• London Cycling Campaign have released their new video today.
    We're hoping to get all London Councils to pledge to use only the best trained drivers in lorries fitted with the best safety equipment and sensors. Seems like a no brainer, right?
    Would be amazing if you'd click and share our video and back the campaign.

    You can watch the video here

    and click through at the end to get involved.


  • What do people think of the video

    It highlights the risk that most forumengers already know about but it is worth spreading out to everyone else.
    Yesterday an elderly pedestrian was killed by a lorry in Islington. There are even more peds than cyclists killed by HGVs in London.

  • I am personally not a fan of the video. Yes, I am for increasing safety by improving vehicles and drivers, but this video does nothing more then shock people in to signing up. At the same time alienates the LGV community.

    Firstly, the impact is from behind in a shunt style. What in the campaign is there to stop these style deaths. My understanding, maybe I am wrong, is that a significant number of the deaths by LGV's were on the inside of the vehicle. Some caused by the driver, some due the cyclist putting themselves in a vulnerable position.

    I wished that the money spent on the video created something more even and highlighted the harrowing effect of being caught on the inside. The information for actual cyclist safety if poorly placed on the website. It takes three clicks from the video and is one bullet point mixed in with other text.

    This is my two pence worth, which I am sure people will disagree with, but more needs to be done in putting the more weight of safety on the cyclist. I personally see a larger number of poor cycling decisions then that of major vehicle mistakes.

  • Interesting points, Neilp.

    Our aim is to galvanise people into contacting their councils to get them to sign the pledge - to only use the best trained drivers and lorries with the best safety equipment.

    If we’re successful, a large proportion of lorries on the roads will be safer, and not only when carrying out contracts with the council. I think the main point is, that many of these deaths can be avoided and in taking action, you can help to make our roads safer.

    In terms of cyclists taking more responsibility, of course, riding safely is important, but as the exposed road user rather than the person riding high in a cab, we are vulnerable. The bicycle itself is not lethal, but a lorry can be.

  • The bicycle is lethal, just not to the same extent.

    I just think as cyclists we would get more support if we were more proactive and self criticising in campaigns. Yes we need to make lorries safer, but they are still lorries.

    And as being the exposed, at risk link in the equation we need to do more ourselves to keep us safe. Starting with better cycling. I just feel that we are trying to put too much of the responsibility on others with these big campaigns. I am sure/know that a large quantity of forum members are good considerate cyclists, but there is probably a larger number of people on the road have minimal cycling experience or just ignorant to the dangers.

  • one of key points in this campaign is the horrific rate of fatalities when lorries are involved.
    the responsibility lies with everyone, absolutely, but we could see a significant reduction in the number of accidents and fatalities if lorries were better equipped and drivers were better trained. And that's no small thing.

  • I totally agree.

    I just think the next major campaign should be closer to home!

  • Also we expect companies to spend large sums of money on updating/improvements and the vast majority of cyclist are unwilling to pay or to arrogant to do some basic training.

  • I'm more inclined to think 'remove the danger, remove the problem.'
    Also, I think one thing we haven't brought up is the fact that the person behind the wheel in a lorry is a professional driver. Cyclists aren't professionals so whilst they should ride safely, for that reason I do feel more responsibility lies with the lorry driver.

  • Equal responsibility should be shared amongst all road users. The danger is still there, if you are on the inside of a lorry and it turns left it could still kill you with barriers, but yes it is reduced. A driver may still make a mistake through ignorance or accident.

    Reduce the number of cyclist on the inside also will reduce the fatalities. Unfortunately what ever we do it will not stop eliminate bad driving.

    The video on youtube by the Met on LGV safety shows a 44ft artic with about 4 mirrors pointing down the inside and there is still a blind spot. There are only so many mirrors a driver can safely look at.

  • I agree, there are only so many mirrors a driver can look at, that's why we're pushing for sensors to be installed which alert the driver if a cyclist is coming up the inside.
    If the addition of these sensors saves lives, then it's worth doing

  • I think sensors are a good idea and the LCC should campaign to the government for it to be compulsory on all new lorries. I just think, especially in the current economic environment to try and make councils to make companies retro fit them. A small firm will struggle to justify costs I can imagine. How much are the sensors to fit?

    This will push all the work to the large companies that might be able to afford this retro fitting.

