|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On 7/3/2015 12:25 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-07-03 8:44 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. ... I don't have problems with that. Ahead of time I move over to the center of the road and hold out my left hand. Car drivers generally understand and pass me on the right unless they also want to turn left. During rush hour getting to road center can be an issue but the same is true on roads without bike lanes because of an endless row of passing cars. Here's the problem with your logic, Joerg. You put up an example of a motorist who wants to clear the road of cyclists, and say that because of people like him, more infrastructure is needed. But if a driver actively wants to hit cyclists, no practical infrastructure will prevent it. In any ordinary paint-striped bike lane, you're still vulnerable. When you move left prior to your left turn, you're still vulnerable. When you ride on any section of road without infrastructure, you're still vulnerable. And putting in segregated infrastructure to protect against the extremely rare crazies can make you more vulnerable to ordinary folks who just don't notice you until you - surprise! - pop out at intersections, driveway crossings and the like. No matter how much it terrifies you, it's better to be where motorists expect vehicles to be. That's where they look, and all but a very, very few do not want to hit you. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 8:15:02 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/3/2015 12:25 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 8:44 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. ... I don't have problems with that. Ahead of time I move over to the center of the road and hold out my left hand. Car drivers generally understand and pass me on the right unless they also want to turn left. During rush hour getting to road center can be an issue but the same is true on roads without bike lanes because of an endless row of passing cars. Here's the problem with your logic, Joerg. You put up an example of a motorist who wants to clear the road of cyclists, and say that because of people like him, more infrastructure is needed. But if a driver actively wants to hit cyclists, no practical infrastructure will prevent it. In any ordinary paint-striped bike lane, you're still vulnerable. When you move left prior to your left turn, you're still vulnerable. When you ride on any section of road without infrastructure, you're still vulnerable. And putting in segregated infrastructure to protect against the extremely rare crazies can make you more vulnerable to ordinary folks who just don't notice you until you - surprise! - pop out at intersections, driveway crossings and the like. No matter how much it terrifies you, it's better to be where motorists expect vehicles to be. That's where they look, and all but a very, very few do not want to hit you. Well, our bike lanes are clearly marked "no homicidal lunatics allowed." That seems to work -- usually. http://bikeportland.org/2013/04/22/r...ike-path-85780 That path, BTW, runs down the middle of a highway bridge. I don't even know how a car could get on it. -- Jay Beattie. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On 2015-07-04 7:24 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 8:15:02 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 7/3/2015 12:25 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 8:44 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. ... I don't have problems with that. Ahead of time I move over to the center of the road and hold out my left hand. Car drivers generally understand and pass me on the right unless they also want to turn left. During rush hour getting to road center can be an issue but the same is true on roads without bike lanes because of an endless row of passing cars. Here's the problem with your logic, Joerg. You put up an example of a motorist who wants to clear the road of cyclists, and say that because of people like him, more infrastructure is needed. But if a driver actively wants to hit cyclists, no practical infrastructure will prevent it. In any ordinary paint-striped bike lane, you're still vulnerable. ... Less so if built correctly. Maniacs like in the link can still get you. But the vast majority aren't maniacs. They are people who chat, text, email, put on make-up, shave, eat, haven't fully come off their sleep medication, had way too many cocktails, are under the influence of some "recreational" drug, and so on. The resulting accidents look similar. Except for the booze all things drivers simply did not do in the 70's which is why riding in the lanes was safer back then, and I felt safer back then. There is a simple and cheap improvement for bike lanes: Rumble strips. That wakes up almost any distracted driver. Of course, segregated structures are best. Example from yesterday: I rode up to Placerville on singletrack which requires me to also use a short county road stretch. On