TD Ciaran Cannon hit by SUV, suffers serious injury

Wasn't sure where to post this, mods feel free to move if there's an appropriate thread

From his twitter

https://twitter.com/ciarancannon/status/1411408338286436356?s=19

Many here will know of Ciaran from either his cycling exploits, greenway advocacy, cyclist safety advocacy and raising issues in the Dail related to cycling, most recently highlighting the farce of trying to submit video evidence recorded by cyclists.

Hope he makes a speedy recovery

Seth Brundle

Too many knobs replying to that tweet asking about his amount of hi-viz clothing.
:rolleyes:

magicbastarder

he's also a decent cyclist in terms of his fitness, did mizen to malin in under 24 hours two weeks ago. hopefully that fitness will aid in his recovery.

adrian522

Saw that earlier, some of the replies to the tweet made me pretty angry.

magicbastarder

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Too many knobs replying to that tweet asking about his amount of hi-viz clothing.
:rolleyes:

tbf, i scrolled a good distance in and searched for 'viz' and there was none found.

Seth Brundle

magicbastarder wrote: »

tbf, i scrolled a good distance in and searched for 'viz' and there was none found.

These are the second and sixth replies to his tweet for me (and there are more)
https://twitter.com/adoolan34/status/1411452335159664643?s=19

https://twitter.com/Allthecake1/status/1411716662978658308?s=19

lawred2

What's a "sturdy" car!?

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

What's a "sturdy" car!?

My 3 year old had one, pretty much bomb proof !!!!!!!!!!

magicbastarder

looks like that'd be far more of a danger to your ankles than your knees.

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

looks like that'd be far more of a danger to your ankles than your knees.

The dreaded walker was the cause of many a bruised shin!!!!!!! She could pick up a fair bit of speed in that yoke.

boombang

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Too many knobs replying to that tweet asking about his amount of hi-viz clothing.
:rolleyes:

Those posts were very much in the minority according to my reading of the replies.

Fils

Perhaps they had it in 4wd by accident.

Damien360

Wondering why he specifically said SUV driver. Our SUV’s are not that much bigger than the average family car. Yes a little taller but same width and length. Lucky he didn’t get worse injuries and hopefully a speedy recovery.

magicbastarder

Damien360 wrote: »

Wondering why he specifically said SUV driver.

because it was an SUV driver, i suspect.

grassylawn

Damien360 wrote: »

Wondering why he specifically said SUV driver. Our SUV’s are not that much bigger than the average family car. Yes a little taller but same width and length. Lucky he didn’t get worse injuries and hopefully a speedy recovery.

The high profile of an SUV makes it more likely to cause serious injury in a collision.

Fils

grassylawn wrote: »

The high profile of an SUV makes it more likely to cause serious injury in a collision.

Marginal I would have thought in relation to a car. We don’t know the story here but from seeing a lot of suv drivers at school morning runs a huge proportion are struggling to drive them safely and correctly.

Darc19

grassylawn wrote: »

The high profile of an SUV makes it more likely to cause serious injury in a collision.

And should make it a lot easier to see cyclists.

I used to drive a SUV - you could see cyclists over the roofline of cars in front and prepare for passing them.

As for "hi viz" - a bright summer's evening would not necessitate hi viz for a motorist paying attention.

I'm not a cyclist - too many crazy motorists out there.

Wishbone Ash

lawred2 wrote: »

What's a "sturdy" car!?

Hillman Hunter. God be with the days when you could stand on the roof of one at a football match. Try doing than in a modern car!

tdf7187

I've said it before and I'll say it again, SUV's are a modern day curse.

tdf7187

tdf7187 wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, SUV's are a modern day curse.

Ford Ranger's the same. The amount of clowns driving these around my way and paying the motor tax that come with them is unreal over the last year and them having no practical reason for driving one.

One parked outside or local Pharmacy every day ffs, guy commutes from the north in it!!!!!:rolleyes:

Fils

tdf7187 wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, SUV's are a modern day curse.

They are a fashion label.

