5 Cyclists dead in 1 week in London

[Brixton Hatter]

 

[littlebabyjesus]

They've got much better recently. I'm guessing quite a few of their staff cycle these days.

Yeah, probably, although that doesn't stop Johnson from being an arse.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Photoshopped, not real, though, sadly.

 

[8ball]

I was pretty shocked watching this.

What a crock of shit!

 

[Utopia]

It makes cycling safer, but whether or not it makes cycling a lot safer is questionable. Given the high proportion of HGVs involved in fatalities, this suggests to me that such things may not be the most important factor - doesn't matter what you're wearing if you're in the HGV's blind spot.

Again, it's a reaction to cyclist deaths that looks primarily to the cyclists to change what they do, when that may very well not be the issue at all.

'Safer' or 'a lot safer'....still makes it safer in my book. As a cyclist, at the moment, all I can control is what I do.....making myself visable is something I can do.....staying as far away from HGV's(inc running red lights, when the road is clear of pedestrians, to get ahead) as is possible is another thing I can do.

 

[andysays]

This is the scene of the latest death on Camberwell Road/Albany Road:

Looks like the lorry was turning left, so possibly another 'left hook' incident.

Just so I understand the "rules" of this thread, it's off-limits to suggest that cyclists, even cyclists in general, may occasionally contribute to accidents in which they're involved, but baseless speculation about the fault of this particular HGV driver is fair game?

 

[Brixton Hatter]

article in the Grauniad about today's various fuck ups

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/18/sixth-london-cyclist-killed-camberwell-lorry

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Just so I understand the "rules" of this thread, it's off-limits to suggest that cyclists, even cyclists in general, may occasionally contribute to accidents in which they're involved, but baseless speculation about the fault of this particular HGV driver is fair game?

Er…where have I suggested that?

In the photo above you can clearly see the lorry was turning left….but I don't know what happened, which is why I said 'possibly'. I'm not even blaming the HGV driver, just pointing out a possible left hook.

 

[Crispy]

I know that junction. The whole road is horrible, but that one's nasty. There's an advance stop box, but no feeder lane. If you do take the gutter to get into it, you're squeezing between left turning traffic and a barrier. If I could remember where I put my magic town planning wand, I'd demolish all those 1 story shop extensions and restore the historic building line, allowing width for a proper segregated lane along there.

 

[andysays]

Er…where have I suggested that?

In the photo above you can clearly see the lorry was turning left….but I don't know what happened, which is why I said 'possibly'. I'm not even blaming the HGV driver, just pointing out a possible left hook.

You've done that by pointing out one particular possibility, and using a distinctly pergorative term to describe it, where in fact there are a number of possible explanations and, unless and until we have further information, your speculation is unhelpful and can only serve to blame the HGV driver involved.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

You've done that by pointing out one particular possibility, and using a distinctly pergorative term to describe it, where in fact there are a number of possible explanations and, unless and until we have further information, your speculation is unhelpful and can only serve to blame the HGV driver involved.

Bore off. Or come up with some solutions.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Stats for cycling crashes/incidents (from memory): 67% the fault of the driver/motorist, 6% the fault of cyclists, the rest unknown.

e2a:

statistics from the Department for Transport and Transport for London (TfL), among others, show that lawbreaking by cyclists is very rarely to blame for serious accidents. TfL figures showed cyclists breaking the law was identified as a factor in just 6% of cases where a rider was killed or badly hurt.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Add that to the evidence that cyclists breaking the law are in certain instances (such as jumping red lights) making themselves safer, and there could even be a net positive safety effect to it. It simply isn't the issue to be highlighted here.

 

[andysays]

Bore off. Or come up with some solutions.

If you care to look back over the thread, you'll see that I've attempted to do just that, come up with a range of possible solutions which don't simply blame one group for all the problems.

Stats for cycling crashes/incidents (from memory): 67% the fault of the driver/motorist, 6% the fault of cyclists, the rest unknown.

statistics from the Department for Transport and Transport for London (TfL), among others, show that lawbreaking by cyclists is very rarely to blame for serious accidents. TfL figures showed cyclists breaking the law was identified as a factor in just 6% of cases where a rider was killed or badly hurt.​

​

It's worth remembering that there are things which cyclists (and other road users) can do which are not breaking the law, but can still contribute to them being involved in serious accidents.

