Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

On Dec 7, 9:31*am, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/7/2010 12:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I think it's dangerous for a cyclist to ride the road's edge so as to
not displease the trucker. *It's unacceptably dangerous to imply to
the trucker (or any motorist) that he's welcome to pass you with only
tiny clearance.

I feel extremely safe handling it the way I do. *I'm making a big deal
of it because Duane mocked the fact that I control the trucker's
behavior.

I didn't mock you. *I questioned your assertion that you
on a bicycle are controlling the trucker's behavior. *This is
only true if the trucker sees you and allows it. *I've had cases
where the truck didn't see me and cases where they didn't allow
it.

Your claim that you can control a truck that weighs several tons more
than you traveling at higher speeds than you, in every case is what
is dangerous here. *Not cycling.

So DR, what _do_ you do in that situation? *10 foot lane, 8.5 foot
truck. *Do you suddenly bail to ride the sidewalk, or do you bump
along in the gutter, or do you control the lane?

Hmm. So staying in my narrow lane when a truck approaches from behind
is what's dangerous? Despite my having done so for decades with no
problems? Not only has it never been a safety problem, I honestly see
no alternative, if I'm going to ride my bike for transportation.

Granted, if I were just a "drive to the bike path and ride" kind of
guy, I could avoid the situation. But to (say) ride to work, or to
the hardware store? I can't wait until they build a completely
segregated bike path. That will _never_ happen. I can't jump on the
sidewalk in many places (even if I mistakenly believed the sidewalk
was safer) because there are no sidewalks in many such places. And
I'm damned sure not going to get off my bike and stand by the side of
the road until some motorist goes by! Kowtowing isn't my style.

Controlling a narrow lane is one of the fundamental skills of
cycling. I really don't think those who fail to do so are competent
cyclists. Sorry folks, but there it is.

Try some education. Try reading _Cyclecraft_ by John Franklin. Read
his sections on Primary and Secondary road positions. He gets it
right. (He's now got editions out for drive-on-left Britain and for
drive-on-right North America.)

- Frank Krygowski

On 12/7/2010 12:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 7, 9:09 am, Duane wrote:
On 12/6/2010 9:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:



On Dec 6, 8:32 pm, Dan wrote:
On Dec 6, 1:47 pm, Frank wrote:

On Dec 6, 3:16 pm, Duane H wrote:

On 12/6/2010 2:56 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:

Dan considered Mon, 6 Dec 2010 08:22:30 -0800
(PST) the perfect time to write:

On Dec 6, 7:58 am, Frank wrote:
On Dec 6, 10:36 am, Duane H wrote:

What I like is the idea that when a bicycle is in front
of a truck, the cyclist is controlling the truck.

The driver is controlling the truck and hopefully he's paying attention,
he sees the cyclist and the truck doesn't have any mechanical issues.

If you want to be pedantic, when the cyclist is properly in front of
the truck in a lane too narrow for safe passing, he is controlling the
use of the lane.

Sure, but the point is your tendency to think you know what everybody
else should be doing.

So Duane, when you're bicycling in a 10 foot lane with a truck that's
8' 6" wide coming up behind you, what exactly do you do?

Depends on what's ahead, first of all. Then depends on if the audible
tells me they've seen me. Then, depends on the shoulder. Then, I go
as far right as the conditions allow, brace for the crosswind, and
hang on.

If you really think you're safer trying to ride in the 18" gap left by
the truck trying to pass in the same lane than by staying wide and
demonstrating to the truck driver that you are well aware that there
is insufficient space to pass in-lane, that's entirely your
perogative.
I certainly wouldn't recommend it though, and I don't know of any
recognised training scheme for cyclists that does.

Sounds like he's only saying he'd do that if the truck didn't see him
and he couldn't take the shoulder. What would you do if the truck
wasn't slowing for you? Stay there and control the lane?

No shoulder, Duane. A city street with a curb at the right. Total
space available is 10 feet, no more.

