Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

On Dec 8, 9:40*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 11:26*am, RobertH wrote:





On Dec 7, 7:35 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°

How does defensive driving apply? *The only similar situation would be
on a low-powered scooter that could not keep pace with other motorized
traffic.

False. When you're simply cruising down the road in your vehicle, the
principles of defensive driving apply, whether you're being passed or
not, because you have to be ready for encroachment from the wings,
watch the road surface, etc. While you're being passed these
principles of defensive driving are even more important.. Furthermore,
when you're being passed, in any vehicle, the principles of defensive
driving should be applied to your relationship with that anonymous
driver to the extent that it is practicable to apply those principles.
Obviously in passing situations the operator of the vehicle being
passed must rely at least somewhat on the faculties of the passing
driver.

So, Robert: *Of course, I know you'd be ever alert, well prepared,
extremely skillful and always taking responsibility for your own
safety, etc.

But in a 10 foot lane, curb at the right, with an 8.5 foot truck
behind you, where exactly would you ride?

Probably the same place he always rides, being that very few people
shift their position in the lane based on vehicles approaching from
the rear. "Oh, look, its an Escalade, better get left." "No, its
just a Prius, I should ride further right." "But wait, its a
Kenworth, better go down the center." Really, I'm riding a bike, not
a yoyo.

Your hypothetical also assumes that the truck is going to try to pass
you in your own lane rather than cross the centerline and pass at a
safe (and legally required) distance. You can make that assumption
sometimes, but not all the time. And if there is a place where
everyone always tries to pass too closely (I admit, there are such
places), then taking the road may be the safe thing to do. It also
requires you to pull off when there are cars piled up behind you to
let them pass. In that case, you are no different than the slow moving
lawn tractor driving down the road. The fact that you are on a bike
does not make you special and immune from the "slow moving vehicle
must yield" laws. -- Jay Beattie.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 1:17 pm, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 12/8/2010 12:27 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Dec 8, 12:06 pm, Duane H wrote:
Like I've said countless times here, I definitely prefer to NOT ride
with cars. When I'm on my weekend rides, I look for routes without much
traffic. Even some with bike paths paralleling the road. Seems like
more fun going down the mountain at 60k in a lane without cars.
But when I commute to work I have little choice. And when I do ride
with cars, what I will do in any given circumstance depends.
So are you, too, one of those guys who frequently ride the sidewalks
because the road makes them nervous?
Just out of curiosity, how do you get that from the lines I posted?

I didn't really "get that." I was trying to clarify what this meant:
"And when I do ride with cars, what I will do in any given
circumstance depends." Did it mean "If I get nervous about cars, I
ride the sidewalk"?

I'm getting the impression a lot of people either

1) don't want to admit they take the lane when necessary, perhaps
because they don't want to admit they agree with me; and/or

2) don't want to admit they ride sidewalks, because they know the data
and the image make that strategy look bad.

- Frank Krygowski

Depends.

Is it a city street with a 40 or 50 km/h speed limit?
I often cycle at that speed, so I wouldn't be slowing anyone up much,
and likely they would be happy enough to stay behind until the lane
widened or it was safe to use the other side of the road and pass.

Or a narrow HWY on a mountain pass with an unrestricted speed limit - as
in http://tinyurl.com/2e4qwr2 ?

Is the truck fully loaded and travelling fast (60+ km/h) up behind you
with no apparent indication of slowing?

Is there any sidewalk, or just a spoon drain and the edge of a mountain?

Is it a single lane road - ie one way traffic? These are rarely in
speed zones that allow more than 40-50km/h.

Cycling over the Black Spur (link I posted above) there are often timber
trucks that pass. If I hear one coming from some distance I ride out
into the middle of the lane until I hear or see that they are getting
close. If they don't appear to be slowing, or if there's adequate
distance up the road for them to pass, I move as far left as _practical_
(being careful not to be re-interpreted as "skulking"), still leaving
myself some room to avoid the road edge should the driver try to squeeze
pass. If the road ahead has blind corners and I feel it would be unsafe
for them to overtake, I stay further out and often signal with my hand
for them to stay back. When I see that there is a clear line ahead,
signal for them to pass and move left to aid their progress. They are
often appreciative of such gestures and give a friendly toot as they
pass - rather than an aggressive "get off the f..ing road" honk.

