Cyclist killed while riding in time trial near Hull

Before we all jump to conclusions that there was a driver at fault (and i know thats the most likely possibility), what if the rider rode into the back of a stationary vehicle......

theres a lot of fact to be ascertained before we can all judge

Prison stint for the driver - simple. He killed someone surely that must be breaking some law or other??

Indeed tragic. Thoughts go out to everyone affected.

Now is not the time to start apportioning "blame", "blame" does nothing to bring back lives lost or undo hurt, and loss..

I do feel though that now is another time to point out that there are no "dangerous roads", it's the people that use them that create the danger.

There will be those who will call for cyclists to be kept off 'fast' DCs - and they will be many no doubt, how long before they get their wish?

..And then how long before they want us off all 'trunk' roads?

.. in fact in cities too. All these deaths involving lorries. Any road in fact. Cycles are not compatible with motorised traffic. The only place for bikes is Sustrans paths and 'traffic free' routes. Drive to the start with bike on car, off-load and ride.

No. Lets push to remove the danger. Not the bikes.

As a general observation, I think that many motorists do not realise how fast a cyclist can travel and cut in too soon after overtaking (especially when towing a trailer) in the believe that the 'obstacle' has been cleared.

Terrible news. While I have no idea as to whether DCs are actually more statistically dangerous there just seems no reason to be riding on them other than chasing meaningless artificially inflated (deflated ?!) times. I marshalled a BUCS tt and the number of relative beginners riding on a busy DC was terrifying. None of them seemed to be enjoying themselves. In general I think the obsession with racing on roads no one would consider training on puts a lot of people off, myself included. Why can't tts be run on more interesting, quiter roads? After all the precise time is meaningless, just how you compare to others and how much fun it is shoukd matter.

I hate the way these incidents are worded. "a collision with"? Seems very unlikely. Why is the victim portrayed as the agent of the incident?

I would like to see events where riders are so exposed brought to an end. Maybe clubs could join forces, rationalising the number of TT's promoted on a regional basis, and in return negotiate with the appropriate authorities to put on larger events with road closures.

Horrible news.

I don't know what the statistics are and whether DCs really do have a higher incident rate. I do know that as a car driver (as well as cyclist) when I'm on a DC, motorway or other main trunk road, my mentality is more about the destination and how far away it might be, than when I'm on a local road doing a relatively short trip.

I suspect I'm not the only driver who is in a "need to get there" frame of mind, which could mean that drivers on DC's are less conscious of hedges/horses/weather/cyclists than motorists on short trips.

And let's bear in mind that a lot of vehicles on DC's are 40t HGVs (no spare lane width) and a lot are doing more like 80 or 90mph than 70mph

I did one year of TT's, including a few 7am dual carriageway rides, and packed it in, partly because of my perception of the risks.

I lived in Brough for 6 years. Know it well. Our local dual carriageway has jut been made 60mph from 70mph after 18 deaths since 1999. Some local councillors wanted 50mph but were over ridden by the usual BS about speed being part of national productivity.

Hopefully when all residential roads are 20mph then dual carriageways can become 50mph. There is no doubt it would save lives.

head down riding is a qualifying event for the darwin awards.

i wonder what the tipping point is for people to view DCs as not especially safe to ride on, because it doesn't appear to be 'a higher than average statistical likelihood that you will die whilst time trialling compared to a single carriageway road'.

and what's with the 'i'll race on a dual carriageway but there's no way i'd ever train on one' approach?

This is where ears come in handy. And I can't think of many riders who have their 'head down' on a TT.

Thanks for that very useful input andyp.

I was not referring to this specific incident, just in general. TT bikes, you are NOT breaking your aero position to look around you.

'But on a DC, how many drivers are expecting to see a cyclist?

Another problem that will come about with a TT, if you have a TT bike, your head is down, looking straight in front, not like a normal cyclist who will be observing everything around them for danger.

If you have your head down, going for a fast time, you are paying no attention to the traffic behind you, only what's in front. That IS dangerous, no matter what anyone says. If you are not fully aware of everything going on around you, you shouldn't be cycling on a road in the first place.
'

To be fair, an awful lot of this is unmitigated toss.

Very sad.

It's too easy to criticise when you don't know the facts - both those specific to the incident and those concerning safety when organising events on the roads. For instance, DCs are not by definition more dangerous for cyclists than single carriageway roads. Do you really think organisers want to play roulette with riders' lives?

We should be asking how to make the roads safer, not telling people where they can't ride. 122 cyclists died in 2012, every life lost is a tragedy whatever the circumstances.

All I'd like to add to this debate is that we should stop referring to it as an accident - the police now, quite rightly IMHO, call them incidents as does the article above.

Someone is at fault for this and it is not the organiser and unlikely to have been the cyclist either.

