Advocacy & Safety - Fatality Hwy 101 Pacific Coast Tourer killed in collision with logging truck.

From a KATU.com report (http://www.katu.com/news/local/126795458.html)
... Oregon State Police (OSP) say an 81-year-old Vancouver, Wash., bicyclist has been killed in a collision with a loaded log trailer on U.S. Highway 101 on the Oregon coast north of Garibaldi.

Sgt. Greg Plummer says the victim in Thursday's crash was described as an experienced cyclist who was riding with his 47-year-old son. The victim was identified Thursday evening as Dale Delane Beacock.

Plummer says Beacock's bicycle swerved in the southbound lane and into the rear of the truck's loaded log pole trailer as it traveled past both bicycles. He was wearing a bike helmet but was dead at the scene. ...

Also reported by SeattlePI.com (http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/WA-man-81-dies-in-OR-bike-log-truck-collision-1729828.php) and OregonLive.Com (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2011/08/cyclist_swerved_into_loaded_log_trailer_police_say.html).

The OregonLive.com report includes details about the direction the pair were heading (south) and also that they were close to milepost 54.

Koordinates.com (http://koordinates.com/layer/874-oregon-highway-mileposts-2007/) can give you milepost data on Google maps.

This gave me the following lat-long coordinates (45.56739 -123.94034) that can be entered directly into the Google maps search box. Or this address might get you there - 14871 U.S. 101, Rockaway Beach, Oregon.

In Streetview (looking north) you should be able to see the start of the steel roadside
barrier. Note that the shoulder goes from quite good to non-existent prior to the point of the OSP photo on the KATU report. Also note that the OSP photo does not show the position of the logging truck after the impact - how long did the truck take to come to a halt?

100 feet further south and looking north again you can see an Oregon Coast Bike Route sign - it's twin on the other side of the road is only visible as a silhouette or from behind. The sign on the southbound side is clearly visible in the OSP photo.

The OSP photo is taken from the rail track side of the steel roadside barrier - both the position of the fog line next to the female trooper's feet in the photo and the Streetview, make it clear that there is NO shoulder of any kind at this point on the road.

As additional confirmation that this is the location of the collision, the background of the OSP photo shows the rooflines of buildings on the adjacent hillside - manipulating Streetview it is possible to see the same rooflines.

The speedlimit is 40 mph at the point where the OSP photo is taken - it is a reasonably safe bet that the logging truck was going at the same speed as the rest of the traffic - probably the speed limit plus 10 to 20 percent.

The report states that the cyclist swerved into the loaded trailer of the truck - I believe this is nonsense.

It is far more likely that the blast of fast moving air from the truck took Dale by surprise, the truck was passing too close and there was insufficient room for Dale to correct and he ended up under the rear wheels.

Now lets all predict the future - the driver will not even get a slap on the wrist and auto-apologists will make the usual predictable posts.

FYI - I just completed a tour down this same road and highway 1 to San Francisco - I also experienced plenty of logging trucks taking extreme liberties.

I believe the cyclist swerved.

There's a phenomenon commonly called "truck suck" that occurs after a semi-truck or other large vehicle passes you at speed... They're pushing a lot of air out of their way, and the initial wind blast if they "buzz" you pushes you to the right (toward the shoulder); as soon as the cab has gone by air rushes back to fill the partial vacuum, and can pull you right under the trailer and into the rear wheels. Even a 3-foot passing distance doesn't mitigate this all that much. It takes firm control of the handlebars and rider balance to counteract this. We have more than our fair share of pulpwood and log trucks out here in south Arkansas, with an 81-year-old rider on the shoulder on the fog line, I'm pretty sure that "truck suck" is what got him.

I experienced Truck Suck once....A very frightening experience.

I would guess a too close pass was involved, whether the cyclist swerved or not. You've got to swerve pretty fast to make up a few feet as a truck passes you at 45mph.

I believe the cyclist swerved.

Are you saying Dale is responsible for his own death?

Waiting for the fools that claim truck/bus suck does not exist.

There was a witness to this event. Mr. Beacock's adult son was riding several yards behind his father at the time.

It doesn't matter if he swerved, whether in response to "truck suck" or not. In OR, when the speed limit is in excess of 35 mph and there is no bike lane, a motor vehicle must give a cyclist room to fall in the motor vehicle's direction when passing. That means that on a road with no shoulder, the truck could not legally be in the same lane as the victim. Not surprisingly, this law was passed in 2008 in response to a log truck crushing a cyclist (in Lane County). The fine is a little less than $400. Striking the cyclist while passing is explicitly written into the law as clear evidence of a violation.

