More about riding too far right

On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 2:08:09 PM UTC-5, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/05/2012 12:16 PM, datakoll wrote:

well, tell us what you instruct new members ?





To ride defensively and try not to make any sudden moves in the group.

^^^^^^^^^^

dewl is when you see and fersure you gotta LOOK for a head/shoudlers in the driver's seat then YOU ARE DOORZONED...that's it.

train tracks are best crossed on foot

b. avoid puddles

On Dec 5, 11:20 am, wrote:
On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 9:14:46 AM UTC-5, Duane Hébert wrote:

On Dec 4, 7:24 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Sadly, that usually includes the guys responsible for

bike lane stripes.

Sorry but around here, even if there are some stupid facilities, it's

not USUALLY the case.

Surely, I'm not the only one here who has dealt with people designing bike facilities?

In my experience, most designers of bike facilities are not dedicated cyclists themselves. (If they were, they'd know the shortcomings of the designs they produce.) And even lots of dedicated cyclists don't understand this hazard, so neither do the designers.


Cracked logic.

The door zone hazard is not hard to understand. ISTM it's among the
most obvious and straightforward of road hazards. The problem is that
parked cars usually present as a *static* hazard, and it's easily
conceivable that this can lull bicyclists into *lapse* of situational
awareness.

We're lucky if they bother to refer to design manuals. And unfortunately, even well-accepted design manuals get this wrong. The 2012 AASHTO bike facility manual permits a seven foot wide parking space with a five foot bike lane immediately adjacent. (That's on page 4-15 of the manual.) Compare that to what's shown inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPA-ZcYGT94

The fifth graphic athttp://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/advocacy/widths-buffers/
illustrates the problem.

Some people may pretend this problem doesn't exist, or that everybody already knows about it, or that their own area is immune to the problem, etc.


I agree with the middle part, because it's obvious and
straighforward. The rest just doesn't make sense.

The number of such crashes shows otherwise. There really is something to learn here.


There is always something to learn. I learn something new every day.
Is there anything for you to learn?

The thing about bike lanes is that they can't provide for every
possible situation and coddle the unthinking users, but they *do* tend
to prescribe the way - as do all traffic control devices.

So there is something to be said for plain, ordinary roads (the road
outside my house has no stripes and no curbs - and almost no traffic;
sweet!) People need to think a little, and to accommodate one
another.

The problem is - especially in the higher traffic areas - motorists
are loath to share the road with bicycles - period - "just because
we're there". Bike lanes introduce a whole set of new problems, but -
especially with some thought from designers and users - the upside
*generally* outweighs this by alleviating the conflict between
bicyclists and intolerant cagers with an inordinate sense of
entitlement supprted by the car culture.

What Portland is doing is not without problems, but it's the right
direction to bring about positive change. When bicycling reaches its
potential, facilities will be mature in appropriate places, and
unnecessary in most other places.

On Dec 5, 3:45*pm, datakoll wrote:
On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 2:08:09 PM UTC-5, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/05/2012 12:16 PM, datakoll wrote:

well, tell us what you instruct *new members ?

To ride defensively and try not to make any sudden moves in the group.

^^^^^^^^^^

dewl is when you see and fersure you gotta LOOK for a head/shoudlers in the driver's seat then YOU ARE DOORZONED...that's *it.

train tracks are best crossed on foot

* * *b. avoid puddles

True, but a lot of the pimp-mobiles have such heavy tinting that you
can't see much. You gotta be paying really close attention -- which I
do when riding in the door zone every morning because it beats sitting
behind the cars, and its illegal to split traffic in this state. No
avoiding puddles. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo-XnPJRJVg

-- Jay Beattie.

On Dec 4, 8:24*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
More here about riding too far right:http://www.wbez.org/news/map-where-a...oring-accident...

577 reported doorings in about 3.5 years. *The door zone extends
farther than most people realize. *And lots of people don't realize it
exists at all. *Sadly, that usually includes the guys responsible for
bike lane stripes.

- Frank Krygowski

If this is tech, then ....
Oh, never mind. Frank Krygowski, the OP, has an agenda that, he
believes, transcends common courtesy.
Even he, who thrives on monchromatic theism, does not appear to grasp
that the "door zone" is just one factor in an accurate "it depends"
analysis of any given situation. No competent cycling instructor
would provide such an incompetent analysis, i.e. that riding to the
right is a bad thing to do.
In contrast, Frank Krygowski would, and does constantly.

DR

DR

bike path designers would be more than ex-static to lay out seperta paths winding thru the elysian fields


but there are constraints forced on designers and what you can get is prob what you see

in facto the designers prob feel way claustrophobic

On Dec 5, 8:10*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 5, 11:20 am, wrote:


Some people may pretend this problem doesn't exist, or that everybody already knows about it, or that their own area is immune to the problem, etc..