One of them, which I unfortunately witness all too often, is attempting to undertake in the driver's blind spot an HGV which is signalling to turn left

 

[hipipol]

Make that 6
Camberwell today
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...sh-with-lorry-at-camberwell-road-8947110.html

 

[fredfelt]

If you care to look back over the thread, you'll see that I've attempted to do just that, come up with a range of possible solutions which don't simply blame one group for all the problems.

​

It's worth remembering that there are things which cyclists (and other road users) can do which are not breaking the law, but can still contribute to them being involved in serious accidents.

One of them, which I unfortunately witness all too often, is attempting to undertake in the driver's blind spot an HGV which is signalling to turn left

Another behaviour is to ensure that you cycle well out from the kerb. This means that you are more easily seen and reduces the chance of a vehicle, in particular a HGV overtaking you and immediately turning left in front of you.

However I think there are far bigger factors in play here than the behaviour of individuals involved directly in each death. Namely the built environment, and perhaps secondly the design and management of HGV's.

I think you can assume, for the sake of this argument, that human behaviour is more or less the same across much of the world. It appears that other countries have made streets safe for cyclists through what is primarily long term investment in streets which are first and foremost designed for people, and not primarily streets which are designed to increae the capacity of vehicles.

You can blame the cyclist or the HGV driver all you like but IMO all this about individual behaviour largely a distraction from what really needs to be done to make our streets fit for purpose.

 

[RedDragon]

Make that 6
Camberwell today
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...sh-with-lorry-at-camberwell-road-8947110.html

Yeah, it was mentioned earlier a number of times.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You can blame the cyclist or the HGV driver all you like but IMO all this about individual behaviour largely a distraction from what really needs to be done to make our streets fit for purpose.

Yep, spot on. In any individual incident, you may be able to attribute fault to one or other (or both) parties, but in looking at all incidents together, the reason for the number of incidents, wherever there may be individual fault, lies in this wider issue.

 

[gentlegreen]

Its so frustrating that we don't have full details of all these "accidents".
Presumably experts WILL eventually get their hands on it and work out what happened and what could have been done.
Presumably the data would be more forthcoming in the case of the hundreds of serious non-fatal incidents that aren't being reported.

It seems bizarre that the police were out in London today lecturing cyclists on helmet wearing when that has nothing to do with very many of these incidents.

 

[laptop]

Its so frustrating that we don't have full details of all these "accidents".

From the point of view of the bereaved, I guess there is an advantage to some delay before the inquest.

I presume the London Cycling Campaign is getting transcripts of inquests, when they happen?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Its so frustrating that we don't have full details of all these "accidents".
Presumably experts WILL eventually get their hands on it and work out what happened and what could have been done.
Presumably the data would be more forthcoming in the case of the hundreds of serious non-fatal incidents that aren't being reported.

It seems bizarre that the police were out in London today lecturing cyclists on helmet wearing when that has nothing to do with very many of these incidents.

It's been a feature of the current Tory party in govt that they have taken an entirely evidence-free approach to policy-making, basing their decisions instead on prejudice, 'common sense' arguments and baseless supposition. This is no different.

It's the age-old logical fallacy:

Something must be done/This is something/Therefore we must do this

It's also, of course, about being seen to be doing something.

 

[andysays]

Another behaviour is to ensure that you cycle well out from the kerb. This means that you are more easily seen and reduces the chance of a vehicle, in particular a HGV overtaking you and immediately turning left in front of you.

However I think there are far bigger factors in play here than the behaviour of individuals involved directly in each death. Namely the built environment, and perhaps secondly the design and management of HGV's.

I think you can assume, for the sake of this argument, that human behaviour is more or less the same across much of the world. It appears that other countries have made streets safe for cyclists through what is primarily long term investment in streets which are first and foremost designed for people, and not primarily streets which are designed to increae the capacity of vehicles.

You can blame the cyclist or the HGV driver all you like but IMO all this about individual behaviour largely a distraction from what really needs to be done to make our streets fit for purpose.

