Report finds construction industry should treat road accidents as seriously as safety on site.
Article here.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/feb/01/construction-lorries-cyclist-deaths-report
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Construction lorries 'disproportionately responsible for cyclist deaths'
(12 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
I don't understand - surely cyclist/lorry deaths are all caused by cyclists riding up the inside of left-signalling vehicles.
If that's the case, why are they disproportionately likely to ride up the inside of *construction* vehicles, rather than any other sort.
Someone must find a cyclist and ask them!
Posted 11 years ago # -
Now where did I read that construction tipper lorries were paid by the load, therfore are under constant time pressure (more loads = more take home pay) and temptation to speed / cut corners / take risks. It was probably here.
Posted 11 years ago # -
From the comments on:
http://cycling-intelligence.com/2011/10/05/cyclist-killed-at-kings-cross-a-predictable-death/
"As an experienced female cyclist who also avoids cycling up the inside of lorries like the plague, I can tell you that my near death experiences with HGVs have occurred when the lorry accelerated to overtake me on a left-hand turn or on a roundabout. That is, I’m moving at a decent clip, they put their foot down, then turn left, right in front of me."
Posted 11 years ago # -
The majority of cyclist deaths are caused by a left turn or run over by a large truck - often the truck overtakes and pulls in or turns left far too early having completely misjudged the cyclist's speed and the fact that they overtake and then slow down to turn - imagining that the cyclist is a stationary object. When will folk actually 'get' this message, and stop being so naieve.
In London and I suspect most other UK cities despite being less than 5% of the vehicle count trucks deliver at least 50% of the fatalities. Thus if we can sort out the killer features of trucks we can make a major impact on the death toll on city streets
The most dangerous trucks are the 32T 4-axle rigid tippers, and an analysis of their use, often on short term contracts, driven by agency/casual drivers aggravates the issue. Visit the Roadpeace/Seemesaveme websites to read of drivers with over 20 previous convictions for serious traffic offences still allowed to drive and kill (whilst drink and using a mobile phone), or with defective eyesight and a trail of crashes and dismissals (killed twice in 2 years in identical circumstances before properly sentenced)
I'll post more later (remind me Chris) of a T&E paper that shows how improved direct vision between truck driver and outside world, and a collision management system could make trucks safer, and how the opportunity to repeal EU legislation that blocks the delivery of this (and blocks a system to cut truck fuel consumption/emissions). The T&E paper is excellent and calculates the savings for the truck operators from a streamlined cab and the saving of between 3200 and 3800 lives EU wide from having a combination of the collision management system and improved direct vision for the driver (eliminating the reliance on mirrors and cameras)
Trucks do not need to have high driving positions anyway for most applications. Walk in cabs can be specified, and are often seen on council refuse trucks (does Edinburgh do this?) and widely seen in use air-side at airports. I've done a sketch of one model cab (Elit 2 by Dennis Eagle) showing how bikes are 'visible' and drivers are 'visible' to those outside from head to hip.
There are just 2 key safety messages for ALL road users
1) Make EYE CONTACT the ONLY CONTACT you make with another road user (anyone know how we might make tabards and quarter panel vinyls with this message - Andy A?)
2) Your Eyes only see 30% of what is happening your ears hear 100% Don't shut down that vital second system by winding up the sounds, keeping the window closed, or wearing earphones. (all the investigations into cyclists killed by rail vehicles showed clear evidence that they had shut out their hearing by wearing earpieces - all riding out in front of trains with brakes on full and horns sounding - not exactly silent in approach)
A tip when a truck overtakes - you can't flash your lights like a truck BUT you can wave the driver in when they have got past you to a safe enough distance it helps immensely when you are trying to watch what is happening in front and judge when your truck has got past a slower vehicle if the slower vehicle user tells you that it is safe to pull in.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Your Eyes only see 30% of what is happening your ears hear 100% Don't shut down that vital second system by winding up the sounds, keeping the window closed, or wearing earphones"
This one always interests me (nothing to disagree with on the rest of the post, all perfectly sensible and reasonable, and this isn't really disagreement, more a query).
