Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6086
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:39 am

Trevtassie wrote:
foo on patrol wrote:Some of you people need to take a step back and take a reality check!!!!!!!!!!! :roll:

Stop all the development around the city area and you can remove them from that area but that's not going to happen, is it???????? :wink:

I'm not sticking up for the drive but I am stating the bleeding obvious as to not having that combination = double the operating cost to the developers which = much higher cost to the end buyer! :idea:

Foo


So why do other countries not have them running around inside cities? Maybe it's because they actually care about safety and the politicians don't bend over every time the road transport lobby squeals "not enough in the trough" Oh sorry, I forgot it's Australia, we're special... we have different economics to the rest of the world.


The thing you got right is your "Maybe".

As to the rest of your response, like it or not, comparisons across the globe and even across cities in the same country, do not compare readily when simplifying it to only one or two factors. This is true whether we are talking about diet and obesity, family violence, mental health, traffic ratios, education or pretty much anything else we choose to compare.

Even though this forum is remarkable amongst most other special interest forums for it's less tribal consideration of issues, we still try too often to find simple causes causes to justify pre-existing beliefs,.

I don't know why it is more dangerous here than elsewhere. Or even it it is. What I do know is that the reasons will be manifold and related to each other in complex ways.

Foo is right to point out the relationship between trucks on roads and inner city development.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6086
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:45 am

There are prime movers that have long snouts that are significantly higher than a cyclists head. It seems to me that the obvious thing to do at all light-controlled intersections is to set the car line well back from from a separate line for cyclists.

We hare seeing this at some. Perhaps it should be for ALL.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
foo on patrol
Posts: 6346
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:12 am
Location: Sanstone Point QLD

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby foo on patrol » Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:01 am

Trevtassie wrote:Japan has side guards on every truck too. Plus no dog trailers. And yep, they move a lot of dirt around too... dump trucks everywhere. They just prioritise safety over economics. Truck drivers are the best in the world I reckon. They know how to drive around bicycles. The ones up north are even better, they have to deal with 15-20m of snow during winter, that takes real skill, punting a semi over an icy snowy mountain pass. So damn considerate it left me gobsmacked. Like seeing a bicycle coming the other way and getting over to the left as far as possible so traffic passing the bike had more room to pass. Like slowing down going up a mountain to my pace, until they could see to pass. Mind you I was on the shoulder, so they could have easily done an Australian style pass: yep, should be able to get by without hitting his elbow. But unless there was a clear 2m it was no go.
How do you think you got to drive your B double in the cities? I remember when they were banned, but the transport lobby got them allowed, then all the roads had to be upgraded to cope at a huge cost which wasn't recouped, because suddenly the "limited routes only" suddenly became pretty well everywhere except suburban streets . So yeah, the transport lobby has a lot of push in Australia.


Do your research as that is BS. You can only run B-doubles on designated roads to Ports and major depots where it is wide enough. It's funny :roll: how everyone wants things cheaper but when the push comes to shove, the only way to get things from A-B is by larger vehicles like B-doubles for major freight. Then you're saying that there should be only single trucks on development sites not truck and dogs or 19mtr B-doubles, so your much happier to have twice the truck movements, that's right, twice the number to move the burden, which in turn pushes the costs even higher? :?

Commonsense has to prevail on all parties involved with using the roads and I don't ride on roads that are to narrow for two vehicles to pass and leave me feeling comfortable if they are busy roads but I guess that's being to smart on my behalf.

Prosecute to the fullest when stupidity and aggression is involved but that's not every going to happen when we have a judicial system with weak kneed lilly livered judges that we have. :wink:

Not all blame can be laid at the feet all motorists because that is living with your eyes closed but then again, this is what I'm seeing all to often. :evil:

Foo
I don't suffer fools easily and so long as you have done your best,you should have no regrets.
Goal 6000km
Image

morini
Posts: 838
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: Southern Downs Qld

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby morini » Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:53 am

Nothing will change while all of you push your various modifications to trucks, line markings, urban restrictions and so on and so on. It's too expensive. The only way to stop people pulling the trigger on a gun is to ban guns or re-educate their attitudes and behaviour. We can't ban cars and trucks so we're left with one choice.

While we the cyclists bicker over what we think is the appropriate approach to the problem more people die. It's time there was consensus on how to deal with the many problems associated with cycling instead of everyone bleating about their personal issues. Sure all of these are important but there must be a clear understanding of the problem and the problem is driver attitude and behaviour.