Now, I have never heard of this law (ORS 811.065) ever being enforced. If this truck driver doesn't get cited, then I guess we have altogether given up on being a nation of laws.

Sgt is wrong, how on earth he determined this?

My money is on...
1)Too close pass and
2)the pup trailer swing out(they swing allover the road).

Are you saying Dale is responsible for his own death?

If he swerved he is. Which is what the report states.

It's not always the driver's fault.

If he swerved he is. Which is what the report states.

It's not always the driver's fault.
That would be quite a swerve. If he was hugging the fog line, the truck would have to be almost entirely out of the lane in order to be lawfully passing. In order to swerve seven feet over and get run over by the rear tires the victim would have had to turn pretty sharply. What makes more sense: the truck was passing illegally (too close) and sucked the cyclist in, or the truck was passing legally (room for cyclist to fall towards the truck without being hit) and the cyclist did the suicide swerve?

I experienced Truck Suck once....A very frightening experience.

+1

There's a phenomenon commonly called "truck suck" ... They're pushing a lot of air out of their way, and the initial wind blast if they "buzz" you pushes you to the right (toward the shoulder); as soon as the cab has gone by air rushes back to fill the partial vacuum,

The main cause of the low pressure zone alongside a fast moving truck is the Bernoulli effect - the air must speed up to pass the truck and the increase in kinetic energy must be balanced by a decrease in pressure energy. This is how planes fly - the high air speed over the wings sucks them up into the sky.

If the truck is close it's easy to be in the middle of correcting for the initial push away from the frontal buffer when the Bernoulli suction hits and this would look like "swerving into the truck" to any bystander not versed in these things.

There was a witness to this event. Mr. Beacock's adult son was riding several yards behind his father at the time.


Sgt is wrong, how on earth he determined this?

My money is on...
1)Too close pass and
2)the pup trailer swing out(they swing allover the road).

Read the story. Failing that read posts. The guy's son was right there.

Read the story. Failing that read posts. The guy's son was right there.

do you have a specific link to a post from the son?

I experienced Truck Suck once....A very frightening experience.

Riding this set up in a 25-30 MPH head-cross wind, being passed by a 18 wheeler with a 53 ft box trailer.

At the halfway point of being passed The Suck Tried to Pull me into the rear wheels.

I had both hands on the bars at the time and had to fight to pull away from the trailer wheels.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh187/10wheels/502%20Mi%20Tour/IMG_2993.jpg

There was a witness to this event. Mr. Beacock's adult son was riding several yards behind his father at the time.

Sgt is wrong, how on earth he determined this?
My money is on...
1) Too close pass and
2) The pup trailer swung out (they swing all over the road).

Read the story. Failing that read posts. The guy's son was right there.

Are you saying that because "the guy's son was right there" that means the truck was not passing too close, the [fast moving and close] trailer did not suck him under, or what?

I've now read several reports on this incident and none contain any statement by the son. It would not surprise me if the son was not actually looking directly at his father as the truck trailer passed, peripheral vision maybe, but why speculate abut something that cannot be inferred?

I've read the posts above and "truck suck" [as a consequence of passing too close] appears to be the majority view - what is yours? Simply stating "the son was present" adds nothing that was not already known to all.

Read the story. Failing that read posts. The guy's son was right there.

I read the story, but the pass was too close(1) and i bet money the pup trailer was not perfectly behind the truck(2).

do you have a specific link to a post from the son?

Again, read the story.

Are you saying that because "the guy's son was right there" that means the truck was not passing too close, the [fast moving and close] trailer did not suck him under, or what? . . . .

I am saying that the guy's son was right there where he could see if his father swerved. I am implying that, as usual, many posters here are risking mental herniation in jumping to conclusions. Facts first, then conclusions.

See post # 14 +1

I am saying that the guy's son was right there where he could see if his father swerved. I am implying that, as usual, many posters here are risking mental herniation in jumping to conclusions. Facts first, then conclusions.

Indeed, since the son was riding "several yards behind" his father, he certainly could have seen exactly what happened, but did he? You are making assumptions and then have the gall to pontificate about facts!

Again, read the story.

I did. Again. And I find no particular links or quotes from the son. Just the cop. Yes, it does say the son was riding right behind the father... which begs the question... how did the son avoid the truck suck, and how did the truck avoid the son.

But as far as comments from the son... I saw nothing.

So perhaps if I misread it... or overlooked it... you could point it out for us all.