|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
On 10/14/2019 7:32 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On Monday, October 14, 2019 at 9:57:12 AM UTC-4, sms wrote: On 10/14/2019 6:04 AM, Zen Cycle wrote: snip All I can tell you john, is that avoiding low branches and bushes is a daily occurrence on my rides. Like frank, just because it isn't your experience doesn't mean it's no one's experience. How many times have you seen a post on Usenet, or other forum, where the poster proclaims that something couldn't possibly exist because they haven't personally experienced it and dismiss the possibility that others that have experienced it must be lying? +1 Thank you. There are non-snarky ways for people to discuss their own personal preferences and experiences in their own locales. Not all equipment is necessary or relevant everywhere in the world. Explaining why you use, or do not use, certain equipment, without insisting that everyone must do what you do, is a more effective technique to get your point across. |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
On 10/14/2019 5:50 AM, Duane wrote:
John B. wrote: On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 03:39:47 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:49:27 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:25:45 -0700, sms wrote: On 10/12/2019 9:57 AM, jbeattie wrote: snip Some years are better than other with sweeping, but generally speaking, he segregated facilities don't get swept -- or they get swept very infrequently. This is North Portland, but typical: https://bikeportland.org/wp-content/...3-1200x838.jpg Wait until those maples dump all their leaves. Adjacent landowners and landscapers love to blow leaves into facilities, too -- segregated or not. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/10698131385/ Our street-sweeping is contracted out. If a resident notifies us about a problem with a street not being cleaned our public works department takes care of the problem Segregated bicycle facilities require different equipment since the large sweepers can't drive down the protected bike lanes. If it costs a little more money to keep the protected bicycle facilities free of debris then that's a cost that has to be paid. The City also does tree trimming, in fact I need to call about a tree that's hanging low over the shoulder of a road I ride on frequently and that I have to duck to get under. Sadly, we don't have panel trucks driving right next to the curb to knock down low-hanging branches (someone on r.b.t. once insisted that there was no need for lights to illuminate a little up so a cyclists could see low-hanging branches because trucks would knock such branches down, writing "Many small trucks exceed seven feet. One or two trucks driving down a lane will take out any branches hazardous to any cyclist"). What? Do you live in a jungle? I ask as I live in a tropical country where things seem to grow overnight and still we don't seem to have problems with tree branches overhanging roads. Yes, I often see, particularly in Bangkok strangely enough, teams of men trimming branches that overhang electric and telephone wires I can only assume that the utilities and highway folks in sleepy old Thailand must be more alert than those in The Richest Country in the World as they seem, here, to cut tree branches before they become a problem. -- cheers, John B. He?s not talking about trees overhanging roads. He?s talking about trees overhanging bike paths. And of course this is an issue. Ah, I see. But of course we don't have bike paths here, as part of the highway system, so of course it isn't an issue here :-) -- cheers, John B. Of course. Though I don’t know what the highway system has to do with anything. Well, I didn't know how else to describe the system of routes that one can use for vehicles transporting goods and people. Where one can, of course, ride a bicycle. -- cheers, John B. Let me rephrase. I don’t know what the highway system has to do with bike paths needing trees to be trimmed. And I don't know what bike paths have to do with Scharf's claim of road riders getting injured by hitting tree branches with their heads. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
On 10/14/2019 9:04 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On Sunday, October 13, 2019 at 8:13:56 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 05:39:46 -0700 (PDT), Zen Cycle wrote: On Saturday, October 12, 2019 at 7:25:52 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: The City also does tree trimming, in fact I need to call about a tree that's hanging low over the shoulder of a road I ride on frequently and that I have to duck to get under. Sadly, we don't have panel trucks driving right next to the curb to knock down low-hanging branches (someone on r.b.t. once insisted that there was no need for lights to illuminate a little up so a cyclists could see low-hanging branches because trucks would knock such branches down, writing "Many small trucks exceed seven feet. One or two trucks driving down a lane will take out any branches hazardous to any cyclist"). On the narrow,winding secondary roads in new england that were once merely cow paths or logging roads, low branches and overgrown vegetation are a very common occurrence. Most local towns seem content to let large trucks do the 'trimming', and it's a rare occurrence when I see any DPW vehicles out trimming branches. The only exceptions are blind corners and intersections where visibility for cars to see oncoming traffic is a problem, and even that goes for a couple of years without maintenance sometimes. I'm sure Frank and John B's experience of their municipalities performing regular maintenance is true, but that doesn't happen everywhere. Gee, I grew up in New England and I don't remember any secondary roads that were cow paths or even logging roads :-) ... In fact we lived on a dirt, secondary road, and there wasn't any low branches and overhanging vegetation. Big tall maple and elm trees, yes, but no bushes. http://www.happyvermont.com/2015/10/...ds-to-explore/ Although the road pictured is actually in the next state it is typical of the "secondary" roads I grew up on. Note the lack of overhanging branches. All I can tell you john, is that avoiding low branches and bushes is a daily occurrence on my rides. Like frank, just because it isn't your experience doesn't mean it's no one's experience. So, please tell us more about your experience! I've been talking about riding on normal public roads and (rarely) on normally designed paved multi-use paths. These seem to all meet the FHWA standard for 14 feet road clearance and 8 foot path clearance. A few ancient railroad underpasses at the edge of my extensive riding area have warning signs for trucks, but those say things like "Clearance 10 ft 8 in". https://goo.gl/maps/Vk1Pfepvp7xrLcGD8 Woodland paths are a different matter entirely. Where are you riding that you daily have to duck under branches that would hit your head? And are you riding a normal height bicycle? Do you have photos? -- - Frank Krygowski |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