The biggest killer is a driver ignoring or not being aware of that little human being they're pushing into the shoulder and gutters because they want to cruise by by creating a third lane. Bicycles need more room than the width of the handle bars and unless we're in our own lane we're not getting it. So where to from here do we do something as a community or sit back and argue about suggestions and ideas that we're never going to reach agreement on?

I saw this back in the late 70's with the increase in motorcycle deaths. The authorities were demanding that manufacturers hard wire motorcycles to leave their lights on permanently. The floor to this argument and there were many, was that by doing so we'd train car drivers to only ever look for a headlight instead of a person. I'm sorry officer I didn't see him because his headlight wasn't working was a real threat to a riders existence. I went to a rally in Canberra to join in the protest and we won. The legislation was dropped.

It's the same problem. Yes I killed her but I didn't see her.

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 6135
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby biker jk » Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:09 am

foo on patrol wrote:
Trevtassie wrote:Japan has side guards on every truck too. Plus no dog trailers. And yep, they move a lot of dirt around too... dump trucks everywhere. They just prioritise safety over economics. Truck drivers are the best in the world I reckon. They know how to drive around bicycles. The ones up north are even better, they have to deal with 15-20m of snow during winter, that takes real skill, punting a semi over an icy snowy mountain pass. So damn considerate it left me gobsmacked. Like seeing a bicycle coming the other way and getting over to the left as far as possible so traffic passing the bike had more room to pass. Like slowing down going up a mountain to my pace, until they could see to pass. Mind you I was on the shoulder, so they could have easily done an Australian style pass: yep, should be able to get by without hitting his elbow. But unless there was a clear 2m it was no go.
How do you think you got to drive your B double in the cities? I remember when they were banned, but the transport lobby got them allowed, then all the roads had to be upgraded to cope at a huge cost which wasn't recouped, because suddenly the "limited routes only" suddenly became pretty well everywhere except suburban streets . So yeah, the transport lobby has a lot of push in Australia.


Do your research as that is BS. You can only run B-doubles on designated roads to Ports and major depots where it is wide enough. It's funny :roll: how everyone wants things cheaper but when the push comes to shove, the only way to get things from A-B is by larger vehicles like B-doubles for major freight. Then you're saying that there should be only single trucks on development sites not truck and dogs or 19mtr B-doubles, so your much happier to have twice the truck movements, that's right, twice the number to move the burden, which in turn pushes the costs even higher? :?

Commonsense has to prevail on all parties involved with using the roads and I don't ride on roads that are to narrow for two vehicles to pass and leave me feeling comfortable if they are busy roads but I guess that's being to smart on my behalf.

Prosecute to the fullest when stupidity and aggression is involved but that's not every going to happen when we have a judicial system with weak kneed lilly livered judges that we have. :wink:

Not all blame can be laid at the feet all motorists because that is living with your eyes closed but then again, this is what I'm seeing all to often. :evil:

Foo


When you talk about increasing costs by using smaller trucks you don't mention external costs such as the disproportionate damage larger vehicles do to roads and humans, We need to take these external costs into account. Moreover, the current system of road user charges has smaller trucks cross subsidising larger trucks which is certainly not an efficient outcome.

"Under the current road user charging system, trucks
overall are undercharged for their use of the road system. Moreover, larger more heavily
laden vehicles and those travelling larger distances are charged the least (per tonne
kilometre) while smaller, less heavily laden vehicles and those travelling shorter distances
cross-subsidise them." The BTRE (1999 p 58) suggested that "Mass-distance based road
use charges offer greater scope to reflect the avoidable cost of heavy vehicle road use."


http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9981&context=infopapers

User avatar
foo on patrol
Posts: 6346
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:12 am
Location: Sanstone Point QLD

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby foo on patrol » Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:43 am

Imposing more costs on larger vehicles will not result in anything = end user costs (public) being charged even more for the cost of goods. :wink: If the contractors did their job properly in laying the base and then the asphalt at the correct mix, then the roads would also be much better and part of the problem is that the Councils and Government dictate what they are prepared to use and it is the bare minimum standards of mix rates.

