Journalism and cycling

magicbastarder

Aha. Same here. I usually only open the journal directly if sitting on the bus to kill time.

Duckjob

amcalester wrote: »

They never load when I access a page via a link but if I go the the site and search for the story the comments load.

AFAIR Its https that causes that problem. if you change the link to http:// the comments will load. Funnily enough though, I couldnt change to http when i was in chrome - it kept defaulting back to https:// - i had to copy the link to firefox and change it there

Edit: it could be Google trying to protect your sanity by not letting you read journal.ie comments

Can't believe I'm going to help people read Journal comments here but they'll load if you click the number of comments at the top of the article

Pinch Flat

Ah taximen. Those bastions of road safety and civilised driving.

Edit - Dublin civic plaza incoming on Matt cooper show on tv3

Pinch Flat

Mannix Flynn on. Hope he’s taking the meds tonight.

Pinch Flat

“Is this not a hidden agenda for cyclists”.....bingo. Yates on it.

ED E

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Mannix Flynn on.

Tombo2001

People with hidden agendas......the Russians......the fascists......the Scientologists.........and the cyclists.....

The cyclist agenda......these people want to get from A to B quicker, they want to be out in the fresh open air, they like getting exercise every day. Down with this sort of thing!@!!

Grassey

Tombo2001 wrote: »

People with hidden agendas......the Russians......the fascists......the Scientologists.........and the cyclists.....
!

Damn Spyclists

tomasrojo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_Mannix_Flynn

Are his plays and novels any good, does anyone know?

I completely understand his anger about many things, based on that bio, but I really don't see what cyclists have to do with his worldview. Or, indeed, some of the other things he seems to be worked up about.

seamus

Poor aul Mannix feels the needs to stick his oar in everywhere. I remember him on another show talking about why the injection rooms proposed for Inner City Dublin were a terrible idea.

He was completely out of his depth and banging on with anecdotes.

I wonder if TV3 pull in Mannix when they want to have someone with an "official" opposition to something but they don't want the opposer to put forward much in the way of argument.

magicbastarder

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/misadventure-dublin-cyclist-death/

Stickybottle report on the inquest into the death of donna fox. Noteworthy that the truck driver appears to only have indicated just before he moved off? Surely you indicate way earlier than that?

P_1

magicbastarder wrote: »

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/misadventure-dublin-cyclist-death/

Stickybottle report on the inquest into the death of donna fox. Noteworthy that the truck driver appears to only have indicated just before he moved off? Surely you indicate way earlier than that?

Not sure how misadventure comes into the cause of death tbh. From the report it appears the impression was that the way to go straight was clear owing to the truck not indicating while it was stopped at the lights. Surely you'd indicate even before you stopped at a set of lights if wanting to turn.

amcalester

P_1 wrote: »

Not sure how misadventure comes into the cause of death tbh. From the report it appears the impression was that the way to go straight was clear owing to the truck not indicating while it was stopped at the lights. Surely you'd indicate even before you stopped at a set of lights if wanting to turn.

Or knowing that you have a blind spot, had not been indicating beforehand and were about to turn left would you not make sure that there was no one in your blind spot before turning.

magicbastarder

yeah, it's kinda galling to read this:

As she pulled up to the traffic lights, a truck was already at the lights and the driver was intending to turn left.

The inquest hearing today and Dublin Coroner’s Court heard she came to a halt just ahead of the truck.

It was also told she would not have seen the driver put on his left indicator just before he began to turn left.

That movement by the driver knocked Donna Fox from her bike and she was crushed to death.

Forensic Collision Investigator Garda Damien Farrell said Ms Fox’s position on the road was dangerous.

on the assumption that the above report is accurate - she pulls past a truck which is waiting at lights and has not indicated intention to turn, and it's commented that her actions have placed her in danger?

seamus

Well perhaps - assuming that is, that she crossed the white line.

Whatever about the driver's failure to indicate or check his blind spots, all vehicles are required to remain behind the white line when the lights are red. And had she stuck to this she may (may, may, may) have seen the driver indicate and not proceeded.

However, there is still obviously the major issue of questions over cycle lanes and their priority. Had she remained in the cycle lane, but behind the white line, would the truck have seen her? No. Would he have checked his blind spots? No. Would the truck have yielded to bicycles in the cycle lane? No. Would she still have died? It's a high possibility.

So to a certain extent it's fair to say that she "placed" herself in the forward blind spot of a large vehicle, but then you have to ask two questions:

1. Why does the vehicle have forward blind spots at all? This can be rectified with appropriate mirrors.
2. Why does the road architecture encourage people to place themselves in dangerous situations? Roadcraft would dictate that you stay behind large vehicles stopped at a junction, but there was a cycle lane running up the inside of the truck. So of course the cyclist is going to use it.


It's unfortunate we don't prosecute truck drivers more often for this. His failure to check blind spots and failure to yield was the primary cause of the incident.

