Journalism and cycling

what_traffic

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
.
..
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.

Good point, it also a design issue- should the type of HGV be in a City environment in the first place? Doubt that thought would have entered into the Forensic Collison Investigator's mind. Was this HGV a "City" roadworthy vehicle if it has such obvious design flaws that has large inbuilt blind spots designed into it?
It is rare to see a tractor in a City environment.

ford2600

what_traffic wrote: »

It is rare to see a tractor in a City environment.

Tractor as in the part of an artic that the driver sits not one like me

If you are going to mix HGV with vulnerable road users without using modern technology you will always have these accidents.

As for breaking lights, what I meant was to be moving ahead of traffic as soon as lights were about to go green. Technically you would probably cross white line before light went green but not enter across mouth of junction.

To me at that type of junction there is two choices be really assertive and be gone or be aware meek and passive as fcuk and yield to everyone.

ED E

Take scenario A:
Truck in L2 of M50
Fiesta in L1 of M50 parallel to truck
Truck decides he needs to take this exit so instantly merges into L1 and crushes the fiesta killing the driver.

What verdict/sanction would you give?


This is almost the exact same except cycle tracks both are and aren't lanes under the nebulous RTAs.

tomasrojo

ED E wrote: »

This is almost the exact same except cycle tracks both are and aren't lanes under the nebulous RTAs.

Yeah, I've never been clear whether cycle tracks are separate lanes or not. But I know that people have been warning for years that "inviting" cyclists to go up the inside of HGVs and buses would end in tragedy.

Pinch Flat

On a separate note, driving school before they can even cycle.....the full circle of car dependency is nearing completion

https://www.dublinlive.ie/whats-on/family-kids-news/tayto-park-driving-course-kids-14386581

ford2600

cdaly_ wrote: »

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.

On all road fatalities the TII (formerly NRA) investigate the accident to establish if the road infrastructure was a contributory factor.

It would be hard to see how their report wouldn't criticise the infrastructure to some degree; the separated lane which gives a notion of safety on approach and beyond junction but leaves cyclist very exposed to turning traffic at mouth of junction.

If the report made such a conclusion and was obtained under FOI it could be used by cycling lobby groups to force redesign of similar junctions.

It might help to prevent a similar accidents with very minor redesign of junctions.

Steoller

tomasrojo wrote: »

ED E wrote: »

This is almost the exact same except cycle tracks both are and aren't lanes under the nebulous RTAs.

Yeah, I've never been clear whether cycle tracks are separate lanes or not. But I know that people have been warning for years that "inviting" cyclists to go up the inside of HGVs and buses would end in tragedy.

According to the NTA interpretation of the law, the legal position is that traffic going straight on the main road, have right of way over traffic exiting the road - exiting traffic MUST yield to cyclists going straight.
Direct Quote: "Legal status - Cycle traffic as well as other traffic on the main road must have right of way. Turning motorised traffic leaving the main road is required to yield to cyclists"
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/archive/provision_of_cycling_facilities_ch4_2006.pdf

buffalo

Steoller wrote: »

According to the NTA interpretation of the law, the legal position is that traffic going straight on the main road, have right of way over traffic exiting the road - exiting traffic MUST yield to cyclists going straight.
Direct Quote: "Legal status - Cycle traffic as well as other traffic on the main road must have right of way. Turning motorised traffic leaving the main road is required to yield to cyclists"
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/archive/provision_of_cycling_facilities_ch4_2006.pdf

Any ideas what that legal status is based on?

axer

buffalo wrote: »

Any ideas what that legal status is based on?

It is not based on law. It is only a design guide.

amcalester

axer wrote: »

It is not based on law. It is only a design guide.

From 12 years ago.

buffalo

The phrase 'Legal status' suggests they have interpreted some piece of legislation to mean this. It's not an aspirational or future goal, nor a recommendation. I'd be interested in knowing what piece of legislation they're reading.

tomasrojo

Might be wishful thinking. If it isn't true, a generation or two of road designers have been encouraging
cyclists to do something hazardous without even the probability of the cyclist not being
found at fault when it goes wrong.

