|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:09:45 +0700, John B.
wrote: On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:48:37 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 6:40 PM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:32:49 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 18:22:18 UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 09:42:30 -0400, Duane wrote: On 11/09/2019 12:46 a.m., Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:01:43 UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote: I wonder if there's a market for a "Google Glass" type of thing w/ a back-facing camera displayed on a forward screen full time. Hmm. pH in Aptos Rear view bicycle cameras already exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycle+rear+view+camera&tbm=isch You might also consider an automotive dashboard camera, which usually has a rear view camera included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 A good rear-view camera can really help if this happens. Frank will say the bicyclist should have been lane center but I don't think that would have helped in this case. youtube.com/watch?v=QYMKp71vW-I Cheers My riding buddy, the paramedic installed a go pro on his bike for his commute. He was getting tailgated, close passes etc. He planned to use it to report idiots to his buddies at the police station. But found that driver stopped most of the bull**** behavior. He thinks it's the camera. So maybe just a fake camera would help? g There was a "study" done in England (I think) that found the absolute best defense against aggressive autos was a jacket with "POLICE" printed on the back :-) Frank lives in Ohio which is devoid of much of a cycling presence. When cyclists are unique occurrences that astound and confound the unwashed masses perhaps they are too shocked to pass and this gives him the impression that he is in fact controlling the road. Seems to also work on cops, preventing them from ticketing him for impeding. Here in Montreal, it's a bit different. C https://globalnews.ca/news/5760125/m...-tickets-2018/ -- cheers, John B. That'd get you charged with impersonating a police officer. LOL Cheers Although that isn't the point the test actually misspelled "police" on the jackets for that reason. The point of the study was, of course, to determine whether most autos are aware of what is going on the highway act in response to actual conditions. Which the study deemed was the fact. For example the study found that cars gave a bicycle much more room when passing when the rider was wearing his jacket than when the same rider was not wearing his jacket. On another forum, a person posted that he seemed to get much more abuse from motorists when he was decked out in sport cycling garb compared to when he rode in normal clothing. I can't say I've noticed that, personally, but I can imagine some drivers might be triggered by certain stereotypes. I suspect that a lot of it is perception. I read here a lot about being passed too closely but, honestly, I've never been passed closely enough that I remembered it by the end of the ride. Not to say it never happens but it has never happened to me. And I do ride on major highways. Right next to the big 20 wheel trucks. You know, the guys that get blamed for not seeing the bicycle way back there next to the trailer. Can it be that people here are just more friendly? I doubt it. Road rage is very common here, just the other day the news had an account of some one getting "cut off" so he pulled a gun and shot the offending driver. I suspect that it is an effect of the "Danger! Danger!" factor. Bicycles are dangerous to ride and thus danger has to be seen to happen. "Danger! Danger!" *faction* Here, if you went down to the open market where the housewives on their bicycles are buying the day's groceries and asked the first five people you met if bicycles are dangerous, you'd get two "no's" and three head shakes, as to say, "who is this loony". -- cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 20:58:26 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/11/2019 7:05 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 18:41:11 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 6:28 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 12:43:27 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 12:46 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:01:43 UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote: I wonder if there's a market for a "Google Glass" type of thing w/ a back-facing camera displayed on a forward screen full time. Hmm. pH in Aptos Rear view bicycle cameras already exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycle+rear+view+camera&tbm=isch You might also consider an automotive dashboard camera, which usually has a rear view camera included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 A good rear-view camera can really help if this happens. Frank will say the bicyclist should have been lane center but I don't think that would have helped in this case. youtube.com/watch?v=QYMKp71vW-I I think the guy was riding in the worst possible position. It looks like there are four feet of paved shoulder outside the rumble strips. Absent piles of shoulder debris, why not ride there? If that shoulder were not present, yes, I would have been toward lane center. Given the speed limit on the road, I'd