Hurrache

tdf7187 wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, SUV's are a modern day curse.

I've also said before that an "SUV" is too wide an umbrella term used for anything that's not a saloon, estate or hatchback. They aren't the easy evil people make them out to be, some have lower footprints and emissions than other saloons and estates.

Fils wrote: »

They are a fashion label.

Maybe for the odd oddball, but generally they aren't.

Cyrus

Hurrache wrote: »

I've also said before that an "SUV" is too wide an umbrella term used for anything that's not a saloon, estate or hatchback. They aren't the easy evil people make them out to be, some have lower footprints and emissions than other saloons and estates.



Maybe for the odd oddball, but generally they aren't.

Exactly it could have been anything from a Ford kuga to a range rover

cruizer101

magicbastarder wrote: »

because it was an SUV driver, i suspect.

Would they have said "Hatchback driver hit me", I doubt it.

Saying SUV driver is making connotations that the fact that it was an SUV is linked to the accident.
It was just an idiot driver by the sounds of things, some people who drive SUV's are idiots some people who drive other types of cars are idiots.
You shouldn't make assumptions on a drivers ability based on their car.

Fils

To be fair about it a lot of people struggle to drive and park suv. This is clearly evident at every school run.

Eamonnator

cruizer101 wrote: »

Would they have said "Hatchback driver hit me", I doubt it.

Saying SUV driver is making connotations that the fact that it was an SUV is linked to the accident.
It was just an idiot driver by the sounds of things, some people who drive SUV's are idiots some people who drive other types of cars are idiots.
You shouldn't make assumptions on a drivers ability based on their car.

Cannon, as far as I can see, just said it was an SUV driver, which apparently it was. He made no judgement about the driver, based on the type of vehicle.
Assumptions were made by others.
It was not an accident, it was a collision.

wench

cruizer101 wrote: »

Would they have said "Hatchback driver hit me", I doubt it.

Saying SUV driver is making connotations that the fact that it was an SUV is linked to the accident.
It was just an idiot driver by the sounds of things, some people who drive SUV's are idiots some people who drive other types of cars are idiots.
You shouldn't make assumptions on a drivers ability based on their car.

Looks like he made a factual statement of who hit him, and you're reading your own interpretation into it.
Should he have just said he was hit by a mechanically propelled vehicle?

Macy0161

Wish him a speedy recovery - a significant number of people driving only seem to "look" for other vehicles, not anyone or anything else on the roads.

Whatever about generalisations on their driving skills, SUV drivers seem very defensive!

Paddigol

Macy0161 wrote: »

Wish him a speedy recovery - a significant number of people driving only seem to "look" for other vehicles, not anyone or anything else on the roads.

Whatever about generalisations on their driving skills, SUV drivers seem very defensive!

I'm an SUV driver -AND- an anti-hiviz, anti-cycle lane cyclist... can you imagine how defensive I am everyday :pac::pac:

Hope he recovers well - the knee is up there with the back as being two debilitating injuries I'd hate to suffer. Hope no long-term effects that might limit his ability on the bike.

Might bring a bit more focus on the issue of driver awareness and the fact that the roads are shared spaces, not single track speedways for cars.

Hurrache

Macy0161 wrote: »

Wish him a speedy recovery - a significant number of people driving only seem to "look" for other vehicles, not anyone or anything else on the roads.

Whatever about generalisations on their driving skills, SUV drivers seem very defensive!

I'm not one, I'm just coming from a factual point of view as to their perception which I think is a hangover from when they all used to be big and dirty which is far from the case now.

marvin80

tdf7187 wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, SUV's are a modern day curse.

Fils wrote: »

They are a fashion label.

Ridiculous how popular they've become especially considering that there more of a danger to vulnerable road users compared to regular saloon cars (that the SUVs have replaced.)

https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-suvs-are-more-lethal-to-pedestrians-than-cars#:~:text=At%20speeds%20of%2020%2D39,involving%20cars%20(54%20percent).

TefalBrain

Darc19 wrote: »

And should make it a lot easier to see cyclists.

