Gerdz

Sadly, you lost him at 'stay on task.' He is very serious when we are out riding but he is still a little kid.

Helmet Head

Sorry if I got you mad. But I call 'em as I see 'em.

Thanks for the more detailed description. A couple of comments:

You wrote (in the OP Edit: in post #18) that the driver turned "into the bike lane in which we were travelling." This may sound like nitpicking, but it's critical to recognize that when you're crossing an intersection you are not traveling in a bike lane, and, more importantly, you should not be where the bike lane would be if it did extend across the intersection, especially if faster same direction traffic is not present to "block" for you. The reason for that is precisely to manage the situation your daughter found herself in. If same direction traffic was present, then the guy would not have popped out of the right turn lane. If you and your kids were riding further left (since there was no same direction traffic), then you would have been able to manage the situation better for two reasons:

1) You would have been riding where the right-turner was likely to have been paying the most attention: in the traffic lane.
2) Her sight lines to the right-turn would have been better, and she would have had more buffer space to deal with it.

Now, if your daughter is not ready to ride across this intersections properly, that's no excuse to have her do it in a way that leads her into these "almost ugly" situations. She shouldn't be allowed to ride on roads with intersections that she is unable to manage properly.

There was no reading of minds. What was obvious was that Gerdz' daughter was in a standard/classic/predictable situation and that his take on it was: "she did everything right". With all due respect, I wouldn't want him teaching my girl how to ride in traffic.

For an example of the writing of someone who does know what he's talking about, and who I wouldn't hestitate in having him teach my girl, see:

Note your original words in the OP: "the bike lane in which we were travelling." Your frame of mind when you wrote ( EDIT: ) the OP post #18, and probably when you were riding, is that you were not riding where vehicular traffic normally travels, but off to the right in space you think of as "the bike lane" (your words). If you were lined up with the bike lane across the intersection then you were too far to the right, precisely because of the vulnerability your daughter was subjected to.

I commend you for recognizing that at least "a brush-up course probably wouldn't hurt." Most cyclists wouldn't even admit that much. If you're good at learning from reading, you should definitely pick up a copy of Effective Cycling and study all the stuff in it about how to ride in the road (you can skip most of the rest of it). But study and practice the road riding stuff. It's about changing your habits to adopt better practices, and that takes time. Don't just skim it.

pj7

Ummm, where in the OP did he mention bike lane? You stated unoquivocally that the original post had "bike lane" in it twice.

So tell me HH, according to the info provided in the OP, and only in the OP, what makes you think he or his daughter did anything wrong?

You make no sense at all here and seem to be getting quite confused.

Gerdz

Just for the record: I am a complete maroon. I take the reflectors off my kids and my bikes to save weight. We ride in the street, going the wrong direction so we can see what cars are doing. I wear only black when I ride, because it looks cool. Oh, and j/k means just kidding. I wasn't mad but you were combative. HH your first post was very helpful and I thank you for educating me about the courses offered by the LAB. I just don't understand why an honest request for advice has to deteriorate to belligerence and one-upsmanship so often in these forums. I will be careful not to include 'examples' in future posts; they seem to serve only to distract from the point.

Helmet Head

Sorry. Good catch. It was in the clarification in post #18 that he wrote that. I'll fix my post accordingly.

The biggest clue was the assertion that "she did everything right" in an intersection conflict without any further detail. This is typical of someone who believes it is normal and quite common for cyclists to do "everything right" and still end up in ugly situations at intersections. For someone who realizes how unusual it is, the importance of providing the details of the situation would have been obvious. If something at an intersection were to happen to Gene, JJ, Goodridge, noisebeam, etc., where they believed they "did everything right", it wouldn't occur to them to not provide the details of the situation.

Note in my response to you in post #13, I wrote:

The implication was that what was notably absent from the OP was an indication that he knew what to teach.

Helmet Head

Sorry about that.

Sorry. I am just very frustrated by the general lack of understanding and appreciation about the importance and relevance of basic vehicular cycling skills and practices on this forum, despite countless claims to the contrary. Everyone claims they get it, and just don't like how it's presented, etc., then a thread like this comes up, and nobody but JJ, SG and me even realize that there is something obviously wrong: that a basic intersection conflict is very unlikely to turn "almost ugly" if the cyclist is truly "doing everything right".

Gerdz

Thanks. For a (at that time) 10 year old on one of her first outings in traffic, who I would not expect to 'command' a lane with a 45 mph speed limit, I thought she did do everything right and felt she needed reassurance. The motor vehicle operator did break the law and she needs to know that that will happen.

Helmet Head

Well, if you told her she did everything right because she had, based on what you had taught her, that's one thing.

But you told us, in the OP, that she did everything right. That's something else again.

Riding a bicycle in traffic is not rocket science, but it's also not trivial. "Doing everything right" is arguably harder than "doing everything right" while driving a car or motorcycle in traffic. And, in my opinion, "doing everything right" should include not only the bare minumum to be legal, but employing all the known best practices to minimize one's exposure to the errors of others. That's why there are books and classes on this stuff. Again it is not rocket science, but it's also not as simple as most people seem to think.

