3 new initiatives that make cycling in London safe – will they work?

Whilst I’m a strong believer in cycle training as a solution to London’s high cyclist accident rate it is important that the problem is tackled from many angles. Here are three of TfL’s new cycle safety initiatives. Take a look and let me know what you think of them.

Trixi Mirrors

Trixi mirror outside Tooting Bec Tube promoting cyclist safety

These mirrors are being installed around key junctions in London. They have a dual purpose. They allow HGV drivers to see more of their road users around them thus spotting cyclists parked up next to the vehicle. They also remind drivers to check their mirrors frequently as there are an increased number of cyclists on London roads.

HGV warning sounds

Inside the HGV cabin

When a HGV is taking a left turn a warning sound is played so that cyclists know to use extra caution and not try to undertake. There is also a sound played inside the HGV when a cyclist is in a dangerous position. This is being installed in some of the HGVs that operate around London.

TfL “All of these bikes are in the driver’s blind spot” poster advertising campaign

TfL HGV blind post poster campaign

The traditional marketing route is also being taken. The criticism of the poster has mainly been at the lack of a cycle lane being included. This is because people frequently think cycle lanes can actually cause more accidents as they encourage cyclists to be on the left of vehicles which is a danger zone. Especially at junctions. However, a lot of people have praised its clear message and striking image.

What do you think of these safety initiatives?

See also:

Join 9,241 fellow cyclists who are subscribed to the London Cyclist newsletter

Sign up for our free newsletter to get...

  • Advice on the best cycling gear
  • A Friday roundup of all the latest London cycling news
  • Exclusive content not available on the blog

Subscribe today, and get exclusive access forever! (It's free)

*No spam, ever!

As seen on The Guardian, BBC and The Independent.

,

49 Responses to 3 new initiatives that make cycling in London safe – will they work?

  1. zanf 09/07/2010 at 9:18 am #

    The 3rd one shows what a massive design flaw there is with lorries and visibility. If they were being put forward now to go out on the roads, they would be banned.

    • Heath Ravey 06/11/2010 at 5:07 pm #

      Hi to all,

      I have been reading alot of the reply’s left and just thought I could leave some feedback from the industries that operate vehicles and have caused death to cyclists. Our company specialises in vehicle safety with the use of cameras, sensors and audiable warnings.

      We currently have trials in place with a major concrete and aggregate company using side sensors, side cameras, digital recorders and left turn warning alarms.

      To explain in brief the left turn warning alarm is a spoken voice not just a noise. “warning this vehicle is turning left” sometimes even the name of the operator is mentioned in the sentence.

      The cameras are located front and rear but also one on the front corner pointing down towards the bumper covering the whole near side corner and just in front of the near side rear wheel pointing slightly out and forwards giving a very wide image of the side of the vehicle and road / pavement. These side two cameras are constantly displayed on a large split screen.

      Side sensors are also being fitted but to tell the truth I personally don’t think they work as they should and are a poor solution and cause the drivers nothing but problems.

      To sum up in my extensive experience the operators are now looking for the solutions to this increasing problem but a combonation of this, advertising and cyclists awareness is the only answer.

      We will never get the idiots off the road, after all you can never compensate for peoples stupidity but please believe that there are people out there working hard to at least try and save there lives by what ever solutions we can provide and hopefully the recent trials in london will be a bench mark for the rest of britain. In the mean time stay safe !!!

  2. Denis 09/07/2010 at 9:26 am #

    Also, The last poster truely highlights how poorly designed the streets are for cyclists: there should be a cycle lane with a 50cm separation miniumum from the carriageway and the carriiageway should made narrower making the right turn for lorries more difficult thus pushing them to be more carefull and processing as the slowest pace…

    For the Trixi miror, I read somewhere that lorry drivers had already loads of mirrors to look at and that they don’t have enough time to look at them/process the information (I guess it’s even harder when you’re on the phone, as many are), so I wonder if adding an extra one will solve anything…

  3. femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 9:34 am #

    Agree with the comment above and inline about number 3. The poster annoyed me as soon as I saw it. I can’t count the number of times I’ve been stationary in the cycle lane/box only to have a lorry pull up alongside me to turn left.

