Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

On Dec 18, 2:04*pm, Michael Press wrote:
In article ,
*Phil W Lee wrote:

You mean you stay out in the lane until you are sure they've seen you,
then move over to allow them to pass as soon as it is safe?
It looks to me like a load of people in furious agreement here, but
using different descriptions for similar behaviour.

I've been thinking the same thing.

I think that may be the case with some, including Robert. That's why
I asked the question about being passed by an 8.5' truck in a 10'
lane.

To my surprise, some people were very resistant to saying they would
ride away from the road edge.

And just for the record, not long ago I rode with one ex-racer and
watched him timidly skim the pavement edge in that exact situation,
and on a downhill! No curb that time - just a nasty ragged drop of an
inch or two, down to a bad gravel shoulder.

Some people really don't understand this idea.

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 18, 2:37 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I think that may be the case with some, including Robert. That's why
I asked the question about being passed by an 8.5' truck in a 10'
lane.

To my surprise, some people were very resistant to saying they would
ride away from the road edge.

It Depends. On a narrow twisty road like that described by Jay
Beattie, with blind corners, I might be over at the edge to start
with. "Timidly" -- hell yeah, in that situation.

On Dec 18, 1:56*pm, RobertH wrote:
On Dec 18, 2:37 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I think that may be the case with some, including Robert. *That's why
I asked the question about being passed by an 8.5' truck in a 10'
lane.

To my surprise, some people were very resistant to saying they would
ride away from the road edge.

It Depends. On a narrow twisty road like that described by Jay
Beattie, with blind corners, I might be over at the edge to start
with. "Timidly" -- hell yeah, in that situation.

We don't have too many cliffs -- so if you miss a down hill turn, you
mostly end up in brambles or a forest -- or someone's front yard.
This is part of my commute home over broken cement roads.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leecommadennis/2740956250/ I definitely
control the traffic -- except the cars headed straight at me. It gets
steeper and more broken up about two hundred yards away -- I crashed
and broke a couple ribs there maybe six years ago.
I'm more likely to go off a cliff on my way skiing.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lucasd/5202388483/ -- Jay Beattie.

On 12/18/2010 1:21 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Dec 18, 9:18 am, Peter wrote:

I've managed to get this far in life without a single surgery, even
minor. I decided that rather giving up on ice biking, I'd just get a
couple of sets of studs (on& off road). So far, so good. The elbow
doesn't bother me unless I put pressure on one exact spot (then it feels
like an ice pick), I can live with it, but even just the clothes I've
wrecked in ice falls would have paid for studded tires...- Hide quoted text -

I got all the way to 50 years old, and then it was downhill from there
-- although my surgeries were from skiing and not bicycling, unless
you consider stitches surgery. Anyway, I was pondering all this lane
controlling stuff on my various commutes last week and realized that
the biggest risk for me on a bike has little to do with cars. Riding
at night in the rain with inches of standing water covering god-knows-
what, I realize that I can't see a f****** thing, and that I am riding
by braille. Now, throw in cars and that complicates things, but there
are many times when conditions alone are the real risk -- like unseen
ice, etc. I was riding to work probably 15 years ago, set in to a
corner and realized I was on ice and was going down, and in that
moment, I though "I'm too old for this." That was years before going
down on ice and driving my frameless glasses through my face and
spending the day at a plastic surgeon. Ice can be a killer. Broken
pavement in the dark can be a killer. I would be far happier
controlling the weather than controlling a few cars promendading at
12mph down a city street. I'm going to control other bikes!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/2902451124/

He has the soul patch of power!

Standing water in the dark is pretty bad, you never know what lurks
beneath the surface. I've done many all night rides in the rain on
unfamiliar roads (brevets). The trick I learned was to ride on the fog
line, and if it disappeared it often indicated the pavement had, too. If
no fog line, I'd often use the median stripe.

Black ice is totally undetectable, studs are the only solution.

On Dec 18, 11:12 am, Phil W Lee wrote:

I would want a lot more information on how that research was collected
and classified, particularly establishing at which point does a too
close pass becomes a run down from behind...[...]

It is probably true that some of the failed passes were misclassified
as hits from behind. It is also probably true that some of the
incidents classified as failed passes were really incidents where the
driver didn't notice the cyclist at all, and just barely missed
hitting them full on. In the end it's probably a wash. In any case,
Type 13 hits from behind are so much more prevalent than the Type 16
failed passes that even if a substantial portion of them were
misclassified it probably still wouldn't change the overall picture
much.


Whether the cyclist is seen depends on the person doing
the seeing, ultimately. You can not, through the magical powers of
lane positioning alone, reach into the car and make the driver look at
you instead of the Egg McMuffin they're trying to eat. Can you change
the odds? Sure, somewhat.

A considerable amount. You only need to compare accident rates of
experienced and inexperienced riders to see that. [...]

Hold on there. There is no evidence that correlates experience with
lane position, and no evidence that correlates differences of a few
feet in lane position with visibility. In the absence of evidence, all
you have is the unsupported assertion that a cyclist can change their
likelihood of being noticed by an approaching driver "a considerable
amount" just by altering their lane position a small amount. I don't
buy it, to put it mildly.

There is no evidence to support the core VC assertions about lane
position and visibility, and no evidence to justify VC's hypocritical
rearward fixation on "dangerous passes." There is however plenty of
evidence showing that the visibility-enhancing powers of assertive
lane position are highly fallible.

On Dec 18, 10:33 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:


And in all those years, your respect in the cycling community is still
minimal. Get over it. Forester's and Franklin's legacies will be
here 100 years from now. You'll be lucky to make an obscure footnote.