the way there everything looked as usual. On the way back just 3h or so later a heavy-gauge steel metal pole _off_ the side of that same road was completely flattened. That must have been at least a heavy pickup truck. ... When you move left prior to your left turn, you're still vulnerable. When you ride on any section of road without infrastructure, you're still vulnerable. And putting in segregated infrastructure to protect against the extremely rare crazies can make you more vulnerable to ordinary folks who just don't notice you until you - surprise! - pop out at intersections, driveway crossings and the like. And here is the major difference that obviously many riders fail to grasp: I do not "pop out" of there. Never. My parents taught me as a young kid to never, ever, rely on my right of way. Especially not when in a more vulnerable position like as a pedestrian or as a cyclist. No matter how much it terrifies you, it's better to be where motorists expect vehicles to be. That's where they look, and all but a very, very few do not want to hit you. Well, our bike lanes are clearly marked "no homicidal lunatics allowed." That seems to work -- usually. http://bikeportland.org/2013/04/22/r...ike-path-85780 That path, BTW, runs down the middle of a highway bridge. I don't even know how a car could get on it. I wonder if they tested that driver for "recreational" drugs. The only motor vehicles I have to watch out for on segregated bike facilities are dirt bikers and ATV using singletrack illegally. That's why I ride with daytime light even on some trail sections when the vegetation is more dense. Oh, and one has to watch out for rattlesnakes, of course. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On 2015-07-03 7:47 PM, Duane wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 8:39:16 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote: Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. As far as i'm con cerned fully segregated bicycle only lanes are an abomination and one had better have highly puncture resistant tires because those segregated lanes aren't cleared very often - heck even the right hand painted strip bicycle lanes are full of debris and you risk your tires every single time you ride in one of those bicycle lanes. Agawin making a left turn is very hard and dan gerous to do in a right hand bicycle lane. What's one supposed to do - rided through the intersection, stop nd then reposition oneself in the direction one wishes to travel? About the only thing good about many bicycle lanes is that they get the really slow bicyclists out of thetraffic lane and that allows a smoother flow of other traffic including fast bicyclists. A lot of bicycle lanes simply reduce bicyclists to second class citizens. Cheers On the other hand I did a 100k in eastern Ontario today around Dalkeith and we noticed a distinct change with drivers moving to the next land to pass us. The new min passing distance law seems to be working. May least to some extent. We've been trying to get one passes in Quebec to clarify the vehicle code that just requires motorists to pass only when it's safe. So far it's been a no go. But recently a respected journalist Isabelle Richer was hit head on when a minivan passed a slow moving vehicle and came into the lane where her group was riding. Now the media is pushing to pass this law. She is out of the coma now and expected to return to work in 6 months. I expect her to publicize this. I agree with you at least to say that SOME bike lanes reduce cyclists to second class citizens. I also use some that are useful. But there are other ways to make cycling safer and a minimum passing law is one. -- duane Ontario recently paased a one metre passing law. Maybe that's why they're passing you further. heers Yeah that's what I was saying. Seems like it could be working. It does. I feel the effect in California after they passed that a few months ago. Except people out here don't know no meidrs so it's three feet :-) Most people now give us those 3ft or even more. But on every ride there are several drivers twho on purpose don't. Plenty of space, nobody coming in the other lane and they don't more even one foot. Those are the scary ones, especially after they had a few cold ones with the guys. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On 2015-07-03 5:37 PM, Duane wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. As far as i'm con cerned fully segregated bicycle only lanes are an abomination and one had better have highly puncture resistant tires because those segregated lanes aren't cleared very often - heck even the right hand painted strip bicycle lanes are full of debris and you risk your tires every single time you ride in one of those bicycle lanes. Agawin making a left turn is very hard and dan gerous to do in a right hand bicycle lane. What's one supposed to do - rided through the intersection, stop nd then reposition oneself in the direction one wishes to travel? About the only thing good about many bicycle lanes is that they get the