Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
kwackers
Posts: 13291
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby kwackers » 25 Feb 2015, 2:50pm

horizon wrote:
Ellieb wrote: I can't help thinking that some people on this forum think that it is a cyclist's right to ride on a road in traffic without any degree of skill or care.


I can't help thinking that some people on this forum think that it is a lorry firm's right to deliver goods in a patently unsafe vehicle without any degree of skill or care.

No, he's just pointing out that if none of us cycle up the inside of a lorry (or at least tipper trucks) then we'll all be perfectly safe and nobody will be KSI'd ever again...

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13263
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby mjr » 25 Feb 2015, 2:52pm

Some of the debate in this topic has been about how much danger cyclists should be exposed to (basically whether protected space at major danger points is a reasonable measure). Bristol Cycling Campaign emailed me a link to http://bristolcyclingcampaign.org.uk/ne ... ing-safety yesterday:
An interesting blog by Alistair Marshall A Health and Safety Perspective of Cycling Safety discusses the Hierarchy of Control approach to health and safety at work. National guidelines set out the necessary sequence of actions through adopting the ERIC model (an acronym for Eliminate, Reduce, Inform and Control). Figure 10 'The ERIC approach to risk management' is attached.

Reading these six points (there are two more on protective measures and PPE, personal protective equipment, which means helmets and hi-viz for example), what becomes clear is that the approach followed on roads, and specifically as regards cycling is almost exactly back to front.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

danhopgood
Posts: 96
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby danhopgood » 25 Feb 2015, 3:15pm

The article referred to re. hierarchy of control relates to experience in the construction industry. The step change in safety there in my view is largely due to the award or otherwise of construction contracts for public sector clients based partly on the previous RIDDOR reportable accident safety record of the companies concerned - which by law has to be recorded. Thus there is a very big carrot (more work) for "safe" companies and a big stick (no work) for those that don't perform. Applying the hierarchy of control is largely done already on managing roads, through safety audits of design through to recommendations of wearing of PPE for those at greatest risk. What's missing from road safety is the big carrot and stick.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13263
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby mjr » 25 Feb 2015, 3:36pm

danhopgood wrote:Applying the hierarchy of control is largely done already on managing roads, through safety audits of design through to recommendations of wearing of PPE for those at greatest risk. What's missing from road safety is the big carrot and stick.

(my emphasis). Safety audits seem only done of new constructions and most audits I've experienced seem to have very poor understanding of cycling. For example, one audit group were against allowing cycles to make a right turn across a 20mph single carriageway because riders would have to cross two lanes... in other words, they appeared to say that people had to cycle in the gutter rather than the lane. I've many more examples. At best, current safety audits are ineffective for cycling and at worst, they actually stop useful safety measures being implemented.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 16932
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby Vorpal » 25 Feb 2015, 4:04pm

The heirarchy of controls (the verison I'm familiar with is below) is not applied to road safety, and particularly not when it comes to vulnerable users. It is applied to some extent for the users of motorised vehicles.

Elimination
The first think to do is eliminate the hazard. That means the removal of the large vehicles (hazard), full segregation of traffic, or limitations on the movement of traffic. Some segregation (like cycle lanes) are not elimination because they reduce exposure rather than removing the hazard.

Substitution
It may be possible in some cases to replace the hazard with a lesser hazard or an alternative for of transport. I suspect that will be impractical in many cases.

Engineering
This means to design in such way that either the hazard does not occur / is not required, or to ensure that people are not significantly exposed to the hazard. This could include the partial segregation of traffic, the redesign of a junction, or changing the design of vehicles to make them less hazardous.

Administration
These are rules and procedures. The sort of thing I was suggesting above (access only routes, risk assessments, spotters, etc.)

Protective Equipment
Protective equipment is the last thing on the list because it is only effective as a 'just in case' and in limited circumstances. PPE makes some sense when it is shown to be effective, and the hazard cannot otherwise be avoided or prevented. For example, it makes sense to wear safety glasses when using a sander or drill because they cannot be completely shielded without making them impractical with regards to their purpose.

The generall approach to road saety is that it is generally low risk to operate in traffic for all road users. However, the RTC rate is higher in some places, so we analyse accidents rates and look at how to reduce them.

