753: "ASLs were never intended for cyclists who wish to go straight on or turn left. "
I have always believed that they were designed to permit and encourageALL cyclists to get safely to to the front so that they restart (sometimes with a wobble) without being surrounded by motorised vehicles.
HIGHWAY Code 178 ASL: "to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic"
Is my view incorrect?
Where is the evidence that it was only intended for cyclists turning right?
Straighten me out if I'm wrong.

posted by LeylandCyclist [1 posts]
7th December 2013 - 19:12

like this
Like (901)

LeylandCyclist wrote:
Neil753: "ASLs were never intended for cyclists who wish to go straight on or turn left. "
I have always believed that they were designed to permit and encourageALL cyclists to get safely to to the front so that they restart (sometimes with a wobble) without being surrounded by motorised vehicles.
HIGHWAY Code 178 ASL: "to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic"
Is my view incorrect?
Where is the evidence that it was only intended for cyclists turning right?
Straighten me out if I'm wrong.
.
I agree, section 178 might be interpreted as you say. It certainly doesn't specifically differentiate between cyclists heading straight on or cyclists turning right.

But neither does it mention anything about allowing for cyclists squeezing up the inside. The ASL is to "allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic", ie to prevent motorists from stopping too close to cyclists in front who are (and this is the crucial bit) already there.

The ASL zone isn't some magical safety zone, surrounded by an inpenetrable force field; it's just some paint on the road. If you're turning right, then positioning yourself in the ASL zone is not without risk but it is less of a risk than trying to move across whilst traffic is moving. But positioning yourself in the ASL zone when you want to move straight on, when many drivers have already engaged first gear and have their eyes firmly fixed on the traffic lights, is definitely not safer than staying on the left hand side of the road.

The ASL, in its current form, is probably responsible for more deaths in town (and more punishment passes further down the road) than anything else.

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
7th December 2013 - 20:09

like this
Like (905)

Dave Atkinson wrote:
GoingRoundInCycles wrote:

No it really isn't. It is the job of the overtaker to carry out the manoeuvre safely and there is no excuse for getting it wrong especially when overtaking a stationary vehicle.

you seem to be a bit fixated about cyclists undertaking lorries. a lot of the time cyclists are in front of large vehicles as they approach a red light, and the large vehicles stop right on the line (or in front of it) meaning they can't see the cyclists. that's what i'm talking about.

I agree. It's important for us hgv drivers not to pull up alongside cyclists who have already arrived at the junction. But it's equally important for cyclists not to pull up alongside our lorries, when we've already come to a standstill.

I guess the reason why cyclists with hgv licences keep banging on about this, is because a lot of other cyclists still aren't listening.

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
7th December 2013 - 20:22

like this
Like (910)

I would recommend anyone, driver, cyclist or pedestrian, to take the opportunity of sitting in the cab of an HGV, if available. I did so a few years ago at a cycling event and now give HGV's an even wider berth than I did before, when cycling, driving a car or as a pedestrian. It only takes a moment's inattention by the HGV driver to that panel of mirrors or for you to be in a blind spot and you're going to get squished, whatever the rights and wrongs of it and no matter who was at fault.

posted by Vercors [44 posts]
7th December 2013 - 23:37

like this
Like (907)

Vercors wrote:
I would recommend anyone, driver, cyclist or pedestrian, to take the opportunity of sitting in the cab of an HGV, if available. I did so a few years ago at a cycling event and now give HGV's an even wider berth than I did before, when cycling, driving a car or as a pedestrian. It only takes a moment's inattention by the HGV driver to that panel of mirrors or for you to be in a blind spot and you're going to get squished, whatever the rights and wrongs of it and no matter who was at fault.
.

I'm pleased that you got to sit behind the wheel of an hgv. All cyclists should do this if they get the chance and, equally, all hgv drivers should do some urban cycling.

But it's important to recognise that drivers will not have the luxury of focussing on one mirror at a time. Keeping track of everything that's going on, using all six mirrors simultaneously (not just one at a time), when the lorry is moving, whilst keeping an eye out for pedstrians and other traffic, with a plethora of road signs to look out for, and mindful of the fact that a single mistake could result in a KSI, or an expensive breech of one of the many hgv related regulations, is quite another matter. And things become markedly more difficult at night, in the rain, or with high powered, poorly adjusted lights making it difficult to use the mirrors in the first place.

The sensible thing to do, as always, is to keep back; not just to keep yourself safe, but also to act as a role model for less experienced cyclists following your wheel.