If a truck overtakes you, then immediately turns left, exactly what warning are your ears going to give you about that happening? Okay, you will hear that a truck is coming up from behind, but does that mean that every time you hear a truck coming from behind you should slow down in case it cuts you up? I'm genuinely unsure what being able to hear fully gives you in that situation (and would be interesting to know of stats involving deaf cyclists, there must be some?).
p.s. I don't ride with earphones in, just find it uncomfortable, and I can't concentrate on what I'm listening to because I'm concentrating on riding!
Posted 11 years ago # -
(all the investigations into cyclists killed by rail vehicles showed clear evidence that they had shut out their hearing by wearing earpieces - all riding out in front of trains with brakes on full and horns sounding - not exactly silent in approach)
I'd love to know how loud people have their music that they can't hear a train horn (if you've ever stood near an unexpected train horn you'll know what I mean) - quite remarkable.
I suppose the accident investigation doesn't go as far as switching on said player (assuming it's still viable) to determine whether it is indeed that loud.
Since these collisions invariably occur on the more dodgy style of crossing, I imagine there's a large incentive to find a convenient explanation like "headphone in - next case".
Unless memory fails, wasn't one mentioned recently in which the crossing was found to be unsafe, but because the cyclist had headphones on this was not reported?
Posted 11 years ago # -
If I hear a truck overtake me I do generally slow down, or at least stop accelerating, just cos of the danger of a sideswipe.
Not sure our ears hear 100% though - I think attentional blindness may apply just as much to our ears, though I'm prepared to be proved wrong. There was something on the radio this week about (among other things) tinnitus and one of the things they do with it is train people to ignore it.
Posted 11 years ago # -
How many cyclists are killed by trains?
In general, I'm not sure that I'm too happy with the advice the most important safety advice is that all road users should make eye contact. I get the idea but it just doesn't seem to be very practical. Most of the time I'm just not in a position to make eye contact with the bozo who's trying to push me into the pavement so that he can squeeze past. And I'm pretty sure he's not trying make any contact at all - he wants me out of the way not on his bonnet.
So what is it saying other than 'don't crash into people'? I'm sure they don't want to crash into me but there are as many ways to not crash as there are to crash and it's their style of not crashing that frightens the crap out of me.
Posted 11 years ago # -
My five year old could show you a thing or two about attentional blindness. My gran had a wee rhyme for it. She'd say, "he's like Willie Weir - what he disnae like, he disnae hear".
Posted 11 years ago # -
In the most recent report on a rail fatality the cyclist was filmed by the train CCTV (hood up riding across in front of train), and 2 pedestrians who arrived at the crossing at the same time shouted to him to stop but received no response. The cyclist had just passed them, and they caught up as he went through the gate to cross the railway.
The latest tram incident (not fatal but very serious) was reckoned to be due to a layout of the tram stop and approach paths which had the pedestrian focussing on the Westbound tram - stopped in the platform, and facing towards her - when she had to cross the Eastbound track, neglecting to notice an Eastbound tram coming up behind as she crossed the track
My reaction to hearing a truck (especially) coming up behind, is to turn and look at the driver and look for a reaction. Using a combination of having an assurance 'look of recognition' from another road user, and hearing/ seeing other indications, such as gear changes, braking etc gain some idea about what the driver's next move might be.
By far the key detail is having that look in through the window that gets a corresponding eye to eye look that assures you that a the driver is well aware of your presence. The sound of a vehicle behind you should generate the action of looking to see what it may be doing.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"having that look in through the window that gets a corresponding eye to eye look that assures you that a the driver is well aware of your presence."
Sadly there is plenty of anecdotal evidence (including on CCE) of drivers looking straight at people (cyclists) and not 'seeing' them/taking any notice.
Though it is a good idea to look. If you see them looking the other way, be extra careful.
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