    As long as four years ago now tfl commissioned their own study into why so many cyclists (especially women) were being injured like this and concluded that stopping at red lights (and then finding yourself on the inside a vehicle) could be at fault. It found women were more likely to stop at red lights than men and therefore statistically more likely to find themselves on the inside of a left turning vehicle. This poster will not solve that. Neither will painting green lanes blue. I wonder why it’s never been openly published? I have a copy if anyone wants to read it?

    • tim 09/07/2010 at 10:15 am #

      please could you share the report?

      • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 10:41 am #

        I have it as a pdf. It is hosted online but I don’t know that the owner would appreciate me hotlinking to it. I can’t upload it here. The report is “Webster (2006) pedal cyclist fatalities involving goods vehicles”.

        • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 10:59 am #

          Sorry, that should have been “Pedal Cyclist Fatalities Involving Goods Vehicles From January 1999 – May 2004: Webster (2006)” and just so you know you have the right report (not the ‘official’ one that tfl replaced it with):

          “a higher proportion of female cyclists (18 out of 21) were involved in fatal collisions with goods vehicles than fatal collisions with other types of vehicle. Women may be over-represented in this type of collision because they are less likely than men to disobey red lights.* This might increase the likelihood of coming into conflict with turning goods vehicles waiting at junctions.”

      • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 11:55 am #

        http://www.scribd.com/doc/34103912/Pedal-Cyclist-Fatalities-Involving-Goods-Vehicles

        Can’t guarantee how long it will stay up, it violates scribd terms of service (I’m not the copyright holder).

  4. Andrew K 09/07/2010 at 9:39 am #

    1) I don’t see how or why a HGV driver is going to be able to focus on that mirror when they’re trying to turn without increasing potential danger
    2) Audible alarms are often confusing if without context; are they going to know why the lorry is making that sound (and subsequently pause or hesistate to try and figure it out)
    3) [see other comments]

    • Andreas 09/07/2010 at 9:45 am #

      Andrew re: 2) luckily the alarm is self-explanatory. Something along the lines of “Warning: This vehicle is turning left” or something like that. The BBC video had a full explanation: http://www.itv.com/london/look-behind-you04620/

      • tim 09/07/2010 at 10:16 am #

        the bbc video is hosted on itv? :-P

        • Andreas 09/07/2010 at 12:01 pm #

          Hehe oops – I’m just used to ITV ignoring these issues but for once they have done a good report!

    • tim 09/07/2010 at 10:17 am #

      i think the idea of the mirror is to look in it before you start moving

    • david 29/09/2010 at 2:19 pm #

      that’s why it’s positioned next to the red light
      if drivers are going to look at any one thing whilst at a junction, it should be the red light!

  5. Gary 09/07/2010 at 9:52 am #

    mmmm.

    The poster for me has the most impact.

    Everytime I see a cyclist go down side of a lorry/bus I cringe.

    I think any initiative is a good thing when it comes to cycling, but there could be a point when it starts to just become just ‘another’ initiative….

    There are a couple of options.

    1. Totally separate cycles from cars. This is not possible in London for various reasons.
    2. Train at a young age. I can still remember doing my cyling proficiency test on my raleigh grifter (3 gears, red, yellow and blue) nice……
    3. Start to put the onus on your own safety and think to yourselves ‘mmm is that safe, what if…..’

    I do think you should cycle with the following in your head at all times….. ‘its my life, lets protect it’.

    • David 10/07/2010 at 8:50 am #

      Bit like one of the golden rules (which every cyclist _should_ have)… “what’s happening around me that could hurt / kill / injure me”.