I certainly agree that there are bigger factors than the behaviour of individuals, and earlier in the thread I've said what I think about the safety (absence of safety) of the recent cycle super highways. The most important thing is that streets are made safe, or as safe as they can be, for everyone who uses them.

I'm not seeking to blame any individual in any of these specific cases, but there are things which individual road users, cyclists and drivers of various classes of motor vehicles, can do to use the roads more safely, and to suggest that mentioning those is simply a distraction is really not helpful.

 

[DJWrongspeed]

Its so frustrating that we don't have full details of all these "accidents".
Presumably experts WILL eventually get their hands on it and work out what happened and what could have been done.
Presumably the data would be more forthcoming in the case of the hundreds of serious non-fatal incidents that aren't being reported.

Exactly , I wrote to the LCC magazine once highlighting this point. It's not morbid to know exactly what happened and for the public to be informed.

With the latest Camberwell fatality that looks a very common accident type. What was the cyclist doing ? it's common sense now to keep well away from big trucks like that.

 

[co-op]

One of them, which I unfortunately witness all too often, is attempting to undertake in the driver's blind spot an HGV which is signalling to turn left

Don't get this argument.

What I don't understand is why it's ok to drive around busy urban streets in a 40 tonne vehicle with blind spots. I wouldn't be allowed to turn around on a building site in one without a banksman directing me and if I killed someone there'd be an automatic HSE inquiry. But do exactly the same on the public roads where ordinary people are just doing their local journeys and I can expect almost total impunity - 'oh they were in my blind spot' - it's ridiculous.

If you're got a blind spot it's your responsibility since these days it's incredibly easy to neutralise.

 

[co-op]

Just so I understand the "rules" of this thread, it's off-limits to suggest that cyclists, even cyclists in general, may occasionally contribute to accidents in which they're involved, but baseless speculation about the fault of this particular HGV driver is fair game?

Silly post.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Don't get this argument.

What I don't understand is why it's ok to drive around busy urban streets in a 40 tonne vehicle with blind spots. I wouldn't be allowed to turn around on a building site in one without a banksman directing me and if I killed someone there'd be an automatic HSE inquiry. But do exactly the same on the public roads where ordinary people are just doing their local journeys and I can expect almost total impunity - 'oh they were in my blind spot' - it's ridiculous.

If you're got a blind spot it's your responsibility since these days it's incredibly easy to neutralise.

Quite. Sending cyclists to see what it's like driving an HGV is all well and good, and no doubt useful to know as a cyclist. But how about sending HGV drivers out on the roads on a bike? Who's the one driving the dangerous vehicle here?

 

[weepiper]

Helmets will protect you from certain kinds of head injury but increase your chance of a rotational neck injury. No amount of hi-viz in the world will allow an HGV driver to see you if his mirrors are inadequate. Bikes should stay the fuck away from big vehicles at all times, in fact I have jumped off the bike onto the pavement at times when a lorry's pulled up behind me because I've got the heebie jeebies about whether he's aware of me or not. There shouldn't be railings round the pavement at junctions because it prevents cyclists from bailing out and gets them crushed.

 

[laptop]

Don't get this argument.

What I don't understand is why it's ok to drive around busy urban streets in a 40 tonne vehicle with blind spots.

But it happens.

So everyone else needs to be aware that it happens, and fuck off out of the way.

Not a question of blame: a question of staying alive.

 

[gentlegreen]

I suppose it depends what we're aiming for.
Urban cycling being reserved for especially highly skilled cyclists with the meek and mild ones taking a gamble with their lives, or the Dutch model where everyone can feel safe cycling.

 

[Pickman's model]

Add that to the evidence that cyclists breaking the law are in certain instances (such as jumping red lights) making themselves safer, and there could even be a net positive safety effect to it. It simply isn't the issue to be highlighted here.

i asked you to reference this earlier in the thread and there was something of a resounding silence from you. perhaps you could produce the evidence to which you refer now. taking it on trust for the time being, while the cyclist may be safer, it is possible that such actions may make other road users less safe - for example, cyclists going through a red light which allows pedestrians to cross. this seems to me to be a situation in which cyclists may, as i have said above, privilege their own safety above those of other vulnerable users.