    The LCC need to run a joint campaign to stop cyclists cycling on the inside, as this will also hopefully save lives! This will give the current campaign more weight and respectability to the LGV drivers.

  • Whilst I'm not a fan of the video, I do understand the tactic of getting people to sign the petition - and I don't think it's a message directly to HGV drivers / Cyclists, the video does reach beyond those directly involved.

    But neilp, there may be some stupid cyclists on the roads, but they are a lot less dangerous than stupid lorry drivers. And remember, a campaign for cyclists is a pretty far reaching target audience, as any age is permitted to cycle willingly on the road.

    Unfortunately we're dealing with the situation that we ALLOW huge vehicles into a dense urban area amongst so many vulnerable people, whether they have a piece of metal sat between their legs is irrelevant.

    We are not tough enough at all in London on protecting the vulnerable, it shouldn't be a case of "small firms will struggle to justify costs", it should be a case of "you're not entering our city without these relevant safety measures".

    Perhaps we should revert to how we ran logistics during the Olympics? All lorry movements between 4am-7am for example?

  • The video will have the affect of getting people to sign and improvements maybe made from that. But I am adverse to some views that what we need to do is put all the responsibility on drivers. In this case it is HGV, but still being on the inside of a car or van will cause injury, hopefully not as serious mind.

    That is a very hard, almost impossible task to make lorry movements through 4-7am, it would have to be all lorry movements between say 9am-4pm.

    Example; new building built by an inhabited building, would the residence like be woken at 4am? Or would all the retailers in central London like employing people to be in store extremely early to take/load delivers?

    Unfortunately, because of London's early development it is not and very hard to make parts of it cycle friendly. The loads are not narrow enough like say central Amsterdam to prevent large vehicle movements but also they are not wide enough to add separated cycle lanes.

    Yes a bad driver has the potential to cause more human damage. But my argument is we as cyclists need to encourage the people with a lower level of understanding and ability to improve. The problem is that non-cycling members of the public have a bad perception of cyclists and singular campaigns like this do not help that. We have to show that we are trying to help combat our own problems rather then off load them.

    So why don't we campaign for a cycle license scheme or you are not allowed to cycle without undertaking bikeability training? This is how a non-cyclist will view such arguments. So to avoid the inhibiting nature of such a scheme we need to be more proactive in our own back yard.

  • Yes I understand, and agree with you to a point, but the way cyclists approach problems as 'cyclists' is perhaps the cause of the image problem. If we focused on the problem of making London more 'human friendly', whether they're on bicycle or foot, then the solutions might be slightly different than this video.

    Construction traffic, by its very nature, is only going to a certain location for a certain time, until construction is complete - but in London, with the massive amount of construction constantly taking place, we need to be far, far more strict on these huge vehicles with restricted visibility.

    I was speaking to a City of London police officer about the problem of lorries v. cyclists, and he pointed out that unless a large goods vehicle has a delivery to be made within the square mile, and can prove it, they won't be allowed in. Not sure as to how they enforce that when all the gates seem to be unmanned, though...

  • I like the soundtrack and the splatting eggs

    Well produced, and the nuances of the arguments above are never going to be captured in a 1 minute advert that also catches the eye of the consumer. Power to the LCC!

  • Should a cycle campaign encourage more people to cycle (safety in numbers) as well as campaign for improved conditions for people who already ride?

    Any potential new cyclists could be put off by the video which emphasises the dangers of a fairly low risk activity. It reminds me of the egg-in-helmet demonstrations by some old school road safety people


  • I agre with skydancer. The inexperienced cyclist will take this video to mean that cycling is a dangerous, frightening activity. The slowmotion crashing is sensationalist and over produced. Reminds me of a bad episode of casualty. It has the same ridiculous sense of fake peril as one of those police camera action films. It is the kind of thing that this very funny coogan spoof is aimed at.


    How about a video showing how safe cycling is if done properly, how easy it is to ride safely, and how quick, efficient and economical it is?

  • The crop is shocking. 16:9 would have been fine.

  • old school road safety people..



  • sure an expert meeja person made that film, doubt if it was anyone whos worked for L.C.C. very long?

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview

London Cycling Campaign's new video - get involved and help

Posted by Avatar for Julio @Julio