| |
Main
Date: 23 Jan 2007 10:25:36
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Pedal Power
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6287085.stm
|
|
| |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 09:16:45
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
On Jan 25, 4:23 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> What you write implies that you have your own standard of safety that
> you apply independently of what other users might believe, e.g., pedestrians
> who might be of the opinion that one meter is too close, ...
Maybe taxes could be raised, then a social statistician hired by the
guvmint, which would then yield a true and perfect "average" number
that informs "us" of "what other users might believe." Numbers are
facts, you know (we've been told right here in rbr). Then set the law
to the "average view" since in some way of convoluted reasoning, that
is what the "majority" believes and wants, and for some reason, the
majority gets to "decide." {laughs}
|
| |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 16:23:25
From: ilan
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
On Jan 25, 8:32 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca > wrote:
>
> I generally give at least a metre of clearance to any pedestrian even in
> my most psychotic moments. I don't really register a car as being
> anything like a close call unless they fall under that 1m distance when
> overtaking (and really, it has to be a lot less than 1m before I get
> annoyed), or at rather greater distances if they are on a crossing or
> intersecting path.
What you write implies that you have your own standard of safety that
you apply
independently of what other users might believe, e.g., pedestrians who
might
be of the opinion that one meter is too close, or what the law
prescribes, assuming that where you
live, a vehicle cannot enter a crosswalk if there are pedestrians in
it, or about to
enter it.
As for the Dutch experiment, it might work in small communities there,
but here in Paris
it is a complete failure since many vehicles, and bicycles in
particular, pay absolutely
no attention to signals, and there are many pedestrians killed by
vehicles every year.
-ilan
|
| | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 03:33:50
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article <1169771005.509509.156440@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"ilan" <ilanpi@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 8:32 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> >
> > I generally give at least a metre of clearance to any pedestrian even in
> > my most psychotic moments. I don't really register a car as being
> > anything like a close call unless they fall under that 1m distance when
> > overtaking (and really, it has to be a lot less than 1m before I get
> > annoyed), or at rather greater distances if they are on a crossing or
> > intersecting path.
>
> What you write implies that you have your own standard of safety that
> you apply
> independently of what other users might believe, e.g., pedestrians who
> might
> be of the opinion that one meter is too close, or what the law
> prescribes, assuming that where you
> live, a vehicle cannot enter a crosswalk if there are pedestrians in
> it, or about to
> enter it.
If I thought I was even flustering the pedestrians, I would change my
ways. I assure you I yield to them vigorously (usually with more care
than the cars) and I breach the rules of the road under the model that
to do so is to take full responsibility for my safety and the safety of
others. In other words, I only do it if it is innocuous (doesn't thwart
anyone's right of way, for example) and risk-free.
> As for the Dutch experiment, it might work in small communities there,
> but here in Paris
> it is a complete failure since many vehicles, and bicycles in
> particular, pay absolutely
> no attention to signals, and there are many pedestrians killed by
> vehicles every year.
The point of the Dutch experiment is that there are no signals. It
essentially drives speeds down by making the hazards psychologically
manifest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/04/ntraffic0
4.xml
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2006/10/14/m
flights114.xml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0127/p01s03-woeu.html
&c.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 10:51:28
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> The point of the Dutch experiment is that there are no signals. It
> essentially drives speeds down by making the hazards psychologically
> manifest:
Ilan's point seems to be in Paris the hazards are physically manifest.
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Jan 2007 01:16:33
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article <45b9c0b0$0$9704$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com >,
Donald Munro <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > The point of the Dutch experiment is that there are no signals. It
> > essentially drives speeds down by making the hazards psychologically
> > manifest:
>
> Ilan's point seems to be in Paris the hazards are physically manifest.
Perhaps, but if that is the case, I suspect that Ilan has it quite
wrong. The hazards are signed and signaled, but not in a way that our
lizard-brains respond to.
on the other hand, if the road space narrows (even if only by illusion
(counter-coloured cobbles that create a suggestion of a roadway, for
example), and the visual environment suddenly gets very _complex_,
people slow down without even thinking about it.