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
8th December 2013 - 22:12

like this
Like (904)

you know those patronising signs on the back of minibusses, vans, busses, lorries

"cyclists stay back"....
(im not against the ones warning not to overtake ont he inside though)

how about all cyclists get one on the back of their t shirt

"motorists stay back"

Feel the fear and do it anyway

hood's picture

posted by hood [116 posts]
10th December 2013 - 12:51

like this
Like (908)

Vercors wrote:
I would recommend anyone, driver, cyclist or pedestrian, to take the opportunity of sitting in the cab of an HGV, if available. I did so a few years ago at a cycling event and now give HGV's an even wider berth than I did before, when cycling, driving a car or as a pedestrian. It only takes a moment's inattention by the HGV driver to that panel of mirrors or for you to be in a blind spot and you're going to get squished, whatever the rights and wrongs of it and no matter who was at fault.

i agree we should all "see it from an hgv drivers position".
but isnt it sort of like saying

"hey, theres a really dangerous seating position, high up, where they can see naff-all. we should all have a go to see how much we cant see. then we will accept that the way the lorry is designed is dangerous"

thats rubbish! why should we ACCEPT how dangerous it is to drice a lorry!?
why should we all "come around" to their point of view (literally).....

WHY arent we tackling this problem by saying
"lower the drivng position, change the design of the lorry, design out the dangers of hgvs, put more glazing on the cab doors.... etc"

instead we just all jump in a cab and go, oh yea, its dangerous up here because you cant see anything!
to go a step further, i'd say the driving cab of a lorry is not actually fit for purpose!!!

Feel the fear and do it anyway

hood's picture

posted by hood [116 posts]
10th December 2013 - 12:54

like this
Like (904)

^^^ To the joker.

The very nature of a lorry's design is to optimise space and put the cabin ontop of the engine. The combustion engine itself can't be made smaller due to the size and torque required to spin the drive shaft at load.

Maybe what you have in mind is to put the engine in the middle, between the payload and the cabin. With the cabin at vehicle height level just to save some other lousy road users.

posted by dogcc [98 posts]
10th December 2013 - 14:34

like this
Like (898)

Dave Atkinson wrote:
GoingRoundInCycles wrote:

No it really isn't. It is the job of the overtaker to carry out the manoeuvre safely and there is no excuse for getting it wrong especially when overtaking a stationary vehicle.

you seem to be a bit fixated about cyclists undertaking lorries.

Hardly! This article is about the driver's hampered vision of cyclists undertaking lorries. Talk of cyclists undertaking lorries is wholly pertinent.

Quote:
a lot of the time cyclists are in front of large vehicles as they approach a red light, and the large vehicles stop right on the line (or in front of it) meaning they can't see the cyclists. that's what i'm talking about.

Ah ... but that isn't what you wrote ......

Dave Atkinson wrote:
on the subject of bellends, if you stop your vehicle, especially a big one, at an ASL that you know will fill with cyclists, and you stop in a position that means you can't see them, then that's driving like a bellend.

... your use of the future tense led me to imagine a situation where an HGV driver arrives at an empty ASL but before stopping, he/she must use magic powers to predict how many cyclists are likely to appear before the lights change, and leave enough room for them all.

If what you really mean is that an HGV driver should stop before the line in a position where he/she can see all of the cyclists who are already stopped ahead of the ASL, I agree with you 100%. Failing to do so would be bellendery beyond the call of duty.

Never in a hurry on a bicycle.

posted by GoingRoundInCycles [134 posts]
10th December 2013 - 18:16

like this
Like (554)

@ GoingRoundInCycles - re: ASL zones.

As an hgv driver, who aims to stop a few feet before the ASL line, I sometimes find that the extra gap I leave fills with even more cyclists. But I still think that leaving a gap is the best policy on balance.

"Hey..... Let's be visible out there."

Neil753's picture

posted by Neil753 [451 posts]
10th December 2013 - 20:40

like this
Like (902)

dogcc wrote:
^^^ To the joker.

The very nature of a lorry's design is to optimise space and put the cabin ontop of the engine. The combustion engine itself can't be made smaller due to the size and torque required to spin the drive shaft at load.

Maybe what you have in mind is to put the engine in the middle, between the payload and the cabin. With the cabin at vehicle height level just to save some other lousy road users.

hello. my name is "joker" and i was thinking about saving lives rather than £.
Sorry, i must have forgotten which is priority. i will pipe down now and let the big lorries keep squashing people to death

Feel the fear and do it anyway

hood's picture

posted by hood [116 posts]
12th December 2013 - 11:33

like this
Like (897)

kie7077 wrote:

If you can't filter, you might as well take a bus. If I filter to the front and there's either some vehicle in the ASL or a HGV parked with it's nose to the ASL then I will move forward until I consider myself to be in a safe position where-ever that may be.

Sit behind the vehicle - How? in that 30cm between the HGV and the car behind, get real.

Agreed, completely. Filtering is a necessary, efficient and safe manoeuver as long as the people driving the dangerous vehicles cop the fuck on.

posted by Ush [379 posts]
21st December 2013 - 20:12

like this
Like (900)