  6. femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 9:55 am #

    Yep, the implementation of the alarm has a sad story behind it:

    After her daughter, Alex, was killed by a cement mixer while cycling to work at a City law firm in 2000, Cynthia Barlow bought shares in the company that owned the lorry and successfully lobbied them to have state-of-the-art safety equipment fitted.
    Cemex lorries now have extra mirrors that dramatically reduce the drivers’ blind spots, as well as sensors along the side of that alert them if a cyclist is alongside and an exterior voice warning which say, “Caution, vehicle turning left”.

    from here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/jul/02/cycling-lorries-women-roads

  7. femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 10:38 am #

    I have it as a pdf. It is hosted online but I don’t know that the owner would appreciate me hotlinking to it. I can’t upload it here. The report is “Webster (2006) pedal cyclist fatalities involving goods vehicles”.

    • botogol 09/07/2010 at 11:33 am #

      femalecyclist? people put things on the web *in order* for people to read them, don’t they?

      • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 11:41 am #

        They do. But this is a pdf not just a web page. It’s considered rude to hotlink to files on other people’s servers, and especially so given that this is a pdf that needs to be downloaded before being read. Just Google “hotlinking pdf rude” and you’ll see why. I work in web so just can’t do it, sorry.

  8. botogol 09/07/2010 at 11:32 am #

    i have heard the ‘warnnig I am turning left’ ghostly voice. I jumped out of my skin.
    while I was waiting patiently behind the lorry in question no fewer than three bikes ignored the voice and snuck up the inside :-(

    I am intrigued by the theory that cycle lanes at junctions *encourage* cyclists into that dangerous blind-spot. That’s a worrying idea, as it may be right.

    • hugomac 09/07/2010 at 11:42 am #

      Perhaps what is needed is a big strong traffic bollard at the corner to force the lorry to go around it leaving room on the inside for the cycle lans and bikes. Maybe carve out a little of the pavement for the cyclist to be safe in if the road can’t spare the room?

  9. Peter Gilheany 09/07/2010 at 11:44 am #

    The first two initiatives are great, the 3rd is risible. It is the usual trick of placing responsibiltiy for safety on the the most vulnerable road user rather than the hulking great lump of machinery. How Tfl can endorse a poster like this is beyond me, it made my blood boil when I first saw it on Southwark Street.

    • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 11:56 am #

      “How Tfl can endorse a poster like this is beyond me, it made my blood boil when I first saw it on Southwark Street.”

      Me too!

    • Adrian 09/07/2010 at 1:48 pm #

      “How Tfl can endorse a poster like this is beyond me, it made my blood boil when I first saw it on Southwark Street”

      I’d suggest that they can endorse it due to the large number of idiots out there that undertake at junctions whilst cycling. I see them every day on my commute into work. They also run red lights, make shortcust on footpaths, and weave all over the road whilst on their mobile phones.

      While a number of accidents are due to careless or reckless driving, careless and reckless cycling is also to blame sometimes.

      This thread has some fairly good images of where HGV blind spots are:
      http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17848500

  10. botogol 09/07/2010 at 11:47 am #

    and also get rid of the railings that cyclists are crushed against.

  11. Corin 09/07/2010 at 12:34 pm #

    Hmmm. I think I approve of the poster with the lorry. Given that HGVs and bicycles have to share London’s roads, both drivers and cyclists should be shocked into thinking about their behaviour.

    The easiest way for us cyclists to be safe at junctions like this is to take primary position behind the lorry and wait for it to complete its manoeuvre. It may not be the fastest way to get around but it’s the safest.

    • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 12:57 pm #

      Given that this situation could present itself at any time (if the lorry pulls up next to you for instance) then by this logic we should never use bike lanes. Which makes you wonder why they are there at all if they’re not properly segregated.

