Accidents - Bicycle Injuries

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on April 17, 2012 at 3:35pm

What a strange thread. I see nobody arguing that the cyclist was not at fault, nor anyone claiming it's a good idea to get in a truck's blind spot, but everyone is passionately arguing the contrary as if somebody had.  Were some posts removed maybe?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David P. on April 17, 2012 at 6:47pm

H', I think that one can easily make a case that the argument that the cyclist was not at fault was implicit in the post that the OP linked to.

DUG is right about the blind spots in Class 6 - 8 trucks. Most people have no idea how limited visibility can be in trucks like that.

David

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on April 17, 2012 at 11:00pm

That is a good video but that truck is a cab over design and has MUCH better visibility from the cab than a conventional truck.

Cameron Puetz said:

It's British so right and left are switched, but otherwise this is a good video about blind spots:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPkbNFt5NuY

notoriousDUG said:

I also, as a person who has operated a large truck on the roadway before, to ask a lot of you to really think about what driving a large truck is like.  The truck in question is huge.  It has a blind spot, directly in front of it, that is large enough to hide a decent sized car; trucks it's size often have a blind spot to the left often have a window on the bottom half of the passenger door so the driver can look out and see if there is a car there because they sit so high up there is a blind spot that completely hides a car.  If you have not driven a truck like this you probably have no idea just how hard it is to see out of it; go find one somewhere and sit in it, you will be shocked how little you see out of it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don P on April 18, 2012 at 1:04pm

Howard, it is clear this accident was unfortunate for both parties, and no posts to my knowledge were removed.

The settlement made by the Mack truck driver’s insurance company, the self-promoting lawyer statements, along with Michael’s set up favor Mr. Zanoni, and his loss of limb.  Based on the available information, we really don’t know why the insurance company lawyers settled this case, resulting in ‘the biggest personal injury case for a plaintiff over 60 years old’.  There may also be other facts of the case that are unknown that led to the settlement.  A court transcript or abstract could be helpful, but even so, a settlement made to a party does not necessarily mean they were ‘right’, or could be repeated for other plaintiffs.

The available facts, and my distillation (several posts earlier) of what happened based on those facts, indicate Mr. Zanoni could have avoided his loss of limb.  Anyone can use Google Maps street view to see this intersection, and how the unfortunate accident likely occurred.

Site lines on the Mack truck (as pointed out in several posts) are a matter of simple geometry.  The roof of the cab on a Mack construction truck is 9.5 feet above the pavement, and the eyes of the driver probably 6-12 inches lower.  The Mack truck also has a long hood, I estimate 5-6 feet.  We don’t know what kind of bike Mr. Zanoni was riding, or if his position was upright.  We don’t know how close the truck was to Mr. Zanoni as he darted into the intersection, or his speed.  The intersection itself is different than most, with the stop sign at least a car length from the painted stop line (which is in line with the building), and the crosswalk just beyond that.  The building on that corner obstructs the left view of Mr. Zanoni, and the view of the Mack truck driver, looking right for pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk.  Most likely, Mr. Zanoni jogged his bike to the curb cut-out, rather than jump the curb (he was 74 at the time of the accident) before entering the painted crosswalk.  If so, his concentration was not to his immediate left.

Unless Mr. Zanoni’s riding profile was over 5 feet, it is unlikely the Mack truck driver ever saw him.  If Mr. Zanoni even saw the Mack truck as he rode into the intersection, it was probably one of those ‘oh s**t’ moments.  The other factor here is timing.  Mr. Zanoni was fortunate he was not slower – he would have gone under the truck.  A little faster, and he may have cleared the Mack truck.  Timing on behalf of the Mack truck driver – how he surveyed the intersection before his turn, was critical too.

Mr. Zanoni was lucky to get this settlement – or more accurately, a portion of it.  Contrary to lawyer Krzak’s statement “This is clearly a case of avoidable negligence” (on behalf of Mr. Zanoni), as a bicyclist, my judgment, based on the available facts is that Mr. Zanoni could have avoided his loss of limb on that Friday ‘on his way back from church’.

As a community, the real takeaway here is that all trucks have blind spots (some more than others), beware of intersections that have obstructed views, and both should factor into our ‘situational awareness’ when riding.

h' said:

What a strange thread. I see nobody arguing that the cyclist was not at fault, nor anyone claiming it's a good idea to get in a truck's blind spot, but everyone is passionately arguing the contrary as if somebody had.  Were some posts removed maybe?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page