Advocacy & Safety - Right Hooks in Copenhagen

http://www.cphpost.dk/get/108132.html

With all due respect to the deceased, and not knowing exactly what happened in this sad case, I am amazed at the number of people in Denmark that pass right-turning vehicles without a care in the world. Yes, the drivers are skilled at driving with bikes around (it's drilled into their heads in driver's ed), but still...you have to be careful.

Why on earth would you want to be to the right of traffic, let alone a truck, at an intersection?

Why on earth would you want to be to the right of traffic, let alone a truck, at an intersection?

Well, that's where the bike lanes are, and so that's where the Danes ride. The big blue stripe, if you will.

I don't like it, but I deal with it. You just have to be aware of the dangers. Copenhagen ain't what everyone makes it out to be, sometimes...

Why on earth would you want to be to the right of traffic, let alone a truck, at an intersection?

Apparently in Denmark it's the law if a bike farcility is provided it's compulsory for cyclists to use it no matter what the size, condition and volume of cyclists.

http://www.cphpost.dk/get/108132.html

With all due respect to the deceased, and not knowing exactly what happened in this sad case, I am amazed at the number of people in Denmark that pass right-turning vehicles without a care in the world. Yes, the drivers are skilled at driving with bikes around (it's drilled into their heads in driver's ed), but still...you have to be careful.

I'm amazed with the amount of bike traffic, driver's ed, and de-fault the drivers there still don't look before turning right. Yeah expect drivers here in the states not to look right before they turn right especially if the light just turned green since they don't look or care.
women drivers being more careful is false, since I've had plenty of close calls by women drivers making a right turn without looking.


n 25 right-turn accidents that the Accident Investigation Board looked at in 2006, cyclists were partly at fault in eight cases. Statistically, more women then men are involved in accidents, which the board believes is due to the fact that women tend to expect that drivers are certain the coast is clear before turning.

From the news article: "... According to Lars Klit Reiff, head of the National Traffic Accident Investigation Board, there appears to be a correlation between the number of right-turn accidents and the number of news reports about them. In 2006 and 2007, when accidents had fallen to their lowest level since 2000, the number of news reports was at its highest. This year, there have been fewer reports than last year. [With a dramatic increase in right-hook fatalities this year.]"

It would be good if this kind of accident, even if non-fatal, made the news and stayed in the news. There can be little doubt that (putting aside bike lanes, VC, and riding to the right of vehicles) that this is a big training issue.

Anyone with basic motor control can learn to balance and ride a bike. Learning to ride sensibly is a whole new book. There is only one cause of injury or death in 'accidents' - large differences in velocity or position, that suddenly cease to exist. Hair splitting pedants should feel free to reply and reveal themselves to the peanut gallery.

I'm amazed with the amount of bike traffic, driver's ed, and de-fault the drivers there still don't look before turning right. Yeah expect drivers here in the states not to look right before they turn right especially if the light just turned green since they don't look or care.
women drivers being more careful is false, since I've had plenty of close calls by women drivers making a right turn without looking.

Usually one is expected to refer to a quote after and not before the quote. Also you have inverted the meaning of the item you quoted. It is women cyclists [in Danish right-hook accidents] that often assume that drivers have made sure the coast is clear. Try again. Here is the full quote "Statistically, more women then men are involved in accidents, which the board believes is due to the fact that women tend to expect that drivers are certain the coast is clear before turning."

I may be mistaken, but I think that there were only 4 bicyclists killed in Copenhagen last year - which would mean, according to the article, that 3 of them were killed in right hooks.

Usually one is expected to refer to a quote after and not before the quote. Also you have inverted the meaning of the item you quoted. It is women cyclists [in Danish right-hook accidents] that often assume that drivers have made sure the coast is clear. Try again. Here is the full quote "Statistically, more women then men are involved in accidents, which the board believes is due to the fact that women tend to expect that drivers are certain the coast is clear before turning."

The Copenhagen Post is not known for their copy editing skills. I had to read that statement twice to figure it out. The gist is, as you note, that more women _cyclists_ are involved in accidents.

