According to Doug, this would have been the lorry driver's fault

PERIL OF HEADPHONES EXPOSED AFTER GIRL CYCLIST DIES IN CRASH
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...-dies-in-crash

Same story here.
http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/...ter___s_death/

If you don't want to read the whole story, here it is in a nutshell:
Cyclist wearing headphones, rides straight out of a junction, slams
into lorry, and dies.

Scarily enough, if you do a search in the words "cyclist inquest
headphones" there are a worryingly large number of hits (though many
duplicates). It's a similar madness as drivers who insist on using
their hand-held phones while driving.

Nothing wrong with bikes/cycling, but a little sense of self-
preservation is definitely worth while.

FrengaX wrote:
PERIL OF HEADPHONES EXPOSED AFTER GIRL CYCLIST DIES IN CRASH
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...-dies-in-crash

Same story here.
http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/...ter___s_death/

If you don't want to read the whole story, here it is in a nutshell:
Cyclist wearing headphones, rides straight out of a junction, slams
into lorry, and dies.

Scarily enough, if you do a search in the words "cyclist inquest
headphones" there are a worryingly large number of hits (though many
duplicates). It's a similar madness as drivers who insist on using
their hand-held phones while driving.

Nothing wrong with bikes/cycling, but a little sense of self-
preservation is definitely worth while.

Look up 'ipod zombie' for a bit of a laugh.
One I saw the other day was texting with both hands while cycling the wrong
way along a one way road.

FrengaX wrote:
PERIL OF HEADPHONES EXPOSED AFTER GIRL CYCLIST DIES IN CRASH
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...-dies-in-crash

Same story here.
http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/...ter___s_death/

If you don't want to read the whole story, here it is in a nutshell:
Cyclist wearing headphones, rides straight out of a junction, slams
into lorry, and dies.

Scarily enough, if you do a search in the words "cyclist inquest
headphones" there are a worryingly large number of hits (though many
duplicates). It's a similar madness as drivers who insist on using
their hand-held phones while driving.

Nothing wrong with bikes/cycling, but a little sense of self-
preservation is definitely worth while.

note that the accident happened after she left the safety of a cycle lane.
Since she was able to cycle straight out of the end of it perhaps there
should be some form of chicane at the end of the cycle path to prevent it
recurring, at least that would heighten awareness that there is a junction.

Mrcheerful wrote:
FrengaX wrote:
PERIL OF HEADPHONES EXPOSED AFTER GIRL CYCLIST DIES IN CRASH
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...-dies-in-crash

Same story here.
http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/...ter___s_death/

If you don't want to read the whole story, here it is in a nutshell:
Cyclist wearing headphones, rides straight out of a junction, slams
into lorry, and dies.

Scarily enough, if you do a search in the words "cyclist inquest
headphones" there are a worryingly large number of hits (though many
duplicates). It's a similar madness as drivers who insist on using
their hand-held phones while driving.

Nothing wrong with bikes/cycling, but a little sense of self-
preservation is definitely worth while.

note that the accident happened after she left the safety of a cycle
lane. Since she was able to cycle straight out of the end of it
perhaps there should be some form of chicane at the end of the cycle
path to prevent it recurring, at least that would heighten awareness
that there is a junction.

Perhaps they could put a red light at the end to stop...........

Nah - never work would it.


--
Dave - intelligent enough to realise that a push bike, like a skateboard, is
a kid's toy, not a viable form of transport.

FrengaX wrote:
PERIL OF HEADPHONES EXPOSED AFTER GIRL CYCLIST DIES IN CRASH
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...-dies-in-crash



This is much more complicated than you are portraying it.

There isn't a cycle lane on Northam Road at that point but there is an
unmarked shared pavement route there. I would guess she was cycling
westbound to the Fire Station in St Marys.

If those assumptions are correct then the accident is a text book one as
illustrated he
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cy...sion_risks.jpg)
and it links to why cycle paths are more dangerous in another thread.
Danish research has classed the problem as insoluble in that even if
the cycle path has priority the problem remains The headphones were
most likely completely incidental to what happened.

Its a busy road so its unlikely the sound of the lorry would have stood
out even if she had not been wearing headphones. The cycle pavement is
on the left of a left turning lane that the lorry would have been using
and ends there so you need to rejoin the straight on traffic by crossing
the left turning lane. The difficulty for a cyclist is you need to
check traffic through 270 degrees when you are on the cycle facility and
that is what she would appear to have failed to do. Headphones or not
do not make up for lack of looking and she paid a high price for it.