Ouch! Don't taze me bro!

I am comfortable with being an obscure footnote. Footnotes are my
favorite part. Although, if my books outsell Franklin and Forester
combined -- not hard to do -- you might recalibrate your thoughts on
who is or is not a footnote.

You may not realize that outside your various groups and listservs, in
the wider 'cycling community,' Vehicular Cycling ideology is wildly
unpopular, so much so that anything associated with it is reflexively
attacked by the new breed of earnest (and perhaps equally clueless)
planners and advocates. It's become more of a laughing stock than
anything else, which is a real shame. That's not my fault, you guys
did that all by yourselves.

On Dec 18, 10:33*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

And in all those years, your respect in the cycling community is still
minimal. *Get over it. *Forester's and Franklin's legacies will be
here 100 years from now. *You'll be lucky to make an obscure footnote.
- Frank "OAFAAF" Krygowski

Krygowski is on track to do for Youngstown State what Fleischmann and
Pons did for the University of Utah.
DR

On Dec 19, 4:33*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

What, for example, _do_ you do if there are right side hazards -
parked cars, a car rapidly approaching a stop sign to the right, AND a
truck coming up from behind? *Do you keep your - what? - seven feet
from the right because of the *right side hazards, or do you dive into
the door-zone shadow of the parked cars, out of sight of the right-
approaching motorist, because you think the trucker may not see you?

I could just say, "it depends", but with a bit more detail it might be
like this...

Look over my shoulder to see how close the truck is, and if he's going
to overtake or stay behind. If he's close enough it is highly
unlikely that the car driver wont pull out in front of the truck,
regardless of whether he's seen me or not. Also I'd be looking in the
vehicles to see if there are any drivers or rear seat passengers about
to open a door, or pedestrians heading out to get in their cars. It
may be safer to move closer to the parked cars as the truck passes.
If there is a good likelihood that there will be a door opening, I'd
be ready to call "DOOR", and stay out a bit further in case I need
more road, hoping the trucker will accommodate me. If he doesn't
appear to be going to, I'd rather brake and move closer to the cars
than get hit by the truck, and take my chances with the door openers.
If the truck is a bit further back, I'll move out further so the car
driver has a better opportunity to see me and I have more room to
maneuver, keeping an eye on the truck to see what he's doing
periodically.

Fine. *If you have no problem inviting close passes, explain that to
James, who has complained mightily about close passes he's gotten.
Tell him he should just suck it up and stop complaining.

I have no problem with motorists passing within a couple of feet or
so, it's when they deliberately come within inches and possibly use
their horn at the same time I get annoyed. It's when they do it on
purpose, just to be an asshole. When it's entirely unnecessary and
_dangerous_ I feel the need to complain about it.

Just imagine you need to move around a hole or debris as they skim
passed. 6 inches could be the difference between no problem and
clipped handlebars and a nasty fall - or worse.

And in all those years, your respect in the cycling community is still
minimal. *Get over it. *Forester's and Franklin's legacies will be
here 100 years from now. *You'll be lucky to make an obscure footnote.

Who gives a toss? It doesn't do you any good to be remembered when
you're dead.

JS

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per Tim McNamara:
As Dick Cheney said, deficits don't matter. We live that way in the
private sector as well as in the public sector.

Once it was apparent that Reagan was successful in pandering to
that segment of the electorate, I figured the handwriting was on
the wall. Cheney put the cap on it.

I would say that people on pensions without a COLA and with, say,
10 years life left in them are doomed to dying in poverty at this
point.

Maybe people with COLAs too - since the government is, with a
straight face, claiming there was almost no inflation this
year.....
--

President Reagan's son Ron is supposed to be coming out in the near future
with a biography that is supposed to have some wow moments about the
president

http://www.theliberaloc.com/2010/12/...e-mr-moorlach/

You're A Mean One Mr. Moorlach
December 16, 2010
By Chris Prevatt

"The Orange County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday will review its annual
Strategic Financial Plan. Our county has been doing 10-year fiscal
projections since our embarrassing bankruptcy protection filing in 1994. It
is an excellent management tool. However, this year it tells us that the
County of Orange is going to hit a wall. Why? Because our defined benefit
pension plan is demanding ever higher annual contributions."

Moorlach goes on with this misleading argument against defined benefit
retirement plans. "In the private sector, unsustainable traditional
defined-benefit pension plans (employer guarantees benefits) have been
frozen and converted to defined-contribution pension plans (the employee
contributes and reaps the compounding benefits). Municipalities in
California may not have this management tool at their disposal and cannot
impose changes to existing pension plans."

What Moorlach leaves out is that the change from defined benefit to defined
contribution plans in the private sector is due to the fact that most of the
industries that offered defined benefit plans, such as manufacturing, have
been moved out of the country, where the profits are greater, and
responsibilities to their workforce less. The drop in prevelance of defined
benefit plans is not due to their sustainability, it is due to corporate
greed. Pensions that have failed have done so primarily because the
corporations managed to raid their plans of their value

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per Dan O:
Ooooh - I'm an EMR (used to be called "First Responder"; now it's
"Emergency Medical Responder").

Tangential question:

Suppose you've done an emergency catheterization on somebody in
urinary retention.

They walk out of the facility with a Foley catheter in place,
feeding a leg bag, but with no instructions - oral or written -
on the care and feeding of the device.

The obsessive in me says that the person should be handed a sheet
of paper with some sort of care and feeding procedures on it...
As in http://nih.kramesonline.com/HealthSheets/3,S,86495

Which would you say is normal practice?
--


home health care