|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Bike "facilities", you gotta love them, at least for the giggle
On 04/08/2014 20:44, Duane wrote:
On 8/4/2014 3:37 PM, Clive George wrote: On 04/08/2014 20:18, Sir Ridesalot wrote: I was just reading in the Toronto (Canada) Sun that the city is nstalling some counter-flow bicycle lanes. That's right, they're installing bicycle lanes that run the OPPOSITE direction to motor vehicle traffic. On one-way streets this is often a good thing. It's always going to depend on where and how they end. Yes, they need to make it all the way to the end, and have an appropriate junction there. Here's two I liked to use some years ago : http://goo.gl/maps/IF7GH http://goo.gl/maps/cQEue I did meet a lady on the first one who was insisting that because it was a bike lane, she should use it even if she was going the other way, and it wasn't big enough for us to pass. Fortunately it wasn't a traffic jammed time so I just went in the car lane. |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Bike "facilities", you gotta love them, at least for the giggle
On 05/08/14 08:27, Frank Krygowski wrote:
We fought that facility for years. The closest we ever got to success was when one of the subsequent park directors told us, "Look, if we were doing it now, we'd do it the way you're saying. But we can't afford to change it." That is a big problem. *They* implement something because people ask for facilities, they do it badly because they have no idea, then get all sorts of complaints after the work is complete, but the money is spent and nothing will be changed for a generation or two. I recently alerted a council to a problem facility. They replied that they agreed there was a problem and had made some design changes that would be implemented in the near future. I asked for the new design drawings, as I couldn't very well visualise the changes they described in words, and have not heard back since - several months. I now fear the cure may be worse than the disease! -- JS |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Bike "facilities", you gotta love them, at least for the giggle
On 8/4/2014 8:13 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
This will be on a two-way street and means te bicyclists will be riding *AGAINST* traffic. Stupid and very dangerous in my opinion. Sounds like you're right. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Bike "facilities", you gotta love them, at least for the giggle
On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:00:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 8/4/2014 8:13 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: This will be on a two-way street and means te bicyclists will be riding *AGAINST* traffic. Stupid and very dangerous in my opinion. Sounds like you're right. On the other hand riding against traffic will likely eliminate the running over of bicycles by overtaking vehicles, said to be a problem :-() -- Cheers, John B. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Bike "facilities", you gotta love them, at least for the giggle
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 6:26:10 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:00:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2014 8:13 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: This will be on a two-way street and means te bicyclists will be riding *AGAINST* traffic. Stupid and very dangerous in my opinion. Sounds like you're right. On the other hand riding against traffic will likely eliminate the running over of bicycles by overtaking vehicles, said to be a problem :-() -- Cheers, John B. Any collision between a bicycle and a motor vehicle going in opposite directions will be far more severe for two reasons. #1 is the simple fact that the closing speed will be greater. Example. In a same direction of trravek collision the combined closing speed of a bicyclist riding at 20 kph and a motor vehicle traveling at 40 kph = 40-20 which leaves a closing speed of only 20 kph. The same speeds in an opposing direction collision is 20kph + 40kph = 60kph closing speed. That's THREE TIMES the closing speed of the same direction colision. #2. In a same direction collision the impact is lessened (compared to opposong direction collision) the bicyclist is thrust forward in the direction of travel. In an oppsing direction of travel the impact is much more severe because the opposing travel means the bicyclist gets hit far harder as theymust come to a sudden stop after the impact before being thrown in tjhe direction the greater mass motor vehicle is traveling from. Like I said earlier, I think opposing direction bicycle lanes are just plain stupid and dangerous. Cheers |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Bike "facilities", you gotta love them, at least for the giggle
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 15:23:46 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 6:26:10 AM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:00:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2014 8:13 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: This will be on a two-way street and means te bicyclists will be riding *AGAINST* traffic. Stupid and very dangerous in my opinion. Sounds like you're right. On the other hand riding against traffic will likely eliminate the running over of bicycles by overtaking vehicles, said to be a problem :-() -- Cheers, John B. Any collision between a bicycle and a motor vehicle going in opposite directions will be far more severe for two reasons. #1 is the simple fact that the closing speed will be greater. Example. In a same direction of trravek collision the combined closing speed of a bicyclist riding at 20 kph and a motor vehicle traveling at 40 kph = 40-20 which leaves a closing speed of only 20 kph. The same speeds in an opposing direction collision is 20kph + 40kph = 60kph closing speed. That's THREE TIMES the closing speed of the same direction colision. #2. In a same direction collision the impact is lessened (compared to opposong direction collision) the bicyclist is thrust forward in the direction of travel. In an oppsing direction of travel the impact is much more severe because the opposing travel means the bicyclist gets hit far harder as theymust come to a sudden stop after the impact before being thrown in tjhe direction the greater mass motor vehicle is traveling from. Like I said earlier, I think opposing direction bicycle lanes are just plain stupid and dangerous. Cheers I see... Same way, different way... I suspect that being hit by an overtaking car doing, say 50 MPH faster then the cyclist is to be any more memorable than one traveling the same speed in the opposite direction :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WHOOPS! "9 fractures in my ribs and a broken clavicle" "will be backon my bike in no time!" | Mike Vandeman[_4_] | Mountain Biking | 1 | May 28th 13 04:37 AM |
This one goes out to all the RBR ball garglers - Soft Cell's "Tainted Love" | Anton Berlin | Racing | 0 | January 23rd 11 05:13 PM |
"He remained "very weak physically" after breaking his back in amountain bike accident" | Mike Vandeman[_4_] | Mountain Biking | 8 | March 26th 10 02:31 AM |
Mountain Bikers' Alleged "Love of Nature" | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 53 | April 24th 08 02:52 PM |
"I love this site and I appreciate the breadth of skills that areemployed in the various games." | [email protected] | Racing | 0 | March 6th 08 04:18 AM |