The point of all this (now that I'm a little more awake) is that while everyone holds up Copenhagen and Amsterdam as cycling Utopias, there are some things to be aware of when you advocate for bike infrastructure. On the whole, I like the system in Denmark, with lots of separated paths, as they allow you to "enjoy the ride" a little more without having to worry about traffic from behind; that is, you don't have to "hold your line" so much while you're checking your cell phone or checking out the pretty women...

But intersections are often a nightmare.

In some places, they have shared right-turn lanes, though many (most?) cyclists _still_ pass cars on the right. There have been several times where I have sat behind a right turning car, only to miss the light because the car had to wait for bikes to go shooting by on the right. It doesn't help that half of the cars will slide all the way over to the right (thus forcing bikes to stay behind and pass left) while the other half leave a big enough gap to "shoot".

In other places, they have separately timed lights for cars and bikes. Sometimes the greens overlap, other places they don't.

Most smaller intersections just have the big blue stripe to the right of traffic. These are not too much of a problem (believe it or not) if there is no light at the intersection. Cars approaching from behind see the bike and know it's there, and bikes don't usually catch up to cars. You have to be careful, though, if you're moving at the same speed as traffic.

The biggest problem, in my mind, occurs at intersections with lights where the bike is about 20-30m back when the light turns green.

Not sure that's any more coherent, but there it is.

Why on earth would you want to be to the right of traffic, let alone a truck, at an intersection?

Because, "When approaching an intersection, cyclists have the right of way over right-turning vehicles. For regular drivers, a quick glance over the shoulder is normally enough to check for on-coming cyclists. But because lorry drivers sit much higher, they have a larger blind spot, making it more difficult to
determine whether it is safe to turn."

This doesn't absolve riders from taking appropriate precautions, such as being careful when a lorry is involved, but, given the very low fatality rates for cyclists in Denmark, the system generally works fine.

Because, "When approaching an intersection, cyclists have the right of way over right-turning vehicles. For regular drivers, a quick glance over the shoulder is normally enough to check for on-coming cyclists. But because lorry drivers sit much higher, they have a larger blind spot, making it more difficult to
determine whether it is safe to turn."

This doesn't absolve riders from taking appropriate precautions, such as being careful when a lorry is involved, but, given the very low fatality rates for cyclists in Denmark, the system generally works fine.

Right of way means very little when getting slammed into by a truck. I don't really care if my family can sue over right of way in case of my death.

-D

as far as I've read, the studies indicate a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lane implementation and ridership in Copenhagen.

a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lanes is also supported in studies from Oregon - less intersection conflicts on roads with bike lanes (to right of potentially turning traffic, no less).

as far as I've read, the studies indicate a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lane implementation and ridership in Copenhagen.

a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lanes is also supported in studies from Oregon - less intersection conflicts on roads with bike lanes (to right of potentially turning traffic, no less).

I think the biggest safety measure is "safety in numbers". I am sure that in areas of high ridership, everyone is more aware of cyclists, both pedestrians and motorists. So anything that can get ridership increased is a good thing IMO.

-D

Apparently in Denmark it's the law if a bike farcility is provided it's compulsory for cyclists to use it no matter what the size, condition and volume of cyclists.

I'm all for the law, but if the law requires you to be in place to be run over by a truck, I think it is time to ignore the law.

as far as I've read, the studies indicate a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lane implementation and ridership in Copenhagen.

a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lanes is also supported in studies from Oregon - less intersection conflicts on roads with bike lanes (to right of potentially turning traffic, no less).

Forcing cyclists to ride to the right of right turn lanes essentially puts them under pedestrian, rather than vehicular, traffic rules. This works only if motor vehicle and bicycle speeds are slow, if motorists routinely watch for cyclists (and pedestrians) to their right, and if cyclists do not blindly assume that they are seen. Unfortunately, at least one of these vital assumptions is violated under many real-life scenarios.