  12. Dave Holladay 09/07/2010 at 1:18 pm #

    I’d endorse a load of the comments to date – what use is just another mirror – since most Trucks are not insured to carry passengers there is no need for a droplight window and so the lower panel of the door can be glazed making it possible to have direct eye contact with cyclists AND pedestrians alongside the truck – as well illustrated by Robin Webb’s video in memory of his daughter also killed by a truck in London. Before deregulation of the road haulage industry in the1950’s goods were delivered from rail depots in town with rather neat 3 wheeler tractor units called Scammel Scarabs – just sufficient to move the loads around at urban speeds and with the drivers’ eye level directly in line with cyclists and pedestrians – not the current might macho throne position, which also creates the immunity of drivers who have wiped out whole families when their truck runs-over a car (how many times does that happen every year?) There is no reason why a driver’s cab has to be so high up – mobile cranes, airport tractors, all have walk-in cabs. So lets have a ‘safer truck’ design competition, a truck with a walk-in cab could be much lower offering reduced wind resistance when running without a load, and greater capacity with a load area over the cab.

    Nowhere in this campaign is the PBO (Pure B***g Obvious) safety action – Make Eye Contact (and no contact of any other sort) between cyclist and truck driver – from the rear look through the mirror – and if you can’t see the driver through the mirror you are in a dangerous place, from the front look through the windscreen – and note here that a major study (5000 cyclists) found the women reported they had difficulty in looking back, whihc directly related to a higher incidence of crashes where poor rearward observation was a factor (The Lot’s Wife Factor?) My suspicion is that many women are riding bikes built for men without having the handlebars moved back to compensate for their proportionately shorter arms, making a rear glance more likely to twitch the handlebars. Only yesterday I ticked off a bus driver in a slow moving bus that I overtook as it was obvious from what I saw in his offside mirror that he was turning round to speak to a passenger – completely illegal by bus driver legislation – and he had no idea that I was overtaking -or for that matter of anything happening suddenly in front of his bus (reckoned to be the cause of a cyclist fatality on Cowley Road in Oxford a few years ago)

    There are enough spurious beeps and synthesised voices an this idea is crass. I was on London Wall shortly after Cynthia Barlow’s daughter was killed, she had been riding well-out from the kerb in the nearside lane. The truck driver turned at speed, illegally into a narrow lane with a ban on through HGV traffic to take a short cut, from the offside lane of the 2-lane street. I maintain that most fatal left hooks happen when the truck and cyclist are moving and the truck swings over after failing to properly overtake or braking and turning into a cyclist who is still moving. Female Cyclist’s experience is similar, due in part to her road position and the truck driver’s ignorance or arrogance of drawing up alongside knowing that he was going to turn left with a cyclist going straight ahead on his nearside ( the solution in this situation is to position your bike slap bang in the centre of the lane where any vehicles behind you are liekly to move off and turn left, and turn round to give a strong non-verbal message that you are in charge of what happens when the lights change. There is in this respect a clear need ban the use of all kerb side filter lanes and to place cycle filter lanes either on the outside of all the traffic lanes or on the offside of the lane nearest to the kerb, so that cyclist will pass the driver’s window of any vehicle going straight ahead in the nearside lane (with a safe manoiuvre to drop back in if the traffic moves away and be on the safe side of any vehicle turning left – even if the cyclist is also turning left. It is worth noting that the main vehicles involved in fatal crashes are those working on construction projects with a pressure to keep a continuous concrete pour running or get waste off site or deliver bulk materials to site – the truck that killed Cynthia’s daughter had already killed another female cyclist and put another in a wheelchair – two of these incidents with the same driver, an in livery contractor supplying a small number of trucks to the company involved (most construction industry trucks are operated by small private contractors in the livery of the concrete or stone supplier.

    When the trucks go on to the building site they operate under Construction Design and Management (CDM) regulations which require a written safety plan – hence the notices calling for a banksman, etc. As soon as they go out on the road no such requirement is enforced, although a responsible project will take this issue on board. However when the Met ran a recent check they found 100% of the trucks stopped were infringing the law in some way, some of these being very serious offences, and one of the contractors on a poject in Camden was fired on the spot after site management witnessed an atrocious piece of driving – word was that the trucks have been spotted working elsewhere since that incident.

    So in summary the campaign should be one focussed on making eye contact – and road positioning to make eye contact, and remain in control where moving traffic can turn left.

    Oh and get rid of those killer ‘safety’ railings.