The morose truth is that driving a car slower in an urban environment is
probably to vehicular safety what hand-washing is to medicine: the
fundamental breakthrough for which all other concepts in the field are
at best useful elaborations.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 20:23:45
From: Robert Chung
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> Perhaps, but if that is the case, I suspect that Ilan has it quite
> wrong. The hazards are signed and signaled, but not in a way that our
> lizard-brains respond to.
A few years ago one of the bicycle advocacy groups tracked down all of the
fatal bike accidents that had happened in the previous year within Paris. My
recollection (which might be faulty) is that the majority of those deaths
occured when cars, trucks, or buses overtook cyclists and then turned in
front of them.
|
| |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 16:35:10
From: ilan
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
I am just curious, but do you yield to pedestrians at crosswalks? If
you don't then it will be the pedestrians who will
experience the "close calls" due to a cyclist not giving right of way.
Anyway, I've seen reports from Holland where some towns have abandoned
right of way at intersections and
let cars, cyclists, and pedestrians settle it among themselves. They
claim that this has reduced the number
of accidents.
-ilan
On Jan 23, 1:32 pm, Ewoud Dronkert <firstn...@lastname.net.invalid >
wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2007 03:44:52 -0800, joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.Could be. My 'close calls' are almost always cars not giving right of
> way at intersections or not looking from driveways. It's because I'm
> so lightning-fast they think they still have time.
>
> --
> E. Dronkert
|
| | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 17:39:53
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article
<1169685309.944782.214570@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"ilan" <ilanpi@yahoo.com > wrote:
> I am just curious, but do you yield to pedestrians at crosswalks? If
> you don't then it will be the pedestrians who will
> experience the "close calls" due to a cyclist not giving right of way.
>
> Anyway, I've seen reports from Holland where some towns have abandoned
> right of way at intersections and
> let cars, cyclists, and pedestrians settle it among themselves. They
> claim that this has reduced the number
> of accidents.
There are no accidents, only winners and losers.
> On Jan 23, 1:32 pm, Ewoud Dronkert <firstn...@lastname.net.invalid>
> wrote:
> > On 23 Jan 2007 03:44:52 -0800, joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.Could be. My 'close calls' are almost always cars not giving right of
> > way at intersections or not looking from driveways. It's because I'm
> > so lightning-fast they think they still have time.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 07:32:33
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article <rubrum-F0F9DF.17395324012007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net >,
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article
> <1169685309.944782.214570@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "ilan" <ilanpi@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I am just curious, but do you yield to pedestrians at crosswalks? If
> > you don't then it will be the pedestrians who will
> > experience the "close calls" due to a cyclist not giving right of way.
The answer for me is "generally, yes." However, I am quite willing to
enter the crosswalk as long as I'll be a metre or so behind them.
I generally give at least a metre of clearance to any pedestrian even in
my most psychotic moments. I don't really register a car as being
anything like a close call unless they fall under that 1m distance when
overtaking (and really, it has to be a lot less than 1m before I get
annoyed), or at rather greater distances if they are on a crossing or
intersecting path.
I daresay a metre of separation from a bike moving at reasonable speeds
(I'd never buzz a ped at close range; that would be purely obnoxious) is
going to be a different experience for a ped than a car overtaking a
bike with less than a metre of difference. The relative mass issues
alone!
> > Anyway, I've seen reports from Holland where some towns have abandoned
> > right of way at intersections and
> > let cars, cyclists, and pedestrians settle it among themselves. They
> > claim that this has reduced the number
> > of accidents.
>
> There are no accidents, only winners and losers.
Heh. The Dutch experiment is both more and less complicated than that.
What has been done away with is stuff like lane kings, road signs
(stop, yield, roundabout ahead, No Left Turn, etc.), and traffic lights.
