A male cyclist has died in London this afternon following a collision with a tipper truck. The incident took place at around 4.20pm in Homerton High Street.
A Metropolitan Police spokesman confirmed to road.cc that officers had attended the incident alongside members of the London Ambulance Service, with the victim pronounced dead at the scene.
The driver of the lorry stopped at the scene and is assisting officers with their investigation.
Twitter user @namelesswon posted a picture of the scene to the social network; the other death mentioned in the tweet was related to a stabbing incident and did not involve a cyclist.
Cyclist hit by lorry Homerton High St. That's two deaths here in three weeks. pic.twitter.com/oKG9Lw4R8V
— namelesswon (@namelesswon) February 2, 2015
Lorries of any description make up just 4 per cent of London's traffic, but account for around half of cyclist deaths in the city.
Among those fatalities, tipper trucks are by far the most common type of lorry involved; the same type of vehicle was involved in the death last month of physiotherapist Stephanie Turner.
The 29-year-old was killed at the junction of Amhurst Road and Seven Sisters Road, just a couple of miles from the scene of today's fatality.
Hundreds of cyclists attended a vigil in her memory last week.
54 thoughts on “Tipper truck involved in another London cyclist fatality”
RIP.
RIP.
Another sad day.
Another sad day. RIP.
“Lorries of any description make up just 4 per cent of London’s traffic, but account for around half of cyclist deaths in the city.”
If that’s true then lorries are killing 24 times more cyclists than any other motorised vehicle. There is something seriously, seriously wrong here…
When will this end, 4% that
When will this end, 4% that kills 50% of cyclists.?
RIP
RIP
Does anyone understand *why*
Does anyone understand *why* tipper trucks specifically are responsible for so many cyclist deaths and injuries?
Is it due to the design of the cabs, a lack of visibility or the training of drivers? Are the drivers generally employed or are they self-employed for example?
There *has* to be a reason and we need to find it as quickly as possible. Maybe some academic can apply to TfL for a grant to research the issue and come up with solutions.
Joeinpoole wrote:Does anyone
TfL funded a study from TRL as part of the work as it developed towards their incoming changes to the London Lorry Control scheme.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/safer-lorry-trl-report.pdf
Table 4-2 is particularly worth a look
Additionally there is a TfL funded piece of research into all London cycle fatalities from 2007-11
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/pedal-cyclist-fatalities-in-london.pdf
The question of how drivers are incentivised is I think the only real gap in the current studies available.
Joeinpoole wrote:Does anyone
Random checks on lorries in the capital under Operation Mermaid (2008) found that every single lorry that was stopped was in contravention of the law in some way.
During the more recent Operation Safeway, two thirds of the lorries on London’s roads were breaking the law in some way – dodgy brakes, a fiddled tacho, unsafe load, etc. Fourteen were considered so dangerous they were immediately taken off the road.
It appears to be a profession in which law-breaking is endemic, and probably even condoned and encouraged by the FTA.
congokid wrote:Joeinpoole
Those were ‘random’ checks carried out by the police. In reality, the police probably took a quick look at the HGVs passing by and knew exactly which ones they wanted to pull over. You can tell a lot about the general condition and maintenance of an HGV by even a quick glance at it. The rear axle of tipper, which is really easy to spot from behind, tells you a good deal. If it’s muddy and there’s grease staining around the axle stubs, keep well back. Dirty trucks are more likely to be badly maintained in the construction sector.
As regards the FTA, it speaks for a wide array of haulage firms. Many of those companies, probably the vast majority, are entirely legitimate and run properly and have decent safety standards. There is a small hard core of firms that are not and it should be of no surprise that the same hard core is also involved in a disproportionately high number of deaths or serious injuries.
But London’s population is increasing. It just passed 8.6 million and is expected to continue rising to 10 million by 2026. So if you think the flow of tipper trucks to construction sites is going to end, think again. There will be more construction, more deliveries and the transport issues could well get worse unless there is serious investment in all types of infrastructure.
Tipper trucks are massively
Tipper trucks are massively over-represented.