really slow bicyclists out of thetraffic lane and that allows a smoother flow of other traffic including fast bicyclists. A lot of bicycle lanes simply reduce bicyclists to second class citizens. Cheers On the other hand I did a 100k in eastern Ontario today around Dalkeith and we noticed a distinct change with drivers moving to the next land to pass us. The new min passing distance law seems to be working. May least to some extent. We've been trying to get one passes in Quebec to clarify the vehicle code that just requires motorists to pass only when it's safe. So far it's been a no go. But recently a respected journalist Isabelle Richer was hit head on when a minivan passed a slow moving vehicle and came into the lane where her group was riding. Now the media is pushing to pass this law. She is out of the coma now and expected to return to work in 6 months. I expect her to publicize this. I agree with you at least to say that SOME bike lanes reduce cyclists to second class citizens. I also use some that are useful. But there are other ways to make cycling safer and a minimum passing law is one. Isabelle Richer might want think about lighting if here bike didn't have any. I found that bright daytime lights reduce the chance of not being seen by car drivers substantially. This includes people who want to pull out to pass another car. They often abandon the manuever and pull back in even though there'd be plenty of space. Probably they think I am on some sort of small motorcycle. Same for people pulling out of driveways, parking lots, side roads and such. This was very different before I had such lighting. I couldn't find any details about how her accident happened but such insurance is cheap, less than $100. And I am sure glad she wore a helmet. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...sion-1.3131405 http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/woman-34-...dent-1.1907257 -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
Joerg wrote:
On 2015-07-03 5:37 PM, Duane wrote: Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. As far as i'm con cerned fully segregated bicycle only lanes are an abomination and one had better have highly puncture resistant tires because those segregated lanes aren't cleared very often - heck even the right hand painted strip bicycle lanes are full of debris and you risk your tires every single time you ride in one of those bicycle lanes. Agawin making a left turn is very hard and dan gerous to do in a right hand bicycle lane. What's one supposed to do - rided through the intersection, stop nd then reposition oneself in the direction one wishes to travel? About the only thing good about many bicycle lanes is that they get the really slow bicyclists out of thetraffic lane and that allows a smoother flow of other traffic including fast bicyclists. A lot of bicycle lanes simply reduce bicyclists to second class citizens. Cheers On the other hand I did a 100k in eastern Ontario today around Dalkeith and we noticed a distinct change with drivers moving to the next land to pass us. The new min passing distance law seems to be working. May least to some extent. We've been trying to get one passes in Quebec to clarify the vehicle code that just requires motorists to pass only when it's safe. So far it's been a no go. But recently a respected journalist Isabelle Richer was hit head on when a minivan passed a slow moving vehicle and came into the lane where her group was riding. Now the media is pushing to pass this law. She is out of the coma now and expected to return to work in 6 months. I expect her to publicize this. I agree with you at least to say that SOME bike lanes reduce cyclists to second class citizens. I also use some that are useful. But there are other ways to make cycling safer and a minimum passing law is one. Isabelle Richer might want think about lighting if here bike didn't have any. I found that bright daytime lights reduce the chance of not being seen by car drivers substantially. This includes people who want to pull out to pass another car. They often abandon the manuever and pull back in even though there'd be plenty of space. Probably they think I am on some sort of small motorcycle. Same for people pulling out of driveways, parking lots, side roads and such. This was very different before I had such lighting. I couldn't find any details about how her accident happened but such insurance is cheap, less than $100. And I am sure glad she wore a helmet. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...sion-1.3131405 http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/woman-34-...dent-1.1907257 While I don't have anything against DRLs, if the idiot that hit her didn't see a pack of roadies with the usual colours in broad daylight I doubt that lights would have helped. There's not a lot of detail about this crash but being familiar with the area I think the idiot decided to pass a hay truck or some other farm equipment without being able to see around it. I've been in this same situation and we've had to bail off the road into the gravel. It's not the rider's fault for not having laser beam strobe lights. It's the fault of the asshole that passed unsafely. Why people feel that they can endanger someone's life because they don't want to be delayed a few seconds is beyond me. -- duane |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On 2015-07-04 12:15 PM, Duane wrote:
Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 5:37 PM, Duane wrote: Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:46:32 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-03 6:42 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Whilst the article is interesting the Comments section below it is even more interesting largely because of the many anti-bicycles on the road comments. A lot of those comments complain about what we hew call 'Scofflaw bicyclists' who ride willy nilly. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...141935846.html Then there are car drivers who are hell-bent on "clearing the road of cyclists" like it just happened around he http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/cri...e26112064.html The picture illustrates why I agree with the notion in the Canadian article that more bike infrastructure is needed. It's a miracle that this cyclist survived. The first cyclist was just side-swiped but the two others were hit full brunt from behind at high speed. IIRC one was catapulted across the road to the left and the other one crashed into the windshield. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ My experiences with bicycle lanes in Ontaro Canada is that they are crap ad are more dan gerous than no bicycle lane. I'm trying to get across town in a reasonable amou nt of time an d i don't need to have the aggravation of trying to move from the far right bike lane over to make a left turn. If I'm riding in a traffic lane i find is far far easier to make that left turn. As far as i'm con cerned fully segregated bicycle only lanes are an abomination and one had better have highly puncture resistant tires because those segregated lanes aren't cleared very often - heck even the right hand painted strip bicycle lanes are full of debris and you risk your tires every single time you ride in one of those bicycle lanes. Agawin making a left turn is very hard and dan gerous to do in a right hand bicycle lane. What's one supposed to do - rided through the intersection, stop nd then reposition oneself in the direction one wishes to travel? About the only thing good about many bicycle lanes is that they get the really slow bicyclists out of thetraffic lane and that allows a smoother flow of other traffic including fast bicyclists. A lot of bicycle lanes simply reduce bicyclists to second class citizens. Cheers On the other hand I did a 100k in eastern Ontario today around Dalkeith and we noticed a distinct change with drivers moving to the next land to pass us. The new min passing distance law seems to be working. May least to some extent. We've been trying to get one passes in Quebec to clarify the vehicle code that just requires motorists to pass only when it's safe. So far it's been a no go. But recently a respected journalist Isabelle Richer was hit head on when a minivan passed a slow moving vehicle and came into the lane where her group was riding. Now the media is pushing to pass this law. She is out of the coma now and expected to return to work in 6 months. I expect her to publicize this. I agree with you at least to say that SOME bike lanes reduce cyclists to second class citizens. I also use some that are useful. But there are other ways to make cycling safer and a minimum passing law is one. Isabelle Richer might want think about lighting if here bike didn't have any. I found that bright daytime lights reduce the chance of not being seen by car drivers substantially. This includes people who want to pull out to pass another car. They often abandon the manuever and pull back in even though there'd be plenty of space. Probably they think I am on some sort of small motorcycle. Same for people pulling out of driveways, parking lots, side roads and such. This was very different before I had such lighting. I couldn't find any details about how her accident happened but such insurance is cheap, less than $100. And I am sure glad she wore a helmet. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...sion-1.3131405 http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/woman-34-...dent-1.1907257 While I don't have anything against DRLs, if the idiot that hit her didn't see a pack of roadies with the usual colours in broad daylight I doubt that lights would have helped. Inattentive driver often don't. But if something with a bright glow comes at them that gets their attention. Same from behind where my daytime lights flash. It makes me visible from a long distance. There's not a lot of detail about this crash but being familiar with the area I think the idiot decided to pass a hay truck or some other farm equipment without being able to see around it. I've been in this same situation and we've had to bail off the road into the gravel. It's not the rider's fault for not having laser beam strobe lights. It's the fault of the asshole that passed unsafely. Why people feel that they can endanger someone's life because they don't want to be delayed a few seconds is beyond me. Full agreement here. However, I believe in prevention so I always ride with lights now, after experiencing the difference time and again. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 8:11:48 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-07-04 7:24 AM, jbeattie wrote: snip Less so if built correctly. Maniacs like in the link can still get you. But the vast majority aren't maniacs. They are people who chat, text, email, put on make-up, shave, eat, haven't fully come off their sleep medication, had way too many cocktails, are under the influence of some "recreational" drug, and so on. The resulting accidents look similar. Except for the booze all things drivers simply did not do in the 70's which is why riding in the lanes was safer back then, and I felt safer back then. There is a simple and cheap improvement for bike lanes: Rumble strips. That wakes up almost any distracted driver. Of course, segregated structures are best. Example from yesterday: I rode up to Placerville on singletrack which requires me to also use a short county road stretch. On the way there everything looked as usual. On the way back just 3h or so later a heavy-gauge steel metal pole _off_ the side of that same road was completely flattened. That must have been at least a heavy pickup truck. ... When you move left prior to your left turn, you're still vulnerable. When you ride on any section of road without infrastructure, you're still vulnerable. And putting in segregated infrastructure to protect against the extremely rare crazies can make you more vulnerable to ordinary folks who just don't notice you until you - surprise! - pop out at intersections, driveway crossings and the like. And here is the major difference that obviously many riders fail to grasp: I do not "pop out" of there. Never. My parents taught me as a young kid to never, ever, rely on my right of way. Especially not when in a more vulnerable position like as a pedestrian or as a cyclist. No matter how much it terrifies you, it's better to be where motorists expect vehicles to be. That's where they look, and all but a very, very few do not want to hit you. Well, our bike lanes are clearly marked "no homicidal lunatics allowed." That seems to work -- usually. http://bikeportland.org/2013/04/22/r...ike-path-85780 That path, BTW, runs down the middle of a highway bridge. I don't even know how a car could get on it. I wonder if they tested that driver for "recreational" drugs. The only motor vehicles I have to watch out for on segregated bike facilities are dirt bikers and ATV using singletrack illegally. That's why I ride with daytime light even on some trail sections when the vegetation is more dense. Oh, and one has to watch out for rattlesnakes, of course. I just returned from like a 1,000 mile ride -- O.K., it was less than 1,000 miles, but still really epic. AND I DIDN'T DIE! (except metaphorically on the last hills getting home). My route even included crossing a water-body, and I didn't wear a life preserver. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=505xiKnCNDk The first part of the ride was with a racing club that happened to roll by me and my riding buddy. No flashers. No powerful front lights. My friend and I looked the part (although twice as old), and they let us drop in until our routes parted. The remainder of the ride was on shoulderless death roads filled with guys in pick-up trucks flying giant Americun flags and blasting country-western music. There really were a lot of guys flying giant flags and blasting country-western music. I guess it's a holiday thing. I was hit seven times, maybe eight, but I kept riding. I'm that tough. I also noted a larger than usual accumulation of dead cyclists by the side of the road. -- Jay Beattie. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On 7/4/2015 11:11 AM, Joerg wrote:
On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 8:15:02 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: Here's the problem with your logic, Joerg. You put up an example of a motorist who wants to clear the road of cyclists, and say that because of people like him, more infrastructure is needed. But if a driver actively wants to hit cyclists, no practical infrastructure will prevent it. In any ordinary paint-striped bike lane, you're still vulnerable. ... Less so if built correctly. Maniacs like in the link can still get you. But the vast majority aren't maniacs. They are people who chat, text, email, put on make-up, shave, eat, haven't fully come off their sleep medication, had way too many cocktails, are under the influence of some "recreational" drug, and so on. The resulting accidents look similar. Except for the booze all things drivers simply did not do in the 70's