lorry drivers

L

liverlips

Guest
What is going on lately with the amount of cyclist been killed by lorry drivers it seems to be happening alot lately. there was two last week alone and it was not at night they where during the day. Is is they are just driving caressly lately.
 
I don't know for a fact but I suspect it's a combination of factors.

1. Cyclists getting killed by trucks is not a new phenomenon. You'd be surprised how often it happens. It can be cyclical though, with more happening at certain times of the year.

2. There are some pretty shocking things going on in the haulage industry in terms of how drivers are paid, how long they are forced to wait for loads, and how many miles they are expected to cover. As I understand it, it's virtually impossible to keep your job if you obey all the laws/rules.

3. There are bad truck drivers, like there are bad people in every profession. Some of the accidents may be down to that.

4. There are also bad cyclists, and cyclists who take unnecessary risks. If you are driving a very large truck in a city, and a cyclist is weaving through traffic and comes off his bike and goes under your wheels, there's nothing you can do, you're unlikely to even know something has happened.

-Rd
 
Cyclists

There are a lot of bad cyclists...
Click to expand...

Too right there are! Nearly crashed because of a group of cyclists who decided to stop just over the brow of a hill in the Wicklow countryside to repair a puncture in the middle of the road! I managed to avoid hitting them, but the guy behind me, who was travelling much faster, swerved to avoid them and ended up in the ditch. Luckily he wasn't hurt, but his car was written off.

The cyclists didn't even apologise or thank him for not killing them, but rode off without a backward glance before the Gardai could be called.

Does anyone know what the rules of the road are with regard to cyclists - for example we have lots of hobby cyclists in Wicklow and they ride 3 or 4 abreast on the narrow roads causing traffic to pile up behind them and motorists to take risks trying to overtake. Are they allowed to do this? I resist beeping my horn at them, eventhough I am very annoyed at their selfish attitude.

Last week I saw a lady on a mountain bike on the Stillorgan Dual Carriageway cycling along happily blocking the left hand lane while the special cycle lane, created at great cost to the tax payer, remained empty!

I've driven a rented truck in the past and I do have some sympathy with the truck drivers as cyclists and scooter drivers often try to overtake on the inside. They don't realise that if they cannot see the truck's mirrors, the truck dirver also cannot see them!

I'm not anti-cyclist, but most are not responsible road users and should have to take some kind of test.
 
Re: Cyclists

I'm not anti-cyclist, but most are not responsible road users and should have to take some kind of test.
Click to expand...

I don't know if *Most* or *Some* is more accurate. But I'd agree with you, if Cycle Lanes etc are going to be created, and Cyclists are not expected to pay a tax for the use of the road like other road users are, then some kind of Rules of The Road Test would be appropriate. Perhaps a License for cycling in a built up area.

Of course to pay for such a scheme Motor Tax would end up being increased, and it would never be policed anyway, that's the way things work here.

If I found cyclists cycling 3 or 4 abrest and blocking a narrow road I wouldn't hesitate to let them know they were blocking traffic.

If I found someone cycling on the road instead of the cycle lane I'd do the same. It's a matter of manners rather than rules of the road.

-Rd
 
"As I understand it, it's virtually impossible to keep your job if you obey all the laws/rules"

Yep!

Max speed for bus ( space for 8 or more passangers ), truck & car towing anything is 80KPH. Max speed for a double deck bus 65KPH ( S.I. No. 9 2005 )

A trip last Saturday on the M1 confirmed that these limits are not observed.

Most seem happy to stick at 100KPH.

S.I. No. 11 2005 prohibits a driver of a class of vehicle that is subject to an ordinary speed limit of not more than 80 KPH from driving in the outside lane of a motorway

( Wonder what the Eircoach driver that overtook me at 100KPH plus on the M1 says about that then :) )
 
There are a lot of bad cyclists...
Click to expand...

The number of cyclists I've seen at junctions, where instead of stopping and giving way to traffic on their right, they just take the left-hand - even if it means that they end up in front of a vehicle that the should have given way to!
 
There are a lot of bad cyclists...
Click to expand...

