Self Driving Vehicles

On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 3:30:11 PM UTC, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2019 09:23:21 UTC-5, Duane wrote:
wrote:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 12:17:16 AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:


There are times, more often than not actually, when I ride
lane center. There are other times and other places where
that's ridiculous and possibly suicidal.


That is just what I and most people do: let it depend on the situation. I
often ride a 3 km stretch of a narrow road. At the end of the road there
is a company that harvest crops for the farmers so once in a while I
encounter big harvest machines or tractors on that narrow road.:

https://tinyurl.com/wxnzcj6

I take the lane if necessary but I gladly make room when I can hop on a
drive way of a house/farm to let him pass. I don't like the sound of a
roaring big engine behind me for the whole stretch. It is just an
example. This 'negotiation' happens a dozen times every ride. Every situation is different.

Lou


Although I agree with you completely any answer that remotely resembles “it
depends� will likely get a rebuke from the fanatics.

Strange since it’s likely the most correct response.

It's quite interesting how this has morphed from Frank's earlier statement that he deliberately moved further into a lane and then deliberately slowed down in order to impede a driver who had done something Frank didn't like. Nowhere in that post did Frank mention anything about how narrow the lane he took was or anything else he's since posted in order to justify his behaviour. Now he's arguing solely to promote his take the lane stance.

Cheers

Franki-boy was trolling you, Ridesalot, so as to put himself centre-stage.

On whose authority do I say that? Why, on Franki-boy's, of course. When I arrived here and mentioned in passing that I did over the ton (100kph/62mph) on my bike, Krygowski accused me of being a troll for leaving off the fact that it was behind a truck, and made a monstrous nastiness about it -- I'm still kicking pieces off his fat arse for it. I just didn't know cyclists are sensitive about "truck assisted" speed. Now Krygowski is doing the thing he accused me of to you, withholding relevant information so there will be an argument with him at the centre of it.

So why don't you call Franki-boy a troll?

Andre Jute
Fair's fair

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 10:45:41 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 12/28/2019 9:23 AM, Duane wrote:
wrote:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 12:17:16 AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:


There are times, more often than not actually, when I ride lane
center. There are other times and other places where that's
ridiculous and possibly suicidal.


That is just what I and most people do: let it depend on the
situation. I often ride a 3 km stretch of a narrow road. At the end of
the road there is a company that harvest crops for the farmers so once
in a while I encounter big harvest machines or tractors on that narrow
road.:

https://tinyurl.com/wxnzcj6

I take the lane if necessary but I gladly make room when I can hop on
a drive way of a house/farm to let him pass. I don't like the sound of
a roaring big engine behind me for the whole stretch. It is just an
example. This 'negotiation' happens a dozen times every ride. Every
situation is different.

Lou


Although I agree with you completely any answer that remotely resembles
“it depends� will likely get a rebuke from the fanatics.

Oh, bull****! You cannot possibly point to a post in this discussion
where anyone said a cyclist must always do one precise thing no matter
the circumstances.

some people re yet to meet logging trucks on a narrow windy cliffside
track.

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 00:52:28 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:19:07 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:


You are correct, in essence, although as I pointed out, even the Holy
Bible was later, perhaps 2,000 years later, was determined to be
incorrect, in part.

Really? How do they determine what IS correct? Is religion not all about belief?

Lou


The reference was to the verses that were used for "proof" that the
sun went around the earth. This theory was reversed in the early
1800's so I assume that the verses changed in interpretation.

As for your question, certainly religion is about belief but any of
the major religions have a history which is commonly held to be, in a
sense, a part of the religion.The Jewish "Passover" for example is
said to reference the period that the Israelites were held in Egypt.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 07:26:40 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, 27 December 2019 20:06:06 UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/27/2019 5:32 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/27/2019 6:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/27/2019 3:15 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have
people who argue against it.


No one is 'against education' but many people see a line
between actual education and indoctrination. Madrassas do
their version of 'education' to inflict on the earth more
jihadis. Defend that!

Especially as to riding bicycles on public roads, many
parse situational technique from categorical dogma.

Again, I think one needs to take the course to know what's
in it. I'm not aware of any cycling course that says "Take
the lane ALL THE TIME, no matter what." I don't do that, and
never said I did.

There are times, more often than not actually, when I ride
lane center. There are other times and other places where
that's ridiculous and possibly suicidal.

And so, yet again: 10 foot lane, 8.5 foot truck. What do
_you_ do?