I used to drive a SUV - you could see cyclists over the roofline of cars in front and prepare for passing them.

As for "hi viz" - a bright summer's evening would not necessitate hi viz for a motorist paying attention.

I'm not a cyclist - too many crazy motorists out there.

And cyclists.

Grassey

You'd hope that as a result of this a renewed focus might be brought to government-minister-dismissive-of-idea-to-upload-video-evidence-of-traffic-crime/

seamus

tdf7187 wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, SUV's are a modern day curse.

You should see the insanity that they're producing in the US

https://www.gmc.com/content/dam/gmc/na/us/english/index/vehicles/2021/crossovers-suvs/yukon-mov/shared-assets/01-images/2021-yukon-mp-rear-21PGYK00132.jpg?imwidth=1200

The people in the picture are accurate to the size of the vehicle. The rear height is 6'4", the bonnet height is 4'3". If you're a fairly average size man, the bonnet is up to your shoulder. If you're a women, only your head will be visible above the front of the car.

When you consider the position that drivers sit in, it's possible that an adult might not be visible in front of this vehicle, never mind a child.

It's absolutely off the wall, and I can only hope that the EU gives focus to vehicle design maximums to avoid these things ever being allowed on the road.

CoBo55

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Hillman Hunter. God be with the days when you could stand on the roof of one at a football match. Try doing than in a modern car!

Del2005

marvin80 wrote: »

Ridiculous how popular they've become especially considering that there more of a danger to vulnerable road users compared to regular saloon cars (that the SUVs have replaced.)

https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-suvs-are-more-lethal-to-pedestrians-than-cars#:~:text=At%20speeds%20of%2020%2D39,involving%20cars%20(54%20percent).

They are American SUV's which would require a C1 licence here. The majority of our "SUVs" are based on cars and nothing like an American SUV for other road user protection.

magicbastarder

my main issue with vehicles is unnecessary height.
if i'm a ped, or if i'm cycling, not being able to see over vehicles, at what other vehicles are doing is an obvious drawback.
and a corollary to that, and possibly even more important, if the drivers of those other vehicles cannot see *me*, that's obviously a major issue.

a 'normal' car is usually under or about 5 foot tall. many SUVs (regardless of the 'they're based on standardised car chassis' argument) cannot be seen over by someone of average height.

Hurrache

But not many 'SUVs' here have that issue over unnecessary height. I'm looking out at the carpark now and I'm parked beside a Qashqai and a similar Hyundai. There's not a huge differnece in height, and in the Nissan/Hyundai the seats are up higher given more or less the same view of what's immediately in front of the car, maybe even more so compared to people who sit low and slouchy in other cars.

Plus I know with the Nissan, it's a colleagues, it has that cool 360 camera view and the front one (and I think the side ones) automatically switch on if it detects anything at a low speed.

But as for the pick ups, we had a tradesman in one of those big Ford Ranger Raptors, that's huge. Although he did have it for all his equipment.

Effects

Hurrache wrote: »

But as for the pick ups, we had a tradesman in one of those big Ford Ranger Raptors, that's huge. Although he did have it for all his equipment.

I know a lot of tradesmen that switched from SUVs (Land Cruiser, Pajero etc.) to vans as they are more practical. So I don't buy the theory that a raptor is needed to carry all his equipment.

magicbastarder

the current qashqai has a stated height of 1,635mm.
the average height of an irish woman is 1,650mm. so the average irish woman cannot see over a qashqai.

at a guess, you'd probably need to be at least 100mm taller than the car to see over it. so for that qashqai, 1,735mm tall, or about 5'8" tall.

(and rather coincidentally, i think i'm 172mm tall. maybe tall people don't realise the issue SUVs can create)

Hurrache

Effects wrote: »

I know a lot of tradesmen that switched from SUVs (Land Cruiser, Pajero etc.) to vans as they are more practical. So I don't buy the theory that a raptor is needed to carry all his equipment.

I'm not saying he needed it, just that it was being used. I can imagine though as it was a crew cab it's more practical in terms if you have a family.