...and not just in the cities and towns. I have come across cyclists with no lights on their bikes and dressed in dark clothes. (at night/twilight) Also I have met cyclists cycling on the wrong side of the road (no hard shoulder) and also cycling "three abreast" (is this still on the statute books?).

Some of these cyclists (but by no means all) are young recent immigrants who do not seem to know the law (rules of the road as they apply to cyclists) or the nature of twilight in Ireland.

ajapale
 
I was driving on the M50 yesterday and passed a cyclist crossing the Ballymount slip road to cycle down the hard shoulder of the motorway.

I think I have seen it all now!
 
For safe driving you must be able to stop in the distance you can see ahead of you. If someone drives too fast over the brow of a hill or around a blind corner (perhaps because he "knows" the road) and crashes as a result of a group of cyclists or a slow moving tractor, the fault lies principally with the speeding driver.
 
Cyclists

If someone drives too fast over the brow of a hill or around a blind corner (perhaps because he "knows" the road) and crashes as a result of a group of cyclists or a slow moving tractor, the fault lies principally with the speeding driver.
Click to expand...

Don't agree with you there Ashambles, I wasn't speeding - travelling at approx 40m.p.h and could only avoid hitting the cyclists as there was no oncoming traffic. The guy behind me was coming only slightly faster as he had maintained the same distance behind me for quite a few miles. The speed limit on this road was 60m.p.h. - now revised to 80kph, which I think is very wise.

The cyclists were immediately over the brow of the hill and spread out across the left side of the road - I would have had to drive at 10m.p.h in order to be able to stop and avoid hitting them - luckily I was able to swerve onto the other side of the road, otherwise the outcome would have been very different!

Had I hit the cyclists, I don't know how the Gardai or the insurance company would have viewed the accident, but where does the responsibility of the cyclists lie in trying to repair a puncture in the middle of the road on the brow of a hill knowing that they could not be seen by oncoming traffic? They made no effort whatsoever to move to the side of the road. On the opposite side was a gate to a field with a recess where they could have made their repair in safety, but they chose not to use it.
 
Re: Cyclists

>Don't agree with you there Ashambles, I wasn't speeding - travelling at approx 40m.p.h and could only avoid hitting the cyclists as there was no oncoming traffic. The guy behind me was coming only slightly faster as he had maintained the same distance behind me for quite a few miles. The speed limit on this road was 60m.p.h. - now revised to 80kph, which I think is very wise.


What if it hadn't been cyclists. What if it'd been a car broken down in the same place and there was oncoming traffic? You seem to be saying you didn't have enough time to stop. Therefore you were going too fast for the conditions. If you can't see what's over a hill or around a corner you slow down.
 
Re: Cyclists

Enough of this 2 wheels good, 4 wheels bad stuff

How about getting back the the topic of the thread

'Lorry Drivers'
 
Elderdog, the thread was about lorry drivers AND cyclists

What if it hadn't been cyclists. What if it'd been a car broken down in the same place
Click to expand...

Gabriel, I'd imagine that's what the red warning triangle in the boot is for - to warn oncoming traffic that there's an obstruction.

Also, if someone has broken down and is unable to move their car that's an entirely different scenario to inconsiderate cyclists who are well able to move off the road.
 
Re: Elderdog, the thread was about lorry drivers AND cyclist

I'm afraid you're trying to put all the blame on the cyclists delgirl. You stated that you were going too fast to stop. What if there had been oncoming traffic and you couldn't swerve?

If you hit a stationary object you're at fault. Full stop...regardless if it's a car or a cyclist. Incidentally, if they were at the brow of the hill and you couldn't see them, how would you see the car's red triangle?
 
Re: Elderdog, the thread was about lorry drivers AND cyclist

The cyclists were stupid and ran the risk of being killed.

A driver that did crash into them would be someone who was not in a position to stop their car safely given the circumstances. The cyclists would be stupid for stopping where they did and shortly after they would be dead. This would not take away from the fact that the driver was someone who was not driving safely given the conditions.

A driver that did not crash into them and managed to avoid them (like delgirl) is someone who was driving safely and is to be congratulated.