On 10/14/2019 11:06 AM, sms wrote:
On 10/14/2019 7:23 AM, jbeattie wrote: snip Although low hanging branches are very rare in most urban settings and certainly notÂ* a justification for retina burning mega lights on city streets and in bicycle facilities.Â* What is needed is a true low-beam/high-beam for bikes used in urban settings -- and maybe even a pulsing secondary light or something to distinguish the bike from cars or fixed light sources on buildings. I would/do use the high beam on the trail sections of my commute or particularly dark sections where tree attacks might be expected. There have been such bicycle lights in the past. They didn't succeed. Either too complicated or too expensive. Which is direct proof that upward beams are NOT essential, as Mayor Scharf has claimed. The reality is that a single light mounted on your handlebar can properly illuminate the road, as well as having a beam that illuminates slightly up so you can see street signs and branches, without blinding other users. Precisely correct! I have those on various bikes. The best examples are our Busch & Muller Cyo headlamps. They are StVZO compliant, they illuminate the road evenly and extremely well, they light up stop signs nearly a quarter mile away, they don't blind oncoming motorists or cyclists, and mine did better than my friend's headlight on our recent nighttime MUP ride, to show us the one leaning tree that could have caused a problem. (That leaning tree was the first example of such a hazard in the 20+ years that trail has existed.) Personally, I don't see the need for the "mega-lumen" lights that some people advocate, at least for on-road use. Even a light with only 1200 lumens is sufficient for on-road use. Proper optics is the key to a good bicycle light, it makes no sense to just do mega-lumens without proper optics. I'll claim another rare chance to agree with Mayor Scharf. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
On 10/14/2019 10:41 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
I did a 75 mile ride yesterday with 3500 feet of climbing. While riding down a main street I was concentrating on missing potholes and was struck so hard by an overhanging branch that I was almost knocked off of my bike. Without that helmet on I would no doubt have been nearly knocked unconscious. And I was only riding about 14 mph. Got a photo? Got an address? You're talking about a stout branch hanging less than six feet over a main street, which is a VERY rare occurrence and typically corrected very quickly, for reasons that _should_ be obvious. You were riding in daylight, I assume, and you didn't notice it, which has to be even more rare. And this happened during the exact time that the issue was being discussed on this tiny discussion group, which is also quite a coincidence. You've multiplied three infinitesmals, and still come up with a perfect example? Sorry, dude, without a photo I'm not prepared to believe that. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
|
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
|
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
|
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Where "Safety Inflation" leads
On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 09:50:45 -0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote: John B. wrote: On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 03:39:47 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:49:27 -0000 (UTC), Duane wrote: John B. wrote: On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:25:45 -0700, sms wrote: On 10/12/2019 9:57 AM, jbeattie wrote: snip Some years are better than other with sweeping, but generally speaking, he segregated facilities don't get swept -- or they get swept very infrequently. This is North Portland, but typical: https://bikeportland.org/wp-content/...3-1200x838.jpg Wait until those maples dump all their leaves. Adjacent landowners and landscapers love to blow leaves into facilities, too -- segregated or not. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/10698131385/ Our street-sweeping is contracted out. If a resident notifies us about a problem with a street not being cleaned our public works department takes care of the problem Segregated bicycle facilities require different equipment since the large sweepers can't drive down the protected bike lanes. If it costs a little more money to keep the protected bicycle facilities free of debris then that's a cost that has to be paid. The City also does tree trimming, in fact I need to call about a tree that's hanging low over the shoulder of a road I ride on frequently and that I have to duck to get under. Sadly, we don't have panel trucks driving right next to the curb to knock down low-hanging branches (someone on r.b.t. once insisted that there was no need for lights to illuminate a little up so a cyclists could see low-hanging branches because trucks would knock such branches down, writing "Many small trucks exceed seven feet. One or two trucks driving down a lane will take out any branches hazardous to any cyclist"). What? Do you live in a jungle? I ask as I live in a tropical country where things seem to grow overnight and still we don't seem to have problems with tree branches overhanging roads. Yes, I often see, particularly in Bangkok strangely enough, teams of men trimming branches that overhang electric and telephone wires I can only assume that the utilities and highway folks in sleepy old Thailand must be more alert than those in The Richest Country in the World as they seem, here, to cut tree branches before they become a problem. -- cheers, John B. He?s not talking about trees overhanging roads. He?s talking about trees overhanging bike paths. And of course this is an issue. Ah, I see. But of course we don't have bike paths here, as part of the highway system, so of course it isn't an issue here :-) -- cheers, John B. Of course. Though I don?t know what the highway system has to do with anything. Well, I didn't know how else to describe the system of routes that one can use for vehicles transporting goods and people. Where one can, of course, ride a bicycle. -- cheers, John B. Let me rephrase. I don’t know what the highway system has to do with bike paths needing trees to be trimmed. Well, O.K. we'll use your terms. Pick one to describe the network of roads, streets, lanes, highways, toll roads and all the other designated places to drive a wheeled vehicle, that exist in a country? -- cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Blackfriars cyclist safety debate 'evaded by Tories'" | Doug[_12_] | UK | 11 | September 27th 11 12:10 PM |
"Blackfriars cyclist safety debate 'evaded by Tories'" | Doug[_10_] | UK | 14 | June 11th 11 04:22 AM |
"Cycle safety mirrors to be mounted to London’s traffic lights" | Doug[_10_] | UK | 7 | June 28th 10 08:03 PM |
"Biking off-road leads to trail erosion and tree root damage" | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 2 | June 30th 07 02:21 AM |
"Biking off-road leads to trail erosion and tree root damage" | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 1 | June 29th 07 05:23 PM |