probably have paid attention to my mirror. But in my considerable experience, motorists would have seen me and slowed down or changed lanes. I've never had to leave the road to avoid a crash from behind. Incidentally, that lane does look wide. If a motorist didn't change lanes (perhaps because the inside lane was occupied), when he slowed I'd probably move toward the fog line. If he's proven he sees me and is adjusting to my presence, I show that cooperation when feasible. (If the lane were too narrow to share I'd stay centered.) All of this works. It's what I do, and I seem to be the guy here who complains the least about close passes, crashes, etc. -- - Frank Krygowski Frank, did you watch the video? The driver never even slowed down thus showing that they most likely could not see the bicyclist. I've read that the driver had a hand up as if trying to shield from sun glare. thus the driver would not have seen the bicyclists even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane. Notice that the other lanes were devoid of traffic when she hit the bicyclist? If the driver could not see ahead of them then the driver should have slowed down a lot. I watched the video. My answer was based on that. I said he was riding in the worst possible position. The shoulder looks clear, and I would have been there. About the sun: In the video, the telltale sign of a low sun hazard was not apparent. That sign is your shadow stretching out _long_ toward the driver. It indicates that the sun is low in the sky and aligned with your position. I've advised my club mates that if that's the case, stay off that road until it's safe. If I saw that danger when riding there, I would have adjusted, perhaps by waiting 20 minutes before proceeding. Sometimes I don't understand your logic, Sir. I'm saying he was riding in the worst possible position. Are you claiming he was doing everything right? Really? Despite your evidence? -- - Frank Krygowski No. What I'm saying is that is was a clear day, and there were empty lanes to the left of the bicyclist and that the driver who struck him was NOT paying attention to the road or was distracted by something inside the vehicle - perhaps a cell phone. I'm also saying that because of that it's most likely that being in the center of that left hand lane would have done that bicyclist no good whatsoever. This isn't the only discussion forum I visit. On another, there are cyclists who are much more militant than I am about taking the lane. There are also many whose views pretty much match my own. (I'll restate some of my views below your next post, where you give evidence of misunderstanding.) But many of those people have pointed out that even distracted drivers are more likely to be safer around lane-center bicyclists. Why? Because a bicyclist in the center of the lane is _relevant_. A driver who's not driving an autopilot car (Tesla, etc.) _must_ glance at the road at least occasionally. The theory is that drivers watching TV on their phones, or whatever, still take notice of a lane-centered cyclist because it's immediately obvious they must react somehow. But that those drivers ignore an edge cyclist because they consciously or unconsciously judge "He's out of the way. He doesn't matter." Whatever the psychological details, it works for me. I tend to ride near lane center even on wide roads. If the lane is safe to share, I move right only when the motor vehicle approaches. As a bonus, I think it signals to the motorist that I've "done something for them." My riding experience is much better since I began doing that. -- - Frank Krygowski The problem with a distracted driver who "glances" at the road ahead of them will most likely NOT see the bicyclist unless that motorist is looking for a bicyclist. There have been studies and tests done that show if a motorist isn't looking for something like a bicyclist then the bicyclist simply doesn't register on the motorist's mind that it's there. This is why so many left hooks happen too. The bicyclist thinks that because the motorist is looking atthem that the motorist sees them when in fact the bicyclist's presence is NOT NOTED by the motorist. Years ago I read a book about about bicycle commuting and it warned NOT TO RELY ON MAKING EYE CONTACT WITH ANY MOTORIST AT N INTERSECTION but to watch the vehicle wheels instead. Why? because many times a motorist does not see the bicyclist because the motorist is not looking for a bicyclist. There are time to take the lane and there are times not to. However you usually post that you'd have taken the lane whenever someone posts about a bicycle accident wherein a vehicle hits a bicyclist. You even have posted that bailing is because the bicyclist is a scardy cat and shouldn't be on the road. In this case though it really does appear that even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane the overtaking motorist would have still hit them.. Cheers |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:07:23 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: Oh, I also find it interesting and amusing that you so dislike bicyclists who say to ride to the right of a lane yet you say this person should not have been on the road at all but should have been riding on the shoulder. You left out a word. It's people who say we should *always* ride far to the right who are killing people. Nobody who has ever given the matter a second's thought says "always". Most of the time, lane center is the right place. Frequently, left edge of the lane is right. I seldom ride without moving to the right edge of the lane to let someone by, and there is an eastbound stretch on Winona Avenue where I ride on the shoulder, to the right of the bike lane. Not riding too far to the right is really, really hard, which is why that mistake comes up more often than riding too far to the left. -- Joy Beeson joy beeson at comcast dot net |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