  13. Dave Holladay 09/07/2010 at 1:31 pm #

    Post thought the Lorry poster is completely at odds with TfL putting in cycle fllter lanes in that position perhaps it may generate a subvertising campaign to highlight this inconsistency in approach. “If this is so dangerous why does TfL put cycle filter lanes there?”

    Far safer is to put the cycle filter on the offside of the lane nearest the kerb or right down the outside of all lanes, where experienced cyclists tend to ride when moving to the front of queuing traffic.

  14. Denis 09/07/2010 at 2:00 pm #

    The problem with this poster is as usual always the same story: the poor (lorry) driver is a victim of these iresponsible cyclists. What kind of image of cyclists does that poster give to Londonners?

    Even though statistics show that cyclists are rarely to blame for theuir own injuries: see p 15 of http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/PC-Cas-Factsheet-Final-1986-2007.pdf

    This image of cyclists responsible of their own accidents is continued by these sorts of “campaigns”.
    All users should take their responsibilities according to the danger they represent to the others, i.e. lorry driver should be extra carefull for all, car drivers for cyclists, cyclists for pedestrians. Unfortunatly in London and at TfL, people didn’t really get to there yet…

  15. John Donnelly 09/07/2010 at 2:12 pm #

    It seems that like many other readers here I am incensed by the TFL advertising campaign. I have been in several situations where a truck pulled up beside me in the ASL box and hooked round left to establish their precedence.

    TFL seem unaware that trucks don’t always arrive at a junction first, or that they muscle themselves forward like every other road user. Having been trapped against railings once I’ve since hauled my bike off the road when this occurs but it is not always possible.

    • femalecyclist 09/07/2010 at 2:27 pm #

      Totally agree. And it’s all very well people saying that experienced cyclists will take up the primary position and never get themselves on the inside of a vehicle, but it’s not always practical or possible to do this. You can’t (and shouldn’t) *always* take up the primary position…yes, when approaching a junction etc, but try holding up a queue of motorists in rush hour London and see how safe you are then! I have literally had people drive at me for doing this, usually while spurting out the “you’re taking up the whole f***ing road and you don’t even pay f***ing road tax” nonsense.

  16. Iain 09/07/2010 at 2:49 pm #

    The traffic light mirrors look to be a good idea, of course the bigger the bike space is at the front of the lights, the easier it will be for cyclists to be seen (there’s quite a big blindspot in front of trucks thanks to the high driving position…) Putting the mirror on the lights means they will be where the driver will be looking anyway so easier for the driver to see down the left without checking umpteen mirrors arranged around the windows.

    Talking trucks should help (haven’t met one yet myself) although they’ll only be useful if drivers indicate on the approach to the junction/light. Last thing you want is to see no indication and naturally assume they’re going straight only to set off and have the truck shout at you… Wonder how many NIMBYs will start whinging about trucks shouting outside their home.

    A lot of junction issues can come down to common sense, yesterday I was cruising along a bus lane near Gatwick when a 30 tonner rolled up alongside indicating left, cue emergency braking… Quite why he didn’t just wait (the overlap speed was marginal) beats me, I doubt it would cost him any time. (Incidentally, it was a construction aggregates delivery vehicle, is there a theme developing here?)

    When I’m riding I try to stay where I can see the mirror of a large vehicle (Well, when I’m around one, I don’t set off chasing trucks!) The majority are very professional and give me room (whether that says something about my riding style is another matter!)

  17. N4 Cyclist 09/07/2010 at 2:59 pm #

    All three seem sensible to me.

    A huge number of cyclists seem to put themselves at risk becuase they don’t realise HGVs can’t see them at junctions. It’s important less experienced cyclists understand the situation – and the poster may help that.

    That doesn’t mean it’s the cyclists fault if they get hit, it certainly doesn’t mean HGV drivers shouldn’t look out for cyclists before turning too. But making it clear to less experienced cyclists they might be in danger may actually save a few lives.

    • idavid 09/07/2010 at 8:30 pm #

      Agreed. All three play their part. You can debate till the cows come home about the detail of the poster, but it gets the general point over well enough.