No more? What is this, like an alley?

You can visualize a two lane or
a four lane street, I don't care.

Oh. Then why only ten feet, no more? Is it heavy traffic right up to
the edge of your lane? Why would I go that way in the first place?

So when you're bicycling in a 10 foot lane with a truck that's 8' 6"
wide coming up behind you, what exactly do you do?

Well, okay - assuming I was idiotic or unlucky enough to find myself
in this very specific situation - I would be scoping put beyond the
curb and looking for cuts or getting ready to hop it, unless I could
just outrun him, as is often the case in town where they have curbs
and heavy traffic and all that. It's moments like this that separate
the ninjas from the fuddy-duddies :-)

This isn't uncommon, at least in my experience.

Really? Only ten feet available, no more, and a truck driver who's
going to shoot the gap if you don't direct traffic? Happens to you
all the time?

On my commute to and from work, I'd say all of the final mile is
exactly like that. There are many stretches on the other six miles
that are like that as well. My residential street, although it has no
curbs, is even narrower, totaling 18 feet IIRC.

Of course, there aren't _always_ trucks waiting to pass me. There are
frequently cars, though, and it makes little difference; a ten foot
lane is far too narrow to be safely shared.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adTpGj2MFec

The truck in this case slowed appreciably when coming up
to the cyclist (whether for the cyclist or for the turn
doesn't really matter) so where's the example where one
didn't?

I don't have an example of one where the truck didn't slow for a
cyclist directly in front. In my experience, they always slow down.
And while I admit it must happen - rarely - it's not likely to happen
to you or any other rider in several hundred lifetimes.

How about an example of a truck tailgaiting the cyclist?

I've occasionally - rarely - had vehicles closer behind me than I
would really like. My usual reaction has been to turn around, look at
their license plates and mouth the plate number out loud. Once on the
tandem, I had my wife do that from the stoker seat. Seemed to work
pretty well each time. There really are ways to control the behavior
of motorists.

What about one of a van between the cyclist and
the truck, blocking the truck's view of the cyclist, who
then turns as the truck is accelerating?

???

Are you really pretending this is a cause of a significant number of
crashes? In fact, do you have even one truck-bike or car-bike crash
caused by that situation?

Who gives a damn about significant number of crashes? When you're
on the road you can't NOT pay attention because of statistical
probabilities. You need to know where all of the other vehicles
are that are sharing the road and have an idea what they're doing.
This is called defensive driving. You always expect the worse and
plan for it. I didn't make this up.

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/defen...ques-tips.html

You're showing so much creative effort going into "proving" that
riding a bike is really, really dangerous! But because you can
imagine some way in which a bicyclist might possibly be hurt, that
does not mean that getting hurt that way is even remotely likely.

Again, you restate and then argue. You are actually telling me that
if I tell someone on the road to drive defensively and pay attention
to oncoming trucks and get out of the way if they don't stop that I'm
saying that cycling is really really dangerous?

There's no need for such obsession with "danger." Just ride properly,
pay attention to the road surface, plan ahead for traffic situations,
use lights at night, and you'll do fine. Really. No matter what you
think, it's just not that bad out there!

You're wrong. Or are you saying that every accident with a bike
involved is because the CYCLIST did something wrong?

On 12/7/2010 12:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 7, 9:19 am, Duane wrote:
On 12/6/2010 9:57 PM, James wrote:


I assume it's illegal to overtake over double lines?

In Quebec, cars must maintain 1.5 meters from a bicycle. They can
cross double yellow to pass as long as it's to maintain the
distance from a bike.

A couple years ago in Ohio, we got it specifically written into law
that motorists can cross those lines, when safe, to pass any vehicle
traveling less than half the speed limit. Really, it was just
codifying what most motorists - including cops, in my experience -
already do.

Here, motorists can only cross those lines legally to pass a bicycle.
Unfortunately, most motorists don't know this. Neither do most cyclists.

Of course, if the bike is in the center of the lane they can't pass.

