Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

On Dec 7, 11:23*am, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 6, 5:51 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:



On Dec 6, 3:47 pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 6, 11:56 am, Phil W Lee wrote:

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

On Dec 6, 7:58 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 6, 10:36 am, Duane Hébert 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.

Very few truck drivers would pass a bicyclist by eighteen inches under
any cricumstances. *Some do, but I'd say they are few. *It's not
pleasant, but they haven't killed me yet.

You need to re-do the math, Dan.

Eighteen inches wasn't my figure, Frank. *Read the context.


If the usable lane width is ten feet
and the truck is 8.5 feet wide, he's not going to be passing you with
18" clearance. *Not if he stays in the lane, anyway.

If the usable space is only a ten foot lane, he can't leave the lane,
and in my experience is not going to try and pass there anyway. *If he
can leave the lane, your ten feet, no more, is BS.

Wow. Let me try to cover details I thought were obvious.

Take your choice: either a two-lane road, one lane in each direction,
each lane being ten feet wide, with 20 feet between the curbs.

Or a four-lane road, two lanes in each direction, each lane being ten
feet wide, with 40 feet between the curbs.

If you attempt to ride anywhere in that right lane, you can't possibly
be safe unless the truck at least partially leaves the lane. Right?
The math is: 10' - 8.5' is 18", but your shoulders and/or handlebars
are wider than 18", and you cannot safely ride with your wheel
immediately next to a curb.

So do you _really_ skim the exact edge of the road to let him shave
your shirt off your shoulder without leaving the lane?

Did I say that? *No, not at all. *

You said "I go as far right as the conditions allow, brace for the
crosswind, and hang on." Did you mean something different?

Then you also talked about bailing out of the road entirely and riding
the sidewalk. Did I get that wrong?

And later I think you talked about finding ways of never riding
there. Correct me if that's not what you meant.

I asked the question because the places I ride very frequently require
me to handle that situation. I can't ride north to work, south into
the country, or west to go shopping without encountering that
situation, or one a lot like it.

*I said I move as far right as conditions allow. *This
signals to the truck driver that I know he's there, that we're going
to have to work together, that I trust his good judgement and good
faith, and - to my right - how much wiggle room I want. * This
approach gets cooperation. *He's not going to stuff it in there, and
if he does, I have sized up my options and am ready to exercise them.

If I look hard for agreement in that paragraph, it would have to be
this: I judge "as far right as conditions allow" to mean "roughly the
center of the lane." No, I do NOT trust the driver to use good
judgment and not pass, especially if I were to obviously move right as
if inviting him to pass. In the situation I describe, safe passing is
impossible within the lane, so I don't invite passing within the lane.

If he were really to exercise good judgment, he wouldn't even try to
pass without leaving the lane almost entirely. So my position near
lane center won't bother a driver with good judgment, and it will
deter drivers with bad judgment.

Have you ever looked at the "Street Smarts" booklet? Many states
distribute it for free, or you can find it online. This section is
what we're talking about:
http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/chapter2a.htm

Of you can get _Cyclecraft_ by John Franklin and read about Primary
and Secondary road positions.

There really is stuff you should learn.

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 7, 11:42*am, DirtRoadie wrote more
nonsense. Let's get back to the point:

So DR, what _do_ you do in that situation? 10 foot lane, 8.5 foot
truck. Curb, no shoulder. Do you suddenly bail to ride the sidewalk,
or do you bump along in the gutter, or do you control the lane?

- Frank Krygowski

On 12/7/2010 1:05 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 7, 8:57 am, Frank wrote:
On Dec 7, 7:15 am, "Duane wrote:



"Frank wrote in message

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

Yeah, it's unique. I have to defend my self against
what you didn't say because I said that I would at
some point do the same thing that you did say.

On 12/7/2010 1:05 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 7, 8:57 am, Frank wrote:
On Dec 7, 7:15 am, "Duane wrote:



"Frank wrote in message

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

Yeah, it's unique. I have to defend my self against
what you didn't say because I said that I would at
some point do the same thing that you did say.

On Dec 7, 12:56*pm, Peter Cole wrote:
On 12/7/2010 12:11 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

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.

Well, it's _often_ a judgment call. The one I've been describing (10
foot lane, 8.5 foot truck) is certainly not, even though there are
cyclists who would foolishly attempt to share as much as possible,
much to their detriment.

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.

Right. They shouldn't have even implied that the cyclists shouldn't
have been controlling that lane.

Now, if they were more than two abreast, that is illegal in (I think)
all states. Personally, I think that ideally, the law should be
changed, since a narrow lane can still safely accommodate three
cyclists. I wouldn't waste much time trying for that change, though.
There are bigger legislative fish to fry.

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.