John B. wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:07:23 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 18:41:11 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 6:28 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 12:43:27 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 12:46 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:01:43 UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote: I wonder if there's a market for a "Google Glass" type of thing w/ a back-facing camera displayed on a forward screen full time. Hmm. pH in Aptos Rear view bicycle cameras already exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycle+rear+view+camera&tbm=isch You might also consider an automotive dashboard camera, which usually has a rear view camera included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 A good rear-view camera can really help if this happens. Frank will say the bicyclist should have been lane center but I don't think that would have helped in this case. youtube.com/watch?v=QYMKp71vW-I I think the guy was riding in the worst possible position. It looks like there are four feet of paved shoulder outside the rumble strips. Absent piles of shoulder debris, why not ride there? If that shoulder were not present, yes, I would have been toward lane center. Given the speed limit on the road, I'd probably have paid attention to my mirror. But in my considerable experience, motorists would have seen me and slowed down or changed lanes. I've never had to leave the road to avoid a crash from behind. Incidentally, that lane does look wide. If a motorist didn't change lanes (perhaps because the inside lane was occupied), when he slowed I'd probably move toward the fog line. If he's proven he sees me and is adjusting to my presence, I show that cooperation when feasible. (If the lane were too narrow to share I'd stay centered.) All of this works. It's what I do, and I seem to be the guy here who complains the least about close passes, crashes, etc. -- - Frank Krygowski Frank, did you watch the video? The driver never even slowed down thus showing that they most likely could not see the bicyclist. I've read that the driver had a hand up as if trying to shield from sun glare. thus the driver would not have seen the bicyclists even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane. Notice that the other lanes were devoid of traffic when she hit the bicyclist? If the driver could not see ahead of them then the driver should have slowed down a lot. I watched the video. My answer was based on that. I said he was riding in the worst possible position. The shoulder looks clear, and I would have been there. About the sun: In the video, the telltale sign of a low sun hazard was not apparent. That sign is your shadow stretching out _long_ toward the driver. It indicates that the sun is low in the sky and aligned with your position. I've advised my club mates that if that's the case, stay off that road until it's safe. If I saw that danger when riding there, I would have adjusted, perhaps by waiting 20 minutes before proceeding. Sometimes I don't understand your logic, Sir. I'm saying he was riding in the worst possible position. Are you claiming he was doing everything right? Really? Despite your evidence? -- - Frank Krygowski Oh, I also find it interesting and amusing that you so dislike bicyclists who say to ride to the right of a lane yet you say this person should not have been on the road at all but should have been riding on the shoulder. Cheers I think it is a matter of relative speed. If the bicycle is moving at approximately the speed of the other traffic than perhaps "taking the lane" is a logical act. But the roads I ride on are major links between cities and as a result you may have 3 lanes of traffic going your way, A lane of heavy trucks, generally going 100km on the level in the outside lane and two lanes of autos doing in excess of 100 km., sometimes far in excess of 100 kpm. Taking the lane in those circumstances would mean a 40 foot truck hauling a 40 ft trailer and loaded with 60 tons (container weight) of cargo having to brake some 2/3rds of its speed to avoid hitting the bicycle thundering along at 30 kph. -- cheers, John B. Typical non neighbourhood speed limits here are 50 km/h. Which means bumper to bumper rush hour traffic at around 65. I’ll take my bike lane and my chances -- duane |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:36:18 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote: John B. wrote: On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:07:23 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 18:41:11 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 6:28 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 12:43:27 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 12:46 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:01:43 UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote: I wonder if there's a market for a "Google Glass" type of thing w/ a back-facing camera displayed on a forward screen full time. Hmm. pH in Aptos Rear view bicycle cameras already exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycle+rear+view+camera&tbm=isch You might also consider an automotive dashboard camera, which usually has a rear view camera included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 A good rear-view camera can really help if this happens. Frank will say the bicyclist should have been lane center but I don't think that would have helped in this case. youtube.com/watch?v=QYMKp71vW-I I think the guy was riding in the worst possible position. It looks like there are four feet of paved shoulder outside the rumble strips. Absent piles of shoulder debris, why not ride there? If that shoulder were not present, yes, I would have been toward lane center. Given the speed limit on the road, I'd probably have paid attention to my mirror. But in my considerable experience, motorists would have seen me and slowed down or changed lanes. I've never had to leave the road to avoid a crash from behind. Incidentally, that lane does look wide. If a motorist didn't change lanes (perhaps because the inside lane was occupied), when he slowed I'd probably move toward the fog line. If he's proven he sees me and is adjusting to my presence, I show that cooperation when feasible. (If the lane were too narrow to share I'd stay centered.) All of this works. It's what I do, and I seem to be the guy here who complains the least about close passes, crashes, etc. -- - Frank Krygowski Frank, did you watch the video? The driver never even slowed down thus showing that they most likely could not see the bicyclist. I've read that the driver had a hand up as if trying to shield from sun glare. thus the driver would not have seen the bicyclists even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane. Notice that the other lanes were devoid of traffic when she hit the bicyclist? If the driver could not see ahead of them then the driver should have slowed down a lot. I watched the video. My answer was based on that. I said he was riding in the worst possible position. The shoulder looks clear, and I would have been there. About the sun: In the video, the telltale sign of a low sun hazard was not apparent. That sign is your shadow stretching out _long_ toward the driver. It indicates that the sun is low in the sky and aligned with your position. I've advised my club mates that if that's the case, stay off that road until it's safe. If I saw that danger when riding there, I would have adjusted, perhaps by waiting 20 minutes before proceeding. Sometimes I don't understand your logic, Sir. I'm saying he was riding in the worst possible position. Are you claiming he was doing everything right? Really? Despite your evidence? -- - Frank Krygowski Oh, I also find it interesting and amusing that you so dislike bicyclists who say to ride to the right of a lane yet you say this person should not have been on the road at all but should have been riding on the shoulder. Cheers I think it is a matter of relative speed. If the bicycle is moving at approximately the speed of the other traffic than perhaps "taking the lane" is a logical act. But the roads I ride on are major links between cities and as a result you may have 3 lanes of traffic going your way, A lane of heavy trucks, generally going 100km on the level in the outside lane and two lanes of autos doing in excess of 100 km., sometimes far in excess of 100 kpm. Taking the lane in those circumstances would mean a 40 foot truck hauling a 40 ft trailer and loaded with 60 tons (container weight) of cargo having to brake some 2/3rds of its speed to avoid hitting the bicycle thundering along at 30 kph. -- cheers, John B. Typical non neighbourhood speed limits here are 50 km/h. Which means bumper to bumper rush hour traffic at around 65. I’ll take my bike lane and my chances Well I ride on roads where the speed limit doesn't seem to be enforced and traffic is usually in the 100+ km range - on the 4 lane road right through the middle of town :-) Out on the open road it is sort of "fast as you can". Heavy trucks about 100 km (on the level) and everything else is faster.The other day my wife was driving 120 kph and almost everything was passing her. And all we got is a "fog line". -- cheers, John B. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 12/09/2019 7:14 a.m., John B. wrote:
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:36:18 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:07:23 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 18:41:11 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 6:28 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 12:43:27 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 12:46 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:01:43 UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote: I wonder if there's a market for a "Google Glass" type of thing w/ a back-facing camera displayed on a forward screen full time. Hmm. pH in Aptos Rear view bicycle cameras already exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycle+rear+view+camera&tbm=isch You might also consider an automotive dashboard camera, which usually has a rear view camera