The economy needs just-in-time deliveries

angrypirate

I think 2 big contributing factors in these accidents is
1. Drivers overtaking cyclists forget that they are supposed to allow cyclists the same space as when overtaking cars - yes that means pulling out to the other side of the road
2. Cyclists forget that when overtaking cars, all overtaking should be done on the right. Too many times at rush hour I have witnessed a number of cyclists creeping past a line of traffic, going both up the inside and down the outside. Unless there is a dedicated cycling lane on the left, I will always overtake traffic on the right.

I say this as a motorist and an experienced road cyclist.

Kennyboy66

Cornucopia wrote: »

They can see around them - except for the back, obviously.

The nature of these accidents seems to involve cyclists colliding with left-turning vehicles. It seems likely that the cyclist is going too fast to avoid the collision, and the motor vehicle driver has not seen the cyclist (not the same thing as being unable to see them).

There is a further question of the positioning of pavement-mounted railings obstructing a possible escape route for the cyclist in some cases.

If you had driven a lorry you would know there a blind spots particulalrly on the off side & low down.

It is generally not cycling too fast - the DoT has done plenty of research and it is more like that;

1) a cyclist is crushed when a lorry turns left - the lorry didn't know they were there.

2) a cyclist under takes when a lorry is about to turn left

Your point about escape route is true.

Just like poor emission LGV vehicles are banned from inside the M25 (or LEZ zone), then I'd expect that all HGV vehicles will have to be fitted with Fresno lenses, under run bars and side scanning equipment within 5 years.

I'd also expect that HGV drivers will have to complete cyclist awareness training as part of their CPC.

CLAPTON

angrypirate wrote: »

I think 2 big contributing factors in these accidents is
1. Drivers overtaking cyclists forget that they are supposed to allow cyclists the same space as when overtaking cars - yes that means pulling out to the other side of the road
2. Cyclists forget that when overtaking cars, all overtaking should be done on the right. Too many times at rush hour I have witnessed a number of cyclists creeping past a line of traffic, going both up the inside and down the outside. Unless there is a dedicated cycling lane on the left, I will always overtake traffic on the right.

I say this as a motorist and an experienced road cyclist.

cycle lanes tend to be kerbside

angrypirate

CLAPTON wrote: »

cycle lanes tend to be kerbside

Kerbside = the left which is what i was saying.

If there is no cycle lane, cyclists should not "undertake" standing traffic on the left. Cyclists should pull out and overtake on the right. I bet a number of accidents involving cyclists is due to cyclists undertaking and not being seen.

skivenov

theEnd wrote: »

How on earth are lorries allowed on the roads when they can't see around them? A car wouldn't be allowed. If cycling was just invented and you could only see forward (or some of the side, as long as you're not turning) it'd be banned straight away.

All vehicles have blind spots, cycles have huge ones if you don't shoulder check. Plenty of cars have blind spots large enough to lose a cyclist in.

I would actually have a bet for real money with you that I could get in your blindspot when you were riding a pushbike, on my motorbike, let alone my pushbike and sit there with you not knowing I was there for at least a minute.

As a road user, you have to be aware of yours and when you can be in other peoples.

skivenov

angrypirate wrote: »

Kerbside = the left which is what i was saying.

If there is no cycle lane, cyclists should not "undertake" standing traffic on the left. Cyclists should pull out and overtake on the right. I bet a number of accidents involving cyclists is due to cyclists undertaking and not being seen.

This is something that's bugged me for ages, cycle lanes imply to cyclists that it's unconditionally safe to pass on the inside.

When I ride my pushbike, I normally filter in exactly the same way I would on my motorbike.

custardy

skivenov wrote: »

All vehicles have blind spots, cycles have huge ones if you don't shoulder check. Plenty of cars have blind spots large enough to lose a cyclist in.

I would actually have a bet for real money with you that I could get in your blindspot when you were riding a pushbike, on my motorbike, let alone my pushbike and sit there with you not knowing I was there for at least a minute.

As a road user, you have to be aware of yours and when you can be in other peoples.

bet you couldnt,unless you are free wheeling engine off

angrypirate

skivenov wrote: »

This is something that's bugged me for ages, cycle lanes imply to cyclists that it's unconditionally safe to pass on the inside.

When I ride my pushbike, I normally filter in exactly the same way I would on my motorbike.

Im talking about proper cycle lanes where there is a solid white line between the cycle lane and a full width vehicle lane, not the excuse of cycle lanes in london where all they have done is chop the vehicle lane in half.

skivenov

custardy wrote: »

bet you couldnt,unless you are free wheeling engine off

Bet I could, not all bikes are loud, I doubt it's noticable over other traffic unless I rev it.

custardy

skivenov wrote: »

Bet I could, not all bikes are loud, I doubt it's noticable over other traffic unless I rev it.

You really think a cyclist cant hear a vehicle with a petrol engine behind it?
By that logic in a full helmet,you wont hear anything but an F1 car?