We recently lost two cyclists in the city of San Diego. The first had been in a bike lane and was attempting to cross a freely diverging exit lane on a 55mph/90kph road when he got right-hooked. The second was using the popular two-way Class I bikeway alongside the 56 freeway. Because of a budgetary shortfall, through cyclists are forced to exit and re-enter the bikeway at every freeway interchange, and they are brought down to the right of one, often two, lanes of right-turning traffic. Under California law, right turns are permitted on all traffic signal phases, so there is arguably never a safe time to cross the road to get back onto the bikeway.

The only place for motor vehicles at intersections is right in front or right behind the biker. Not beside.

Ah, Bikelandia.

Why on earth would you want to be to the right of traffic, let alone a truck, at an intersection?

Because, "When approaching an intersection, cyclists have the right of way over right-turning vehicles. For regular drivers, a quick glance over the shoulder is normally enough to check for on-coming cyclists. But because lorry drivers sit much higher, they have a larger blind spot, making it more difficult to
determine whether it is safe to turn."

This doesn't absolve riders from taking appropriate precautions, such as being careful when a lorry is involved, but, given the very low fatality rates for cyclists in Denmark, the system generally works fine.


Right of way means very little when getting slammed into by a truck. I don't really care if my family can sue over right of way in case of my death.-D

See my bit in italics, derath. It would seem that these incidents are rare enough to be a major news item in Copenhagen. Not to mention that trucks in Europe are generally required to have side bars between the wheels, thereby reducing the chances of a rider falling under the rear ones. In the US, however, such legislation seems to be regarded, in most states that I've read about, as an infringement on the rights of trucking companies to save money at the expense of pedestrians and cyclists

And, given that accident rates in Denmark and other European countries are lower than in the US or the UK, which system would you prefer to ride under?

I've been to Copenhagen. I spent a lot of time there studying 'Wind Turbine Design' for my Aero degree. They had some very good bike programs there! They had a city-shared bicycle program. You could put a '20 Kroner' piece in a bike lock ($3 equivalent) and it would pull out a bike for you to use. You used it as long as you wanted, and when you were done you would simply put it back on any unoccupied lock and a 20 Kroner would pop out!

The wheels and the frame had advertisements in Danish that I couldn't understand. These ads were used to mitigate the cost of the program. Very progressive!

http://photos-f.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sf2p/v49/126/19/39700702/n39700702_30549429_2864.jpg

This doesn't absolve riders from taking appropriate precautions, such as being careful when a lorry is involved, but, given the very low fatality rates for cyclists in Denmark, the system generally works fine.



See my bit in italics, derath.

And my comment was to illustrate that point. So we are on the same page.

-F

as far as I've read, the studies indicate a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lane implementation and ridership in Copenhagen..

I'd like to know what you're reading. Here's what I find in a before-and-after study (http://www.ecf.com/files/2/12/16/070503_Cycle_Tracks_Copenhagen.pdf) by the city of Copenhagen regarding cycle tracks (i.e. sidepath) in that city:


The construction of cycle tracks has resulted in a slight drop in the total number of accidents and injuries on the road sections between junctions of 10% and 4% respectively. At junctions on the other hand, the number of accidents and injuries has risen significantly, by 18%. A decline in road safety at junctions has undoubtedly taken place after the construction of cycle tracks. If the figures for the road sections are combined with those for the junctions, an increase of 9-10% in accidents and injuries has taken place.

The study combines bicyclists and mopeds into a single category "C/M." Right hook collisions are up 129% with a 161% increase in injuries in these collisions with cyclists and mopeds. About 5% to 10% of this increase is attributed to the increase in bicyclist traffic at the intersection.

So yeah, watch out for those right turning trucks. Bike lanes are nice but they're no panacea.

I'd like to know what you're reading. Here's what I find in a before-and-after study (http://www.ecf.com/files/2/12/16/070503_Cycle_Tracks_Copenhagen.pdf) by the city of Copenhagen regarding cycle tracks (i.e. sidepath) in that city:

I agree, I would also like to know what Bekologist is reading.


as far as I've read, the studies indicate a reduction in right hooks as a result of bike lane implementation and ridership in Copenhagen.