Bail out, jump up over the curb.
I have plenty enough steel bits in my bones already.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Frank will call you a scardy cat and say you shouldn't be riding on the roads in traffic if you're that scared. At least that's what he told me when I bailed off a road because three 18-wheelers were bearing down on me as I approached a very narrow lane bridge, and the third back truck had it's wheels over the fogline and none of the trucks were slowing down.

Cheers

This was essentially my argument with Frank, but he insists that the
right thing to do - he read the book - is to be lane center.

My point would be that it depends on whether it was summer or
winter... assuming that you are a considerate sort of guy. Graves are
just so much easier to dig in the summer time :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:56:17 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 7:39:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
snip?

Given the fact that almost all lanes are (by simple math) too narrow to
safely share, it makes sense to use a position toward center as the
default.

With long sight lines on flat-ish country roads, cars just go around when I'm riding AFRAP. I have the room I need and so do they. When riding in the sticks, sitting in the middle of the road produces closes passes and honking. Why make myself miserable?


And that's even without needing reference to the rest of the typical
examptions. Example from Ohio law: "Conditions that may require riding
away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed
or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it
otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is
too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle
to travel safely side by side within the lane. "

The Oregon law says you can take the lane to avoid "unsafe operation" by a MV in the lane if the lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. It is generally interpreted by ODOT as meaning that you can take the lane to prevent unsafe passing.

With the safe passing law, a car must pass within a "safe distance" (bicycle fall-over distance), and the law expressly allows the vehicle to cross a solid center-line to pass a bike. Assuming a empty road, a car can simply go around, and there is no risk of unsafe passing within the lane, so AFRAP is what you do. That's the ODOT handbook rule.

But like I said, if there is oncoming traffic or a congested second lane -- assuming two travel lanes in the same direction -- then I'll take the lane. I just don't sit in the middle of the lane willy-nilly as a default rule.

Also, there is an express requirement that cyclists follow the "failure to yield" law:

ORS 811.425

A person commits the offense of failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle if the person is driving a vehicle and the person fails to move the person’s vehicle off the main traveled portion of the highway into an area sufficient for safe turnout when:

(a)The driver of the overtaken vehicle is proceeding at a speed less than a speed established in ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation) as prima facie evidence of violation of the basic speed rule;

(b)The driver of the overtaking vehicle is proceeding at a speed in conformity with ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation);

(c)The highway is a two directional, two-lane highway; and

(d)There is no clear lane for passing available to the driver of the overtaking vehicle.

(2)This section does not apply to the driver of a vehicle in a funeral procession.

(3)The offense described in this section, failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle, is a Class B traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §640; 1991 c.482 §16; 1995 c.383 §68; 2001 c.104 §307; 2003 c.819 §15]


On the typical one-lane each way road, you have to pull over to let cars go if there is a twisting or congested lane in the opposite direction. Sorry, but the Officious Cyclist promenading through the countryside with a car -- or ten cars -- stuck behind him would get a ticket. He would also get run-down by some ****ed-off mullet head in a pickup.

Personally, I don't like cars lurking behind me. I pull AFRAP and let them go when it is safe to do so. I have no point to prove.


I don't doubt that there are other sources of good information. But I do
believe that most cyclists never seek out any such information, and
their behavior proves that.

Also, those who take a class will practice things like emergency hazard
avoidance and trickier on-road situations - things like complicated
intersections, freeway ramp merges, and maybe even dealing with some of
the green nonsense Portland sprays on its streets.

Wow, that is totally so next level stuff.

It may not be next level for you. It certainly is for many people. (Can
you really say you don't see cyclists making mistakes?)

Complicated intersection? Are they somehow more complicated for bicycles than for cars? I guess I need to take the class to be able to spot a complicated intersection.

There certainly are intersections that are more complicated than others!
And many that are acceptable to cars are complicated for the typical
cyclist, specifically because the typical cyclist thinks everything must
be done from the far right edge of the road. I can't believe you haven't
observed that behavior.

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have people who
argue against it.

I don't argue against education. I'm just tired of insufferable know-it-alls and ideologues. If it isn't the law, then its just opinion.

Hah! Well, that attitude negates math, science and engineering, doesn't it?

Is it really your opinion that "two feet plus three feet plus 8.5 feet"
is less than twelve feet?

The relevant question is "do I need to take the lane to prevent unsafe passing." Usually not. Cars just go around, crossing the center line. Again, in cramped quarters, I'll take the lane for as long as I need it, which is generally not long.