which is why riding in the lanes was safer back then, and I felt safer back then. There are a lot of feelings about danger, and feelings about safety, that don't match reality. Many people feel much safer traveling with a St. Christopher medal. Do you think they work? There is a simple and cheap improvement for bike lanes: Rumble strips. That wakes up almost any distracted driver. Oh good grief. The bike-ignorant superintendent of our local metro park decided to "improve" bike safety by adding rumble strips between a bike lane and an adjoining standard lane. I know of one of my bike club members who crashed because of hitting that rumble strip, and another one who doubted my warnings that it was dangerous until he hit it and nearly crashed. And BTW, the latter guy was on a mountain bike. I think if he'd been on a road bike, it would have been worse. Of course, segregated structures are best. Good grief. And putting in segregated infrastructure to protect against the extremely rare crazies can make you more vulnerable to ordinary folks who just don't notice you until you - surprise! - pop out at intersections, driveway crossings and the like. And here is the major difference that obviously many riders fail to grasp: I do not "pop out" of there. Never. My parents taught me as a young kid to never, ever, rely on my right of way. Especially not when in a more vulnerable position like as a pedestrian or as a cyclist. "Never, ever rely on my right of way"?? That's advice as useless as "ride as if you are invisible to motorists." If you were to really do what you say, you'd stop and wait at every intersection with any road or driveway, if there were any possibility a car might pull out. Sorry, Joerg, but you're spouting nonsense yet again. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling deaths in Toronto traced back to city infrastructure
On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 6:22:27 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 8:11:48 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2015-07-04 7:24 AM, jbeattie wrote: snip Snipped I wonder if they tested that driver for "recreational" drugs. The only motor vehicles I have to watch out for on segregated bike facilities are dirt bikers and ATV using singletrack illegally. That's why I ride with daytime light even on some trail sections when the vegetation is more dense. Oh, and one has to watch out for rattlesnakes, of course. I just returned from like a 1,000 mile ride -- O.K., it was less than 1,000 miles, but still really epic. AND I DIDN'T DIE! (except metaphorically on the last hills getting home). My route even included crossing a water-body, and I didn't wear a life preserver. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=505xiKnCNDk The first part of the ride was with a racing club that happened to roll by me and my riding buddy. No flashers. No powerful front lights. My friend and I looked the part (although twice as old), and they let us drop in until our routes parted. The remainder of the ride was on shoulderless death roads filled with guys in pick-up trucks flying giant Americun flags and blasting country-western music. There really were a lot of guys flying giant flags and blasting country-western music. I guess it's a holiday thing. I was hit seven times, maybe eight, but I kept riding. I'm that tough. I also noted a larger than usual accumulation of dead cyclists by the side of the road. -- Jay Beattie. I ride may tens of thousands of kilometres each and every year. I ride year round with at least 50kms a day but usually between 75kms and 100kms daily and then longer rides Sayturdays and Sundays. I've never used daylight running lights front or rear. If a driver can't tell thata bicyclist is on the road then that driver should not be driving. Bright clothing is far more visible to me that any flashing lights I've seen on any bicycle. This thing tthat you need all this crap in order to ride the streets of maiming and death is a surefire way to discourage any newbie bicylist or potential bicycle commuter from ever venturing out onto the roads. That's because tthey'll take one look at the cost of the stuff required, like Jeoerg's $100.00 light and say "It's too dangerous out there for me!" Joerg, are you trying to turn people off of bicycling entirely? Same to you SMS? Cheers |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists and pedestrians | Sir Ridesalot | Techniques | 11 | May 30th 11 04:33 PM |
Drinking and cycling in Toronto, what are the rules? | Jason Spaceman[_2_] | Racing | 4 | June 15th 10 10:27 PM |
the money order has been traced back to marty fart wallace61897342316 [email protected] is a Janitor at Muja Power Station and The CollieValley Marathon Committee. police said wallace is a psychopathic from the kuklux klan volks front racist skin head | [email protected] | Australia | 0 | May 15th 08 02:43 PM |
Winter Cycling Clothing in Toronto | BeeRich | Techniques | 37 | February 3rd 06 05:42 PM |
FL cycling deaths | Hamfest | Rides | 0 | December 16th 05 12:46 AM |