The only way forward is to plan all new developments to be designed with separate bike only lanes and not these shared paths that you have to continually avoid pedestrians walking side by side with dogs on leashes. :idea:

Foo
I don't suffer fools easily and so long as you have done your best,you should have no regrets.
Goal 6000km
Image

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4029
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby Thoglette » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:05 am

foo on patrol wrote:The only way forward

...is rarely the only way forward.

But it's usually the one that lets existing vested interests keep doing what they've always done
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

Trevtassie
Posts: 658
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2015 10:57 am

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby Trevtassie » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:06 am

I actually remember when B doubles were only going to be on the recently opened Roe Highway into Canning Vale, was a huge hoo hah at the time. No road trains in the city at all, they had to be made up on the other side of Northam for the Great Eastern Highway and up past Muchea for the Great Northern Highway. That seems to have changed too... and co-incidentally while they were shutting the spur rail lines. So yeah, the road transport lobby has no push at all...nope, our prime minister just looooves trains too... I heard he was going to give lots of funding to to a freight rail network. Oh, hang on, sorry, that was he was going to de-fund a rail freight network...

Perth as a city sucks because of that. The truck and car is king. Every time I go back it reminds me how crappy a city is when you let motorised traffic rule... though at least they seem to have come to a bit of a realisation now and are building some cycleways. Lucky for me if I do commute there, one of those cycleways happens to be going where I need it.

Safer cycling is a mix of things infrastructure and education, but good luck with the latter in Australia. Our culture of me, me, me won't allow that to get very far... and restricts the former as well, because, hey, taxes.

Well built roads for heavy vehicles are called railway lines. The only way you can build a road that will survive a heavy vehicle is to use concrete. I hear Queensland is going to be paying theirs off for the next 50 years. Unfortunately trains can't form picket lines around Parliament House, so they tend to get the short end of the stick.

User avatar
foo on patrol
Posts: 6346
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:12 am
Location: Sanstone Point QLD

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby foo on patrol » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:12 am

State Governments are the major interest holders in rail, not Federal. Federal were talking about the link from the line up to Darwin from the south and it has been the State Governments closing down rail, not Federal. :?

Foo
I don't suffer fools easily and so long as you have done your best,you should have no regrets.
Goal 6000km
Image

morini
Posts: 838
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: Southern Downs Qld

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby morini » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:33 am

....and both Federal and State government funded railways have been criticised since the early 20th century for competing against private enterprise. This is why much of the Fed and State railway systems have been either sold off, mothballed or privatised. The transport industry has a vested interest in lobbying the State to improve, maintain and create road networks so they can conduct business under the mantra of "job creation". There is no argument, even from the Transport industries leading figures, about the efficiency of rail. It's just that they don't want the biggest business in town, the government, competing against them. How do you think Reg Ansett started his airline company?

This still has nothing to do with the prevention of cycling deaths.


Who fault is it when people drive in front of trains?


You're way off the point.

Trevtassie
Posts: 658
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2015 10:57 am

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby Trevtassie » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:48 am

Uh Huh.... http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/coali ... 2pdsq.html

It takes, for example, a lot more effort to be run over by a train than a truck, you need to be riding on the tracks for a start. A train takes maybe 40 trucks off the road, so yeah, it has nothing to do with cycling amenity and safety.

Like all rent seekers, the road transport industry doesn't want government competition, but they are happy to be heavily subsidised by effectively free use of the road system. It's called competitive neutrality nowadays.

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 6086
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Sun Aug 23, 2015 11:19 am

We seem to be getting way off topic.

The subject of trucks and how we accommodate them is worthy of it's own thread if it does not have one already. I suggest that someone interested start one up and have the mods move some of the previous posts to it.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

User avatar
Lukeyboy
Posts: 3447
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby Lukeyboy » Sun Aug 23, 2015 12:14 pm

foo on patrol wrote:State Governments are the major interest holders in rail, not Federal. Federal were talking about the link from the line up to Darwin from the south and it has been the State Governments closing down rail, not Federal. :?