And, BTW, taking the lane doesn't prevent unsafe passing unless you are dealing with compliant drivers. I've been lane center and gotten passed many times within inches with on-coming traffic on narrow roads. There are many non-compliant drivers -- more in certain areas than others -- which was my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

What I find disturbing is cars passing me on blind turns. I always figured on taking the lane when it was unsafe for cars to pass under any conditions but soon learned that there aren't any conditions when a car won't pass a bicycle.

Drivers will do absolutely anything to pass a bicycle. Well, you can watch it on any highway - cars will speed up to any speed to catch the traffic jam in front of them so this must be the mental conditioning that operates when a driver sees a bicyclist in the distance. On one occasion some driver in a gravel truck saw me approximate a quarter mile in the distance and he knew that there was a railroad overcrossing ahead with only room for one vehicle in each lane. I heard him floorboard the throttle and I jumped on it and getting through the overpass pulled in behind the protection of 12 feet of concrete. That truck case through that slight S bend at perhaps 70 mph and couldn't control the doubles which were whipping all over the road. As luck would have it there were no cars coming from the other direction because it would have been a massive pile-up. So I have no trust at all of cars or trucks and none of the police are going to do anything about it.

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 9:56:56 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:56:17 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 7:39:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
snip?

Given the fact that almost all lanes are (by simple math) too narrow to
safely share, it makes sense to use a position toward center as the
default.

With long sight lines on flat-ish country roads, cars just go around when I'm riding AFRAP. I have the room I need and so do they. When riding in the sticks, sitting in the middle of the road produces closes passes and honking. Why make myself miserable?


And that's even without needing reference to the rest of the typical
examptions. Example from Ohio law: "Conditions that may require riding
away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed
or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it
otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is
too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle
to travel safely side by side within the lane. "

The Oregon law says you can take the lane to avoid "unsafe operation" by a MV in the lane if the lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. It is generally interpreted by ODOT as meaning that you can take the lane to prevent unsafe passing.

With the safe passing law, a car must pass within a "safe distance" (bicycle fall-over distance), and the law expressly allows the vehicle to cross a solid center-line to pass a bike. Assuming a empty road, a car can simply go around, and there is no risk of unsafe passing within the lane, so AFRAP is what you do. That's the ODOT handbook rule.

But like I said, if there is oncoming traffic or a congested second lane -- assuming two travel lanes in the same direction -- then I'll take the lane. I just don't sit in the middle of the lane willy-nilly as a default rule.

Also, there is an express requirement that cyclists follow the "failure to yield" law:

ORS 811.425

A person commits the offense of failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle if the person is driving a vehicle and the person fails to move the person’s vehicle off the main traveled portion of the highway into an area sufficient for safe turnout when:

(a)The driver of the overtaken vehicle is proceeding at a speed less than a speed established in ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation) as prima facie evidence of violation of the basic speed rule;

(b)The driver of the overtaking vehicle is proceeding at a speed in conformity with ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation);

(c)The highway is a two directional, two-lane highway; and

(d)There is no clear lane for passing available to the driver of the overtaking vehicle.

(2)This section does not apply to the driver of a vehicle in a funeral procession.

(3)The offense described in this section, failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle, is a Class B traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §640; 1991 c.482 §16; 1995 c.383 §68; 2001 c.104 §307; 2003 c.819 §15]


On the typical one-lane each way road, you have to pull over to let cars go if there is a twisting or congested lane in the opposite direction. Sorry, but the Officious Cyclist promenading through the countryside with a car -- or ten cars -- stuck behind him would get a ticket. He would also get run-down by some ****ed-off mullet head in a pickup.

Personally, I don't like cars lurking behind me. I pull AFRAP and let them go when it is safe to do so. I have no point to prove.


I don't doubt that there are other sources of good information. But I do
believe that most cyclists never seek out any such information, and
their behavior proves that.

Also, those who take a class will practice things like emergency hazard
avoidance and trickier on-road situations - things like complicated
intersections, freeway ramp merges, and maybe even dealing with some of
the green nonsense Portland sprays on its streets.

Wow, that is totally so next level stuff.

It may not be next level for you. It certainly is for many people. (Can
you really say you don't see cyclists making mistakes?)

Complicated intersection? Are they somehow more complicated for bicycles than for cars? I guess I need to take the class to be able to spot a complicated intersection.

