Five cyclists die in five days

[ellipsis]

....something happened along those lines down here.... in the 80s i think....wanker who opened the car door was dealt to by the law in a big way.....bikes creeping around on streets are not new and are part of the deal....prick who opened car door without looking deserves the heavy hand....

[Bass]

The woman who died yesterday was a victim of her own mistake. She swerved to avoid a car door opening, into the path of a truck.

It's always easy to blame other road users, but the unpalatable truth is that more often than not, people die as a result of their own mistakes.

Some years ago, the same thing happened in Christchurch. The guy who swung the car door open into the cyclists path was initially charged with manslaughter but the charge was eventually reduced to dangerous use of a motor vehicle causing death. I think in that case that the cyclist actually hit the door and bounced out under a passing car.
I personally think the charges were appropriate as I don't see a difference between this and driving out into traffic.

[danchop]

truckie followed her around the corner cause its very narrow and with a concrete barrier in the centre of the road so he couldnt overtake her,when then the barrier finished he veered right to overtake,this is when she encountered the opening door.car door opener should hold some blame but the poor girl could be still alive if she knew a large truck was behind her wanting to get past,wearing an ipod meant she was oblivious to the truck behind her

[Pascal]

wearing an ipod meant she was oblivious to the truck behind her

I don't get that. I see pedestrians, cyclists, motorists and even know a few bikers that keep those white little earbuds plugged into their ears and the volume turned up.

How can you operate a vehicle when you can't hear any approaching hazard? You've effectively cut out or plugged up one of two (three?) senses that help you operate the vehicle with your own bloody safety in mind!

[Bald Eagle]

Agree IMHO ipod + moving road transport = disaster waiting to happen

[Grubber]

I don't get that. I see pedestrians, cyclists, motorists and even know a few bikers that keep those white little earbuds plugged into their ears and the volume turned up.

How can you operate a vehicle when you can't hear any approaching hazard? You've effectively cut out or plugged up one of two (three?) senses that help you operate the vehicle with your own bloody safety in mind!

Agree IMHO ipod + moving road transport = disaster waiting to happen

I agree. It's not something i would be doing, but all the same, i figure if she thought she had the right of way past the car (with door closed) then she probably had very little to worry about until that said door opened unexpectedly.

[yungatart]

Very true for the most part.
One exception would be, if the car door opens at the very point your right there, your options become extremely limited. You either hit the door with the knowledge there will be a heavy impact, or you swerve around said door. In this case the split second decision was the wrong one. I don't think she had too much time to do anything that was going to save herself really. This is how these things happen sometimes.
I would say the truck (to which she would have been to the left of) would have had plenty of clear distance ahead, until she swerved out to avoid the car door.

Exactly right! 1st being that shen collided with the car door then got flung onto the road under the truck or, 2nd she swerved to miss the door and ran into the truck.
Would love to see you try to stay alive under those circumstances!
She in FACT, was forced to make 1 of 2 really shit decisions.

Two words...hazard awareness!

Cyclists surely need to develop this skill, as do motorcyclists, if they are to stay alive out there.

If I see a car parked on the side of the road with a person in it, I automatically assume they are either a) going to pull out without seeing me or b)get out, again, without seeing me.

Spidey sense!
Tragic, yes.
Unavoidable, probably not.

[Smifffy]

Agreed. The best bit is if you time it right you can nail the fecker to their door as they begin to get out, whilst being prepared for the impact. You don't have to hit em very hard, and they''ll remember to look before moving for at least a couple of days after that.

Two words...hazard awareness!

Cyclists surely need to develop this skill, as do motorcyclists, if they are to stay alive out there.

If I see a car parked on the side of the road with a person in it, I automatically assume they are either a) going to pull out without seeing me or b)get out, again, without seeing me.

Spidey sense!
Tragic, yes.
Unavoidable, probably not.

[Hoon]

Aren't you also supposed to be able to stop in half the visible distance ahead? I'm not suggesting that she is to "blame", I suggesting that she ran out of skill and made an error of judgement, which many, many motorcyclists also manage to do. Including me.

Yes but when a threat suddenly appears within that half visible distance then you are forced to take evasive action. This has nothing to do with skill or judgement.

Or are you advocating that bikers and cyclists should never swerve for fear of falling under a truck?

When faced with such a situation most of us will swerve. 99% of the time it is the best option, we will get away with it, swerve into empty space and carry on our merry way. This was just a case of someones number coming up not just once but twice in succession and in cases of extremely bad luck like this there is little anyone could've done.

