Lorry firm boss tells of effect of cyclist's death on the driver and the company

Cycrow

bugslet wrote: »

As I said Marco, responsibility lies with both parties. It is difficult to catch every area of a large vehicle, you need to check the front and the off-side as well.

Not seeing the cyclist for whatever reason is not the cyclists fault. But the cyclist is at fault for positioning herself in such a position that when a vehicle is turning left you are in its way. He was indicating to turn a sharp left, at what point would you place yourself in its path.

but your assuming the cyclist put themselves into that position. They could have easily have been forced into that position and had no choose

Jo_F

It's all very well putting a camera on the truck and a small monitor to look at the pictures its conveying, but that is giving the truck driver something else to have to glance at, in addition to all the mirrors and also his vision through the windows, all it takes is that brief glance at one, to miss something happening in another.

googler

"According to ELB Partners, safety measures introduced by the firm ...include ... top-specification blind spot mirrors"

So, trucks in standard spec don't have 'top spec' mirrors?

What's different about the spec? Do the lower-spec mirrors not show the blind spots at all? If so, can they really be called blind-spot mirrors?

bugslet

Cycrow wrote: »

but your assuming the cyclist put themselves into that position. They could have easily have been forced into that position and had no choose

At the junction with Abbey Street she cycled down the left-hand side of the 18 tonne rigid DAF, that was stationary at the lights and indicating to turn left. The lorry was positioned slightly over to the right of the road as it was a sharp turn.

Whilst I cannot say categorically that she wasn't forced into that position, I can't see how you can be forced to cycle down the left hand side of a stationery vehicle.

I don't fully understand the phrase top-spec mirrors, I'm wondering if they mean they have added additional mirrors to the arm.That's just a thought, no definites.

bugslet

Jo_F wrote: »

It's all very well putting a camera on the truck and a small monitor to look at the pictures its conveying, but that is giving the truck driver something else to have to glance at, in addition to all the mirrors and also his vision through the windows, all it takes is that brief glance at one, to miss something happening in another.

It happens in cars from time to time that people miss something in a mirror and they only have two and small vehicle!

I'v pointed out before that experiments show that it takes 5 seconds to look in each mirror, 8 mirrors = 40 seconds, a lot changes in the first mirror by the time you've got to the 8th.

Marco_Panettone

bugslet wrote: »

At the junction with Abbey Street she cycled down the left-hand side of the 18 tonne rigid DAF, that was stationary at the lights and indicating to turn left. The lorry was positioned slightly over to the right of the road as it was a sharp turn.

Whilst I cannot say categorically that she wasn't forced into that position, I can't see how you can be forced to cycle down the left hand side of a stationery vehicle.

I don't fully understand the phrase top-spec mirrors, I'm wondering if they mean they have added additional mirrors to the arm.That's just a thought, no definites.

Left turns at that junction have subsequently been banned for motor vehicles, and a mirror installed at the lights. It isn't a junction I know, but looking at the picture it's more than likely there's a cycle lane leading into the ASL painted on the road. This tells EVERYONE where cyclists are supposed to go - the highway code even says you may be safer if you use them. Dangerous infrastructure + user error = death. It's more than possible to design the danger out of our junctions.

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/6487

Jo_F

bugslet wrote: »

It happens in cars from time to time that people miss something in a mirror and they only have two and small vehicle!

I'v pointed out before that experiments show that it takes 5 seconds to look in each mirror, 8 mirrors = 40 seconds, a lot changes in the first mirror by the time you've got to the 8th.

Absolutely and that was the point I was making, giving them something else to look at means diverting attention from somewhere else.

As to more mirrors, for each you add, it creates a blind spot somewhere else, to a point where the driver will not be able to see out of the windows for all the mirrors there.

When I did my CBT last year, I hung back while a truck was shunting into a supermarket yard, as soon as I could tell he was in, I then proceeded. When the instructor mentioned it (not that he was saying I was wrong, he was just curious about why I slowed when I did and set off again when I did), I explained to him why.

I also said that as far as I am concerned, the 3 metre exclusion we put around the delivery wagons at work applies to me on the road, I just mentally apply a 3 metre or so blind spot around a lorry (and bus) and stay out of it.

I guess this also comes from being the partner of a lorry driver, it's pretty scary how much of the outside world just disappears when you sit in a cab.

custardy

bugslet wrote: »

As I said Marco, responsibility lies with both parties. It is difficult to catch every area of a large vehicle, you need to check the front and the off-side as well.

Not seeing the cyclist for whatever reason is not the cyclists fault. But the cyclist is at fault for positioning herself in such a position that when a vehicle is turning left you are in its way. He was indicating to turn a sharp left, at what point would you place yourself in its path.

People want to berate a driver for not seeing a cyclist yet ignore the fact that the cyclist has taken no notice of something which is approx 30' x 8' by 14' with its left hand indicators flashing.

Indeed there is a lot of difference between cycling in a rural/suburban setting versus city centre London, but the point is there is some knowledge whereas the majority of cyclists have no knowledge of how to drive a LGV.

My position remains that we have to use roads together. I become defensive when blame is apportioned purely to one set of road users, when there are times when that blame can be placed on both parties.

so in the video to this story
what responsibility goes to the cyclists? (or car driver ofr that matter)

custardy

Jo_F wrote: »

It's all very well putting a camera on the truck and a small monitor to look at the pictures its conveying, but that is giving the truck driver something else to have to glance at, in addition to all the mirrors and also his vision through the windows, all it takes is that brief glance at one, to miss something happening in another.

The camera can add a far greater viewing angle than the mirrors
Having driven vehicles with cameras
With practice it becomes the norm to view the monitor as part of the mirrors routine

liz545

bugslet wrote: »

At the junction with Abbey Street she cycled down the left-hand side of the 18 tonne rigid DAF, that was stationary at the lights and indicating to turn left. The lorry was positioned slightly over to the right of the road as it was a sharp turn.

Whilst I cannot say categorically that she wasn't forced into that position, I can't see how you can be forced to cycle down the left hand side of a stationery vehicle.

I remember Ellie's death, it happened quite close to where I live. From knowing the road layout, and from the coroner's investigation, it's entirely likely that the HGV was in the outside lane in order to make the sharp left turn into Abbey Street.

An experienced cyclist may have noticed the HGV's indicators, and may have understood that they were on not because the driver had forgotten to turn them off but because of the turning circle of his vehicle. But making a left turn from the outside lane is not something all riders will be anticipating. This is clearly a junction where the road layout and infrastructure puts all road users into conflict, and even careful riders and drivers can experience problems.

Rather than blaming drivers or cyclists for making bad decisions that have fatal consequences, we should be working on designing safer roads where a small mistake won't kill you.