Missus Doubtfire

Steoller wrote: »

According to the NTA interpretation of the law, the legal position is that traffic going straight on the main road, have right of way over traffic exiting the road - exiting traffic MUST yield to cyclists going straight.
Direct Quote: "Legal status - Cycle traffic as well as other traffic on the main road must have right of way. Turning motorised traffic leaving the main road is required to yield to cyclists"
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/archive/provision_of_cycling_facilities_ch4_2006.pdf

I'm almost 60 years old and I have always believed that the person or vehicle going straight on has right of way. So if you are at an uncontrolled junction a vehicle turning at that junction must yield to you, whether you are a pedestrian, cyclist or motorist. Someone correct me if I am wrong

Hurrache

Read some tweets on a story regarding the long Luas being taken out of service, someone actually commented that this is what happens when you let cyclists do the planning. I blame our education system.

tomasrojo

Hurrache wrote: »

Read some tweets on a story regarding the long Luas being taken out of service, someone actually commented that this is what happens when you let cyclists do the planning. I blame our education system.

If cyclists planned Luas Cross City, they must be a masochistic lot.

ED E

Yep, definitely planned by the two wheel brigade....
https://twitter.com/stuartbolger/status/974358644287574016?s=21

TheChizler

ED E wrote: »

Yep, definitely planned by the two wheel brigade....

The cycling agenda at play...

Pinch Flat

TheChizler wrote: »

The cycling agenda at play...

Can never work out - are we a cycling agenda, brigade or lobby?

magicbastarder

i like to think of us as a mafia.
cross us, and you'll find a headset in your bed.

Grassey

A brigade with an agenda sat in the lobby

RobertFoster

Don't forget entitled and militant.

tomasrojo

I'm still waiting for George Hook to link cyclists to George Soros.

doozerie

ford2600 wrote: »

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

That's an interesting article, it takes a much broader and more considered approach to the question of why more women die in collisions with trucks than most of the articles I've read on or around that topic.

Related to that question, the suggestion that women die *because* they obey red lights, originated from media reporting of a leaked TfL report from many years ago. I'm not suggesting that this is what you are saying, incidentally, but it's a persistent theory that can creep into and influence any discussion where the death of a female cyclist is mentioned. For some reason, despite the ludicrous nature of the suggestion, it stuck, and gets trotted out still as if it were an indisputable fact.

TfL produced a subsequent report in 2007 (LINK) which delved into the stats more thoroughly and stated amongst other things:

1.2 Articles have emerged recently in The Times, The Guardian and The Evening Standard stating that women are more likely to be killed or seriously injured while cycling as they obey the law and wait whilst traffic lights are red. The media claim that this is supported by an unpublished TfL report which states that 86% of female cyclist fatalities in London involved a heavy goods vehicle turning left at a junction. This traffic note sets out to test a second hypothesis by distinguishing the gender of cyclists that ride through red lights.

When a comparison is made of the behaviour of male and female cyclists it can be concluded that men are slightly more likely to violate red lights (17% compared to 13%).

Which chimes with the tone of the Standard article above, with statements in that article like:

Lloyd offers a note of caution, however, about instructing women to change their behaviour: “Women are generally more careful than men, so our focus should be ‘what’s wrong with lorries?’ not ‘what’s wrong with women cyclists?’”

Thinkingaboutit

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Can never work out - are we a cycling agenda, brigade or lobby?

Front?

zurbfoundation

Anyone know any journalists writing about todays domestic bike races? You'd get more coverage on the 1976 Rapport tour

tomasrojo

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

Front?

We are a bunch of laughable hippies that nobody respects, who simultaneously run a secret organisation of great power that crushes all opposition.

Lemming

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

Front?

Somewhere in there is a Monty Python parody about splitters and people's fronts.

AndrewJRenko

RobertFoster wrote: »

Don't forget entitled and militant.

And the lycra - don't forget to reference lycra covered arses

Grassey

Lycra clad MAMILS

AndrewJRenko

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?

Just noticed that this thread started out some 18 months and 3.8k posts ago with Donna's death, and here we are, a long way down the road with very little change. The MPDL legislation passed, which is obviously a good thing, but the real success will depend in enforcement and culture change, both of which are very uncertain at the moment. Attitudes against cyclists seem to have got even worse over that time.