Having said, I've seen it all too often that the driver of any vehicle
is so busting to get passed, that they often overtake on blind corners
over double lines regardless of whether I'm in the middle of the lane or
closer to the left edge. This happens all to often as I cycle up Mt
Dandenong http://tinyurl.com/32u5al4 . I am amazed at how frequently it
happens and that no oncoming traffic has yet appeared and caused a
severe accident. I should video a few ascents. 15 minutes of cycling
usually gets at least one or two of these incidents.

The last nasty one I had going up there was when a bus driver was
overtaking and something came the other way. The bus driver pulled it
hard to the gutter and the back of the bus pushed me into the concrete
of the gutter as it came passed. I was very ****ed off and gave the
asshole driver a vile mouthful when I caught up to him only a few
hundred yards further on at the bus turn around.

Of course in his view I was to blame for just being there. Drivers are
so defensive when you unleash hell on them for damn near causing your
undoing.

JS.

Dan O wrote:

Here we enjoy pedestrian legal status while riding with no speed limit
on sidewalks - we just have to slow to a normal walking pace at
crosswalks, and at driveways where a car is coming, and we have to
give audible warning to and right-of-way to pedestrians.

Frank likens it to "skulking" :-)

Unless you're in the middle of a road lane you are skulking in Frank's
terminology. Maybe we shouldn't take offense, as most people ride as
far left/right as practical, as the law requires us to do in many
places. Maybe obeying the road law is "skulking" in Franks dictionary.
He seems to have a strange dictionary meaning for other terms, like
danger/dangerous and even acceleration for example.

I guess a lot of cities have local rules specifically prohibiting
bikes on some sidewalks, though. There are usually markings on the
curb cuts at intersections.

Yup. Must be under 8 or 10 years I think here, or be a postman (dunno
how they managed that on a motorbike), or be a parent in charge of a
youngster.

Keep the front wheel in the air, Dan ;-)

JS.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 1:18 pm, AMuzi wrote:

The licensing of drivers seems to work about as well as
prohibition (alcohol, marijuana etc) or gun control laws.

That could be changed.

We have to verify, to reasonable accuracy anyway, that we have money
whenever we use a debit card. Seems to me the technology could be
applied inside cars. Swipe a valid driver's license (or leave it in
the dash slot), and you get to drive the car.

It wouldn't be foolproof, but it would be better than what we have
now. And it might restore the idea of driving being a privilege, not
a right.

Now that's a good one.

I think there are some vehicles here fitted with BAC readers, that won't
let you start the car if you're over the legal limit.

JS.

Jay Beattie wrote:
On Dec 8, 9:40 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

But in a 10 foot lane, curb at the right, with an 8.5 foot truck
behind you, where exactly would you ride?

Probably the same place he always rides, being that very few people
shift their position in the lane based on vehicles approaching from
the rear. "Oh, look, its an Escalade, better get left." "No, its
just a Prius, I should ride further right." "But wait, its a
Kenworth, better go down the center." Really, I'm riding a bike, not
a yoyo.

Your hypothetical also assumes that the truck is going to try to pass
you in your own lane rather than cross the centerline and pass at a
safe (and legally required) distance. You can make that assumption
sometimes, but not all the time. And if there is a place where
everyone always tries to pass too closely (I admit, there are such
places), then taking the road may be the safe thing to do. It also
requires you to pull off when there are cars piled up behind you to
let them pass. In that case, you are no different than the slow moving
lawn tractor driving down the road. The fact that you are on a bike
does not make you special and immune from the "slow moving vehicle
must yield" laws. -- Jay Beattie.

I agree, but you don't often get car drivers showing tractor drivers the
pointy end of the stick (basically harassment). Would you pass in your
Merc within 6 inches of a bouncing tractor at 40 km/h?

JS.

On Dec 8, 2:54*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Dec 8, 9:40*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:


On Dec 8, 11:26*am, RobertH wrote:

On Dec 7, 7:35 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°

How does defensive driving apply? *The only similar situation would be
on a low-powered scooter that could not keep pace with other motorized
traffic.

False. When you're simply cruising down the road in your vehicle, the
principles of defensive driving apply, whether you're being passed or
not, because you have to be ready for encroachment from the wings,
watch the road surface, etc. While you're being passed these
principles of defensive driving are even more important.. Furthermore,
when you're being passed, in any vehicle, the principles of defensive
driving should be applied to your relationship with that anonymous
driver to the extent that it is practicable to apply those principles..
Obviously in passing situations the operator of the vehicle being
passed must rely at least somewhat on the faculties of the passing
driver.