      Truth is, all road users share a duty to look out for one another. And size matters; if I’m on a bike, I’m very wary of trucks. They can do me more harm than vice versa, OTOH I’m faster through traffic – and I have more fun.

  18. Corin 09/07/2010 at 2:59 pm #

    I just have to repeat, if you arrive at a junction first, position yourself in the middle of the lane so no vehicle can pull alongside you, regardless of cycle lanes, ASLs, etc. If you arrive at a junction where vehicles are already waiting, if you can safely filter to the right of traffic ahead then do so, otherwise take primary behind the lead vehicles.

    I’m afraid until London is as cycle-friendly as Copenhagen or Amsterdam or wherever a bit of banter is to be expected when cyclists assert their road position. Remember, drivers are in vehicles that are identifiably owned so if you feel you have been verbally assaulted, report them.

    • Johns 09/07/2010 at 7:34 pm #

      Absolutely right. Never compromise your safety because you’re worried about offending motorists.

      As for the initiatives, every little helps. The one I would like to see (can’t remember if I saw it mentioned on here in another thread) is the continental-style countdown display on red lights, giving 30 seconds notice that they are going to change.

  19. John 09/07/2010 at 7:38 pm #

    The place to be where buses and lorries are concerned is infront or behind but never alongside. The readers that suggest putting the cycle lanes on the outside where you come up to a junction are forgetting that if you are in a line or staitionary alongside a lorry that is turning left can have the rear end of the trailer swing across and hit you which the driver has no control over.
    I always pull out from cycle lanes if there is a straight on lane and thats where I am going at junctions and then rejoin the cycle lane on the other side of the junction and if turning left with a cycle lane pull out to be behind the traffic turning left if it is busy, that way you cant get squashed.
    How some cyclists can ride up to a cycle box infront of a lorry at traffic lights just makes me cringe! dont they have any idea of the huge blind spot infront of a lorry? The driver would have no Idea that you were there if your chain slipped and you just stayed where you were.
    But railing are certainly a hazard at junctions, there should be the ability to just bail out if caught up in a dangerous situation, why not have posts to stop vehicles mounting the pavement but giving an area for cyclists to slip through?

  20. zanf 10/07/2010 at 9:40 am #

    I’ll just leave this here:

    http://imgur.com/PaT3h

  21. nununoolio 10/07/2010 at 11:18 pm #

    Femalecyclist and John Donelly. I’ve never met either of you but I can tell you desperately need some lessons with an accredited cycle instructor. It’s that or face the real prospect of being scraped up off the road like a blob of strawberry jam!

    It would be a good idea to buy a copy of Cyclecraft too. You can get it for less than a tenner on Amazon

    • John Donnelly 11/07/2010 at 7:59 am #

      To clarify I was in the ASL and whilst not central, a reasonable distance from the kerb.

      In one case the driver had pulled into the oncoming lane, through the ASL section and hooked left in front of me. Do tell me if you think that is reasonable behaviour. I consider it deliberate lawlessness by HGV drivers and it happens often enough that I have adapted my behaviour to accomodate them and protect my own life.

  22. el-gordo 13/07/2010 at 10:25 am #

    Are people really concerned about the poster!?!

    It is clearly aimed at those cyclists that do undertake at junctions – that is why it shows cyclists pulling out alongside the lorry and also uses the slogan “undertaking at junctions can be fatal”. If it was aimed at HGV drivers it would use a completely different slogan.

    Of course, it could say “oh and by the way lorries pulling up at junctions and you not making yourself more visible by taking centre position on the road and/or them pulling into the ASL when really they shouldn’t but they have anyway and then them swinging around the corner could also cause an issue” but I think it sort of losses the punch, don’t you?

    Just because it is trying to target a particular group (in this instance cyclists) that doesn’t mean that it is blaming that group for all accidents at junctions.