In their place is a road design that uses subtler cues to present
information: roads are narrowed, or cobble-textured where vehicles must
slow to avoid an approaching hazard, roundabouts are in heavy use, and
other elements of the design
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 17:04:14
From: Robert Chung
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
ilan wrote:
> Anyway, I've seen reports from Holland where some towns have abandoned
> right of way at intersections and
> let cars, cyclists, and pedestrians settle it among themselves. They
> claim that this has reduced the number
> of accidents.
>
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,448747,00.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/traffic.html
|
| |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 08:56:53
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
On Jan 23, 3:44 am, joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
> One man's narrow gin is another man's close call. Just now I was
> driving home and the car started drifting out in an off camber turn.
> There was a big truck coming the other way. I didn't slide that much,
> and the truck passed with probably the same clearance it would have had
> there been no ice on the road. Was this a close call? I don't think so,
> as I was within my gin, albeit a narrow one. Same thing when cars
> pass too close when I am riding. It's irritating, dangerous, and
> unnecessary, but not a close call (usually).
>
> I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.
"Those who test limits will eventually find them." -- Ben Franklin,
1759
|
| | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 19:47:17
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
> "Those who test limits will eventually find them." -- Ben Franklin,
> 1759
Was he thinking about unprotected sex when he said that ?
|
| |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 03:44:52
From:
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:25:36 GMT, B. Lafferty wrote:
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6287085.stm
>
> An Australian: "I've had a fair few problems with traffic. You can
> guarantee every time you go for a cycle there's going to be a close
> call of some sort"
>
> Well, it's really the same over here.
>
> --
> E. Dronkert
One man's narrow gin is another man's close call. Just now I was
driving home and the car started drifting out in an off camber turn.
There was a big truck coming the other way. I didn't slide that much,
and the truck passed with probably the same clearance it would have had
there been no ice on the road. Was this a close call? I don't think so,
as I was within my gin, albeit a narrow one. Same thing when cars
pass too close when I am riding. It's irritating, dangerous, and
unnecessary, but not a close call (usually).
I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 13:32:20
From: Ewoud Dronkert
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
On 23 Jan 2007 03:44:52 -0800, joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.
Could be. My 'close calls' are almost always cars not giving right of
way at intersections or not looking from driveways. It's because I'm
so lightning-fast they think they still have time.
--
E. Dronkert
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 18:24:48
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article <hsvbr2l1jvun9cjgbvejc0b2457u2rqcl6@4ax.com >,
Ewoud Dronkert <firstname@lastname.net.invalid > wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2007 03:44:52 -0800, joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> > I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.
>
> Could be. My 'close calls' are almost always cars not giving right of
> way at intersections or not looking from driveways. It's because I'm
> so lightning-fast they think they still have time.
I believe that most people in cars here in the US see a bicycle as only going one
speed: slow. So they'll pull out in front of you, assuming that they have plenty of
time. On the other hand, it could be that they just don't give a damn. Even if a
cyclist hits them, they will suffer no physical damage (uh, that's in general).
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 21:48:12
From: Carl Sundquist
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
"Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com > wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-608848.18244824012007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
> I believe that most people in cars here in the US see a bicycle as only
> going one
> speed: slow. So they'll pull out in front of you, assuming that they have
> plenty of
> time. On the other hand, it could be that they just don't give a damn.
> Even if a
> cyclist hits them, they will suffer no physical damage (uh, that's in
> general).
>
I feel that part of the reason they don't give a damn is bike riders'
general disdain for courteous road manners, be it running stop lights and
stop signs to lane splitters and hopping on sidewalks when convenient. Plus
bike riders' lack of directional predictability.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 20:41:28
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article <1MVth.84159$Yu6.52371@newsfe16.lga >, "Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net>
wrote:
> "Howard Kveck" <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
> news:YOURhoward-608848.18244824012007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> >
> > I believe that most people in cars here in the US see a bicycle as only
> > going one speed: slow. So they'll pull out in front of you, assuming that they
> > have plenty of time. On the other hand, it could be that they just don't give
> > a damn. Even if a cyclist hits them, they will suffer no physical damage (uh,
> > that's in general).
