facing the traffic old laws

On Oct 17, 2:26*pm, Peter Cole wrote:


I think there was plenty of advice (and still is) to walk or run facing
traffic.

Which makes sense. The main difference, of course, is that a
pedestrian can hop three feet sideways almost instantaneously.
Cyclists can't.

My impression is that novice cyclists sometimes just carry this
advice over to cycling. For those who ride at walking/jogging speed it
doesn't seem to make much difference.

It does make a difference! Riding facing traffic is a leading cause
of serious car/bike crashes!

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:26 pm, Peter Cole wrote:

I think there was plenty of advice (and still is) to walk or run facing
traffic.

Which makes sense. The main difference, of course, is that a
pedestrian can hop three feet sideways almost instantaneously.
Cyclists can't.

My impression is that novice cyclists sometimes just carry this
advice over to cycling. For those who ride at walking/jogging speed it
doesn't seem to make much difference.

It does make a difference! Riding facing traffic is a leading cause
of serious car/bike crashes!

- Frank Krygowski

I think the correlation/causality issue might be very difficult to prove.

On 2009-10-18, Peter Cole wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

It does make a difference! Riding facing traffic is a leading cause
of serious car/bike crashes!

I think the correlation/causality issue might be very difficult to prove.

Perhaps so, but due to the higher collision velocity of a head-on with a
wrong-way cyclist, any accident that does occur is likely to be more
serious.

--

-John )

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:29:09 -0500, "Pat" wrote:

You wouldn't have said that if you had been in my car early the other
morning, in the FOG, and all of a sudden there was a cyclist coming straight
at me in my lane!

How about a peloton of marathon runners? No fog, and it was twenty or
thirty years ago, but I'm still shaking.

There is quite a lot of very emphatic advice that walkers and runners
face traffic, and it's almost as daft as riding into traffic. Once I
stepped onto the shoulder of a road to walk around the windbreak
between my house and the high school, and a deputy stopped to inform
me that I must cross a state road twice rather than walk ten feet near
the right edge!

I walk on the left when I plan to YIELD RIGHT OF WAY TO ABSOLUTELY
EVERYTHING THAT COMES ALONG.

Some people can't get out of the road, some roads nobody can get out
of, and some runners refuse to break their rhythm no matter what.
Whether by will or necessity, if you are going to throw all
responsibility for your non-squashed condition onto drivers, you
should be walking, running, or hobbling *with* the traffic, to give
each driver an extra split second to see and avoid you.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net

Joy Beeson writes:

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:29:09 -0500, "Pat" wrote:

You wouldn't have said that if you had been in my car early the other
morning, in the FOG, and all of a sudden there was a cyclist coming straight
at me in my lane!

How about a peloton of marathon runners? No fog, and it was twenty or
thirty years ago, but I'm still shaking.

There is quite a lot of very emphatic advice that walkers and runners
face traffic, and it's almost as daft as riding into traffic. Once I

It makes perfect sense to walk into traffic.

Humans are very sensitive to eye contact.

You can see the oncoming traffic.

As a walker you are close enough to the kerb/hedge.

You are more agile than a cyclist.

John Thompson wrote:
On 2009-10-18, Peter Cole wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:
It does make a difference! Riding facing traffic is a leading cause
of serious car/bike crashes!

I think the correlation/causality issue might be very difficult to prove.

Perhaps so, but due to the higher collision velocity of a head-on with a
wrong-way cyclist, any accident that does occur is likely to be more
serious.


Yes, obviously. My point is that the advice is often given to runners,
and slow bicyclists are pretty equivalent in speed, at least almost all
the wrong-way riders I've seen ride very slowly. My guess is that the
wrong-way cyclists don't come from the high-skill, high-experience end
of the spectrum.

"Joy Beeson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:29:09 -0500, "Pat"
wrote:

You wouldn't have said that if you had been in my car early the
other
morning, in the FOG, and all of a sudden there was a cyclist
coming straight
at me in my lane!

How about a peloton of marathon runners? No fog, and it was twenty
or
thirty years ago, but I'm still shaking.