Oh, there's always going to be conflict, period. People get into
conflicts over the tiniest things. It always astounds me that
motorists get incensed over events that delay them by even ten
seconds. And I don't mean only bicycling-related delays. I've seen
rude behavior by motorists entering or leaving church!

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.

Part of that "What do you expect?" is what I try to fight - especially
the part that goes "What do you expect? You know bicycling is really
dangerous."

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 7, 12:55*pm, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/7/2010 12:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Dec 7, 9:19 am, Duane H *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.

Right. Again, education is important. And since most drivers (and
cyclists) will never voluntarily seek their own education, I think we
need to do it through the media.

Some of us in Ohio are currently working on a new preface for the Ohio
version of "Street Smarts." Among other things, it will cover that
new passing law.


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.

In my experience, most drivers' lane choice is sort of binary. Most
either stay entirely in one lane, or cross entirely into the next.
When I take lane center in a narrow lane and the next lane becomes
clear for passing, very few pass with minimal clearance. If it did
happen, at least I'd have escape room to my right. That wouldn't be
true if I went far right trying to let them squeeze past.

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 7, 1:02*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 6, 6:14 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

... , and it makes little difference; a ten foot
lane is far too narrow to be safely shared.

If I'm a foot or two off the curb (depends on circumstances, but basic
clearance for storm drains, staying off the gutter seam, wiggle room,
etc.) in your ten feet no more scenario, there's still no room to pass
and they're not going to try; but I show my good faith and intention
with respect for theirs until I have reason to doubt it.

I mean, really - what's going to happen is they'll wait until there is
no oncoming traffic, then pull out and pass. *

So here's a story told to me by my closest two friends:

The husband had taken a road cycling course from me. In it, he'd
heard the idea of controlling a lane. Perhaps he didn't quite buy it,
but he must have demonstrated it well enough to pass the course, get
the national certificate, etc.

Anyway, a year or so later, he and his wife were on a biking vacation
in the Finger Lakes region of New York. They were on their tandem,
riding a narrow two lane highway, keeping to the right, and they were
really, really nervous, because cars and trucks kept passing them far
too closely.

The guy said to his wife, "Frank says we should take the lane in a
situation like this, so they won't pass unless there's room. Should
we try it?" She nervously agreed. He began riding at lane center.

They told me "It transformed the ride! From that point on, everyone
waited behind until it was safe to pass. There were no more close
calls! It was wonderful!"

My experience was the same when I learned this, many years before. In
particular, I remember when I was new at it, taking the lane on a
narrow, potholed truck route in the rain. And I remember the big
semis braking from 55 down to our 15 mph, then waiting to pass until
it was safe. Yes, it was scary to do so for the first time. But it
was even scarier to _not_ do so.

What can I say? It takes a little guts until you're used to it. But
it works. And I can't ride where I want without doing it, at least
some of the time.

- Frank Krygowski

On 12/7/2010 1:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 7, 12:55 pm, Duane wrote:
On 12/7/2010 12:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Dec 7, 9:19 am, Duane H 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.

Right. Again, education is important. And since most drivers (and
cyclists) will never voluntarily seek their own education, I think we
need to do it through the media.

Some of us in Ohio are currently working on a new preface for the Ohio
version of "Street Smarts." Among other things, it will cover that
new passing law.

Education is always good but there is a push here to get a couple of
questions on the driver test. Seems like something mandatory has to be done.

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.

In my experience, most drivers' lane choice is sort of binary. Most
either stay entirely in one lane, or cross entirely into the next.
When I take lane center in a narrow lane and the next lane becomes
clear for passing, very few pass with minimal clearance. If it did
happen, at least I'd have escape room to my right. That wouldn't be
true if I went far right trying to let them squeeze past.

Not my experience though. Whether they pass too close or not usually
depends on the driver and their level of tolerance and has very little
to do with my relative position. Though I've had times when they
buzzed me precisely because I was in the center and they had to
wait longer to pass me. Or at least thought that they did.

Someone else here posted that moving a bit
to the right gives the impression that you're being polite and the
drivers ofter reciprocate. Please no skulking in the ditch replies.

On Dec 7, 1:05*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 7, 8:57 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? *Make yourself clear!

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

??

You said "Well, okay - assuming I was idiotic or unlucky enough to
find myself
in this very specific situation - I would be scoping put [sic] beyond
the curb and looking for cuts or getting ready to hop it, unless I
could just outrun him..."

Since you've talked so much about riding sidewalks before, I assumed
you were hopping the curb at a curb cut to get to the sidewalk. And
on our city streets, when you hop the curb, you're on the sidewalk.

So what did you mean by that, if not riding on the sidewalk?

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 7, 1:06*pm, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/7/2010 12:47 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

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.

Can we make a deal? I'll do the latter if you'll do the former.

(Of course, I've already done the former, but I'm willing to do it
again if it will get people to read Franklin's book.)

- Frank Krygowski