I'm sure for most of us on here cycling (and TT) remains a voluntary passtime, not a job. I honestly can't see myself leaving the house on a sunday morning kissing the kids and wife goodbye, with a big smile saying 'just off to do some fun TTing on the double carriageway'. With any luck, I'll be back for lunch.

Seriously, I'd like to enjoy my cycling for many years to come and if that means I have to adjust routes/activities then that is what I will do. Not interested in my rights to cycle on DCs or other problematic routes; I'd rather get my HR up because I'm pushing harder on the pedals.

A tragic accident, but in my view avoidable.

There are a number of good points raised here.

But on a DC, how many drivers are expecting to see a cyclist?

Another problem that will come about with a TT, if you have a TT bike, your head is down, looking straight in front, not like a normal cyclist who will be observing everything around them for danger.

If you have your head down, going for a fast time, you are paying no attention to the traffic behind you, only what's in front. That IS dangerous, no matter what anyone says. If you are not fully aware of everything going on around you, you shouldn't be cycling on a road in the first place.

I am in NO WAY blaming the rider here, Its a tragic accident, but its an avoidable one all the same.

you can quote law and highway code all you want, the idea of cycling on a dual carriageway terrifies me. Even urban 30mph ones are bad enough (just in from a trip to the shops along one, where I was hooted at by a car whilst cycling in a bus lane)- there's too many ignorant, unobservant and downright aggressive drivers, and at 70mph when they really don't have any expectation of seeing cyclists the idea of mixing with them, especially if you're doing a form of cycling where you're pushing yourself to your physical limits and are as a result probably a little less aware of your surroundings, just seems daft.

I appreciate the money isn't there- but I'd gladly see all motorway-esque dual carriageways upgraded to motorways.

As far as I can remember the onus is on the person overtaking to do so in a safe manner that will not affect the safety of what they are overtaking be it a horse, cyclist or honking great tractor (Highway Code 162-163). What road it is on and what the cyclist was doing are irrelevant.

My condolences to the friends and family.

first and foremost, condolences to Chris Auker, family, friends and Brough Wheelers.

i've ridden the above course. i've organised an event on a dual carriageway before which had to be cancelled because of a major incident that left several people in hospital.

the statement above regarding space for overtaking becomes problematic when there are two cars side by side, or one already overtaking, usually at 70mph+. there isn't really enough room for the car on the inside to move out to overtake the cyclist doing 25mph. the margin for error is slim and there isn't a hard shoulder.

which of course might have nothing to do with Chris' tragic death, but do contribute towards the higher risk of riding on this particular road. and it's specious to ignore the wider debate; at some point the TT/DC debate has to be bought into the open rather than leaving it currently until the police attempt to expressly forbid use of DC courses to protect riders (ie Norfolk police A1).

whilst there isn't a stock argument, i.e DCs are unsafe, single carriageways safer, it's quite chilling that nearly all of the deaths and serious injuries in time trialling over the past decade appear to have been on DCs, including Alec Anderson, Len Grayson, as well as the names above and Jane Kilmartin's life-threatening injuries.

At some point the arguments just no longer stack up, and it isn't about free will or being unnecessarily risk-averse. it's to do with the fact that you are statistically more likely to die when riding on a dual carriageway. as traffic counts increase and at the same time driving habits and the lack of awareness (or a safer driving culture) from drivers towards cyclists shows no sign of changing for the better - see rob jeffries - then the idea that somehow DCs are safe(r) becomes more and more self-serving to those who want to ride them in search of a fast time. (and it's about the fast time, nothing else; the sport valorises times over placings or points, this is its strength and appeal, and also its inherent weakness).

somewhere along the line the TT community has become sucked into a debate about riding DCs, and quite an assertive one about 'rights to the roads' and so on, that doesn't seem to take into account the stark reality of road and cultural conditions within the UK and the very real danger of death. it's a self-defeating argument.

i no longer organise events on dual carriageways - main arterial trunk roads - and i very rarely race on them, with the heads of the valleys road in wales being the exception because it's one of the quietest roads i've ridden, regardless of DC/SC status.

What is this talk of cycling organisations being at fault? and the use of dual carriageways? The only thing that matters is :: This person has lost his life; it's a tragedy, an accident that should not have happened.

With the increase of cyclists on our roads, there should be far more public awareness to the dangers faced when cycling. The press and media should increase their coverage of road safety issues; this would surely help to inform other road users of the dangers we face when cycling.

I live on a dual carriageway, that is fed by a motorway and is a main trunk road out of the city centre.

Should I not leave my house?

I've always felt that dual carriageways, whilst being fast are safer because cars don't need to squeeze past, lots of room for an overtake.

Dual carriageways are at least wide and give the cyclist a chance of some space; probably much safer than a quiet single carriageway road.

Would this even matter if it was a TT or not. We all have close shaves every time we go out on our bikes. Sometimes, it ends in tragedy.

My thoughts go out to the family; it must be heartbreaking.