From the drivers perspective it doesn't matter whether it is a group of stupid cyclists, a cow, a toddler, a bale of hay dropped off a tractor, or whatever. If they crash into it they are driving too fast to react.

I cycle to work every day and see the most stupid moves carried out by cyclists - pulling up beside cars that are indicating left at red lights, pulling up beside *trucks* that are indicating left, shooting red lights when there are cars coming through the junction at right angles to them, etc . . .
I also see pedestrians and motorists doing dumb things.

The reality is that people are dumb and do dumb things all the time. Those people in charge of the best part of a tonne of metal traveling at speed need to get their brain into gear as much as those on a bike or on foot.

z
 
Cyclists

how would you see the car's red triangle?
Click to expand...

Should the driver of the broken down car value his own safety, his car and the safety of approaching traffic he would place the triangle over the brow of the hill so it could be seen by oncoming traffic.

Agree fully with Zag and accept that had I hit the cyclists, I would probably have been partially to blame as I was unable to stop. Do any of you drive 10mph over hill brows or around bad bends on country roads in case there's something stationary on the road?

It was the attitude of the cyclists which botherd me most - the poor man who ended up with his car written off in the ditch was of no concern to them even though his quick reaction most certainly saved them from very serious injury or worse.

They also knew that the guards had been called and left the scene of the accident prior to their arrival.
 
Re: Cyclists

I'm not trying to have a go at anyone here...but I'll reitterate. This idea of "does anyone drive around bends or corners at 10mph" is erroneous. That's how a lot of people kill themselves down the country - by driving into blind corners too fast and discovering a bus or a cow or a tractor in front of them and nowhere to go.
Swerving to avoid something is lucky. Stopping before you have to swerve is intelligent. It's the first rule I learnt when driving...if you can't see the road in front of you, or you can't see what's on it then you slow down. You can berate the cyclists all you want for being there. And yes, they were wrong, but so was the manner in which you were driving.
 
I am both a motorist and regular A to B cyclist. In my experience the majority of drivers, including HGV's, are courteous and considerate and have never had a horn blown at me.

Generally speaking though, A to B cyclists (rather than those in a club) are a wayward bunch - no lights, on the pavement, ignoring traffic lights, wrong side of the road, dark clothing etc.etc - and the way EU law stands is the cyclist is always right which is such an anolomy.

There should be a cycling proficiency test, as in the UK, but make it mandatory.
 
the brow of the hill

Are the levels of cyclist deaths really high enough that we should worry?

I don't want to sound cold, and obviously 1 death is one too many, but let's look at the death rate as compared with other causes of death, and see if we can figure out what the government considers an acceptable level of deaths.

E.g. according to Morning Ireland there are 200 deaths a year due to Radon. It would cost a mere €4 million to test the approx 90,000 at risk houses. Since this issue is basically ignored by the government I'm assuming that 200 deaths a year is acceptable, or at least not worth spending €4million (once off) to tackle.

So unless we can save more than 200 cyclists a year, by spending less than 4 million (once off) then It would appear the government are not interested.

Similarly with all road deaths. Why are we spending a fortune on safety campaigns which appear to be having little impact, when people are dying in all sorts of other ways that can be tackled, but which are completely ignored?

If we have to make a hard choice on funding then the Radon victims should be saved and the cyclists allowed to die, since the cyclist is more likely to die quickly and not be a drain on the health service.

A single case of Radon affects an entire family and kills them with Lung Cancer, which is far more costly both financially and in terms of services.

Sorry to be so crude about this, but if we are going to talk about spending money to save lives, then we inevitably get into the value of life and how the money can be best spent.

I happen to think there's enough money to save both the cyclists and the Radon victims, but the government clearly doesn't, so let's help them to prioritise.

-Rd
 
Cyclists

If you take motorbike lessons one of the first things you are taught by your instructor is that - as a vulnerable road user - YOU are wholly responsible for your own safety and well-being. This is even developed to the extent that he will tell you that any motorbike rider who is involved in an accident has only him/herself to blame, because car/lorry/bus drivers are all to be considered as lunatics on a mission to kill you.

If anything, cyclists are even more vulnerable than motorcyclists, therefore the above rule should go double for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top