There certainly are intersections that are more complicated than others!
And many that are acceptable to cars are complicated for the typical
cyclist, specifically because the typical cyclist thinks everything must
be done from the far right edge of the road. I can't believe you haven't
observed that behavior.

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have people who
argue against it.

I don't argue against education. I'm just tired of insufferable know-it-alls and ideologues. If it isn't the law, then its just opinion.

Hah! Well, that attitude negates math, science and engineering, doesn't it?

Is it really your opinion that "two feet plus three feet plus 8.5 feet"
is less than twelve feet?

The relevant question is "do I need to take the lane to prevent unsafe passing." Usually not. Cars just go around, crossing the center line. Again, in cramped quarters, I'll take the lane for as long as I need it, which is generally not long.

And, BTW, taking the lane doesn't prevent unsafe passing unless you are dealing with compliant drivers. I've been lane center and gotten passed many times within inches with on-coming traffic on narrow roads. There are many non-compliant drivers -- more in certain areas than others -- which was my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

What I find disturbing is cars passing me on blind turns. I always figured on taking the lane when it was unsafe for cars to pass under any conditions but soon learned that there aren't any conditions when a car won't pass a bicycle.

Taking the lane works with compliant drivers. Ass***** will pass you anywhere, even on blind corners with on-coming traffic. It is truly amazing. Believing you can control traffic in these areas is delusional.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 12/29/2019 1:59 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 9:56:56 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:56:17 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 7:39:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
snip?

Given the fact that almost all lanes are (by simple math) too narrow to
safely share, it makes sense to use a position toward center as the
default.

With long sight lines on flat-ish country roads, cars just go around when I'm riding AFRAP. I have the room I need and so do they. When riding in the sticks, sitting in the middle of the road produces closes passes and honking. Why make myself miserable?


And that's even without needing reference to the rest of the typical
examptions. Example from Ohio law: "Conditions that may require riding
away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed
or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it
otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is
too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle
to travel safely side by side within the lane. "

The Oregon law says you can take the lane to avoid "unsafe operation" by a MV in the lane if the lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. It is generally interpreted by ODOT as meaning that you can take the lane to prevent unsafe passing.

With the safe passing law, a car must pass within a "safe distance" (bicycle fall-over distance), and the law expressly allows the vehicle to cross a solid center-line to pass a bike. Assuming a empty road, a car can simply go around, and there is no risk of unsafe passing within the lane, so AFRAP is what you do. That's the ODOT handbook rule.

But like I said, if there is oncoming traffic or a congested second lane -- assuming two travel lanes in the same direction -- then I'll take the lane. I just don't sit in the middle of the lane willy-nilly as a default rule.

Also, there is an express requirement that cyclists follow the "failure to yield" law:

ORS 811.425

A person commits the offense of failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle if the person is driving a vehicle and the person fails to move the person’s vehicle off the main traveled portion of the highway into an area sufficient for safe turnout when:

(a)The driver of the overtaken vehicle is proceeding at a speed less than a speed established in ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation) as prima facie evidence of violation of the basic speed rule;

(b)The driver of the overtaking vehicle is proceeding at a speed in conformity with ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation);

(c)The highway is a two directional, two-lane highway; and

(d)There is no clear lane for passing available to the driver of the overtaking vehicle.

(2)This section does not apply to the driver of a vehicle in a funeral procession.

(3)The offense described in this section, failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle, is a Class B traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §640; 1991 c.482 §16; 1995 c.383 §68; 2001 c.104 §307; 2003 c.819 §15]


On the typical one-lane each way road, you have to pull over to let cars go if there is a twisting or congested lane in the opposite direction. Sorry, but the Officious Cyclist promenading through the countryside with a car -- or ten cars -- stuck behind him would get a ticket. He would also get run-down by some ****ed-off mullet head in a pickup.

Personally, I don't like cars lurking behind me. I pull AFRAP and let them go when it is safe to do so. I have no point to prove.


I don't doubt that there are other sources of good information. But I do
believe that most cyclists never seek out any such information, and
their behavior proves that.

Also, those who take a class will practice things like emergency hazard
avoidance and trickier on-road situations - things like complicated
intersections, freeway ramp merges, and maybe even dealing with some of
the green nonsense Portland sprays on its streets.

Wow, that is totally so next level stuff.

It may not be next level for you. It certainly is for many people. (Can
you really say you don't see cyclists making mistakes?)

Complicated intersection? Are they somehow more complicated for bicycles than for cars? I guess I need to take the class to be able to spot a complicated intersection.