It’s a problem with how that industry is structured. With pay per load contracts, sole operators, and razor thin margins all leading to aggressive driving of poorly maintained vehicles in what is usually busy areas as that’s where construction is.
jacknorell wrote:Tipper
Tipper truck drivers do often seem to be more of the “I’m big, get out of the way” attitude than drivers of other vehicles.
I had a strange incident with one on Monday morning, I was in my car. At lights, two lanes filtering left, four lanes going straight ahead. I was on the right of the two left filter lanes, he was alongside me in the left most “straight ahead” lane.
As the lights turned green we both started to move forward, he then put his left indicator on (no, that’s not the strange bit!) and started to turn in to me. I had to sound my horn, there was nowhere for me to go. The car behind me let him pull in and he started having a go at me. At the next lights, I got out to find out what the problem was. Apparently “I could see what he wanted to do and should have let him do it”.
He simply couldn’t get his head around the fact that this wasn’t an option for me. He was a complete moron.
Another big problem is that
Another big problem is that if someone is knocked off their bike by a tipper truck or other construction vehicle it’s much too easy for them to fall under the wheels instead of being pushed away. They are often designed with a lot of open space around the wheels, which makes them easier to drive on the uneven ground of bulding sites but much more dangerous.
bdsl wrote:Another big
No, the drivers are just psychos.
How many more people have to
How many more people have to die because our government will not make collision avoidance systems mandatory for large and dangerous on vehicles on our nation’s roads?
If this happened in the rail,
If this happened in the rail, air or maritime industry, tipper trucks would be off the road until made safe.
“The question of how drivers
“The question of how drivers are incentivised is I think the only real gap in the current studies available.”
also do major construction contractors put pressure on suppliers to meet delivery slots? Is performance on this issue used to reward contracts / deny contracts / lodge claims for delays on site
note the right turn lane in the picture that narrows the road lane,
traffic flow rules 🙁
antigee wrote:note the right
Add to that the Pavlovian obeyance to white lines by drivers and you have a recipe for disaster.
http://road.cc/content/news/135156-roads-without-centre-lines-make-safer-passing-study-finds
antigee wrote:”The question
Yes indeed, construction firms do put pressure on suppliers to make deliveries on time. It costs money , a lot of money, if deliveries are late as this can hold up construction work.
There are many factors as to why tipper trucks are involved in so many fatalities involving cyclists and most have been mentioned in previous posts. One that hasn’t so far is that a lot of the companies running tipper truck fleets operate under very questionable methods. Some of the tipper trucks are also poorly maintained. And there are a lot of owner-operators of tipper trucks who are under the most pressure of all. If they miss deadlines for deliveries, they can well lose their job and their truck.
OldRidgeback wrote:
Yes
But there’s a lot of other owner-operators of HGVs working for the construction industry and who don’t keep killing cyclists. For example most concrete-mixing lorries (even though they may be decked out in the livery of a concrete manufacturer) are owned/operated by their drivers. Also the tipper-truck phenomena appears to be confined largely to London. Why? Is it just the sheer volume of construction traffic?
Joeinpoole wrote:Also the
Yes, pretty much. There’s been a boom in commercial construction for the last decade.
Something is very very wrong,
Something is very very wrong, it’s always tipper trucks. Both sides should be more aware, even if it means as cyclists we avoid going anywhere near these things just to protect ourselves, the tipper trucks are clearly not equipped properly to spot cyclists.
There is something to be said
There is something to be said for the Swiss method of logistical planning: make sure there are plenty of contingencies and waits so that you will not be held up in case of an unforeseen delay. It means that multiple moving components of a complex system (like a railway, construction site, etc) can operate safely and like clockwork.
Unfortunately Japanese Kaizen methods are all the rage – to identify ‘waste’ and eliminate it. In simplistic terms when a lorry is not trundling along at its optimum speed this is a waste in Kaizen terms.
This all comes from applying methodologies uncritically in situations without looking at the broader context (in this case costs and ‘wastes’ outside the immediate and narrow construction model.
Oh, and the greed of the people at the top, and the love of our politicians for money.
I note that there is a camera
I note that there is a camera on the left opposite the scene.