Gerdz

Attorney, right?

Helmet Head

Me? An attorney? Hardly - though I've been told I should have been more than once...

sggoodri

I don't think the girl did anything wrong. She was in the right side of the roadway in the correct lane(not on the sidewalk) going straight; the driver entering the roadway failed to yield to her.

Yes, her position in the lane was farther right than we adult cyclists would prefer to use for the purpose of visibility and maneuvering space at a junction. However, lateral positioning is a balance of concerns about intersecting traffic and same-direction traffic. I find it credible to believe that the same-direction traffic on a high speed road could be equally dangerous to a ten-year-old cycling at slow speed as the intersection traffic.

The motorist blew through the crosswalk and failed to stop before entering the roadway. Certainly, this hazard cannot be fixed by sidewalk bike paths/sidewalk cycling or bike lane striping. But operating farther into the high speed roadway creates undesirable friction with high speed motor traffic. Some roads are really unpleasant for low-speed cycling, and some motorists are unsafe for everybody.

I think the most effective fixes for this problem, in terms of child cyclists, are good alertness and braking skill, improved street topology with better alternate low-speed routes, and better law enforcement. All of this is consistent with vehicular cycling, but also considers the special needs of children.

sbhikes

It's time once again to stick this topic into the VC forum, dontcha think?

Helmet Head

And that's where it gets tricky: taking the presence or absence of faster same direction traffic into account when deciding where to position yourself is an important part of "doing everything right". Because the motorist was able to pull out from the right, turn right and proceed in the same direction as the cyclist without an incident with other motor vehicle traffic in that direction, we know there was no other same direction traffic present at the time. Same-direction traffic that is not even there cannot be dangerous. And if it was there, just far enough back to for it to not effect this guy pulling out like he did, then it was far enough back for the cyclists to have been further left at this point too.

It's not clear to me if he failed to stop, or stopped and proceeded without yielding, but in any case, he was clearly in the wrong.

Operating farther into the high speed roadway creates undesirable friction with high speed motor traffic only if the high speed motor traffic is there!

If you don't have the skills for vehicular cycling on a given road, then you should be riding according to ped rules (and at ped/jog speeds). It's no excuse to be doing half-a$$ed VC.

sggoodri

Or "Recreational and Family?"

I think this thread raises lots of issues for both family cycling and safety concerns, including street topology, lack of alternate routes, poor motorist behavior, law enforcement, and the skillsets/maturity of children.

Brian Ratliff

The way my father taught me to ride in traffic was to start out riding in our neighborhood and eventually out on a park bike path. It was there where I learned to handle the bike and ride in a straight line. He then started taking us out on roads; slowly at first. One time I distinctly remember, we were riding from our elementry school, and we were faced with making a left turn onto an arterial. He asked me: "so, do you want to do it the correct way and on the right side of the road (we would later have to make a second left to get into our neighborhood street), or do you want to do it wrong and ride on the left side of the road. I wasn't confident and told him I wanted to ride on the left side of the road; and we did that. He didn't push me beyond my limits of skill and confidence, but at the same time, instilled in me the wrongness of what we were doing at that moment.

Later on, my family would take rides to the nearby town, and later on, to a classy old fashioned soda fountain in a town further away. These were, perhaps, 20-30 miles, all told, and we treated them as day trips. The roads were all rural backroads, and I don't ever remember being threatened on these roads.

I particularly remember having to cross a bridge over a river which was narrow enough that schoolbuses were regularly getting their mirrors taken off, and large trucks had to stop and wait until there were no other cars coming the opposite way to cross. At some point, my father taught me and my brother to cross riding "vehicularly" to get to the fishladder on the other side.

In highschool, I never rode to school, but I would ride to my summer job as a lifeguard at a swimmingpool along a rural highway. My father's advice was to "ride 12 inches to the left of the white fog line". There were no intersections except for some driveways every once in a while. By college, I was introduced to destination lane positioning by Mr. Forester in his book. I was not aware of his style or his advocacy because I only read chapter 4! I consummed everything on the web about cycling advocacy, particularly vehicular cycling. A few years ago, I finally got a real permanant address which I actually live at, and now have more experience than ever at bicycle commuting, and pendulum started swinging back toward the middle ground, keeping the techniques taught by Vehicular Cyclists while seeing the benefit of bike lanes and quieter cycling techniques that other, non-branded cyclists use.

My life story in a pinch.

sggoodri

Taking the lane at junctions is not vehicular cycling. Taking the lane at junctions is a defensive driving technique that is merely consistent with vehicular cycling.

I believe riding on the right side of the roadway in the normal direction of traffic is generally better (safer and more efficient) than riding on the sidewalk. Sidewalk users have much greater conflicts of this kind than do roadway cyclists.

I disagree that vehicular cycing is not useful enough to practice unless one always takes the lane at junctions. Taking the lane is usually better than not, but not taking the lane is still better than pedestrian-on-wheels cycling.

