Why truck are dangerous.

[Tamyka Bell]

falx wrote:
<snip>
> Another thing may forget is that if you cannot see the truck driver in
> his mirrors they can not see you. If there is time and they know your
> there they may look for your shadow, dont count on it. If the driver can
> not see you and does not know your there, that is _your_ fault.
<snip>

First I want to say I agree with a lot of what you said, particularly
about safety being your own responsibility, so I snipped all that stuff
out.

The main comment people were making _in this thread_ about trucks was
not about cyclists passing/ducking/weaving etc, but rather about trucks
that overtake cyclists and merge back too soon, before they are clear of
the cyclist.

It is the truck driver's responsibility to pass safely. It is the truck
driver's responsibility to ensure he/she is clear of the cyclist before
returning to that lane.

If the truck driver is overtaking you, they know you are there,
regardless of whether or not they can see you in their mirrors.

If the truck driver fails to identify that they have passed the cyclist
and it is safe to change lanes again, it is _the truck driver's_ fault,
not the cyclist's fault.

That being said, as soon as a truck starts moving our way, I think most
of us are smart enough to get out of the way.

We also commented that car drivers do exactly the same thing, however
the smaller vehicle length makes it less dangerous for the cyclists
(i.e. it was not an attack on professional large vehicle drivers).

Tam

 

[Bleve]

Tamyka Bell wrote:
>
> That being said, as soon as a truck starts moving our way, I think most
> of us are smart enough to get out of the way.

Bunnyhop onto the pavement, sometimes!

 

[Tamyka Bell]

Bleve wrote:
>
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
> >
> > That being said, as soon as a truck starts moving our way, I think most
> > of us are smart enough to get out of the way.
>
> Bunnyhop onto the pavement, sometimes!

Been there, done that, where's my frickin' t-shirt?

Tam

 

[Bleve]

Tamyka Bell wrote:
> Bleve wrote:
> >
> > Tamyka Bell wrote:
> > >
> > > That being said, as soon as a truck starts moving our way, I think most
> > > of us are smart enough to get out of the way.
> >
> > Bunnyhop onto the pavement, sometimes!
>
> Been there, done that, where's my frickin' t-shirt?

You said "no presents"

Make up your mind ...

 

[falx]

Tamyka Bell wrote:
> The main comment people were making _in this thread_ about trucks was
> not about cyclists passing/ducking/weaving etc, but rather about trucks
> that overtake cyclists and merge back too soon, before they are clear of
> the cyclist.

True enough, but coming into a thread late with only standard retention
on the news server meant that a lot of what was previously said was
missed by me; which I pointed out at the start of my post.

I still think the ph number on the side of the truck is your first best
recourse in a situation like that. No company really wants the adverse
publicity involved.

 

[Bleve]

falx wrote:
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
> > The main comment people were making _in this thread_ about trucks was
> > not about cyclists passing/ducking/weaving etc, but rather about trucks
> > that overtake cyclists and merge back too soon, before they are clear of
> > the cyclist.
>
> True enough, but coming into a thread late with only standard retention
> on the news server meant that a lot of what was previously said was
> missed by me; which I pointed out at the start of my post.
>
> I still think the ph number on the side of the truck is your first best
> recourse in a situation like that. No company really wants the adverse
> publicity involved.

Often there's no recourse - anonymous white light truck, and/or no way
to record a number in a hurry, esp after being bundled into a ditch or
gutter! But ideally, yes, calling the trucking company and politely
suggesting that they remind their drivers of how to pass cyclists is
the best thing to do.

 

[Tamyka Bell]

falx wrote:
>
> Tamyka Bell wrote:
> > The main comment people were making _in this thread_ about trucks was
> > not about cyclists passing/ducking/weaving etc, but rather about trucks
> > that overtake cyclists and merge back too soon, before they are clear of
> > the cyclist.
>
> True enough, but coming into a thread late with only standard retention
> on the news server meant that a lot of what was previously said was
> missed by me; which I pointed out at the start of my post.
>
> I still think the ph number on the side of the truck is your first best
> recourse in a situation like that. No company really wants the adverse
> publicity involved.

Yeah, I've done that one, but it was actually after a truck tried to run
my car off the road.