RIP,
I regularly have a
RIP,
I regularly have a number of tipper trucks pass me on the way to work, and i have never had an issue the drivers give me plenty of room. However this is in a rural setting plenty of time good sight lines etc. now take one of these trucks and place it into a urban setting, far more to see, far more going on, driver distracted by sat nav trying to find delivery address, cars and cyclists cutting in and out, then through in to the mix the trucks own issues with blind spots and you really do have a disaster waiting to happen.
In the right place these trucks are perfectly safe, an urban setting isn’t the right place without major work.
I seem to remember that a large quantity of materials for the olympics were brought in on barges to keep trucks off the road. This won’t work for everything but it is things like this that should be addressed on all developments.
mrmo wrote:
I seem to
I’m afraid that was greenwash. Barges were hardly used at all. It was a scam to barrage the tidal river Lea so that there’d be no low-tide mud by the riverside housing they wanted to sell. You used to see the tides at Hackney marsh – not any more.
http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/771
http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/401
hoopyfrood wrote:mrmo
Might have been greenwash, but it does point out that if they could be arsed there are things that could be done, infact it does actually make an important point, if they could be arsed to spend the money they could get trucks off the road. How much is a life worth?
mrmo wrote:
Might have been
Sure, I think so too.
I’m just saying that the olympics doesn’t provide an example.
mrmo wrote:hoopyfrood
Might have been greenwash, but it does point out that if they could be arsed there are things that could be done, infact it does actually make an important point, if they could be arsed to spend the money they could get trucks off the road. How much is a life worth?— mrmo
London right now has a population of 8.6 million. It’s expected to grow to 10 million by 2030, and possibly earlier than that (2026 some estimates say). The city will require massive infrastructure development plus new homes as there is already a massive shortage. How do you think that will be achieved? We’re going to see a lot more construction sites and a lot more tipper trucks. Forget about barges. They’re not economic.
I know this road and from the
I know this road and from the picture exactly where this is. It’s quite a narrow stretch and there is some road furniture which puts the cyclists in direct conflict with the traffic.
Usually the traffic is slow just before Chatsworth Road, often cyclists coming up from the junction get the hop on the traffic because of queues. The tendency is for them to under cut the traffic. As the approach the traffic island the inside route is normally barred because the cars/buses/trucks take away the space. I would not recommend doing this, and that cyclists overtake the slow moving traffic here.
I have seen many less wary about doing so.
The road infrastructure will have a massive part to play in this.
Quote:The road infrastructure
Driver attitude will have a massive part to play in this.
I lived and drove, cycled and motorcycled in Madrid and not once had issue with drivers. That is except for one bus driver who was looking for trouble and deliberately drove at me while cycling.
As a driver you have to expect the motorbikes and scooters filter through to the front a traffic lights. Even if none filter through, you expect it and therefore look for it. There is a far heightened awareness of other road users. The only accidents I saw were where the scooterist had gambled and lost.
There are lots of cyclists in that there London village and the driver’s default should be that there is a cyclist coming from behind.
We must learn to share the roads.
You don’t know that road.
You don’t know that road. Cyclists regular come up on vehicles from the left and so drop into a massive blind spot. The driver will likely have been focusing on the car in front and the traffic in front of that. Undertaking is never recommended but this is how the road set-up dictates things. Strictly speaking the cyclist should take the lane and sit behind the truck – never undertake a tipper.
It’s not surprising that a tipper truck was involved as they have huge off-side blind spots. The driver will not have known that the cyclist was there and may have done nothing wrong.
The filtering of cyclists happens well before any junction or traffic light.
Colin Peyresourde wrote:You
Please heed your own advice & keep your victim blaming opinions to yourself.
tarquin_foxglove wrote:Colin
Well I have seen a lot of cyclists do this and it is dangerous to do so here. I’m explaining that it is about the road structure forcing cyclists into a behaviour they have learned. And explaining that the lorry driver may have been obeying the rules of the road too. People are pretty quick to jump on lorry driver (as evidenced above). You haven’t told them to be quiet so I won’t be anytime soon.
Colin Peyresourde wrote:Well
Which may or may not have any relevance to this incident. You weren’t there, you don’t know, speculation doesn’t help anyone.
