Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Dec 07, 2019 21:09

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2009 15:55 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Edited by Claire : Topic moved from here

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009 ... is-cycling


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2009 17:05 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
:o That lorry driver was driving like a knob.

Does that parked car in the foreground even get hit?

If not, the owner is the luckiest person on earth...

EDIT: That could only be London: big accident, people just walking by. So glad I don't live there any more.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2009 18:44 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 14:47
Posts: 1659
Location: A Dark Desert Highway
It looked like the door on the (was it a big walk in skip on the back?) back of the truck swung open because it bounced. Yes, the driver should have slowed down to go over the hump, but had the hump not been there, the door would not have unlatched it self and grabbed the car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 15:18 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
Borris nearly wiped out in bizzar lorry accident
A lorry trys to over take cyclists and then the rear door swings open, the door picks up a car and drags it down the street.

When will Borris get the message. Him up there sends thieves to knick them many times and now car hurling lorries.
I imaging the car owner will have an interesting time filling out the insurance claim.

Must watch video! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8066461.stm

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Last edited by anton on Mon May 25, 2009 15:34, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 15:29 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
I have merged Anton's last post into the pre-existing topic.

Not sure whether "Trucking" is the best place for it, though :scratchchin:

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 15:40 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
I seached for the most relevent stuff ie Boris,
I cant believe this didnt make the headline news. The Mayor of london is nearly strawberry jam in a unique accident.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 16:34 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
As pointed out, the door unlatches on a speed bump. The question is who installed the bump. Ken or Boris!

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 18:05 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
anton wrote:
As pointed out, the door unlatches on a speed bump. The question is who installed the bump. Ken or Boris!

Is it fair to say that was the question?
Surely the real one is 'why did the door come open when going over a speed bump?' Is it reasonable to expect a door to unlatch when going over a bump?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 21:39 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Steve wrote:
anton wrote:
As pointed out, the door unlatches on a speed bump. The question is who installed the bump. Ken or Boris!

Is it fair to say that was the question?
Surely the real one is 'why did the door come open when going over a speed bump?' Is it reasonable to expect a door to unlatch when going over a bump?


And why was the guy driving a seven and a half tonner going so fast in the fist place?

And if he's still on the road with a license, why?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 22:01 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
And why was the guy driving a seven and a half tonner going so fast in the fist place?

And if he's still on the road with a license, why?

The selective poster strikes again!

Fast? He wasn't even making any ground on the cyclist who was second in the group of cyclists :roll:
In fact, I reckon there was 0.45 seconds between the front and rear axels hitting/leaving the raised platform. Assuming a 4m wheelbase (generous), that's 9m/s = 20mph.

Unless you believe 20mph is grounds for losing one's licence?
edited to add: none of those cyclists seemed to mind (or at least mention) the truck's speed.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 22:41 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Steve wrote:
Unless you believe 20mph is grounds for losing one's licence?


No, but driving a truck like that is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 22:56 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
No, but driving a truck like that is.

Like what? What exactly is "that"?

Did Boris or any of the other very nearby witnesses give any complaint?

Maybe he was a bit fast over the platform, but to lose one's licence for it (disregarding how secure the door wasn't - that alone could possibly be grounds for losing the right to drive trucks) ... are you sure that's a proportionate response? :?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 23:07 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Steve wrote:
Maybe he was a bit fast over the platform, but to lose one's licence for it (disregarding how secure the door wasn't - that alone could possibly be grounds for losing the right to drive trucks) ... are you sure that's a proportionate response? :?


Yes.

In my book we're far too lax about this.

"Nobody got hurt, never mind, carry on."

That truck driver with his close pass and clearly inapproriate speed and acceleration (it's pretty clear to me he was flooring it past the cyclists) should never be allowed near a truck again IMO. He's clearly not mature enough to drive such a vehicle. I'm 50/50 myself on phoning the police to ensure he's been prosecuted, and if he hasn't I'll be making a complaint against him on the grounds that I don't think his driving was acceptable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2009 23:46 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
Steve wrote:
Maybe he was a bit fast over the platform, but to lose one's licence for it (disregarding how secure the door wasn't - that alone could possibly be grounds for losing the right to drive trucks) ... are you sure that's a proportionate response? :?

Yes.