There certainly are intersections that are more complicated than others!
And many that are acceptable to cars are complicated for the typical
cyclist, specifically because the typical cyclist thinks everything must
be done from the far right edge of the road. I can't believe you haven't
observed that behavior.

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have people who
argue against it.

I don't argue against education. I'm just tired of insufferable know-it-alls and ideologues. If it isn't the law, then its just opinion.

Hah! Well, that attitude negates math, science and engineering, doesn't it?

Is it really your opinion that "two feet plus three feet plus 8.5 feet"
is less than twelve feet?

The relevant question is "do I need to take the lane to prevent unsafe passing." Usually not. Cars just go around, crossing the center line. Again, in cramped quarters, I'll take the lane for as long as I need it, which is generally not long.

And, BTW, taking the lane doesn't prevent unsafe passing unless you are dealing with compliant drivers. I've been lane center and gotten passed many times within inches with on-coming traffic on narrow roads. There are many non-compliant drivers -- more in certain areas than others -- which was my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

What I find disturbing is cars passing me on blind turns. I always figured on taking the lane when it was unsafe for cars to pass under any conditions but soon learned that there aren't any conditions when a car won't pass a bicycle.

Taking the lane works with compliant drivers. Ass***** will pass you anywhere, even on blind corners with on-coming traffic. It is truly amazing. Believing you can control traffic in these areas is delusional.

But is the solution really to ride at far right where they're tempted to
squeeze by with inches to spare, and where you have no room to the right
to dodge them if necessary?

I don't think so.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:31:15 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/29/2019 1:59 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 9:56:56 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:56:17 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 7:39:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
snip?

Given the fact that almost all lanes are (by simple math) too narrow to
safely share, it makes sense to use a position toward center as the
default.

With long sight lines on flat-ish country roads, cars just go around when I'm riding AFRAP. I have the room I need and so do they. When riding in the sticks, sitting in the middle of the road produces closes passes and honking. Why make myself miserable?


And that's even without needing reference to the rest of the typical
examptions. Example from Ohio law: "Conditions that may require riding
away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed
or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it
otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is
too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle
to travel safely side by side within the lane. "

The Oregon law says you can take the lane to avoid "unsafe operation" by a MV in the lane if the lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. It is generally interpreted by ODOT as meaning that you can take the lane to prevent unsafe passing.

With the safe passing law, a car must pass within a "safe distance" (bicycle fall-over distance), and the law expressly allows the vehicle to cross a solid center-line to pass a bike. Assuming a empty road, a car can simply go around, and there is no risk of unsafe passing within the lane, so AFRAP is what you do. That's the ODOT handbook rule.

But like I said, if there is oncoming traffic or a congested second lane -- assuming two travel lanes in the same direction -- then I'll take the lane. I just don't sit in the middle of the lane willy-nilly as a default rule.

Also, there is an express requirement that cyclists follow the "failure to yield" law:

ORS 811.425

A person commits the offense of failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle if the person is driving a vehicle and the person fails to move the person’s vehicle off the main traveled portion of the highway into an area sufficient for safe turnout when:

(a)The driver of the overtaken vehicle is proceeding at a speed less than a speed established in ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation) as prima facie evidence of violation of the basic speed rule;

(b)The driver of the overtaking vehicle is proceeding at a speed in conformity with ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation);

(c)The highway is a two directional, two-lane highway; and

(d)There is no clear lane for passing available to the driver of the overtaking vehicle.

(2)This section does not apply to the driver of a vehicle in a funeral procession.

(3)The offense described in this section, failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle, is a Class B traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §640; 1991 c.482 §16; 1995 c.383 §68; 2001 c.104 §307; 2003 c.819 §15]


On the typical one-lane each way road, you have to pull over to let cars go if there is a twisting or congested lane in the opposite direction. Sorry, but the Officious Cyclist promenading through the countryside with a car -- or ten cars -- stuck behind him would get a ticket. He would also get run-down by some ****ed-off mullet head in a pickup.

Personally, I don't like cars lurking behind me. I pull AFRAP and let them go when it is safe to do so. I have no point to prove.


I don't doubt that there are other sources of good information. But I do
believe that most cyclists never seek out any such information, and
their behavior proves that.

Also, those who take a class will practice things like emergency hazard
avoidance and trickier on-road situations - things like complicated
intersections, freeway ramp merges, and maybe even dealing with some of
the green nonsense Portland sprays on its streets.

Wow, that is totally so next level stuff.