You weren’t there, you don’t know, speculation doesn’t help anyone.
It is understandable that people will empathise with the dead cyclist & blame the driver of the vehicle that killed them but of the 20 odd comments prior to your comment blaming the victim & imaging what the driver was thinking about, 1 person mentioned the driver & said that their attitude would be a contributing factor.
The driver has a
The driver has a responsibility to be aware of the fact that a cyclist may be there. If he was not aware then he has done something wrong.
sargey2003 wrote:The driver
I would agree with you if the lorry is turning and moving into space. But if it just moving forward then you cannot hope for it to be aware 100% of the time of what happens behind or beside it.
Colin Peyresourde wrote:
It’s
That tells us that these things are inherently unsafe and shouldn’t be on the road
ConcordeCX wrote:Colin
That tells us that these things are inherently unsafe and shouldn’t be on the road— Colin Peyresourde
Careful about the logic. People talk about cyclists in the same way….
Colin Peyresourde
That tells us that these things are inherently unsafe and shouldn’t be on the road— ConcordeCX
Careful about the logic. People talk about cyclists in the same way….— Colin Peyresourde
Only daft people. We probably shouldn’t be listening to daft people.
Quote:You don’t know that
What a ridiculously presumptuous thing to say.
don simon wrote:Quote:You
Anymore ridiculous than talking about Madrid lorry drivers? Me’ thinks not.
Colin Peyresourde wrote:don
If you think that an illustration of driver awareness in a heavily congested city as an example of how people live together and how this particular truck driver should have been aware of cyclists is more ridiculous than assuming you know which roads I do or don’t know and the resulting right to comment, then that’s up to you. 🙂
Ah, Hackney – the “share the
Ah, Hackney – the “share the road – it’s safer” borough. Thanks again…
teaboy wrote:Ah, Hackney –
Homerton High Street is less than nine metres wide where Akis was killed, and narrows to seven metres in places.
If teaboy has a proposal for how to provide high quality protected space on this rather narrow street, and at this minor junction in particular, he should put it forward.
Deleted
For some reason the
Deleted
For some reason the Evening Standard reported earlier that the driver had been arrested, before removing the revised story. Apologies for relaying what appears to have been a false report.
There is an issue with Tipper
There is an issue with Tipper Trucks. I’ve never driven one so I don’t know what that is. As a former professional driver I always default to driver error. If your vehicle has blind spots you should know what they are and take them into account.
For my part the Tipper Truck phenomena has been such a constant feature that I do everything I can not to go anywhere near them. I’m certainly not going up the inside of one.
oozaveared wrote:There is an
I’ve driven a tipper truck (not on-road as I don’t have an HGV licence) and I’m highly aware of the poor visibility from the cab. It is all too easy to make a mistake. Sadly, this can result in death and serious injury.
We still don’t know exactly what did happen in this incident.
OldRidgeback wrote:I’ve
How can it ever be called a mistake to drive a vehicle into a space which isn’t viewable, on purpose?
If you can’t see, you don’t move it, simple.
Any other interpretation of the law of liability or the HC means we’ve accepted that road fatalities are inevitable and will happen. No big deal… just expect it, get out of the way, because might makes right.
jacknorell wrote:OldRidgeback
How can it ever be called a mistake to drive a vehicle into a space which isn’t viewable, on purpose?
If you can’t see, you don’t move it, simple.
Any other interpretation of the law of liability or the HC means we’ve accepted that road fatalities are inevitable and will happen. No big deal… just expect it, get out of the way, because might makes right.— OldRidgeback
No, you’ve misinterpreted what I said. You’ve also suggested the tipper truck driver did this on purpose, which we don’t know and which the police seem to think was not the case, otherwise the driver would have been arrested on the spot. Yes, tipper trucks do present a hazard and there are safety issues involved in their use but that doesn’t mean you can throw out accusations at people without knowing all the facts, unless you really want to risk a libel case.
OldRidgeback wrote:jacknorell
How can it ever be called a mistake to drive a vehicle into a space which isn’t viewable, on purpose?
