Transport minister rejects call to make HGV cycle safety features compulsory

The EC has recently proposed the abandoning of a legislation requiring retro fitting of mirrors to trucks manufactured between 2000 and 2007, on the pretext that the trucks covered by this requirement have now all been retrofitted. However the UK agency, VOSA, which supervises the annual testing of LGV and PCV is unable to provide clear figures that the UK truck parc has fully complied with this standard

A review of safety systems reveals that it can take a driver 5 seconds to scan a full set of blind spot mirrors - by which time a cyclist may easily have 'disappeared'. Many drivers are saying that monitoring mirrors distracts them from their core activity of driving.

2 answers - design trucks with direct vision between the driver and those outside - reduce the number of large truck movements by sensible use of transport.

YORN !

more bollocks from our MPs positioning themselfs ready for the election l M H O

Quote:

The minister highlighted the four-week THINK! campaign aimed at cyclists and motorists launched in the latter part of October and covering London, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol and Cambridge.

In Leeds I have seen nothing of this.

Jesus H. Christ you know when you are in trouble and are a vulnerable minority when George Galloway steps in.

I would scrap asl's if not that. Scrap the lane filtering into them
With that. I would make it an offence to filter down near side of vehicles within a certain distance of the junction. Like, how many motorists apart from lorry drivers check their near side any way. Also. If a cyclist is ahead within say 25 meters of a junction then the motorist can't push past in that zone or once the cyclist has come to a stand still.

Sadly though. Not sure how this would be policed!!!

Hmmm - with friends like George Galloway, who needs enemies?

Any new legislation, or an "agreed standard" proposal, must indeed be carefully assessed.

Would accidents on the outside of the hgv increase, if drivers were spending more time monitoring "safety systems" on the left hand side?
Would stationary HGVs at junctions, with triggered warning systems, encourage impatient cyclists further back to take greater risks?
Would cyclists feel more "confident" in squeezing up the inside, on the assumption that they were being "monitored" by the driver?
How easy would it be to stop the "flow" of cyclists, once the hgv had come to a sudden stop?
Would the incidence of punishment passes increase?
How many extra pollution related deaths would be added to the (current) 3,000 per year in London alone, through increased hold ups at each junction?
How easy would it be to introduce compulsory "in cab" monitors, when the average age of hgv drivers is 54, and half of those over 50 need reading glasses?
Would an audio alert system prevent other audio "clues" from being heard at critical moments?
Would consumers, many of whom are already in financial difficulty or particularly vulnerable groups, be happy to absorb these extra costs?
Would we be making our country even less economically competitive?

It's only natural for cyclists to want these systems, and we should leave no stone unturned in our efforts to reduce KSIs, but there's far more to this than meets the eye.

Which is the most powerful and influential: the cycling lobby or the transport/haulage lobby? Just saying...

Did anybody really expect a Tory scum to give a shit??? Really??

"A full assessment of these systems will be needed before reaching a decision to impose additional costs on operators of these vehicles."

In other words, we'll sit on our behinds until we're forced to make a decision...

It seems to me that insurance companies are going to impose these systems on operators before the government does.

In the netherlands (and probably most of the EU) most big trucks, busses etc are fitted with deadspot mirror's this should already help a lot.
As extra camera systems become more common it's a good idea to have these systems fitted in the next 4 years, it's also good for insurance company's who more and more demand video proof for car crash claims.