Firstly: thank you for your clear and direct answer.
Secondly: :o :banghead: :loco:

Losing the ability to drive purely for doing 20mph (and that's generous) over a raised platform? Honestly, I don't think that reflects a sane and/or rational mentality.

weepej wrote:
That truck driver with his close pass

I thought there was plenty of room to pass; don't forget, he was fully in the other carriageway and the cyclists were single file as he passed them - don't forget again: the cyclists weren't hit by the car as it flew sideways behind the truck, so there must have been a lot of room!!!!!

weepej wrote:
and clearly inapproriate speed

20mph? (at best)

weepej wrote:
and acceleration

I didn't think he was accelerating at all; like I said, he wasn't making any ground on that other cyclist...

weepej wrote:
(it's pretty clear to me he was flooring it past the cyclists)

Please explain exactly why you believe it is "pretty clear to [you] he was flooring it past the cyclists".
I'm not letting you off the hook on this one until you give reasonable justification, or a retraction.

I predict a bollox response :roll:
Scrutinising this one claim will flush out any irrational thought processes.

weepej wrote:
should never be allowed near a truck again IMO. He's clearly not mature enough to drive such a vehicle. I'm 50/50 myself on phoning the police to ensure he's been prosecuted, and if he hasn't I'll be making a complaint against him on the grounds that I don't think his driving was acceptable.

I won't stop you. Let us know how you get on. I bet he'll only done for the lack of door security - if that.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2009 07:26 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
A driver of a commercial vehicle has to take the truck he is told to take. He may have failed to shut the door properly or it may have failed when going over the hump. He could not have replicated that test with human strength. There are two many accidents of this type with stabilizer booms coming free, doors flying open. They need a secondary safety device such as placing a saferty chain on after it is locked or latched.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2009 08:45 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
Steve wrote:
weepej wrote:
And why was the guy driving a seven and a half tonner going so fast in the fist place?

And if he's still on the road with a license, why?

The selective poster strikes again!

Fast? He wasn't even making any ground on the cyclist who was second in the group of cyclists :roll:
In fact, I reckon there was 0.45 seconds between the front and rear axels hitting/leaving the raised platform. Assuming a 4m wheelbase (generous), that's 9m/s = 20mph.

Unless you believe 20mph is grounds for losing one's licence?
edited to add: none of those cyclists seemed to mind (or at least mention) the truck's speed.


The speed to me isn't an issue but he does appear to be forcing his way past a group of cyclists in an irresponsible manner. I think he got the punishment he deserved though, just having to fill out the insurance forms.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2009 08:57 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
If that was a two way street he was certainly wrong to overtake the bikes the way he did.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2009 10:38 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Homer wrote:
but he does appear to be forcing his way past a group of cyclists in an irresponsible manner.

I didn’t think that was the case, although he did get close behind them.

Johnnytheboy wrote:
If that was a two way street he was certainly wrong to overtake the bikes the way he did.

It is a two-way street (you can tell by how the cards are parked). A quick look at the aerial shot via Google maps shows he probably had about 100m of visibility (before the next junction). That may not be enough to complete the manoeuvre in time to avoid vehicles coming from the other direction, but one would hope he would safely abort if that were to occur.



I’ve had a close look at the video and images surrounding the story. Has anyone else noticed how both doors simultaneously flew open, yet the mechanism that holds both doors looks undamaged – and that each door has it’s own lock - and that the driver managed to bolt (at least one of) the doors closed afterwards ?
:scratchchin:

It may well be that going over the raised platform made all the lock mechanisms fail, but I wouldn’t expect that to happen with that kind of force, at least not without some prior mechanical weakness - or human negligence. Granted I’m only basing all this on what scant footage there is, but my money is on negligence.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2009 10:40 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
Johnnytheboy wrote:
If that was a two way street he was certainly wrong to overtake the bikes the way he did.


why ?
the inside of the bend looked very open and with a truck height driving position may have afforded more than enough visibility to consider a pass safe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2009 19:08 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
The driver has been reported for for driving without due care and attention and keeping a vehicle in a dangerous condition (presumably relating to the fact the back doors swung open when they shouldn't have).

Boris alleged that the back doors were secured with a wire coat hanger.

Now Boris often has a turn of phrase (he claimed bendy buses killed many cyclist each year and they've never killed one) but I don't think he was joking about this one.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politi ... ng_Mission


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.259s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]