[george formby]

The timing of these tragedy's coincides with a recently released Road Safety report, from Sweden, I think, which plainly stated that cycling on a public highway will never be safe. I only read a comment about it in the Herald so my info is scant. Makes sense though, large, hard, fast moving vehicles & soft, slow, difficult to see cyclists on the same bit of road is dangerous. A cyclists vulnerability is greater than ours, they are totally dictated too by traffic & road conditions. In heavy traffic with a lot of distractions a cyclist is very hard to spot.
Without dedicated cycle lanes everywhere the only real hope of making things safer lies, again, with education for motorists & cyclists. Motorcyclists are trained to be aware of potential hazards & to observe closely what is happening around us. In their own interests cyclists need to adopt the same strategies & be proactive about getting the message out.
The fallibility & behaviour of drivers will not change with legislation & education can only have a limited effect if it is a one off test rather than ongoing over a number of years.
A lot of the skills we use apply to cyclists too, how many here would have alarm bells ringing seeing a person sat in their car on Tamaki drive & anticipate what could happen next? That little bit of knowledge could have saved a life.
Blame is irrelevant in the aftermath.
The physics will not change so all road users attitudes must if safety is to improve.

From another slant, we are financially penalised for our vulnerability in an accident yet in the case of cyclists it's the car drivers that get clattered in court. Whats the difference apart from revenue?

[Luckylegs]

...Or are you advocating that bikers and cyclists should never swerve for fear of falling under a truck?

...When faced with such a situation most of us will swerve. 99%

Not if you know there's a truck up your date or right next to you

[Str8 Jacket]

To me the worry is that 5 cyclists die and there are calls to instigate 10year reviews of drivers abilities (ie you resit your license every 10 years)

The implication being its poor drivers at fault rather than the cyclists...

With motorcyclists - its our fault we are getting injured and killed so we have to pay for training and extra ACC...

Um.....

Hell yeah, I was just having this same conversation with a workmate today. Also that they record these type off accidents as car vs bike but motorcycle accidents like when I was rear ended at the lights are recorded as motorcycle accidents.

Fault is no solace when you're dead. I'm totally sick of hearing the same argument from motorcyclists.

It doesn't matter who is at fault. Aren't you also supposed to be able to stop in half the visible distance ahead? I'm not suggesting that she is to "blame", I suggesting that she ran out of skill and made an error of judgement, which many, many motorcyclists also manage to do. Including me.

Bang on IMO. Every road user is at risk of seriously hurting or killing themselves or someone else because of one moment. I often think people should be made to ride scooters for 6 months before obtaining any type of licence so that they can learn first hand what inattention or lazy driving/riding can cause. Who know's maybe we'd only have half the amount of road users....

[Grubber]

Two words...hazard awareness!

Cyclists surely need to develop this skill, as do motorcyclists, if they are to stay alive out there.

If I see a car parked on the side of the road with a person in it, I automatically assume they are either a) going to pull out without seeing me or b)get out, again, without seeing me.

Spidey sense!
Tragic, yes.
Unavoidable, probably not.

As do i. But it don't always work. As it didn't in this case. One can be aware and be somewhat careful, but it doesn't always mean it will be perfect. Some hazards just come at you from nowhere.

[Grubber]

Not if you know there's a truck up your date or right next to you

you can be aware of that truck all you like, it still doesn't stop the dick from opening the door.
Jeez mate, your obviously so damn perfect! You should live till your 100 at this rate.

[slofox]

On RNZ's Nine to Noon program yesterday, a couple of cycling advocates were interviewed. One of them suggested that the speed limit on "most" open roads should be dropped to 80km/hr to protect cyclists. He seemed to think the 100km/hr could stay on motorways (where cyclists are not allowed anyway).

Apart from the difficulty of implementation, I doubt that being hit at 80km/hr is going to be any less damaging to cyclists than being hit at 100km/hr - they'd both hurt - probably fatally as well. There may be some small gain in that there is more time to react at 80km/hr than 100km/hr but overall I doubt that it would help much. It certainly would not help in urban settings where events such as that on Tamaki Drive occur.

I agree with those who mention hazard awareness. This I think is even more important for the more vulnerable cyclist. Most of them are clad in flimsy stuff that does not measure up to the level of protection of armoured leathers for instance.

To a large extent, cyclists and motorcyclists share similar risks and should adopt similar risk management strategies. Which should include greater awareness on the part of motorists - many of whom seem reluctant to share the road with anyone else, no matter what they are driving.