Weepsie

Drivers not indicating at traffic lights is an annoyingly bad habit, and in this circumstance tragic. Probably goes for a lot of cyclists too though, so it's just a bad habit all round.

CramCycle

seamus wrote: »

Well perhaps - assuming that is, that she crossed the white line.

Whatever about the driver's failure to indicate or check his blind spots, all vehicles are required to remain behind the white line when the lights are red. And had she stuck to this she may (may, may, may) have seen the driver indicate and not proceeded.

She would have been in a pinch point position then, i don't agree but I suppose I don't want to find out either.

However, there is still obviously the major issue of questions over cycle lanes and their priority. Had she remained in the cycle lane, but behind the white line, would the truck have seen her? No. Would he have checked his blind spots? No. Would the truck have yielded to bicycles in the cycle lane? No. Would she still have died? It's a high possibility.

My father was a truck driver for years, I often went out with him and drove myself for a bit. While there is a forward blind spot, it is only large if you don't lean forward. The DPP and the Gardai don't seem to like pursuing this sort of crime but from the descriptions, with a minor increase in the drivers movement and an increase in caution, this would never have happened or would have been greatly reduced. I for one think she was in one of the few safer positions, far more than waiting behind the line.

So to a certain extent it's fair to say that she "placed" herself in the forward blind spot of a large vehicle, but then you have to ask two questions:

Two things here would have also helped, an ASL, if the driver stopped correctly would have made sure she was visible, I am still not convinced by the descriptions that she wasn't but it is what it is now. Better designed cabs. While overall length would increase, either transparent doors or lower front seats would again increase viewing ability and reduce risk.

2. Why does the road architecture encourage people to place themselves in dangerous situations? Roadcraft would dictate that you stay behind large vehicles stopped at a junction, but there was a cycle lane running up the inside of the truck. So of course the cyclist is going to use it.

It is changing but often i would get blasted out of it at one junction where I move right to stay either out of the left turn (bus and cyclist only straight) lane as the cycle lane is a source of conflict every morning. Most drivers who frequent the junction now realise this and happily let you through but some still are too blind to see the benefits of you not using the cycle lane that is curved before the junction so you are only visible for 3 seconds before the turn.

It's unfortunate we don't prosecute truck drivers more often for this. His failure to check blind spots and failure to yield was the primary cause of the incident.

There is an adverse reaction in this country to prosecuting death by dangerous driving in my opinion.

Weepsie wrote: »

Drivers not indicating at traffic lights is an annoyingly bad habit, and in this circumstance tragic. Probably goes for a lot of cyclists too though, so it's just a bad habit all round.

Drivers not indicating anywhere, it is seen by some as a requirement to do it without realisation of the purpose, so they hit it as they turn the wheel, which is pointless.

magicbastarder

going by the latest street view, they've staggered the stop lines for cyclists and motorists - there's no advanced stop box, but that would gel with the fact there are wands there to separate cyclists and motorists. but cyclists seem to be able to legitimately stop a couple of metres forward of motorists:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3507637,-6.2413634,3a,75y,86.91h,67.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZkJ81bOwqpBwHZJDTznaeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

it's just a guess, but it seems they pulled the old stop line for motorists back about a metre, and pushed it forward for cyclists by about a metre.

eeeee

That's a horrendous verdict, can it be appealed? I don't think she was in an unsafe position at all, if she was in front of the lorry. As cram says leaning forward you can see what's in front of you pretty easily. I grew up in and around lorries, and there's no excuse for not indicating coming up to a junction if you intend to turn or checking your blind spot before moving off in any vehicle never mind a HGV in the city. Driver should lose their license. Can this be appealed?

magicbastarder

i don't recall ever hearing about an inquest verdict being appealed, but it's not the sort of thing which i guess you'd hear about much if it is possible.

Hurrache

nee wrote: »

That's a horrendous verdict, can it be appealed? I don't think she was in an unsafe position at all, if she was in front of the lorry. As cram says leaning forward you can see what's in front of you pretty easily. I grew up in and around lorries, and there's no excuse for not indicating coming up to a junction if you intend to turn or checking your blind spot before moving off in any vehicle never mind a HGV in the city. Driver should lose their license. Can this be appealed?

Appealed by who? I don't think the parents have any interest in going through an inquest again, and they're much more forgiving than I think I'd ever be in such a situation, I think they're happy to leave it lie now.

Tombo2001

"Forensic Collision Investigator Garda Damien Farrell said Ms Fox’s position on the road was dangerous."

I have a major difficulty with this sentence; that is appearing in pretty much all of the media coverage.

What it appears to be saying is that the cyclist was at fault.

Between the lines, I dont thing he is saying that; I think effectively what he is saying is that the layout was badly designed, and as a result of stopping where any other cyclist would stop in that situation, she was exposed.

However the way its pitched very much feeds into the narrative that the cyclist was at fault.

You could argue that any road position a cyclist finds themselves in is dangerous, given how poor the cycling infrastructure is in Dublin.

check_six

Tombo2001 wrote: »

"Forensic Collision Investigator Garda Damien Farrell said Ms Fox’s position on the road was dangerous."