They can pass in the same way they'd pass an Amish buggy, a post
office truck stopping at roadside mailboxes, a street sweeper, a heavy
truck grinding slowly up a steep hill, and so on. Pass when it's
clear. Wait if it's not.

They can't pass any of these vehicles when there are double yellow
lines. So for the cyclists, they can pass still ONLY if they leave
the 1.5 meters. So the size of the lanes and the cyclists position may
prevent them from passing. So, either they pass illegally, probably
buzzing the cyclist or they will wait until they can pass. They don't
always wait patiently.

On 12/7/2010 12:11 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 7, 7:31 am, Peter wrote:
On 12/6/2010 9:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Of course, there aren't _always_ trucks waiting to pass me. There are
frequently cars, though, and it makes little difference; a ten foot
lane is far too narrow to be safely shared.

Somebody needs to tell that to the cops:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHNd_...eature=related

Forget about the drivers, they'll never get it. They don't want to.

Well, I'm not ready to give up on education for any group - cops,
motorists, or cyclists.

FWIW, it's not easy to get cops educated. One of my best cycling
friends is on the board of a police academy. We tried to get just a
bit on bicyclists rights into their curriculum, but it was rejected.
The response was "We can't fit that in; there's far too much stuff
we're already mandated to cover."

And I've noticed in our own area (where each suburb has its own police
force) that some cops are better than others. My village and the
surrounding township has a police chief and cops who are well aware of
our rights to the road, perhaps because some township cops have been
cycling buddies of mine. In the township to the south, the police
chief is ex-president of our bike club. But in another adjoining
township, two members of our club were told over a patrol car
loudspeaker to "Get on the sidewalk!" (To their credit, they yelled
"NO!" and the cop did not hassle them. In fact - no kidding - he
turned into the Dunkin' Donuts shop for his break!)

But as I've said, education regarding cycling is a strategy that's
gotten very little trial. There are lots of media that could be used
effectively, but aren't being used at all.

I think a big part of it is that the laws are much too fuzzy. Terms like
"practicable" -- no one knows what that really means. There's no
standard for when a lane is too narrow to share, it's always a judgment
call. Ditto for riding abreast and cyclists passing cyclists, ditto for
road position in response to hazards or cyclist relative speed. In the
video I showed, the cop said that the cyclists should have singled up to
let the cars by, but the lane was clearly not of sharable width, even
with only a single cyclist. Even the significance of lane/median
striping is fuzzy, particularly when cyclists are thrown into the mix.

When the principles are fuzzy, and competition for space exists, there's
going to be conflict. No amount of education is going to fix that. I
have had arguments with cops who knew the law very well. When they
didn't like how we were riding, despite it being legal, they simply
accused us of breaking the law. The law is fuzzy enough for them to get
away with that without even outright lying. Some cops may be sympathetic
to cyclists, most in my experience aren't. When something bad happens,
even if it wasn't the cyclist's fault, they take a "what do you expect?"
attitude. Average people don't have a high opinion of cyclists, and cops
are pretty average people -- if somewhat more authoritarian.

On 12/7/2010 12:32 PM, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Dec 7, 9:53 am, Duane wrote:
On 12/7/2010 11:42 AM, DirtRoadie wrote:

Duane, shame on you! Were you mocking Frank? Frank is an "expert,"
just ask him. He can control everything.

Apparently everything except disagreement. Sorry, I mean
mocking. What's this a Monty Python schtick?

I think Frank is trying to bolster his "straw" resume so he can seek
gainful employment in both "argument" AND "abuse." He's tired of
arguing in his spare time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

LOL

I was thinking more along the lines of shrubberies though.

On Dec 6, 6:32*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 6, 1:47 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

This isn't uncommon, at least in my experience.

Really? *Only ten feet available, no more, and a truck driver who's
going to shoot the gap if you don't direct traffic? *Happens to you
all the time?