From the article linked in the original post: "In 2006 and 2007, when accidents had fallen to their lowest level since 2000, the number of news reports was at its highest. This year" This suggests a reduction in right hooks as a result of accidents being frequently reported.

From the article linked in the original post: "In 2006 and 2007, when accidents had fallen to their lowest level since 2000, the number of news reports was at its highest. This year" This suggests a reduction in right hooks as a result of accidents being frequently reported.

In other words, "informing the public," something that is terribly missing here on any sort of PSA or "accident report," in fact the usual quotes from on scene officials tends to muddy the picture by broadcasting the usual half truths and mindless beliefs such as "the roads are for cars... "

Is it any wonder therefore that the general public here on this side of "the pond" has no second thoughts about such things as right hooks or even cyclists' rights to the road and the entire lane?

In other words, "informing the public," something that is terribly missing here on any sort of PSA or "accident report," in fact the usual quotes from on scene officials tends to muddy the picture by broadcasting the usual half truths and mindless beliefs such as "the roads are for cars... "

Is it any wonder therefore that the general public here on this side of "the pond" has no second thoughts about such things as right hooks or even cyclists' rights to the road and the entire lane?

I agree completely. You are preaching to the choir.

I agree, I would also like to know what Bekologist is reading.



From the article linked in the original post: "In 2006 and 2007, when accidents had fallen to their lowest level since 2000, the number of news reports was at its highest. This year" This suggests a reduction in right hooks as a result of accidents being frequently reported.

Possibly he's thinking of the "painting blue stripes at intersections makes them safer" studies. Bek?

I've seen studies that show increased cyclist safety in copenhagen, overall, as a result of the installation of bike infrastructure.

Additionally, the striping of blue lanes across intersections as well as advanced cyclist signals add to safety by decreasing motorist/cyclist conflicts. This are the results from portland (blue bike lanes) as well.

I agree completely. You are preaching to the choir.

So do you think the "choir" will take up a collection and make it happen?

So do you think the "choir" will take up a collection and make it happen?

Short answer is no :notamused:

Long answer, the cycling community is probably one of the most disparate, we come literally from all walks of life, income bands, religions, any demographic you care to sample. In densely populated and in my opinion more enlightened parts of Europe there is reduced need to 'take up a collection and make it happen' because it already is happening. In the USA the cycling population is tiny, in relative terms, and geographically well dispersed. In the USA the disparity and dispersal makes single minded activity based on a consensus almost impossible.

Public Service Announcements (PSA's) or making main-stream-media reporting of 'accidents' (they are usually not accidents) more constructive is an extreme challenge.

PSA's would probably be effective, especially if they could be self sustaining once released. By self sustaining, I mean that they contain sufficient humor or entertainment or controversy, that people are compelled to chat about them to friends, and they become a form of viral marketing.

Attempting to modify main-stream-media reporting of bike accidents in the news is also an enormous challenge, news presentation is highly formulaic - just like baking a cake by adding water, stir and toss in the oven for 20 minutes.

The reality is that we, as a group, could quite easily be one of the most effective. All that is missing is tolerable leadership and finding a way to overcome the apathy of the membership.

It would help if BikeForums.Net and all of the other pro-cycling web sites and publications could agree on some basic set of principles, and then act in concert.

For example - when was the last time, you saw the same message appearing in the masthead across all forums within BikeForums.Net?

^^^ Well answered.

http://www.cphpost.dk/get/108132.html

With all due respect to the deceased, and not knowing exactly what happened in this sad case, I am amazed at the number of people in Denmark that pass right-turning vehicles without a care in the world. Yes, the drivers are skilled at driving with bikes around (it's drilled into their heads in driver's ed), but still...you have to be careful.

Well, as a cycle commuter that travels a fair distance into and out of Copenhagen on a daily basis, year round, all weathers, the reasons for these accidents is not what you'd think from reading these reports.

For instance, I saw a right turn accident near Tivoli, nice pile-up, the taxi driver said he thought all the bikes would stop for him...

On Jagtvej a young lady was offed by a car driver high on drink and drugs that had a paranoid delusion that she was laughing at him, so he right turned into her at the next junction...