Tam

 

[dave]

Tamyka Bell wrote:
> falx wrote:
>
>>Tamyka Bell wrote:
>>
>>>The main comment people were making _in this thread_ about trucks was
>>>not about cyclists passing/ducking/weaving etc, but rather about trucks
>>>that overtake cyclists and merge back too soon, before they are clear of
>>>the cyclist.
>>
>>True enough, but coming into a thread late with only standard retention
>>on the news server meant that a lot of what was previously said was
>>missed by me; which I pointed out at the start of my post.
>>
>>I still think the ph number on the side of the truck is your first best
>>recourse in a situation like that. No company really wants the adverse
>>publicity involved.
>
>
> Yeah, I've done that one, but it was actually after a truck tried to run
> my car off the road.
>
> Tam


I have rung the mobile while following the guy.. watched him pick it up
and then had words.

(As passenger of course

Dave

 

[Euan]

>>>>> "falx" == falx <[email protected]> writes:

falx> ps. Where I live (cairns) there is one thing that irrits me no
falx> end everytime I see a cyclist do it. If you live in the Cairns
falx> area, and road train. Please do not hillclimb the Kuranda
falx> range. Doing so is stupidly dangerous. There is nowhere for
falx> you, (a cyclist) to get off the road and there is no room to
falx> pass you (the cyclist) without crossing the white lines, even
falx> in a car. Also you (the cyclist) are doing less than 10 kmh
falx> (more like <5). The difference between your speed and the
falx> speed of an empty gravel truck is 50 kmh, he weighs 18 000 kg
falx> you weigh 100kg? You are slow enough to be hidden in a bend
falx> untill its far to late. If a driver has to choose between
falx> squishing a cyclist or hitting another truck head on; I'm
falx> sorry for the cyclists family.

This response is not about that particular hill, it's more general than
that. It's about operating a vehicle withing its safe stopping
distance.

When I did my training for my HGV licence in Germany it was drilled in
to me that I'm operating a slow and heavy lump and must always operate
the vehicle in such a manner that I can safely stop at all times. That
means slowing down going around a bend such that the stopping distance
is what I can see, overtaking at a speed where I can react to other road
users etc etc.

It's not much comfort to the cyclist but if the driver of a gravel truck
rounds a bend at a speed at which the driver is unable to react to a
change in road conditions it is the driver at fault, not the cyclist for
being there.

Just 'cause you can achieve a speed doesn't mean you should.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)

 

[TimC]

On 2005-12-13, Euan (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>>>>> "falx" == falx <[email protected]> writes:
>
> falx> ps. Where I live (cairns) there is one thing that irrits me no
> falx> end everytime I see a cyclist do it. If you live in the Cairns
> falx> area, and road train. Please do not hillclimb the Kuranda
> falx> range. Doing so is stupidly dangerous. There is nowhere for
> falx> you, (a cyclist) to get off the road and there is no room to
> falx> pass you (the cyclist) without crossing the white lines, even
> falx> in a car. Also you (the cyclist) are doing less than 10 kmh
> falx> (more like <5). The difference between your speed and the
> falx> speed of an empty gravel truck is 50 kmh, he weighs 18 000 kg
> falx> you weigh 100kg? You are slow enough to be hidden in a bend
> falx> untill its far to late. If a driver has to choose between
> falx> squishing a cyclist or hitting another truck head on; I'm
> falx> sorry for the cyclists family.
>
> This response is not about that particular hill, it's more general than
> that. It's about operating a vehicle withing its safe stopping
> distance.
>
> When I did my training for my HGV licence in Germany it was drilled in
> to me that I'm operating a slow and heavy lump and must always operate
> the vehicle in such a manner that I can safely stop at all times. That
> means slowing down going around a bend such that the stopping distance
> is what I can see, overtaking at a speed where I can react to other road
> users etc etc.
>
> It's not much comfort to the cyclist but if the driver of a gravel truck
> rounds a bend at a speed at which the driver is unable to react to a
> change in road conditions it is the driver at fault, not the cyclist for
> being there.

It's just like riding single track. If you are confident you can
bunny hop any log that is likely to be obscured around that corner, go
for it. But then, the consequences aren't likely to be so bad if you
stuff it up, than if a truck stuffs it up because he was going too
fast around a blind corner.

What *would* happen if there was a rock slide or large downed tree
around the corner? If you can't stop for a cyclist in time, you won't
be able to stop for a pile of rocks or a 1m thick tree either, and
they are much more likely to harm you and your truck.

--
TimC
Speaker: They used an alcohol fog to visualize what's happening.
From the audience: That's always worked for me. -- From an astronomy talk