Frank Krygowski has no apparent skills, but he does have a fertile
imagination.
DR

On Dec 7, 9:57*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Wait! *You said you would do what Dan does. *Dan said he'd jump to the
sidewalk. *Did you mean something different?

Actually, what Dan said was that he'd keep his options open.
Your reading comprehension is abyssmal. No wonder you have so much
trouble keeping up.

DR

On Dec 7, 8:57 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 7, 7:15 am, "Duane Hebert" wrote:



"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message

...
On Dec 6, 6:17 pm, "Duane Hebert" wrote:

I would make myself as visible as possible and try to verify that
he sees me. If so, I would stay in the center of the lane. If
not, and he keeps coming I would do the same thing that Dan would
do.
So you really bail out and try to jump to the sidewalk, eh? Wow. Do
you do this when he's a block back? Seems you can't delay until he's
50 feet behind, else you may not be able to bail out in time. So much
for a right to the road!

Again, you can't deal with my answer so you make up one and
ridicule me for that.

Wait! You said you would do what Dan does. Dan said he'd jump to the
sidewalk. Did you mean something different? Make yourself clear!


Knock it off, man. I didn't say that.

On 12/7/2010 12:47 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 7, 9:31 am, Duane wrote:
On 12/7/2010 12:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I think it's dangerous for a cyclist to ride the road's edge so as to
not displease the trucker. It's unacceptably dangerous to imply to
the trucker (or any motorist) that he's welcome to pass you with only
tiny clearance.

I feel extremely safe handling it the way I do. I'm making a big deal
of it because Duane mocked the fact that I control the trucker's
behavior.

I didn't mock you. I questioned your assertion that you
on a bicycle are controlling the trucker's behavior. This is
only true if the trucker sees you and allows it. I've had cases
where the truck didn't see me and cases where they didn't allow
it.

Your claim that you can control a truck that weighs several tons more
than you traveling at higher speeds than you, in every case is what
is dangerous here. Not cycling.

So DR, what _do_ you do in that situation? 10 foot lane, 8.5 foot
truck. Do you suddenly bail to ride the sidewalk, or do you bump
along in the gutter, or do you control the lane?

Hmm. So staying in my narrow lane when a truck approaches from behind
is what's dangerous? Despite my having done so for decades with no
problems? Not only has it never been a safety problem, I honestly see
no alternative, if I'm going to ride my bike for transportation.

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying assuming that it's safe because
you have control is incorrect. I'm saying that thinking that there
are NO dangers is incorrect. I'm saying to practice defensive driving
at all time instead of relying on some illusion of control or some
statistics. Argue against that if you like but stop arguing against
what you say that I say. This started because I said that you have
to be aware that the truck MAY NOT STOP. You seem to be claiming
that that isn't the case because you've never seen it and statistically
it won't happen.


Granted, if I were just a "drive to the bike path and ride" kind of
guy, I could avoid the situation. But to (say) ride to work, or to
the hardware store? I can't wait until they build a completely
segregated bike path. That will _never_ happen. I can't jump on the
sidewalk in many places (even if I mistakenly believed the sidewalk
was safer) because there are no sidewalks in many such places. And
I'm damned sure not going to get off my bike and stand by the side of
the road until some motorist goes by! Kowtowing isn't my style.

I doubt if any of the people here are the kind of cyclist that you
describe.

Controlling a narrow lane is one of the fundamental skills of
cycling. I really don't think those who fail to do so are competent
cyclists. Sorry folks, but there it is.

Try some education. Try reading _Cyclecraft_ by John Franklin. Read
his sections on Primary and Secondary road positions. He gets it
right. (He's now got editions out for drive-on-left Britain and for
drive-on-right North America.)

Try reading some links about defensive driving.

On Dec 7, 10:27*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I would have followed them into the drive and gave them some
grief.

Agreed. *In fact, when I saw a driver do something similar to some
other club members on a ride, that's exactly what I did.

Did you tell them that their errant behavior makes cycling dangerous
for others?
DR