If you can’t see, you don’t move it, simple. …— jacknorell
No, you’ve misinterpreted what I said. You’ve also suggested the tipper truck driver did this on purpose, which we don’t know and which the police seem to think was not the case, otherwise the driver would have been arrested on the spot. Yes, tipper trucks do present a hazard and there are safety issues involved in their use but that doesn’t mean you can throw out accusations at people without knowing all the facts, unless you really want to risk a libel case.— OldRidgeback
Not just directed at you, but anyone looking at it in the view that it’s hard to see out of the cab, so… it’s ok to move without seeing.
Yes, if the driver moves his vehicle into a space where he can’t see it to be clear, it’s intentional. Else, the driver isn’t in control, which is dangerous driving by default rather than the careless driving the intentional move is.
Yes, he purposefully drove the vehicle without knowing the space his vehicle was to occupy was clear of other roadusers.
Why is this so hard for so many to understand?
Rule 126: Drive at a speed where you can stop within distance that can be seen to be clear (translation: If you can’t see, stop the f-ing vehicle)
Rule 159:
Before moving off you should:
– use all mirrors to check the road is clear
– look round to check the blind spots (the areas you are unable to see in the mirrors)
– signal if necessary before moving out
– look round for a final check.
Move off only when it is safe to do so.
What’s so difficult about this?
How fucking tragic.
RIP
How fucking tragic.
RIP
All lorries, as far as I’m
All lorries, as far as I’m aware, have an audible siren that activates when reversing. Having them fitted to activate with the left indicator as well would also alert anyone caught up the inside of a turning vehicle that they are in harms way. Granted, this could me annoying most of the time, but if it helps prevent these sad stories cropping every week then surely it’s worth it. That’s assuming the vehicle bothers indicating of course, which seems to be “optional” around where I live.
Tipper trucks also seem to be the major culprit, so surely something should be done urgently to address this situation. I’m saddened that nothing seems to be happening in this regard. Boris Johnson, get the finger oot ffs!!!
Tragic. Just yesterday at the
Tragic. Just yesterday at the top of Borough High Street, I deliberately stayed back on my cycle in the northbound left hand lane to see whether the tipper truck to my right would come over into the left hand lane, as I expected he would, to head over London Bridge. Sure enough he pulls over without even bothering to indicate. I am pretty sure if I had carried on in my lane he would not have seen me. About three months back I witnessed hoards of cyclists surrounding a stationary tipper truck trying to edge forward in the traffic in the middle lane on the north side of London Bridge. He realized he couldn’t see properly and sounded his horn to warn cyclists to keep clear, which seemed like the right thing to do. Many cyclists do not seem to realize the danger from these vehicles with their limited visibility. It’s not only left turns that kill. Getting dragged under the wheels when next to the truck also causes deaths. In the short term I think the government does not do nearly enough to educate cyclists to keep out of danger situations for example not sitting in the gutter in stationary traffic. Also to react to danger situations if you find yourself in one through no fault of your own. These trucks and their human drivers have to be regarded at all times as unpredictable killers and treated accordingly. As for changing truck driver behaviour how to do that? Maybe mandatory cameras in the cab pointing at the road and the truck driver should be mandatory would help. In the longer term these vehicles should be re-designed like many refuse lorries have, with the cab much lower. That would reduce pedestrian deaths too. Once again what a tragic waste of a life.
Being reported elsewhere that
Being reported elsewhere that the cyclist was an experienced commuter, an active member of London Dynamo Cycle Club and raced at Hillingdon on Saturday:
Practically the complete opposite of a noob that would be oblivious about going up the inside of a HGV.
Frankly, if it could happen to him, it could happen to anyone.
I think I will wear blinkers
I think I will wear blinkers and fire a gun in random directions. Not my fault if I hit someone. Right?
We know the inherent issues with blind spots. We know the lack of public awareness of the safety issues of cycling in traffic, how cycle lanes guide the unwary trusting cyclist down the left hand side of vehicles at traffic lights. Remember these are not cyclists who look up safety issues etc. They assume that the road structure, if it has cycle lanes on it, is there to keep them safe. And why shouldn’t they assume this?
Not a worthwhile exercise arguing who is at fault, but it is worthwhile arguing how to prevent it from happening again. And again. And again.