included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 A good rear-view camera can really help if this happens. Frank will say the bicyclist should have been lane center but I don't think that would have helped in this case. youtube.com/watch?v=QYMKp71vW-I I think the guy was riding in the worst possible position. It looks like there are four feet of paved shoulder outside the rumble strips. Absent piles of shoulder debris, why not ride there? If that shoulder were not present, yes, I would have been toward lane center. Given the speed limit on the road, I'd probably have paid attention to my mirror. But in my considerable experience, motorists would have seen me and slowed down or changed lanes. I've never had to leave the road to avoid a crash from behind. Incidentally, that lane does look wide. If a motorist didn't change lanes (perhaps because the inside lane was occupied), when he slowed I'd probably move toward the fog line. If he's proven he sees me and is adjusting to my presence, I show that cooperation when feasible. (If the lane were too narrow to share I'd stay centered.) All of this works. It's what I do, and I seem to be the guy here who complains the least about close passes, crashes, etc. -- - Frank Krygowski Frank, did you watch the video? The driver never even slowed down thus showing that they most likely could not see the bicyclist. I've read that the driver had a hand up as if trying to shield from sun glare. thus the driver would not have seen the bicyclists even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane. Notice that the other lanes were devoid of traffic when she hit the bicyclist? If the driver could not see ahead of them then the driver should have slowed down a lot. I watched the video. My answer was based on that. I said he was riding in the worst possible position. The shoulder looks clear, and I would have been there. About the sun: In the video, the telltale sign of a low sun hazard was not apparent. That sign is your shadow stretching out _long_ toward the driver. It indicates that the sun is low in the sky and aligned with your position. I've advised my club mates that if that's the case, stay off that road until it's safe. If I saw that danger when riding there, I would have adjusted, perhaps by waiting 20 minutes before proceeding. Sometimes I don't understand your logic, Sir. I'm saying he was riding in the worst possible position. Are you claiming he was doing everything right? Really? Despite your evidence? -- - Frank Krygowski Oh, I also find it interesting and amusing that you so dislike bicyclists who say to ride to the right of a lane yet you say this person should not have been on the road at all but should have been riding on the shoulder. Cheers I think it is a matter of relative speed. If the bicycle is moving at approximately the speed of the other traffic than perhaps "taking the lane" is a logical act. But the roads I ride on are major links between cities and as a result you may have 3 lanes of traffic going your way, A lane of heavy trucks, generally going 100km on the level in the outside lane and two lanes of autos doing in excess of 100 km., sometimes far in excess of 100 kpm. Taking the lane in those circumstances would mean a 40 foot truck hauling a 40 ft trailer and loaded with 60 tons (container weight) of cargo having to brake some 2/3rds of its speed to avoid hitting the bicycle thundering along at 30 kph. -- cheers, John B. Typical non neighbourhood speed limits here are 50 km/h. Which means bumper to bumper rush hour traffic at around 65. I’ll take my bike lane and my chances Well I ride on roads where the speed limit doesn't seem to be enforced and traffic is usually in the 100+ km range - on the 4 lane road right through the middle of town :-) Out on the open road it is sort of "fast as you can". Heavy trucks about 100 km (on the level) and everything else is faster.The other day my wife was driving 120 kph and almost everything was passing her. And all we got is a "fog line". -- cheers, John B. Sure we have a lot of roads like that as well. Certainly a nice shoulder would be preferable but there you are. I just mean I'm happier with a bike lane on the typical 50 km/h boulevards around here than trying to fight with traffic. Not saying I don't fight with traffic just don't prefer it. The thing here that seems different is that the bike lanes get cleaned occasionally and also, since trucks don't usually drive on them, there are a lot fewer potholes. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/12/2019 9:16 AM, Duane wrote:
The thing here that seems different is that the bike lanes get cleaned occasionally and also, since trucks don't usually drive on them, there are a lot fewer potholes. So, on today's ride we did several miles on a very smoothly paved minor highway with nice wide, smooth shoulders, speed limit 45 mph, taking us into a small town. I rode mostly between the right tire track and lane center, moving to the shoulder only when necessary to let cars pass. Two other riders did as I did. Three more were on the shoulder the whole way. When we got into that small town, one of the three shoulder riders had a flat, from a tiny bit of steel wire, probably 0.010" diameter and 0.1" long. As I told him, that was precisely why I minimized my shoulder riding. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/11/2019 10:03 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 20:58:26 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: This isn't the only discussion forum I visit. On another, there are cyclists who are much more militant than I am about taking the lane. There are also many whose views pretty much match my own. (I'll restate some of my views below your next post, where you give evidence of misunderstanding.) But many of those people have pointed out that even distracted drivers are more likely to be safer around lane-center bicyclists. Why? Because a bicyclist in the center of the lane is _relevant_. A driver who's not driving an autopilot car (Tesla, etc.) _must_ glance at the road at least occasionally. The theory is that drivers watching TV on their phones, or whatever, still take notice of a lane-centered cyclist because it's immediately obvious they must react somehow. But that those drivers ignore an edge cyclist because they consciously or unconsciously judge "He's out of the way. He doesn't matter." Whatever the psychological details, it works for me. I tend to ride near lane center even on wide roads. If the lane is safe to share, I move right only when the motor vehicle approaches. As a bonus, I think it signals to the motorist that I've "done something for them." My riding experience is much better since I began doing that. -- - Frank Krygowski The problem with a distracted driver who "glances" at the road ahead of them will most likely NOT see the bicyclist unless that motorist is looking for a bicyclist. There have been studies and tests done that show if a motorist isn't looking for something like a bicyclist then the bicyclist simply doesn't register on the motorist's mind that it's there. This is why so many left hooks happen too. The bicyclist thinks that because the motorist is looking atthem that the motorist sees them when in fact the bicyclist's presence is NOT NOTED by the motorist. Years ago I read a book about about bicycle commuting and it warned NOT TO RELY ON MAKING EYE CONTACT WITH ANY MOTORIST AT N INTERSECTION but to watch the vehicle wheels instead. Why? because many times a motorist does not see the bicyclist because the motorist is not looking for a bicyclist. There are time to take the lane and there are times not to. However you usually post that you'd have taken the lane whenever someone posts about a bicycle accident wherein a vehicle hits a bicyclist. You even have posted that bailing is because the bicyclist is a scardy cat and shouldn't be on the road. In this case though it really does appear that even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane the overtaking motorist would have still hit them. Well, we don't know that, and it appears different to you than it does to me. But are you forgetting that I probably would have been on that shoulder? As I mentioned in another post, one problem I have with shoulders is road debris. But an open freeway-style road has less debris than a typical street or road, IME. As to riding the fog line vs. riding lane center, my experience has shown FAR fewer problems since defaulting to lane center. This is precisely what I've observed: http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...e-positioning/ -- - Frank Krygowski |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:57:32 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/12/2019 9:16 AM, Duane wrote: The thing here that seems different is that the bike lanes get cleaned occasionally and also, since trucks don't usually drive on them, there are a lot fewer potholes. So, on today's ride we did several miles on a very smoothly paved minor highway with nice wide, smooth shoulders, speed limit 45 mph, taking us into a small town. I rode mostly between the right tire track and lane center, moving to the shoulder only when necessary to let cars pass. Two other riders did as I did. Three more were on the shoulder the whole way. When we got into that small town, one of the three shoulder riders had a flat, from a tiny bit of steel wire, probably 0.010" diameter and 0.1" long. As I told him, that was precisely why I minimized my shoulder riding. You can pick up a cord wire anywhere on a roadway. The real lesson should be to get a tire with a protective ply. Also, the shoulder riders probably had a more enjoyable ride on the wide, smooth shoulder because they didn't have to watch for traffic and get out of the way when cars approached. Why ride on the road surface at all? What did it accomplish? Do you like oscillating in and out of the roadway? -- Jay Beattie. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:16:37 -0400, Duane