Foo


Both. Federal, State and private (as is the case with Aurizon and others). The ARTC is a Federal organization who manage some of the freight corridors in most states. Darwin to Adelaide is actually a privately owned railway line and was built under a boot scheme (either a 50 or 99 year lease at the time).
Image

One of Queenslands downfall in its rail network was competition from roads and how it was heavily subsidised. More and more money was being spent on highways/road upgrades by local, state and federal. As a result industries moved around or they just simply ended. As things quietened down train services were reduced as a result to the point where they were losing money. No choice but to close them down. One of the final nails in the coffin was when QR was split and privitised. The majority of the coal network was now owned by them as was all the locomotives and freight wagons. Aurizon had no need to keep the smaller locomotives that were used on the smaller spur lines and sold them off and scrapped the unused wagons. There was also a clause that passenger trains could no longer transport small freight which was used very frequently on the Westlander and Inlander services. The fright that went into them have now been shifted to road and the passenger services themselves are in real danger of being closed.
Image

Abbot think's that the railways are a state problem so won't invest any money in them. Take the North Coast Railway line from Brisbane to Cairns where 95 percent of traffic is freight yet he has no problem throwing billions upgrading the highway when that could be spent upgrading the railway line from realignment to upgrading the size of the passing loops (freight trains are limited to 600m in length due to several passing loops being 650m long. They have trialed 1000m trains with success but they had full priority as they couldn't fit in any passing loops). State Government doesn't want to invest in it - they even cancelled (they said postponed until 2032 but it has been cancelled) the Beerburrim-Landsborough stage of realignment and duplication. As much as trucks are a necessity I personally think the railway line (nationally) should be properly upgraded. Better alignment instead of the 1850-1950 alignment. Higher track speeds. Longer passing loops to allow 1.6km trains. Upgrading of loading/unloading facilities. You get more trucks off the road/used more efficiently. Less road damage. Less pollution. Win win.

morini
Posts: 838
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: Southern Downs Qld

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby morini » Sun Aug 23, 2015 12:39 pm

Well said. There is momentum building to move away from the ARTC as the preferred Inland Rail contractor and instead consider offering it to a consortium who want to include and upgrade, to standard gauge, many of the existing Queensland spur lines into the proposal. This would reopen many of the underused and closed lines and link them to both ports. Unfortunately it won't happen because it makes too much sense and will remove hundreds of thousands of trucks off the road.

Government used to be a collective to provide services for the benefit of it's constituents. Do they have this debate in Denmark? I doubt it because European countries are decades ahead of Australia in public policy. Many of us would agree that Australians need to re-educated into the benefits of cycling, railways and renewable energy but in Australia any investment in public and social policy attracts accusations of "nanny state", political correctness and meddling into citizens private affairs.

Stop drivers using us as the third lane and we might be heading towards a resolution that may save a few lives and us having this discussion again when another cyclist is killed and run over.

User avatar
PiratePete
Posts: 660
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 9:04 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby PiratePete » Sun Aug 23, 2015 2:29 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote:There are prime movers that have long snouts that are significantly higher than a cyclists head. It seems to me that the obvious thing to do at all light-controlled intersections is to set the car line well back from from a separate line for cyclists.

We hare seeing this at some. Perhaps it should be for ALL.


Even better, we as cyclists queue with the traffic rather than being in front. This solves a couple of problems:

Firstly, your not sneaking up the side of, then in front of the truck (potentially unnoticed and possibly out of the drivers vision).

Secondly, Driver attitude. To expand on this I'll give you an example, I drive a Truck and Dog, recently traveling out bound on Old Cleveland Rd, I overtook the same pair of riders a total of four times. We were playing leap frog, they would ride up my left side (out of view at two of the traffic lights when sitting beside by front left wheel), once the light when green, they would take off in front of me, I'd follow them till I was able to safely move my 19m long vehicle into the right lane. Once I completed my overtaking move, I would merge back to the left lane, only to be stopped by another traffic light and have the same two catch up and repeat the process.

As I said, this happened four times, before I got a clean run through a couple of traffic lights and left the cyclists behind.

Most drivers of any vehicle would not be this tolerant, I was, however I had a good think about how frustrating this was from where I was seated. So I have adjusted my riding habits and now when I pull up at a traffic light, I stop and fully occupy the left lane. Not at the front of the queue, but where I am in the flow of traffic. It makes no difference to me or my travel time, but it prevents me agitating the car/truck drivers who are trying to do the right thing but do get frustrated by us, constantly wiggling our way to the front, only to command that the other vehicles give us fair room. I have noticed less angst from my fellow road users having adopting this process.

So basically, simple, never put yourself where the driver of the vehicle next to or behind you cannot be seen (yes - you see the driver's face), and secondly queue like every other car at the intersection.