It may not be next level for you. It certainly is for many people. (Can
you really say you don't see cyclists making mistakes?)

Complicated intersection? Are they somehow more complicated for bicycles than for cars? I guess I need to take the class to be able to spot a complicated intersection.

There certainly are intersections that are more complicated than others!
And many that are acceptable to cars are complicated for the typical
cyclist, specifically because the typical cyclist thinks everything must
be done from the far right edge of the road. I can't believe you haven't
observed that behavior.

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have people who
argue against it.

I don't argue against education. I'm just tired of insufferable know-it-alls and ideologues. If it isn't the law, then its just opinion.

Hah! Well, that attitude negates math, science and engineering, doesn't it?

Is it really your opinion that "two feet plus three feet plus 8.5 feet"
is less than twelve feet?

The relevant question is "do I need to take the lane to prevent unsafe passing." Usually not. Cars just go around, crossing the center line. Again, in cramped quarters, I'll take the lane for as long as I need it, which is generally not long.

And, BTW, taking the lane doesn't prevent unsafe passing unless you are dealing with compliant drivers. I've been lane center and gotten passed many times within inches with on-coming traffic on narrow roads. There are many non-compliant drivers -- more in certain areas than others -- which was my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

What I find disturbing is cars passing me on blind turns. I always figured on taking the lane when it was unsafe for cars to pass under any conditions but soon learned that there aren't any conditions when a car won't pass a bicycle.

Taking the lane works with compliant drivers. Ass***** will pass you anywhere, even on blind corners with on-coming traffic. It is truly amazing.. Believing you can control traffic in these areas is delusional.

But is the solution really to ride at far right where they're tempted to
squeeze by with inches to spare, and where you have no room to the right
to dodge them if necessary?

I don't think so.

It might be, if that means the car just drives by rather than squeezing by at any cost. Who knows -- I'm not running double-blind tests up narrow roads with traffic. My consistently bad experience is with the tourist coming out of Crown Point. This modest little climb-out (on a very low traffic day): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMw19VqT8kA From the other direction on a busier day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-ntVIhwCDo Note the tour bus. Just being in the road is practically lane center, so its not like there is much difference between the hallowed Position One and AFRAP, although there are places where you can squeeze over that don't put you at risk of going over cliff. OT, my favorite cliff road is directly on the other side of the river at Cape Horn. https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/me...rn-lookout.jpg

-- Jay Beattie.

On 12/29/2019 5:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:31:15 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/29/2019 1:59 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 9:56:56 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:56:17 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 7:39:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
snip?

Given the fact that almost all lanes are (by simple math) too narrow to
safely share, it makes sense to use a position toward center as the
default.

With long sight lines on flat-ish country roads, cars just go around when I'm riding AFRAP. I have the room I need and so do they. When riding in the sticks, sitting in the middle of the road produces closes passes and honking. Why make myself miserable?


And that's even without needing reference to the rest of the typical
examptions. Example from Ohio law: "Conditions that may require riding
away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed
or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it
otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is
too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle
to travel safely side by side within the lane. "

The Oregon law says you can take the lane to avoid "unsafe operation" by a MV in the lane if the lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. It is generally interpreted by ODOT as meaning that you can take the lane to prevent unsafe passing.

With the safe passing law, a car must pass within a "safe distance" (bicycle fall-over distance), and the law expressly allows the vehicle to cross a solid center-line to pass a bike. Assuming a empty road, a car can simply go around, and there is no risk of unsafe passing within the lane, so AFRAP is what you do. That's the ODOT handbook rule.

But like I said, if there is oncoming traffic or a congested second lane -- assuming two travel lanes in the same direction -- then I'll take the lane. I just don't sit in the middle of the lane willy-nilly as a default rule.

Also, there is an express requirement that cyclists follow the "failure to yield" law:

ORS 811.425

A person commits the offense of failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle if the person is driving a vehicle and the person fails to move the person’s vehicle off the main traveled portion of the highway into an area sufficient for safe turnout when:

(a)The driver of the overtaken vehicle is proceeding at a speed less than a speed established in ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation) as prima facie evidence of violation of the basic speed rule;

(b)The driver of the overtaking vehicle is proceeding at a speed in conformity with ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation);

(c)The highway is a two directional, two-lane highway; and

(d)There is no clear lane for passing available to the driver of the overtaking vehicle.

(2)This section does not apply to the driver of a vehicle in a funeral procession.