    I would also like to point out that HGV drivers a) are professional drivers who use the roads a lot b) actually receive additional training from many firms c) are well aware of their vehicles size and limitations and d) they own driving licences. A great many cyclists on the roads do not meet any of those criteria, much less all of them, and so an advert that raises their awareness that by underaking it could put them in danger is surely no bad thing? Particularly as cyclists do undertake HGVs at junctions, I see it happen most days.

    Therefore, if this advert will raise awareness then I am all for it. It is not “the rest of the world against cyclists” and I don’t think people need to look at everything in that way.

  23. Advert Man 16/07/2010 at 8:28 pm #

    I did this poster.

    It isn’t blaming cyclists. It’s instructing them to hold back and take care around lorries, especially left-turning lorries, at junctions.

    The driver of the lorry literally cannot physically see any of the cyclists in this area, therefore the cyclists are the ones who need to take precautions. It’s that simple.

    Here’s a film we shot on the shoot to show that none of the bikes can be seen from the driver’s seat.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzL0Kyk4m-8

    You may not agree but at the very least it’s got cyclists talking about it. Box ticked.

  24. Alex 28/10/2010 at 11:52 am #

    I started cycling to work about 12 months ago and was initially fairly nervous and I notice that a lot of people using the bike scheme are not aware of safety and not very good on a bike and it amazes me more people do not wear a helmet. regularly cycle as part of my cummute and have had a number of close calls with buses and taxis. Just out of interest I have put together a short survey to get some insight in this and it would be great to hear your thoughts about safety and collect some responses to the survey. This is purely for interest and I am happy to share the results within this blog. If you would like to complete the survey simply go to: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/cyclesafety Thanks

    • Heath Ravey 07/11/2010 at 7:17 pm #

      As above and below, I would be extremely interested in any information, surveys and feedback we can use to take to the various operators to help provide safer solutions. The bloggers help is invaluble.

      Best regards.

  25. Dave Holladay 07/11/2010 at 1:20 am #

    Spoke to Ashok (LCC ) and Jennie (TfL) today and it does seem that it is the truck driving that is the biggest issue and 2 main causes for run overs.

    Truck ‘overtakes’ cyclists (either moving or by cyclist being at lights and truck pulling alongside) and truck turns left as both move forward

    Truck pull in ignoring cyclist alongside as truck driver takes cyclist as stationary object in an overtaking move, and fails to account for both moving forward, and often truck slowing down as it pulls in.

    Very few deaths from cyclists going up on the nearside.

    • Heath Ravey 07/11/2010 at 7:13 pm #

      As I posted at the top of the page we have trials in place with new technologyand any feedback from anyone is very helpfull. I can speak to the company involved at my next meeting and put forward your views and see what the responce is.

      Please read above and let me know. After all its you that experience the problems and us that are here to help.

      Best Regards.

  26. Heath Ravey 24/11/2010 at 9:21 pm #

    Hi to all,

    I have been reading alot of the reply’s left and just thought I could leave some feedback from the industries that operate vehicles and have caused death to cyclists. Our company specialises in vehicle safety with the use of cameras, sensors and audiable warnings.

    We currently have trials in place with a major concrete and aggregate company using side sensors, side cameras, digital recorders and left turn warning alarms.

    To explain in brief the left turn warning alarm is a spoken voice not just a noise. “warning this vehicle is turning left” sometimes even the name of the operator is mentioned in the sentence.

    The cameras are located front and rear but also one on the front corner pointing down towards the bumper covering the whole near side corner and just in front of the near side rear wheel pointing slightly out and forwards giving a very wide image of the side of the vehicle and road / pavement. These side two cameras are constantly displayed on a large split screen.

    Side sensors are also being fitted but to tell the truth I personally don’t think they work as they should and are a poor solution and cause the drivers nothing but problems.

    To sum up in my extensive experience the operators are now looking for the solutions to this increasing problem but a combonation of this, advertising and cyclists awareness is the only answer.

    We will never get the idiots off the road, after all you can never compensate for peoples stupidity but please believe that there are people out there working hard to at least try and save there lives by what ever solutions we can provide and hopefully the recent trials in london will be a bench mark for the rest of britain. In the mean time stay safe !!!

Leave a Reply