|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks - "Be Bright - Wear White" vs' "Fight Back - Wear Black"
Thanks for all of the observations. Here are a few of my own:
1 - It's far better to be lit up at night - and ride with the mentality that you're in matt black and everyone driving a car has a guide dog in the back. 2 - On unlit lanes, you need a bright front light. In addition to illuminating the road/obstacles ahead, it forces oncoming drivers to dip their headlights. 3 - I've read cyclecraft and after lots of experimentation, came to the conclusion that if you're too far out, you get a lot of abuse from drivers. I agree that being in the left tyre track is the best position for 3 reasons: a) You're in the line of sight of drivers - without appearing to be deliberately hogging the road (important at rush hour). b) It forces "use of brain" overtaking in a way that being too far over to the left doesn't. c) There is much less road debris as it tends to get knocked aside by motor vehicles . I once clipped a house brick in the middle of the road which gave me the SHIVERS. 4 - Juggling in the dark is hard. On a similar point to 1 above, I firmly believe that it's crucial to wear a helmet - and ride with the mentality that your brain is encased in an egg shell. A testament to this is that an oncoming SMIDSY* WVM once pulled across me to turn right and I went into the side of him at around 30 mph (I was going down hill at the time). I didn't even have a chance to put my hands out and I ploughed into him head first - resulting in a cracked helmet but an intact skull. I am convinced that things would have been quite different had I not conceded to my wife's powers of persuasion and started wearing a helmet. *I'm not really sure if he was a SMIDSY because he drove off in a cloud of diesel exhaust fumes. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Drinky wrote:
.. On a similar point to 1 above, I firmly believe that it's crucial to wear a helmet - and ride with the mentality that your brain is encased in an egg shell. I don't. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Drinky wrote:
On a similar point to 1 above, I firmly believe that it's crucial to wear a helmet - and ride with the mentality that your brain is encased in an egg shell. If you're wearing a lid, ride with the mentality that it will do what they have a proven track record of doing: nothing to save serious injuries. There is /no/ compelling evidence that they'll save you from anything more than a graze, and though a graze isn't any fun it's by no means "crucial" that you avoid them at all costs. A testament to this is that an oncoming SMIDSY* WVM once pulled across me to turn right and I went into the side of him at around 30 mph (I was going down hill at the time). I didn't even have a chance to put my hands out and I ploughed into him head first - resulting in a cracked helmet but an intact skull. I am convinced that things would have been quite different had I not conceded to my wife's powers of persuasion and started wearing a helmet. If your helmet cracked then it failed. It is quite unlikely your skull would have cracked, skulls are very hard and the sides of white vans are actually quite ductile (broad, unstressed sheets of thin, soft metal which dent easily with nothing behind them to bring you to a sudden stop) and in impacts will undergo the sort of deformation without breaking that your helmet /should/ have done if it had worked properly to absorb the blow. It wouldn't have been any fun, but it's most unlikely you'd have been killed and very possibly not much injured beyond a bit dazed. I'm afraid this looks like another "a helmet saved my life!" anecdote which if a control was possible would turn out not to be quite the benefit you've assumed. Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Response to Peter Clinch:
I'm afraid this looks like another "a helmet saved my life!" anecdote which if a control was possible would turn out not to be quite the benefit you've assumed. And "brain enclosed in eggshell" perception or not, I found myself wondering if the PP would have been riding downhill at 30mph at all if he hadn't been wearing a lid. I hope I'm under no illusions as to the lack of benefit/dangers of helmets, but on the rare occasions I wear one, I still wonder if I'm guilty of a degree of risk compensation. -- Mark, UK. We hope to hear him swear, we love to hear him squeak, We like to see him biting fingers in his horny beak. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Peter Clinch wrote:
If your helmet cracked then it failed. It is quite unlikely your skull would have cracked, skulls are very hard and the sides of white vans are actually quite ductile (broad, unstressed sheets of thin, soft metal which dent easily with nothing behind them to bring you to a sudden stop) Indeed. confession time In my callow and reckless youth I was cycling rather too fast around a corner and found a white van (one of the little ones based on a car) parked there where there hadn't been before :-). Naturally I stared at it in terror and therefore hit it :-) but had the presence of instinct to manage to skid the bike sideways so I hit it with me sideways on. There was a godalmighty BANG. Once I'd dusted myself off and figured that none of me was broken, I inspected the van. There was a HUGE dent in the side. So wearing my most sheepish expression I knocked on the door of the house without which it was parked. The owner came out, listening to me apologise, and was inspecting the damage - when there was another, slightly less huge, BANG, and the entire side popped out again to resume its original shape. He looked at me, I looked at him, and he said, "Well, that's alright then. Forget about it, mate" and wandered back inside. R. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Drinky wrote:
Thanks for all of the observations. Here are a few of my own: 1 - It's far better to be lit up at night - and ride with the mentality that you're in matt black and everyone driving a car has a guide dog in the back. More or less with you so far. Unfortunately there are so many lights of all sorts in (sub)urban environments that the relatively feeble ones found on normally equipped bikes do not necessarily stand out. 2 - On unlit lanes, you need a bright front light. In addition to illuminating the road/obstacles ahead, it forces oncoming drivers to dip their headlights. As the author of the post that inspired this thread, I ought to point out it had nothing to do with riding on unlit roads where there is a need to illuminate your route. However, I am amused by your notion that anything the cyclist does forces a driver to do anything. Au contraire to your supposition, I have known car drivers switch from dip to full beam upon getting a glimpse of an oncoming cyclist. Perhaps they were curious to find out what was approaching. Perhaps they thought this a way of communicating "you have only one light working" to the thing they had glimpsed. Perhaps they just hate cyclists. 3 - I've read cyclecraft and after lots of experimentation, came to the conclusion that if you're too far out, you get a lot of abuse from drivers. I agree that being in the left tyre track is the best position for 3 reasons: a) You're in the line of sight of drivers - without appearing to be deliberately hogging the road (important at rush hour). b) It forces "use of brain" overtaking in a way that being too far over to the left doesn't. c) There is much less road debris as it tends to get knocked aside by motor vehicles . I once clipped a house brick in the middle of the road which gave me the SHIVERS. Position is indeed crucial. 4 - Juggling in the dark is hard. On a similar point to 1 above, I firmly believe that it's crucial to wear a helmet - and ride with the mentality that your brain is encased in an egg shell. Could not agree less. A testament to this is that an oncoming SMIDSY* WVM once pulled across me to turn right and I went into the side of him at around 30 mph (I was going down hill at the time). I didn't even have a chance to put my hands out and I ploughed into him head first - resulting in a cracked helmet but an intact skull. I am convinced that things would have been quite different had I not conceded to my wife's powers of persuasion and started wearing a helmet. Anecdotes are not evidence or a testimony to the helmet's efficacy and give no worthwhile indication of what would have happened otherwise. Would you be impressed by one of my (many) stories about how I went on a ride without a helmet and did not hit my head off anything at all? Why not? -- Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Peter Clinch wrote:
Drinky wrote: On a similar point to 1 above, I firmly believe that it's crucial to wear a helmet - and ride with the mentality that your brain is encased in an egg shell. If you're wearing a lid, ride with the mentality that it will do what they have a proven track record of doing: nothing to save serious injuries. There is /no/ compelling evidence that they'll save you from anything more than a graze, and though a graze isn't any fun it's by no means "crucial" that you avoid them at all costs. A testament to this is that an oncoming SMIDSY* WVM once pulled across me to turn right and I went into the side of him at around 30 mph (I was going down hill at the time). I didn't even have a chance to put my hands out and I ploughed into him head first - resulting in a cracked helmet but an intact skull. I am convinced that things would have been quite different had I not conceded to my wife's powers of persuasion and started wearing a helmet. If your helmet cracked then it failed. It is quite unlikely your skull would have cracked, skulls are very hard and the sides of white vans are actually quite ductile (broad, unstressed sheets of thin, soft metal which dent easily with nothing behind them to bring you to a sudden stop) and in impacts will undergo the sort of deformation without breaking that your helmet /should/ have done if it had worked properly to absorb the blow. It wouldn't have been any fun, but it's most unlikely you'd have been killed and very possibly not much injured beyond a bit dazed. I'm afraid this looks like another "a helmet saved my life!" anecdote which if a control was possible would turn out not to be quite the benefit you've assumed. Pete. SMIDSY No can't get this one? (small minded idiot driving...?) skulls are very hard and the sides of white vans are actually quite ductile (broad... I thought skulls were comparativly weak requiring only about 8lbs per sq inch to break. Thats what I was taught as a RM. Sniper8052 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:28:37 GMT, "Sniper8052(L96A1)"
wrote: SMIDSY No can't get this one? (small minded idiot driving...?) "Sorry, mate, I didn't see you" Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On 23/11/04 2:28 pm, in article
, "Sniper8052(L96A1)" wrote: SMIDSY No can't get this one? (small minded idiot driving...?) Sorry Mate I didn't See you. skulls are very hard and the sides of white vans are actually quite ductile (broad... I thought skulls were comparativly weak requiring only about 8lbs per sq inch to break. Thats what I was taught as a RM. RM? I'd be most surprised if a skull would break at 8lb per sq in. So far I have found the following: Young's modulus of bone varies from 1.8x10e10 N/m2 fro compact bone to 7.6 x 10e7 for trabecular bone. Tensile strength is 1.2x10e8 N/m2 Compressive strength is 1.7x10e10 (compact) 2.2x10e6 (Trabecular). I suppose it does matter where you put your 8lb/sq in but a quick calculation indicates this is equivalent to 2.8x10e5, at least an order of magnitude below the tensile strength of the bone. ...d |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
I thought skulls were comparativly weak requiring only about 8lbs per sq inch to break. Thats what I was taught as a RM. Comparitive to what? If they were too weak to be useful fractured skulls would be commonplace, but though bumps and scrapes happen a lot fractures don't strike me as /that/ common. Especially if the impact is against a broad sheet to spread the load that also deforms and conforms as you strike it. Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Be Bright - Wear White" vs' "Fight Back - Wear Black" | Drinky | UK | 45 | November 28th 04 12:42 AM |
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 | Mike Iglesias | General | 4 | October 29th 04 07:11 AM |
RoadBikeRider newsletter on tire wear | Matt O'Toole | Techniques | 2 | June 11th 04 12:08 AM |
ARBR has gone downhill | Al Kubeluis | Recumbent Biking | 143 | December 20th 03 11:29 PM |