(3)The offense described in this section, failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle, is a Class B traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §640; 1991 c.482 §16; 1995 c.383 §68; 2001 c.104 §307; 2003 c.819 §15]


On the typical one-lane each way road, you have to pull over to let cars go if there is a twisting or congested lane in the opposite direction. Sorry, but the Officious Cyclist promenading through the countryside with a car -- or ten cars -- stuck behind him would get a ticket. He would also get run-down by some ****ed-off mullet head in a pickup.

Personally, I don't like cars lurking behind me. I pull AFRAP and let them go when it is safe to do so. I have no point to prove.


I don't doubt that there are other sources of good information. But I do
believe that most cyclists never seek out any such information, and
their behavior proves that.

Also, those who take a class will practice things like emergency hazard
avoidance and trickier on-road situations - things like complicated
intersections, freeway ramp merges, and maybe even dealing with some of
the green nonsense Portland sprays on its streets.

Wow, that is totally so next level stuff.

It may not be next level for you. It certainly is for many people. (Can
you really say you don't see cyclists making mistakes?)

Complicated intersection? Are they somehow more complicated for bicycles than for cars? I guess I need to take the class to be able to spot a complicated intersection.

There certainly are intersections that are more complicated than others!
And many that are acceptable to cars are complicated for the typical
cyclist, specifically because the typical cyclist thinks everything must
be done from the far right edge of the road. I can't believe you haven't
observed that behavior.

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have people who
argue against it.

I don't argue against education. I'm just tired of insufferable know-it-alls and ideologues. If it isn't the law, then its just opinion.

Hah! Well, that attitude negates math, science and engineering, doesn't it?

Is it really your opinion that "two feet plus three feet plus 8.5 feet"
is less than twelve feet?

The relevant question is "do I need to take the lane to prevent unsafe passing." Usually not. Cars just go around, crossing the center line. Again, in cramped quarters, I'll take the lane for as long as I need it, which is generally not long.

And, BTW, taking the lane doesn't prevent unsafe passing unless you are dealing with compliant drivers. I've been lane center and gotten passed many times within inches with on-coming traffic on narrow roads. There are many non-compliant drivers -- more in certain areas than others -- which was my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

What I find disturbing is cars passing me on blind turns. I always figured on taking the lane when it was unsafe for cars to pass under any conditions but soon learned that there aren't any conditions when a car won't pass a bicycle.

Taking the lane works with compliant drivers. Ass***** will pass you anywhere, even on blind corners with on-coming traffic. It is truly amazing. Believing you can control traffic in these areas is delusional.

But is the solution really to ride at far right where they're tempted to
squeeze by with inches to spare, and where you have no room to the right
to dodge them if necessary?

I don't think so.

It might be, if that means the car just drives by rather than squeezing by at any cost. Who knows -- I'm not running double-blind tests up narrow roads with traffic. My consistently bad experience is with the tourist coming out of Crown Point. This modest little climb-out (on a very low traffic day): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMw19VqT8kA From the other direction on a busier day: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-ntVIhwCDo Note the tour bus. Just being in the road is practically lane center, so its not like there is much difference between the hallowed Position One and AFRAP...

Whether there's a difference depends largely on the definition of "P" -
that is, "practicable." If you ride, as you showed with a photo, about
two or three feet from the right edge, then I agree there's not much
difference.

But I've seen countless cyclists who would, on that road, skim along
within a few inches of the right edge. That does tempt motorists to
squeeze past.

I'd ride lane center. If a car slowed behind me when it was clear to
pass, I'd probably wave them around. On some roads I might shift
rightward for emphasis, but I don't think I would on that one, until the
pass was already in progress. That's because even when they're fully in
the left lane, a passing vehicle could be pretty close.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 10:59:40 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 9:56:56 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:56:17 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 7:39:43 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
snip?

Given the fact that almost all lanes are (by simple math) too narrow to
safely share, it makes sense to use a position toward center as the
default.

With long sight lines on flat-ish country roads, cars just go around when I'm riding AFRAP. I have the room I need and so do they. When riding in the sticks, sitting in the middle of the road produces closes passes and honking. Why make myself miserable?


And that's even without needing reference to the rest of the typical
examptions. Example from Ohio law: "Conditions that may require riding
away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed
or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it
otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is
too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle
to travel safely side by side within the lane. "

The Oregon law says you can take the lane to avoid "unsafe operation" by a MV in the lane if the lane is too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side by side. It is generally interpreted by ODOT as meaning that you can take the lane to prevent unsafe passing.