> >
>
> I feel that part of the reason they don't give a damn is bike riders'
> general disdain for courteous road manners, be it running stop lights and
> stop signs to lane splitters and hopping on sidewalks when convenient. Plus
> bike riders' lack of directional predictability.
I wouldn't argue with any of that.
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 20:32:51
From: Robert Chung
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
Carl Sundquist wrote:
> I feel that part of the reason they don't give a damn is bike riders'
> general disdain for courteous road manners, be it running stop lights
> and stop signs to lane splitters and hopping on sidewalks when
> convenient. Plus bike riders' lack of directional predictability.
I used to think this, until I lived in France. If anything, both cyclists
and drivers lack predictability (or, as I've tried to explain to American
visitors, the lane that a car occupies just before an intersection gives you
no information about which way the driver will turn) but cars typically give
much more passing room to cyclists than in the US.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 21:18:30
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
In article <51qq7lF1llnv1U1@mid.individual.net >,
"Robert Chung" <me@address.invalid > wrote:
> Carl Sundquist wrote:
>
> > I feel that part of the reason they don't give a damn is bike riders'
> > general disdain for courteous road manners, be it running stop lights
> > and stop signs to lane splitters and hopping on sidewalks when
> > convenient. Plus bike riders' lack of directional predictability.
>
> I used to think this, until I lived in France. If anything, both cyclists
> and drivers lack predictability (or, as I've tried to explain to American
> visitors, the lane that a car occupies just before an intersection gives you
> no information about which way the driver will turn) but cars typically give
> much more passing room to cyclists than in the US.
When I was in Barcelona, I thought that cars gave motorcycles and scooters a lot
of room and respect, but cyclists got pretty short shrift. It looked like you took a
pretty big risk riding in town there.
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 22:17:04
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:24:48 -0800, Howard Kveck <YOURhoward@h-SHOESbomb.com >
wrote:
>In article <hsvbr2l1jvun9cjgbvejc0b2457u2rqcl6@4ax.com>,
> Ewoud Dronkert <firstname@lastname.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 23 Jan 2007 03:44:52 -0800, joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
>> > I think new cyclists often mistake proximity for close call.
>>
>> Could be. My 'close calls' are almost always cars not giving right of
>> way at intersections or not looking from driveways. It's because I'm
>> so lightning-fast they think they still have time.
>
> I believe that most people in cars here in the US see a bicycle as only going one
>speed: slow. So they'll pull out in front of you, assuming that they have plenty of
>time. On the other hand, it could be that they just don't give a damn. Even if a
>cyclist hits them, they will suffer no physical damage (uh, that's in general).
Yep, they usually get the speed wrong. It seems to me that they make fewer
mistakes the faster I go. Like over 20mph is fast enough that their mental
calculator can actually predict where I'll be. Much under that and they check
off the "slow" box and pay attention to something else.
Ron
|
| |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 11:47:49
From: Ewoud Dronkert
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:25:36 GMT, B. Lafferty wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6287085.stm
An Australian: "I've had a fair few problems with traffic. You can
guarantee every time you go for a cycle there's going to be a close
call of some sort"
Well, it's really the same over here.
--
E. Dronkert
|
| |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 02:38:11
From:
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
B. Lafferty wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6287085.stm
Riding naked. That's a good way to get drivers who think cycling is a
nuisance to take bikers seriously.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 15:49:42
From: Phil Holman
Subject: Re: Pedal Power
|
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1169548691.010553.221470@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6287085.stm
>
> Riding naked. That's a good way to get drivers who think cycling is a
> nuisance to take bikers seriously.
It brings a new visual to the term "down tube".
Phil H
|
|