Why couldn't they say that what the truck driver did was both negligent and dangerous?

Tombo2001

check_six wrote: »

Why couldn't they say that what the truck driver did was both negligent and dangerous?

I am assuming their view is that the bike was positioned in a place on the road - to the front left of the front left wheel of the truck - where the driver couldnt see her either through the windscreen or through the mirror.

So as such, the only negligence is that he didnt indicate early enough. I am guessing thats how they read it.

Eamonnator

check_six wrote: »

Why couldn't they say that what the truck driver did was both negligent and dangerous?

It was an inquest, not a criminal court. An inquest can't convict anybody of dangerous driving

Tombo2001

I note the family have also come out and said they dont blame the driver.

ford2600

Tombo2001 wrote: »

"Forensic Collision Investigator Garda Damien Farrell said Ms Fox’s position on the road was dangerous."

I have a major difficulty with this sentence; that is appearing in pretty much all of the media coverage.

What it appears to be saying is that the cyclist was at fault.

Between the lines, I dont thing he is saying that; I think effectively what he is saying is that the layout was badly designed, and as a result of stopping where any other cyclist would stop in that situation, she was exposed.

However the way its pitched very much feeds into the narrative that the cyclist was at fault.

You could argue that any road position a cyclist finds themselves in is dangerous, given how poor the cycling infrastructure is in Dublin.

Forensic Collison Investigator's are often just normal Gardaí who have been trained up on this course
http://www.dmu.ac.uk/study/courses/undergraduate-courses/forensic-road-collision-investigation-foundation-degree-(fdsc).aspx

They usually who have in mind whether they have a case which they could prosecute in a criminal court or not; where the onus is to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Once there is issues around the road design and the Deceased placing themselves in a vulnerable position they know a prosecution would be really difficult.

As an aside some of the investigators put a awful lot of faith in some of the more shaky reconstruction formulas in the course material; "pedestrian throw distance" in particular.

Had the cyclist been a little less law abiding she might still be alive; by jumping lights as soon as it was safe to do so. From memory a disproportionate number of women die in collisions with trucks in London.

Here is a discussion from
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/why-women-seem-to-be-more-vulnerable-around-traffic-blackspots-in-london-10341420.html

"Since January 2009, 84 cyclists over the age of 16 have been killed following crashes with vehicles in Greater London: 33 women and 51 men (three children have also died). According to Transport for London, women make only a quarter of our city’s bike journeys, yet they represent 39 per cent of adult cycling fatalities in the past six-and-a-half years.


Analysis by the Evening Standard reveals something more stark, though: a much higher proportion of female cyclists die in HGV crashes than male cyclists. Of the 33 female deaths, 27 — or 82 per cent — were hit by lorries. Only 22 of the 51 men collided with lorries; 17 with cars; four with buses; three with vans; two with coaches; and one each with a rollerblader, a parked car and an opening car door."

Better road design, roadcraft and appropriate technology on every HGV would almost eliminate this type of accident. While there may be an issue when tractors are not compatible with every trailer, sensors in the tractor unit is all is needed for this type of incident.

Tombo2001

ford2600 wrote: »

Forensic Collison Investigator's are often just normal Gardaí who have been trained up on this course
http://www.dmu.ac.uk/study/courses/undergraduate-courses/forensic-road-collision-investigation-foundation-degree-(fdsc).aspx

They usually who have in mind whether they have a case which they could prosecute in a criminal court or not; where the onus is to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Once there is issues around the road design and the Deceased placing themselves in a vulnerable position they know a prosecution would be really difficult.

As an aside some of the investigators put a awful lot of faith in some of the more shaky reconstruction formulas in the course material; "pedestrian throw distance" in particular.

Had the cyclist been a little less law abiding she might still be alive; by jumping lights as soon as it was safe to do so. From memory a disproportionate number of women die in collisions with trucks in London.
.

Thats a really outstanding point.

We hear day in day out about cyclists jumping the lights and how reckless they are.

And yet here we have a cyclist who stopped at the lights exactly where she was supposed to stop; and the Forensic expert saying she was in a dangerous position.

I've argued a number of times before that it is sometimes safer for a cyclist to brake the lights.

When you say this, driver see it as vindication of their view that cyclists are reckless.

cdaly_

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Thats a really outstanding point.

We hear day in day out about cyclists jumping the lights and how reckless they are.

And yet here we have a cyclist who stopped at the lights exactly where she was supposed to stop; and the Forensic expert saying she was in a dangerous position.

I've argued a number of times before that it is sometimes safer for a cyclist to brake the lights.

When you say this, driver see it as vindication of their view that cyclists are reckless.

While I agree that the road layout may have left her in a dangerous position, there's still no need to brake lights to be safer. In the circumstance, the cyclist could have gone further ahead to be out of a blind spot or could have waited behind the truck.

The blame lies both with the infrastructure which suggested to her that she could travel up the side of the truck and with the driver who did not indicate in good time.