Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

RainyDay · 06-11-2015 5:53pm

Sitting in a classroom (sleeping gently) is now considered to be a hazardous activity;

https://twitter.com/gardainfo/status/662671694381916160

galwaycyclist · 06-11-2015 6:59pm

Qualitymark wrote: »

Assuming the driver's awake and alert. One of them nearly got me the other day, when I was cycling on a narrow road with one of those kind of framed chainlink things on one side that they use while building Luas tracks. He swooshed up beside me and started going left… left… left…

I banged on the side of the bus three times with the flat of my hand; still going left… left… left…

Banged again, and this time he heard me, or his passengers did and yelled. He pulled out and I got out in front of him and waved thanks and got the hell out of there.

How he didn't see me is a mystery: flashing lights, bizarre fluorescent-Battenburg-cake hi-viz, scarlet Lidl jacket, reflective Sealskinz gloves.

No - I knew driver behaviour would come up - but I think statistically buses are less associated with cyclist fatalities than HGVs even though the sizes are similar. (makes mental note to check)

Now that you mention it, the effect may actually be due to the presence of passengers.

It just occurred to me that some fatalities I have heard of involving buses - were with buses that were out of service at the time. Another line of enquiry.

eeeee · 06-11-2015 10:08pm

Just wondering at what point is it acceptable for human culpability to cede to technology? Is not one of the themes in this thread that cyclists don't want to wear high-viz as it removes the responsibility of observation from the motorist to the cyclist? The HGV argument can be said to be the same. Until teleportation can transport the millions of tones of goods, equipment and services required by a city/town requires to function, HGV's are the most efficient and cost effective method of transporting goods. So cyclists have to learn how to be around them. HGV drivers spend a lot of time every year learning how to be around other traffic.

It strikes me that most cyclists will have experienced cars, either driven in them or been a passenger, same with buses and coaches but not with HGV's. This must have some bearing on the problem. Of course there are rogue drivers, but, from what I see on Dublin streets every day the majority of cyclists I encounter have no idea their behaviour is so dangerous around HGV's. As HGV's are an essential part of our transport system, sitting cyclists into a cab may make them more aware of the dangers/how to safely cycle near one? All the beeps, magic mirrors, sensors and long windows can't make up for someone cycling in too close to the cab of a vehicle. And I think it's mainly from a lack of awareness. More campaigns maybe? We all have to share the road, and we can't expect motorists to make an exception of observation for cyclists and not extend the same curtesy ourselves to HGV's.

roverrules · 06-11-2015 10:13pm

Qualitymark wrote: »

2,500 years ago the Romans made a law that all deliveries to their congested streets be made overnight. We could do the same.

What about cyclists at night time, they'd surely be more at risk?

tigerboon · 07-11-2015 1:07am

Qualitymark wrote: »

The Romans didn't build all night either, but deliveries were at night.

Yeah, well look at the state of the Colluseum now, half fallen down.
Concrete and tarmac/asphalt can't be stored until the next day. Safety wise, I know of workers who have been assaulted, fallen into open manholes, and threatened with a 3ft machete by a drugged up loon while working at night. Some of these lads will never work again. Trading your safety for theirs is not the answer. It's very easy to say do these things at night, but why not do the safe office jobs at night?

Qualitymark · 07-11-2015 7:39am

roverrules wrote: »

What about cyclists at night time, they'd surely be more at risk?

Fewer of them, though.

tigerboon wrote: »

Yeah, well look at the state of the Colluseum now, half fallen down.
Concrete and tarmac/asphalt can't be stored until the next day. Safety wise, I know of workers who have been assaulted, fallen into open manholes, and threatened with a 3ft machete by a drugged up loon while working at night. Some of these lads will never work again. Trading your safety for theirs is not the answer. It's very easy to say do these things at night, but why not do the safe office jobs at night?

I'm not suggesting that construction workers do the building at nigh. I'm suggesting that the supplies - the sacks of cement, the gravel, the blocks, the kilometres of electrical cable and piping, the slates, the tiles… - that all that, or a high proportion of it, be delivered at night, so that the trucks don't have to cross the city during the day. It would even be cheaper and more efficient for the truckers: little or no car traffic to stop them.

Wishbone Ash · 07-11-2015 9:57am

Qualitymark wrote: »

.. the sacks of cement..

Concrete is delivered 'ready-mixed' to 99% of sites.

Leroy42 · 07-11-2015 10:29am

Right, so we are now down to discussing the building trade?

Lets agree that night time only deliveries is not a complete solution.

Some on here are of the opinion that current HGV trucks are here to stay, and it is up to others to adapt to their shortcomings and massive blind spots. The job they do is important and as such it would appear that HGV should be accepted and we should adapt to suit them.