Regularly riding in Beaudesert Rd, I have noticed the intersections prior to where I've received punishment passes have all been where a third lane has been added and I've used that and passed vehicles which have already had to change lanes to pass me prior to the intersection. Think about it.
2015 Specialized Diverge Carbon Expert
2013 Giant Reign MTB.
Pirate Pete on Instagram

User avatar
yugyug
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am
Location: Sydney

Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby yugyug » Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:05 pm

I also sit in the queue, not all the time, but more than most other cyclists I see. I kinda mostly agree with your opinion on it, but there are some problems with it too.

The first and most serious is that sitting behind in the queue can expose you to being rear ended by an inattentive driver coming towards the lights. I don't know how likely that it and it never used to worry me until I heard some motorcyclists talking about it and saying it was a common type of motorcycle accident.

The second is that exhaust fumes really suck, especially diesel fumes from a truck. Maybe that was the only reason those cyclists kept filtering to the front of you?

The third is that when the traffic is really congested it makes sense to filter because cyclists can travel through congestion faster than cars. This isn't a problem with staying in the queue, except that it influences the decision to stay in the queue or not, and the situation may be ambiguous to the cyclist while they are in the queue i.e they likely need to filter to know if they can filter and beat the motor traffic.

User avatar
Lukeyboy
Posts: 3447
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby Lukeyboy » Sun Aug 23, 2015 8:15 pm

yugyug wrote:The first and most serious is that sitting behind in the queue can expose you to being rear ended by an inattentive driver coming towards the lights. I don't know how likely that it and it never used to worry me until I heard some motorcyclists talking about it and saying it was a common type of motorcycle accident.


Rear ending at lights/stationary traffic is very common. Usually the numpty driver behind mistakes the brake light on the bike to be the car in front. Almost had that pleasure the other night when the idiot came full speed to duck between the car and the gutter on the left turn lane only to realise at the last minute that I was actually there. Good thing it wasn't a prius otherwise I would never have herd it coming.

User avatar
PiratePete
Posts: 660
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2014 9:04 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby PiratePete » Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:17 am

Lukeyboy wrote:
yugyug wrote:The first and most serious is that sitting behind in the queue can expose you to being rear ended by an inattentive driver coming towards the lights. I don't know how likely that it and it never used to worry me until I heard some motorcyclists talking about it and saying it was a common type of motorcycle accident.


Rear ending at lights/stationary traffic is very common. Usually the numpty driver behind mistakes the brake light on the bike to be the car in front. Almost had that pleasure the other night when the idiot came full speed to duck between the car and the gutter on the left turn lane only to realise at the last minute that I was actually there. Good thing it wasn't a prius otherwise I would never have herd it coming.


Hopefully my Exposure Blaze is different enough to a car tail light to wake the numpty from his/her daze... So far I've received more respect. Better a calm driver, than an aggravated one.
2015 Specialized Diverge Carbon Expert
2013 Giant Reign MTB.
Pirate Pete on Instagram

User avatar
elantra
Posts: 2104
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:01 am
Location: Trying to avoid the Brisbane traffic.

Re: Cyclist dies - collision near Mater Hospital

Postby elantra » Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:45 am

Lukeyboy wrote:
yugyug wrote:The first and most serious is that sitting behind in the queue can expose you to being rear ended by an inattentive driver coming towards the lights. I don't know how likely that it and it never used to worry me until I heard some motorcyclists talking about it and saying it was a common type of motorcycle accident.


Rear ending at lights/stationary traffic is very common. Usually the numpty driver behind mistakes the brake light on the bike to be the car in front. Almost had that pleasure the other night when the idiot came full speed to duck between the car and the gutter on the left turn lane only to realise at the last minute that I was actually there. Good thing it wasn't a prius otherwise I would never have herd it coming.

For sure.
Riding a bike or a motorbike is an exercise in risk analysis and it makes no sense to expose yourself to this danger all the time.
Sometimes I wait in the line of traffic, sometimes I filter, it depends upon so many factors.
I don't filter past trucks unless the line of traffic is very long or the truck is really old and slow.
At the right turn tailback at the Epic cycles intersection in Brisbane I wait in line but feel less exposed because there is a traffic island and you can wait in line but slightly offset up against the traffic island. This feels better anyway.
"Technology gives us much more information but Education is never be able to give us the skill to evaluate it"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hoodlum