With the safe passing law, a car must pass within a "safe distance" (bicycle fall-over distance), and the law expressly allows the vehicle to cross a solid center-line to pass a bike. Assuming a empty road, a car can simply go around, and there is no risk of unsafe passing within the lane, so AFRAP is what you do. That's the ODOT handbook rule.

But like I said, if there is oncoming traffic or a congested second lane -- assuming two travel lanes in the same direction -- then I'll take the lane. I just don't sit in the middle of the lane willy-nilly as a default rule.

Also, there is an express requirement that cyclists follow the "failure to yield" law:

ORS 811.425

A person commits the offense of failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle if the person is driving a vehicle and the person fails to move the person’s vehicle off the main traveled portion of the highway into an area sufficient for safe turnout when:

(a)The driver of the overtaken vehicle is proceeding at a speed less than a speed established in ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation) as prima facie evidence of violation of the basic speed rule;

(b)The driver of the overtaking vehicle is proceeding at a speed in conformity with ORS 811.105 (Speeds that are evidence of basic rule violation);

(c)The highway is a two directional, two-lane highway; and

(d)There is no clear lane for passing available to the driver of the overtaking vehicle.

(2)This section does not apply to the driver of a vehicle in a funeral procession.

(3)The offense described in this section, failure of a slower driver to yield to overtaking vehicle, is a Class B traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §640; 1991 c.482 §16; 1995 c.383 §68; 2001 c.104 §307; 2003 c.819 §15]


On the typical one-lane each way road, you have to pull over to let cars go if there is a twisting or congested lane in the opposite direction. Sorry, but the Officious Cyclist promenading through the countryside with a car -- or ten cars -- stuck behind him would get a ticket. He would also get run-down by some ****ed-off mullet head in a pickup.

Personally, I don't like cars lurking behind me. I pull AFRAP and let them go when it is safe to do so. I have no point to prove.


I don't doubt that there are other sources of good information. But I do
believe that most cyclists never seek out any such information, and
their behavior proves that.

Also, those who take a class will practice things like emergency hazard
avoidance and trickier on-road situations - things like complicated
intersections, freeway ramp merges, and maybe even dealing with some of
the green nonsense Portland sprays on its streets.

Wow, that is totally so next level stuff.

It may not be next level for you. It certainly is for many people. (Can
you really say you don't see cyclists making mistakes?)

Complicated intersection? Are they somehow more complicated for bicycles than for cars? I guess I need to take the class to be able to spot a complicated intersection.

There certainly are intersections that are more complicated than others!
And many that are acceptable to cars are complicated for the typical
cyclist, specifically because the typical cyclist thinks everything must
be done from the far right edge of the road. I can't believe you haven't
observed that behavior.

I'm adamantly pro-education. I think it's weird that we have people who
argue against it.

I don't argue against education. I'm just tired of insufferable know-it-alls and ideologues. If it isn't the law, then its just opinion.

Hah! Well, that attitude negates math, science and engineering, doesn't it?

Is it really your opinion that "two feet plus three feet plus 8.5 feet"
is less than twelve feet?

The relevant question is "do I need to take the lane to prevent unsafe passing." Usually not. Cars just go around, crossing the center line. Again, in cramped quarters, I'll take the lane for as long as I need it, which is generally not long.

And, BTW, taking the lane doesn't prevent unsafe passing unless you are dealing with compliant drivers. I've been lane center and gotten passed many times within inches with on-coming traffic on narrow roads. There are many non-compliant drivers -- more in certain areas than others -- which was my point.

-- Jay Beattie.

What I find disturbing is cars passing me on blind turns. I always figured on taking the lane when it was unsafe for cars to pass under any conditions but soon learned that there aren't any conditions when a car won't pass a bicycle.

Taking the lane works with compliant drivers. Ass***** will pass you anywhere, even on blind corners with on-coming traffic. It is truly amazing. Believing you can control traffic in these areas is delusional.

-- Jay Beattie.

There are several areas in which a bike can descend faster than cars and I can pull out as much as several hundred yards. But as soon as the curves lighten up a car will slam the throttle down to catch and pass no matter who it endangers. Bringing my wife back from radiation treatments a little while ago I watched these maniacs doing this in the rain. It was clear behind me and yet some ass would pass me and pull violently over in front of me to pull over yet another lane cutting someone else off.

Rather than snivel about lack of funds simply enforcing driving laws would make the state rich.