Others, myself being one, agree of the need for HGV type vehicles but consider the inherent design flaws as unacceptable in the modern traffic environment and feel that something has to be done to make them safer. I simply cannot understand how people can accept that a vehicle can be legally driven on the road which such clear and documented shortcomings when it comes to interacting with other road users.

Qualitymark · 07-11-2015 11:26am

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Concrete is delivered 'ready-mixed' to 99% of sites.

So deliver readymix during the day and everything else at night. It would still cut down the number of trucks on the daylight streets enormously - with exra added safety

:):) for cyclists.

rollingscone · 07-11-2015 11:53am

Cutting down the number of precious dumdums careening ineptly about the roads in their private cars would be much more effective.

They create the rat race.

tomasrojo · 07-11-2015 12:08pm

Cab redesign:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/23/revamped-lorry-designs-could-avoid-hundreds-of-cycling-deaths-study-claims

Image there also shows how completely the RSA misrepresents the nature of blind spots in their campaign upthread.

tomasrojo · 07-11-2015 12:10pm

Morgan believes banning trucks that weigh more than 3.5 tonnes from cities and building a network of distribution centres on the edge of towns, where goods can be decanted into smaller vehicles, would save lives. The practice is widespread in Germany, he said.

He said that fitting trucks with additional mirrors wouldn't solve the problem. "Mirrors obviously improve your field of vision but they are not as good as seeing things directly as you need extra time to interpret exactly where the person in the mirror is. Also, if you've got a mirror in front of your window it's going to be obscuring part of your view. Mirrors are often placed at the corners of vehicles so the mirrors themselves may be obscuring the cyclist. All in all, lower cabs with large windows, like buses or the newer dustbin trucks, are the solution in built-up areas."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2010/nov/18/hgv-city-ban-to-protect-cyclists

Rogue-Trooper · 07-11-2015 12:32pm

Just passed the entrance to Pavilions Shopping Centre in Swords and it looks like Garda Traffic are setting up one of their cyclist awareness thingies.

As well as the usual RSA vests and crappy free lights, more importantly they have a HGV tractor unit there that you can sit into. As Gadetra mentioned in her post, getting a cyclist into a cab so they can experience things from the HGV drivers perspective is invaluable.

eeeee · 07-11-2015 12:46pm

Redesign and mirrors (although I thinkt there is an argument against too many mirrirs, sensors and gadgets -your attention needs to be on the road at all times, glancing in mirrors but there comes a point at which mirrirs and safety features become distracting) are being developed all the time and will continue to be. Saferty features are continually being developed, their current largest short coming is other vehicles awareness of them and their blindspots and turning circles. Until an efficient system of replacement is in place we have to deal with HGV's, and consequently we need to know how to deal with them. They are part of traffic now, so awareness needs to be developed.

The iniative outside the Pavillion in Swords is an excellent idea, should happen all over the city on a regular basis.

Wishbone Ash · 07-11-2015 1:19pm

Rogue-Trooper wrote: »

Just passed the entrance to Pavilions Shopping Centre in Swords and it looks like Garda Traffic are setting up one of their cyclist awareness thingies...

:eek: The McNally Swords CC racing crew usually end up with a sprint there on a Saturday morning!

07Lapierre, Inquitus, Greenmat, manwithaplan, Robert Foster et al...take note!

Wishbone Ash · 07-11-2015 1:26pm

lower cabs with large windows, like buses or the newer dustbin trucks, are the solution in built-up areas

Lowering the cab is difficult especially on tractor units as the engine would have to be mounted behind the cab instead of under it increasing the length of the unit. The fifth wheel would have to be mounted further back. As a result, the overall length of the vehicle would increase necessitating a shorter trailer increasing overall costs. This would also create a large gap between the cab and the trailer increasing fuel consumption on long haul operations.

tomasrojo · 07-11-2015 2:22pm

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Lowering the cab is difficult especially on tractor units as the engine would have to be mounted behind the cab instead of under it increasing the length of the unit. The fifth wheel would have to be mounted further back. As a result, the overall length of the vehicle would increase necessitating a shorter trailer increasing overall costs. This would also create a large gap between the cab and the trailer increasing fuel consumption on long haul operations.

I assume that they don't envision the motorway-suitable HGVs being in town at all. So this redesign is for smaller redistribution vehicles -- I assume (again) about the size of a garbage truck.

On the subject of training and awareness, I have very little faith in these initiatives, for three reasons:

1) They've had cycle training in the UK for quite a while now, and it's had no impact, not even modest, on the proportion of cyclist deaths attributable to HGVs.
2) In Ireland, the training/awareness would fall to the Gardaí and RSA, who fundamentally have a windshield view of the world (despite what they might say), and regard healthy travel as a nuisance more than anything else. Which is why they consistently bungle the message and turn everything into victim-blaming, or just miss the point.
3) A good rule of thumb is the ethos of the Road Danger Reduction Forum in the UK: reduce danger at source. That means tackling HGV design where practical, and HGV prevalence where not.