In terms of height, I'm coming from the POV of the argument being made that the height means a driver can't see what's immediately Infront of them, not who can or cannot see over them. Sure we'd be arguing for thirsty sports cars in that case.

CoBo55

magicbastarder wrote: »

the current qashqai has a stated height of 1,635mm.
the average height of an irish woman is 1,650mm. so the average irish woman cannot see over a qashqai.

at a guess, you'd probably need to be at least 100mm taller than the car to see over it. so for that qashqai, 1,735mm tall, or about 5'8" tall.

(and rather coincidentally, i think i'm 172mm tall. maybe tall people don't realise the issue SUVs can create)

Ha ha, that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The driver is sitting in the car, not standing beside it pushing it along...

seamus

magicbastarder wrote: »

the current qashqai has a stated height of 1,635mm.
the average height of an irish woman is 1,650mm. so the average irish woman cannot see over a qashqai.

at a guess, you'd probably need to be at least 100mm taller than the car to see over it. so for that qashqai, 1,735mm tall, or about 5'8" tall.

That's the roof height to be fair, not the bonnet height. Though there's a reasonable point that the visibility through the rear window of these higher vehicles may be very inadequate.

(and rather coincidentally, i think i'm 172mm tall. maybe tall people don't realise the issue SUVs can create)

At 172mm sure you'd pass right underneath the front bumper

magicbastarder

CoBo55 wrote: »

Ha ha, that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The driver is sitting in the car, not standing beside it pushing it along...

who said anything about the driver? you could try reading my previous post on it. it's only four posts above the one you quoted.

CoBo55

Del2005 wrote: »

They are American SUV's which would require a C1 licence here. The majority of our "SUVs" are based on cars and nothing like an American SUV for other road user protection.

Would American stuff be over 3500kg, not that I'll ever be driving one.

magicbastarder

seamus wrote: »

That's the roof height to be fair, not the bonnet height.

it's not the bonnet i'm worried about.

one context - i used to cycle newtownpark avenue from the N11 to blackrock on my commute. it's fast downhill, and the main danger there is cars pulling across in front of you. if i was sitting a distance back from a 'normal' car, i could see what oncoming cars were doing easily without having to position myself wide out on the road; and they could see me too. when it was a tall vehicle in front of me, i was in danger of not being seen by the oncoming motorist, who could (and did, in several circumstances) swing across the lane just after that car in front passed them.

i.e. with a normal car, i was able to see them easily, they were able to see me. with an SUV in front of me, i had to strive to see and to be seen. the bonnet height was immaterial.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

who said anything about the driver? you could try reading my previous post on it. it's only four posts above the one you quoted.

Classic driver centric thinking on display

Edgarfrndly

I always try to be conscious of cyclists when driving as I cycle myself, but the amount of people I've seen push into the cycle lanes without even looking is astounding.

statto25

Deleted User wrote: »

Ford Ranger's the same

The new automobile of the agriw@nker and the wannabe agriw@nker

magicbastarder

Weepsie wrote: »

They generally also have much bigger blind spots as they have bigger pillars so to speak (probably a better term).

yeah, the closest i ever came to knocking a cyclist down was when i was pulling up at a roundabout and whatever the combination of my speed and the cyclist's speed, he was hidden behind my A pillar till the very last second. i managed to scare the daylights out of the poor guy.

machiavellianme

magicbastarder wrote: »

the current qashqai has a stated height of 1,635mm.
the average height of an irish woman is 1,650mm. so the average irish woman cannot see over a qashqai.

at a guess, you'd probably need to be at least 100mm taller than the car to see over it. so for that qashqai, 1,735mm tall, or about 5'8" tall.

(and rather coincidentally, i think i'm 172mm tall. maybe tall people don't realise the issue SUVs can create)

Can you see over trucks, vans, caravans, buses or tractors?
Assuming you haven't been killed by one of them or whatever traffic is behind it, why is it such a problem for SUVs?
I would have thought that it's pretty simple - look where you are going and if you aren't sure, don't do it!