I agree with the middle part, because it's obvious and
straighforward. *The rest just doesn't make sense.

None of it makes sense, especially in view of the crash counts. But
people persist in those beliefs, or at least implications.


*The number of such crashes shows otherwise. *There really is something to learn here.

There is always something to learn. *I learn something new every day.
Is there anything for you to learn?

Of course. That's why I read and build a library on these (and other)
topics. That's why I took yet another cycling class this summer.

How about you? Ever take a class on cycling? Ever read an entire book
on riding and dealing with traffic?

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 5, 9:35 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:10 pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 5, 11:20 am, wrote:

Some people may pretend this problem doesn't exist, or that everybody already knows about it, or that their own area is immune to the problem, etc.

I agree with the middle part, because it's obvious and
straighforward. The rest just doesn't make sense.

None of it makes sense, especially in view of the crash counts. But
people persist in those beliefs, or at least implications.


I told you: The hazard is obvious and straightforward, but because
the parked cars are so usually static, it is easily conceivable that
riders may be lulled into lapsed situational awareness. (State of
mind, Flow, etc. is an interesting thing. I can imagine *myself*
getting doored; and belive it when I say I am aware the hazard exists
[****in' duh!]; I've done stupider things.)



The number of such crashes shows otherwise. There really is something to learn here.

There is always something to learn. I learn something new every day.
Is there anything for you to learn?

Of course. That's why I read and build a library on these (and other)
topics. That's why I took yet another cycling class this summer.

How about you?

I told you: I learn something new every day.

Ever take a class on cycling?

Hmm... (lemme think)... No. (Though it may depend on what you
consider "a class".)

(What the hell is "cycling", anyway. Sounds like something an
automatic washing machine does.)

Ever read an entire book
on riding and dealing with traffic?


Yes, but what it offered me in terms of understanding doesn't amount
to a hill of beans (not even a bean) in the context of my knowledge on
the subject.

On Dec 5, 9:35*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:10*pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 5, 11:20 am, wrote:

Some people may pretend this problem doesn't exist, or that everybody already knows about it, or that their own area is immune to the problem, etc.

I agree with the middle part, because it's obvious and
straighforward. *The rest just doesn't make sense.

None of it makes sense, especially in view of the crash counts. *But
people persist in those beliefs, or at least implications.



*The number of such crashes shows otherwise. *There really is something to learn here.

There is always something to learn. *I learn something new every day.
Is there anything for you to learn?

Of course. *That's why I read and build a library on these (and other)
topics. *That's why I took yet another cycling class this summer.

How about you? Ever take a class on cycling? *Ever read an entire book
on riding and dealing with traffic?

I did take a class when I was seven or eight years old after getting
busted for riding on the wrong side of the road. It was taught by a
cop. I learned everything I needed to know. I already knew not to
ride on the wrong side of the road, but I was goofing off. My fifth
grade teacher, Bob Tetzlaff, was an Olympic cyclist (in fact, in
training for the '68 Olympics when I was in his class in '67). He
taught us how to ride. I got coached for years when I was racing, but
that primarily involves painful work outs on the road or track and not
much about hand signals and controlling the lane and pointing out
potato chip bags on the ground.

Riding is not complex, although people try to make it complex because
it makes them feel official. I sometimes ride with excessively studied
vehicular cyclists -- at least until I can get around them. I spend
most of my time shaking my head, wondering what the f*** they are
doing riding in the middle of the road, bolt-upright like those farmer-
on-tractor signs. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jcanen57/302340381/

-- Jay Beattie.

On Dec 5, 9:35 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:10 pm, Dan O wrote:

On Dec 5, 11:20 am, wrote:


snip


The number of such crashes shows otherwise. There really is something to learn here.

There is always something to learn. I learn something new every day.
Is there anything for you to learn?

Of course. That's why I read and build a library on these (and other)
topics. That's why I took yet another cycling class this summer.


Are you sure you don't just do it to shore up your existing bias and
beliefs, and the classes to carouse with your cohort "certifiers", and
impress the dimwits with your incredible mastery and expertise? (What
did you you learn? What would you like to learn?... without casting
aspersions!)

snip

On 12/06/2012 01:31 AM, Jay Beattie wrote:

snip

Riding is not complex, although people try to make it complex because
it makes them feel official. I sometimes ride with excessively studied
vehicular cyclists -- at least until I can get around them. I spend
most of my time shaking my head, wondering what the f*** they are
doing riding in the middle of the road, bolt-upright like those farmer-
on-tractor signs. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jcanen57/302340381/


I assume that they're getting sore asses putting all of their weight on
said asses and that's what makes them give the rest of us **** so often.
Fortunately, around here we don't see many of them. Maybe our drivers
are too crazy for even the more steadfast VC guys to ride like that.