We don't consider the transport system holistically. Most controls are applied from Engineering downward. And, many engineering solutions are considered too impractical or expensive.
Image Attachments
hofc.jpg
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby beardy » 25 Feb 2015, 4:18pm

I can't help thinking that some people on this forum think that it is a cyclist's right to ride on a road in traffic without any degree of skill or care. I'm sorry but I don't agree.


That is probably me!

The roads are a public place, there has never been any restriction put on the access to them for anybody but motor vehicles. You are not allowed to go and endanger people in a public place and you can not use their minor negligence as an excuse to do so.

The situation of this HGV and cyclist would never have been allowed to happen if H&S were let loose on the public highway!

If I was waving my chainsaw around on the pavement cutting some branches and some pedestrian was silly enough to walk into it, I would share the blame for creating the dangerous situation which they entered.

pwa
Posts: 9850
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby pwa » 25 Feb 2015, 4:33pm

Be careful what you wish for. One way of eliminating the risk of harm to cyclists was implemented about a decade ago when a new dual carriageway to Cardiff Bay was being built. About a mile of it was too dodgy for cycling so cycling was forbidden. There we are! Risk eliminated. Alternative cycle tracks were included in the design, but they were fiddly and discontinuous, taking cyclists down to a major roundabout.

danhopgood
Posts: 96
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby danhopgood » 25 Feb 2015, 4:40pm

beardy wrote:
The roads are a public place, there has never been any restriction put on the access to them for anybody but motor vehicles.


I beg to differ. There are plenty of restrictions on all road users - described in the Highway Code, many of which are legal requirements and an offence is committed if not complied with. Those restrictions are put there to control behaviour to a generally accepted pattern - sadly not adequately enforced.

What sort of road syctem would it be where pedestrians can walk anywhere they like any time they like with no regard to anyone else?

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby beardy » 25 Feb 2015, 4:49pm

What sort of road syctem would it be where pedestrians can walk anywhere they like any time they like with no regard to anyone else?


A better one. The place where they are not allowed to is the motorways and restricted dual carriageways.

danhopgood
Posts: 96
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby danhopgood » 25 Feb 2015, 4:53pm

Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.

kwackers
Posts: 13291
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby kwackers » 25 Feb 2015, 4:55pm

danhopgood wrote:Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.

As a pedestrian I long for the days drivers obey the rules. Rule 170 would be a good start.

pwa
Posts: 9850
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby pwa » 25 Feb 2015, 4:57pm

Beardy

I don't know how many billion people there are on the planet, but there's too many for us all to move about without a bit of regulation. We all have to conform to some agreed standards of behaviour to make our movements safe and practical. And I do mean all: cyclists, lorry drivers, pedestrians .....

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 9350
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby horizon » 25 Feb 2015, 5:11pm

pwa wrote:Beardy

I don't know how many billion people there are on the planet, but there's too many for us all to move about without a bit of regulation. We all have to conform to some agreed standards of behaviour to make our movements safe and practical. And I do mean all: cyclists, lorry drivers, pedestrians .....


pwa: we agree on this. Cyclists need to be careful and obey the rules of the road (such as they are). Where we disagree is in seeing the moral equivalence between a lorry (even when following the rules) and a cyclist (even when not). The point at issue is not the following of the rules but the imbalanced consequence of not doing so. We need to create rules that demand that lorries take into account the mistakes of others. That's fair, not because lorry drivers should have to follow rules and cyclists not, but because the consequences are different.
I have two doctors, my left leg and my right leg. (G. M. Trevelyan)
PS I always wondered why the YHA HQ was called Trevelyan House. :)

danhopgood
Posts: 96
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby danhopgood » 25 Feb 2015, 5:18pm

kwackers wrote:
danhopgood wrote:Have you read the Highway Code?!

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35 is not talking about prohibited areas.

As a pedestrian I long for the days drivers obey the rules. Rule 170 would be a good start.


And as a vehicle user I like pedestrians who obey Rule 7D.

pwa
Posts: 9850
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Another cyclist death: left-turning lorry

Postby pwa » 25 Feb 2015, 5:32pm

Horizon

I suspect that if we worked on it we would find that we kind of agree on lots of things. I'm not against guards on the sides of lorries, better infrastructure at busy junctions and anything that makes things safer without stopping people going about their daily business. Things can and should be improved. But if one of my teenage kids said they were cycling around a busy city tomorrow I would want them to be 100% sure in their own minds that trying to pass any vehicle on the left when it is indicating left and has started turning left is an absolute no no.