So, Robert: *Of course, I know you'd be ever alert, well prepared,
extremely skillful and always taking responsibility for your own
safety, etc.

But in a 10 foot lane, curb at the right, with an 8.5 foot truck
behind you, where exactly would you ride?

Probably the same place he always rides, being that very few people
shift their position in the lane based on vehicles approaching from
the rear. *"Oh, look, its an Escalade, better get left." *"No, its
just a Prius, I should ride further right." *"But wait, its a
Kenworth, better go down the center." *Really, I'm riding a bike, not
a yoyo.

And apparently Frank also assumes that the driver of an 8.5 foot truck
is unaware of the size of his vehicle and will not take it into
account if attempting to pass.

Your hypothetical also assumes that the truck is going to try to pass
you in your own lane rather than cross the centerline and pass at a
safe (and legally required) distance. *

Actually, the numbers from Frank's hypothetical pretty much mandate
that the vehicle cross the center line to pass no matter where the
cyclist is positioned. That's one of the reasons it is pretty silly.
Frank would apparently draw a dramatic distinction between a cyclist
using ~4 feet of a ten foot lane vs. a cyclist taking ~6 feet of the
same lane.
One is "invisible" and/or "inviting" the vehicle to pass, while the
other is not. Yeah, right.

You can make that assumption
sometimes, but not all the time. *And if there is a place where
everyone always tries to pass too closely (I admit, there are such
places), then taking the road may be the safe thing to do. *

Sometimes it isn't even an issue of being "safe," it's the one and
only possibility.

It also
requires you to pull off when there are cars piled up behind you to
let them pass. In that case, you are no different than the slow moving
lawn tractor driving down the road. The fact that you are on a bike
does not make you special and immune from the "slow moving vehicle
must yield" laws.

All good points that are largely beyond Frank's tunnel vision view.

DR

On Dec 8, 3:09*pm, James wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 8, 1:18 pm, AMuzi wrote:
The licensing of drivers seems to work about as well as
prohibition (alcohol, marijuana etc) or gun control laws.

That could be changed.

We have to verify, to reasonable accuracy anyway, that we have money
whenever we use a debit card. *Seems to me the technology could be
applied inside cars. *Swipe a valid driver's license (or leave it in
the dash slot), and you get to drive the car.

It wouldn't be foolproof, but it would be better than what we have
now. *And it might restore the idea of driving being a privilege, not
a right.

Now that's a good one.

I think there are some vehicles here fitted with BAC readers, that won't
let you start the car if you're over the legal limit.

Yup, here too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignitio...ock_device#USA
VERY expensive. No way in hell a similar device will ever exist for
mere administrative purposes.
DR

On Dec 8, 2:19*pm, Duane Hébert wrote:

I guess my point in responding to this post is that cyclists need to
ride defensively. *You can't rely on the motorist to see you and be able
to avoid you.

You can forget about that, Duane. On slippery roads car with four
wheels is easier to control than a bike with two wheels. In addition,
in really foul weather, a cyclist has less visibility in the forward
direction through his spectacles or goggles than a motorist behind his
windshield. It seems to me that a point does arrive where you have to
decide that the bike is more of a danger than a solution, and ice on
the roads is past that point. Mind you, the same applies to cars. --
Andre Jute

On Dec 8, 1:26*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

Let's face it, Microsoft is what made the computer what it is today, a
common appliance found in just about every home in America.

A common appliance much cursed by everyone, except those who have the
brains and the money to buy a Mac.

Does Mr. Sherman
have an Apple Mac

Of course he doesn't.
1. He's an engineer. Nobody's explained to him yet that there's an
easier way to do things.
2. If he had a Mac, his temper and manners would be much improved.
They aren't, ergo he doesn't have a Mac.

Andre Jute
Civilized people use the original GUI, just as civilized cyclists use
Cane Creek headsets

On Dec 8, 5:14*am, James wrote:
T m Sherm n _ wrote:

On 12/7/2010 11:50 AM, Duane H bert wrote:
[...]
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.[...]

Plan for the worst? *Every driver a homicidal maniac? *Terrorists with
RPG launchers behind every bush? *Armed thermonuclear warheads falling
out of bombers passing overhead? *Volcanic explosions below? *Sun going
nova? *Universe collapsing into a singularity?

Careful, you're beginning to sound like FK.

JS.

They have a place for Liddell Tommi high up in the Scientology
hierarchy.

Andre Jute
L. Ron Hubbard will be proud of him