Qualitymark · 07-11-2015 4:34pm

Again, might I suggest that a physical indicator of the trucks' blind spot, in the form of coloured light (this would work better after dark than during daylight, of course) might be a help - like this similar idea for a bicycle:

wendell borton · 07-11-2015 5:20pm

At the end of the day your safety is your own responsibility. Depending on technology or other road users attentiveness is a losing game, the best option is to just give HGV's a wide berth.

tomasrojo · 07-11-2015 5:35pm

wendell borton wrote: »

At the end of the day your safety is your own responsibility. Depending on technology or other road users attentiveness is a losing game, the best option is to just give HGV's a wide berth.

On a personal level, yes, that's the best option, but what should town planners and authorities do?

Your safety is not just your own responsibility either, really. People who put you in danger are regarded as culpable too, even if the intention was not to put you in danger.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 08-11-2015 4:57pm

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Lowering the cab is difficult especially on tractor units as the engine would have to be mounted behind the cab instead of under it increasing the length of the unit. The fifth wheel would have to be mounted further back. As a result, the overall length of the vehicle would increase necessitating a shorter trailer increasing overall costs. This would also create a large gap between the cab and the trailer increasing fuel consumption on long haul operations.

And the passenger seat would have to be removed from the cab completely

tomasrojo · 08-11-2015 9:08pm

Frances Ugly Shopkeeper wrote: »

And the passenger seat would have to be removed from the cab completely

Why's that?

Modern garbage trucks have passenger seats. I assume you mean the passenger (and/or the passenger seat) blocks the view of the driver?

tomasrojo · 09-11-2015 12:01pm

Volvo Life Paint! It's here! It's not very good!

My primary issue is that it’s a publicity stunt designed for Instagram rather than roads. If it doesn’t really show up in car headlights, it doesn’t work. And to suggest it does – and can somehow prevent the 19,000 bicycle accidents the publicity material suggests happen in the UK each year – is not only rather misleading but also irresponsible.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/09/volvo-life-paint-hi-vis-cyclist-road-safety-review

Macy0161 · 10-11-2015 10:43am

Not sure if this is for the Hi Vis thread or the helmet thread, but those of us opposed to compulsory Hi-Viz and Helmets should take note at how the RSA are framing the debate... There's a section in their survey released yesterday on cyclists headed - "Safety gear compliance". It only mentions helmets and hi vis.

tomasrojo · 10-11-2015 11:01am

The RSA and the Gardaí do seem to have adopted a tactic of pretending that helmet and hi-viz laws are already in place (or that they're so very important that they effectively are legally required). I have heard Gardaí tell people that helmets are required by law, and others here have too. The information leaflet about Fixed-Charge Notices was designed largely to dupe people into thinking that helmet and hi-viz laws existed and were included in the new FCNs.

Bit like the way the post-Rising, pre-Independence Nationalists used to have parliamentary meetings and decide on policies, despite the fact that Ireland was still governed from Westminster.

Macy0161 · 10-11-2015 11:24am

It doesn't look like they even bothered to ask cyclists about lights when they were doing their "compliance" bit.

tomasrojo · 10-11-2015 11:32am

Yes, and use of lights would warrant the use of the word "compliance".

My usual response to just about anything the RSA (and to a large extent the Gardaí) have to say about cycling is just to roll my eyes. They pretty much are the @RoadSofaAuthority of Twitter fame.

tomasrojo · 10-11-2015 11:37am

In fact:

https://twitter.com/Flaminghobo1/status/664027299210240000

bambergbike · 10-11-2015 4:19pm

tomasrojo wrote: »

My usual response to just about anything the RSA (and to a large extent the Gardaí) have to say about cycling is just to roll my eyes. They pretty much are the @RoadSofaAuthority of Twitter fame.

Well, yes. I'm sort of resigned to the fact that even if things do change, the RSA will be the last people to get the memo.

But I'm still a bit irked by seeing their nonsensical personal protective equipment ideology data being reported, nay parroted, so completely uncritically by the Irish Times (silly hairstyles headline and all!) in a week when the sources of danger and inconvenience to cyclists in Ireland really were so screamingly obvious (from the RSA's own data on speeding, usefully supplemented by @cosain's tweets, and from the succinct summary of what's wrong with Irish cycle infrastructure on IrishCycle.

tomasrojo · 10-11-2015 7:03pm

The Irish Times' reporting on utility cycling is dreadful, and has been for some time. Not as bad as their reporting on the Irish economy during the property porn years (1999-2007), but really shoddy, inaccurate and lazy. Stenographers for the policy-based evidence-makers in the RSA.

Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Comments