It was nearly sixty years ago here in Britain, and it wasn't marathon
runners, it was a column of marching sea cadets, at night, that had a
car plough into them. Several were killed, and more injured. After
the subsequent enquiry and so forth the existing "face traffic" rule
in Britain's "Highway Code" was changed. It now reads:

Rule 2 If there is no pavement [i.e. sidewalk] keep to the right
[Britain drives on the left] -hand side of the road so that you can
see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and

*be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in
poor light

*keep close to the side of the road

It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend
so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross
back after the bend

Rule 5 Organised walks. large groups of people walking together
should use a pavement if available; if one is not they should keep to
the left. Look-outs should be positioned at the front and back of
the group, and they should wear fluorescent clothes in daylight and
reflective clothes in the dark. At night the look-out in front
should show a white light and the one at the back a red light.
People on the outside of large groups should also carry lights and
wear reflective clothing.

Jeremy Parker

On Oct 19, 8:00*am, Peter Cole wrote:
My point is that the advice is often given to runners,
and slow bicyclists are pretty equivalent in speed, at least almost all
the wrong-way riders I've seen ride very slowly. My guess is that the
wrong-way cyclists don't come from the high-skill, high-experience end
of the spectrum.

In general, a runner (even one moving at 15 mph) is much more agile
and maneuverable than a cyclist, particularly a novice cyclist. Any
middle school football kid can cut left far faster than I can do it on
my bike. And the kinds of people who ride bikes at - what? - 10 mph
are far less capable of emergency maneuvers than I am. They can't
sidestep to avoid a collision, so they should not be permitted to ride
facing traffic.

Also, keep in mind that the most common crash resulting from wrong way
riding involves a driver pulling out, making a right turn exit from a
side street or parking lot. Those drivers typically look to their
left, not right, because nobody should be approaching above walking
speed from the right. In that scenario, the cyclist is right in front
of the car when it pulls out. There's not much the cyclist can do at
that point.

I think it's bad policy to give any legitimacy to wrong-way riding.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Oct 19, 8:00 am, Peter Cole wrote:
My point is that the advice is often given to runners,
and slow bicyclists are pretty equivalent in speed, at least almost all
the wrong-way riders I've seen ride very slowly. My guess is that the
wrong-way cyclists don't come from the high-skill, high-experience end
of the spectrum.

In general, a runner (even one moving at 15 mph) is much more agile
and maneuverable than a cyclist, particularly a novice cyclist. Any
middle school football kid can cut left far faster than I can do it on
my bike. And the kinds of people who ride bikes at - what? - 10 mph
are far less capable of emergency maneuvers than I am. They can't
sidestep to avoid a collision, so they should not be permitted to ride
facing traffic.

Also, keep in mind that the most common crash resulting from wrong way
riding involves a driver pulling out, making a right turn exit from a
side street or parking lot. Those drivers typically look to their
left, not right, because nobody should be approaching above walking
speed from the right. In that scenario, the cyclist is right in front
of the car when it pulls out. There's not much the cyclist can do at
that point.

I think it's bad policy to give any legitimacy to wrong-way riding.

- Frank Krygowski

I agree with the hazards. I just feel that they're roughly the same. I'm
not attempting to give anything legitimacy, the very idea of that makes
me laugh.

....... keep in mind that the most common crash resulting from wrong way
riding involves a driver pulling out, making a right turn exit from a
side street or parking lot. *Those drivers typically look to their
left, not right, because nobody should be approaching above walking
speed from the right. *In that scenario, the cyclist is right in front
of the car when it pulls out. *There's not much the cyclist can do at
that point.

I think it's bad policy to give any legitimacy to wrong-way riding.

- Frank Krygowski

I agree and then some. Across the street from the Milwaukee Art
Museum, a parking lot exit crosses the Oak Leaf recreation path as it
heads north from downtown. The path is parallel to Lincoln Memorial
Drive, on which the exiting traffic is turning, and this parking lot
driveway is the last grade crossing for 5 miles. The light is usually
red for those exiting the lot, and the bike path" "walk" light is
usually on. Nevertheless, right turning cars notoriously look only to
the left, planning to turn right as soon as the right lane is clear of
southbound auto traffic, and are usually oblivious to northbound
bikes on the recreation trail. It's a real hazard that I've learned
to treat with the greatest of respect, notwithstanding my annoyance
with the inattentive auto drivers. At least in that situation, the
drivers ought to be aware of the recreation trail. For bikes going
the wrong way on the traffic lane, the hazard is all the greater.