The lorry driver did what is classically known in the literature as
"looked but failed to see" - cyclists in those positions are invariably
invisible to drivers even when they are looking. Whether he made the
other classic error of not fully passing her before making his turn I
don't know but he should have been aware she was there from having
passed her earlier.

The guilty parties if any are the traffic planners. If she had been
riding on the road she would not have been going straight on on a cycle
path to the left of a left turning lane. Its not the only place where
I've seen such stupidity I'm afraid to say.

Tony

Tony Raven wrote:
FrengaX wrote:
PERIL OF HEADPHONES EXPOSED AFTER GIRL CYCLIST DIES IN CRASH
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...-dies-in-crash



This is much more complicated than you are portraying it.

There isn't a cycle lane on Northam Road at that point but there is an
unmarked shared pavement route there. I would guess she was cycling
westbound to the Fire Station in St Marys.

If those assumptions are correct then the accident is a text book one
as illustrated he
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cy...sion_risks.jpg)
and it links to why cycle paths are more dangerous in another thread.
Danish research has classed the problem as insoluble in that even if
the cycle path has priority the problem remains The headphones were
most likely completely incidental to what happened.

Its a busy road so its unlikely the sound of the lorry would have
stood out even if she had not been wearing headphones. The cycle
pavement is on the left of a left turning lane that the lorry would
have been using and ends there so you need to rejoin the straight on
traffic by crossing the left turning lane. The difficulty for a
cyclist is you need to check traffic through 270 degrees when you are
on the cycle facility and that is what she would appear to have
failed to do. Headphones or not do not make up for lack of looking
and she paid a high price for it.
The lorry driver did what is classically known in the literature as
"looked but failed to see" - cyclists in those positions are
invariably invisible to drivers even when they are looking. Whether
he made the other classic error of not fully passing her before
making his turn I don't know but he should have been aware she was
there from having passed her earlier.

The guilty parties if any are the traffic planners. If she had been
riding on the road she would not have been going straight on on a
cycle path to the left of a left turning lane. Its not the only
place where I've seen such stupidity I'm afraid to say.

Tony

she should have stopped and looked when she reached the junction, she did
not, she cycled straight on.
since she had been stopped and told to remove the headphones on previous
occasions it is reasonable to assume that she was a typical cyclist: "road
laws do not apply to me"
in those glamour shots she is quite good looking, what a waste.

Mrcheerful wrote:


since she had been stopped and told
to remove the headphones on previous occasions it is reasonable to
assume that she was a typical cyclist: "road laws do not apply to me"

Wearing headphones cycling is no more illegal than listening to the car
radio with the windows closed.


in those glamour shots she is quite good looking, what a waste.


That's how you value women is it?

Tony

On Sat, 04 Sep 2010 20:49:32 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote:

Wearing headphones cycling is no more illegal than listening to the car
radio with the windows closed.

It is no more illegal, but it is considerably less sensible. When you
are on an unstable fragile vehicle with poor braking and limited
steering it rather pays to try not to limit what senses you have. Is
this not one of the arguments used by those who dislike wearing
helmets - that they reduce your perception of environmental sounds?

Peter Parry wrote:
On Sat, 04 Sep 2010 20:49:32 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote:

Wearing headphones cycling is no more illegal than listening to the car
radio with the windows closed.

It is no more illegal, but it is considerably less sensible. When you
are on an unstable fragile vehicle with poor braking and limited
steering it rather pays to try not to limit what senses you have. Is
this not one of the arguments used by those who dislike wearing
helmets - that they reduce your perception of environmental sounds?


I don't disagree. I was simply responding to Mr Cheerless' assertion
that wearing headphones made her a scofflaw.

Tony

Tony Raven wrote:
Mrcheerful wrote:


since she had been stopped and told
to remove the headphones on previous occasions it is reasonable to
assume that she was a typical cyclist: "road laws do not apply to me"

Wearing headphones cycling is no more illegal than listening to the
car radio with the windows closed.


in those glamour shots she is quite good looking, what a waste.


That's how you value women is it?

Tony

I would expect that wearing headphones or having loud music on in a car
could both be considered to be driving without due care and attention.

Pretty people are more highly valued the world over, there is nothing wrong
with that.