A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old September 12th 19, 02:14 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 03:03 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 03:53 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joy Beeson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,638
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 11:36 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,546
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 12:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 02:16 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 08:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 09:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 09:47 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default 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  
Old September 12th 19, 11:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another cyclist killed Mentalguy2k8[_2_] UK 5 December 19th 13 01:50 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 05:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.