wrote: On 12/09/2019 7:14 a.m., John B. wrote: On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:36:18 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:07:23 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 18:41:11 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 6:28 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 12:43:27 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/11/2019 12:46 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, 11 September 2019 00:01:43 UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:29 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote: I wonder if there's a market for a "Google Glass" type of thing w/ a back-facing camera displayed on a forward screen full time. Hmm. pH in Aptos Rear view bicycle cameras already exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=bicycle+rear+view+camera&tbm=isch You might also consider an automotive dashboard camera, which usually has a rear view camera included. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 A good rear-view camera can really help if this happens. Frank will say the bicyclist should have been lane center but I don't think that would have helped in this case. youtube.com/watch?v=QYMKp71vW-I I think the guy was riding in the worst possible position. It looks like there are four feet of paved shoulder outside the rumble strips. Absent piles of shoulder debris, why not ride there? If that shoulder were not present, yes, I would have been toward lane center. Given the speed limit on the road, I'd probably have paid attention to my mirror. But in my considerable experience, motorists would have seen me and slowed down or changed lanes. I've never had to leave the road to avoid a crash from behind. Incidentally, that lane does look wide. If a motorist didn't change lanes (perhaps because the inside lane was occupied), when he slowed I'd probably move toward the fog line. If he's proven he sees me and is adjusting to my presence, I show that cooperation when feasible. (If the lane were too narrow to share I'd stay centered.) All of this works. It's what I do, and I seem to be the guy here who complains the least about close passes, crashes, etc. -- - Frank Krygowski Frank, did you watch the video? The driver never even slowed down thus showing that they most likely could not see the bicyclist. I've read that the driver had a hand up as if trying to shield from sun glare. thus the driver would not have seen the bicyclists even had the bicyclist been in the center of the lane. Notice that the other lanes were devoid of traffic when she hit the bicyclist? If the driver could not see ahead of them then the driver should have slowed down a lot. I watched the video. My answer was based on that. I said he was riding in the worst possible position. The shoulder looks clear, and I would have been there. About the sun: In the video, the telltale sign of a low sun hazard was not apparent. That sign is your shadow stretching out _long_ toward the driver. It indicates that the sun is low in the sky and aligned with your position. I've advised my club mates that if that's the case, stay off that road until it's safe. If I saw that danger when riding there, I would have adjusted, perhaps by waiting 20 minutes before proceeding. Sometimes I don't understand your logic, Sir. I'm saying he was riding in the worst possible position. Are you claiming he was doing everything right? Really? Despite your evidence? -- - Frank Krygowski Oh, I also find it interesting and amusing that you so dislike bicyclists who say to ride to the right of a lane yet you say this person should not have been on the road at all but should have been riding on the shoulder. Cheers I think it is a matter of relative speed. If the bicycle is moving at approximately the speed of the other traffic than perhaps "taking the lane" is a logical act. But the roads I ride on are major links between cities and as a result you may have 3 lanes of traffic going your way, A lane of heavy trucks, generally going 100km on the level in the outside lane and two lanes of autos doing in excess of 100 km., sometimes far in excess of 100 kpm. Taking the lane in those circumstances would mean a 40 foot truck hauling a 40 ft trailer and loaded with 60 tons (container weight) of cargo having to brake some 2/3rds of its speed to avoid hitting the bicycle thundering along at 30 kph. -- cheers, John B. Typical non neighbourhood speed limits here are 50 km/h. Which means bumper to bumper rush hour traffic at around 65. I’ll take my bike lane and my chances Well I ride on roads where the speed limit doesn't seem to be enforced and traffic is usually in the 100+ km range - on the 4 lane road right through the middle of town :-) Out on the open road it is sort of "fast as you can". Heavy trucks about 100 km (on the level) and everything else is faster.The other day my wife was driving 120 kph and almost everything was passing her. And all we got is a "fog line". -- cheers, John B. Sure we have a lot of roads like that as well. Certainly a nice shoulder would be preferable but there you are. I just mean I'm happier with a bike lane on the typical 50 km/h boulevards around here than trying to fight with traffic. Not saying I don't fight with traffic just don't prefer it. The thing here that seems different is that the bike lanes get cleaned occasionally and also, since trucks don't usually drive on them, there are a lot fewer potholes. Over here we have "street sweepers" that clean the streets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vv-BGGlMkN0 I've had occasion to talk with some of them and they are minimum wage employees of the city/town who if they weren't sweeping the street would have no job. -- cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another cyclist killed | Mentalguy2k8[_2_] | UK | 5 | December 19th 13 12:50 PM |
Cyclist killed | Anton Berlin | Racing | 2 | July 24th 10 04:08 AM |
Pedestrian killed by cyclist (BNE) and cyclist killed by car (MEL) | Adrian Cook | Australia | 26 | July 20th 06 03:55 AM |
Cyclist killed | endroll | Australia | 0 | September 24th 05 08:46 AM |
Cyclist Killed | Jimscozz | Recumbent Biking | 1 | November 28th 03 04:39 PM |