Not all bad cyclist-motorist interactions can be eliminated by being more assertive in the lane. This fact does not reduce the usefulness of operating according to vehicular rules.

Brian Ratliff

Advice to the OP in a nutshell:

1) Stay within your childrens' abilities and confidence levels. Don't let anyone tell you when your children can go out on the road; only you can know that.

2) Before going out on the road, have them ride bike paths where they are forced to learn to ride a straight line out of the presence of cars. Straight line riding is essential.

3) Take them on lots of pleasure rides outside the city, on roads where there are no intersections. Take another adult along (wifey works best) and have your children ride between you two. This gets them used to being passed by cars. Works best if there is icecream and treats at the turnaround point .

4) Only after they can ride a straight line and can be passed by cars can you take them out onto busy streets.

kf5nd

Mmmmm, Brown & Root food !!!!

Gerdz

Thanks, Brian. Unfortunately, we are in a position of riding because we need to get somewhere and not just for fun. Your advice is still good and I'll get a video as was suggested and do training in a park and on residential streets. For our current transportation needs, it looks like using sidewalks and becoming pedestrians at crossings is our best, safest bet. Over in 'Car-Free', there is a video of bike facilities in Europe and even in Columbia which is amazing. It really saddens and angers me that, in the US, the car is king and very little is done to equalize safe transportation for those for whom the car is not an option. I commute about 9 miles each way by bicycle and about 3 or more miles of that trip are spent zig-zagging around to stay on lower-speed lower-traffic routes. I also use the bus to take the kids on longer outings. We have to walk over a mile just to get on a bus. In Phoenix, that can get pretty unpleasant at times. At least my kids are learning to be patient and resourceful.

Helmet Head

Taking the lane (when going straight) at junctions is certainly consistent with best practices as taught by Forester (destination positioning) and what is taught about proper motorcycle/motorscooter positioning at junctions in motorcycle safety courses and manuals.


Yes, riding in the "right turn zone" of the lane at junctions is also better than riding on the other side of the street against traffic, that doesn't mean it's riding in accordance to the vehicular rules of the road.

I never said one should ALWAYS take the lane at junctions. One should do it whenever there is a chance for conflict (as there clearly was in this case), and especially when no faster same direction traffic is present than can "block" for you (as also was the case here). But I realize this not explicitly part of the Road 1/2 curricula. It should be, as it is derived from the basic destination positioning principle.

Agreed, but "not taking the lane" is all too often not good enough. Case in point.

Agreed.

sggoodri

It is not clear from the description of the junction with the exit ramp that a right turn is even allowed from the cyclists' direction of travel. The cyclist was traveling straight in a through lane; since we are not talking about a right hook, I think the issue is not destination positioning, but general conspicuity.

I infer from the description that the motorist exiting the freeway turned right-on-red (without stopping) from a right-turn only lane in order to enter the roadway the cyclists were using. If I am correct, the cyclist had already passed the point in the intersection where a right-hook could be an issue.

Therefore, I infer this to be a law enforcement issue (RTOR without stopping) as well as a conspicuity issue (small bicyclist, rightward roadway positioning, motorist misjudgement may have combined) and a road design issue (right turn only lane that encourages turning without stopping; freeway barrier lacking enough crossing locations to provide adequate alternate low-volume routes).

Michel Gagnon

While I generally agree with Brian Ratliff's point of view, there are times where all the advice doesn't readily apply. For instance, in my case, there are a few busy streets to deal with close to home, and there is actually lots of interesting rides to do in the urban area. Here is what worked in our case.

1. Make sure the child knows the difference between right and left. There is no better way to try it than on a bike path where you have a Y fork with two interesting options: tell the child to go right and see what happens.
When dealing with children (mine or friends), I found it easy to direct a child if she knows what you say, and almost impossible to do if the child hesitates between sides.

2. At first, I usually stopped before tricky intersections and explained in detail how to deal with the intersection. That briefing usually worked fine.

3. In our neighbourhood, we have one or two "right lane must turn right" situations. I usually dealt with them in either of these two ways:
– We stop before the critical point, wait for a clearing in traffic, then cross the right-turning lane and continue. Or
– We do like a left turn: in two steps.
We don't have extra right-turning lanes added on the right, but I suspect we would have dealt with them roughly the same way.

In other words, I tend to avoid traffic merges for three reasons:
– lack of skills (I want herto be able to assess traffic before she merges by herself);
– lack of speed (it's a bit inconsiderate to ask people to stay for too long behind a cyclist going at 5-10 km/h);
– lack of visibility (a young cyclist on 20" wheels is not that visible).

4. With my oldest daughter, I found that I had no problem riding with her in traffic when she was 7 years old... providing it didn't last too long. Better ride for 0,5 km on a really busy street than for 5 km on a so-so street. I'll have to see how things go with my youngest. She just turned 7, but hardly keeps her balance on the bike; though usually, when she starts something, she goes 110%.