In Norrebronx an OAP was offed in a racist attack...

I've seen studies that show increased cyclist safety in copenhagen, overall, as a result of the installation of bike infrastructure.

Additionally, the striping of blue lanes across intersections as well as advanced cyclist signals add to safety by decreasing motorist/cyclist conflicts. This are the results from portland (blue bike lanes) as well.

Don't know what reports you've read, but all the ones I've seen indicate an increase in cycling accidents with installation of the bike infrastructure, but you get screamed down if you have to guts to stand up and say why you think it is... The truth is there are very few cycling 'accidents', there is a significant number of car drivers using their cars as threatening weapons though, and many of them, unfortunately, don't quite have the skill to stop in time...

an increase in total accidents since the 1970's or indexed against the increase of riders in copenhagen since the installation of bike lanes? I've seen reports of a decrease in fatalities, and a reduction in indexed accident rates for danes - of course raw accident numbers will have gone up since the low modal share days in the 1960s...

Cykelstier i byer - den sikkerhedsmaessige effekt. Bach, Rosbach, Joergensen. Vejdirekforatet, Denmark, 1988

Before and after study of 105 new cycle paths in Denmark, introduced 1978-81, totalling 64km. Cyclist casualties increased 48% following introduction of paths. Car drivers, moped riders and pedestrians also suffered more accidents, with overall rise in casualties of 27%.

Cykelstier i byer - den sikkerhedsmaessige effekt. Bach, Rosbach, Joergensen. Vejdirekforatet, Denmark, 1988

Before and after study of 105 new cycle paths in Denmark, introduced 1978-81, totalling 64km. Cyclist casualties increased 48% following introduction of paths. Car drivers, moped riders and pedestrians also suffered more accidents, with overall rise in casualties of 27%.

Also "Cykelstiers trafiksikkerhed" ("Bike path traffic safety"), Agerholm, Caspersen, and Lahrmann. 35% increase between before and after. 44% increase at intersections and 25% increase in straights (sorry to Bek, Gene, etc., it's in Danish).

The problem, however, is correcting the accident rate for the amount of use. In the article I cite, the 'expected' accident rate is weighted by the total number of accidents _in the surrounding city_, which does not account for the possibility that that particular stretch of road my see more bike traffic simply because it has a bike lane, or that the overall accident rate may be affected by other factors.

Nevertheless, the evidence points towards an increase in accident rate.

I'm not sure how Bach et al. did it, and strangely, I cannot find the report on line. Lots of references to it, but not the original article.

PS. På beløb, hvad betyder 'OAP'?

'OAP' = Old Aged Pensioner

The accident stuff in Denmark is quite surprising. There's another study that shows you're actually slightly safer riding a road route than on a dedicated cycle route, which appears bizarre, there again I've seen taxis and white-van-man using the cycle paths for short cuts so often some people must think it's allowed! Examples include several incidents on the dedicated cycle-routes off Peter Bangs Vej, and general experience is such from taxis exiting Samsøgade to enter the IBM building on Jagtvej, that I've seen cyclists regularly give way, even though the taxi should not even try to be there.

Don't get it at all, the average speed of commuter cyclists in Denmark is quite a bit slower than other countries, so maybe it is because cycle traffic speed is such, the car drivers think they can nip round in time, but get caught out? An example of this was an experienced lady cyclist got offed on a right hook by a car who, claims, vision obscured by a van parked on the cycle-path, junction of Vardegade and Vordingborggade, but the cyclist had actually slowed to negotiate the van...

the problem, however , is correcting the accident rate for the amount of use.

yes, I'd say. an increase in total accidents needs to be considered against the increase of bicyclists.

yes, I'd say. an increase in total accidents needs to be considered against the increase of bicyclists.

Yes, and the studies I've mentioned show the increase in accidents increased further than the increase in usage, they also show that the increase in accidents is faster on dedicated cycle paths when compared to cyclists riding on normal carriage-ways.

You see the problem is not the cyclists but motorised driver attitudes. It is as if the more cycle paths the dafter the car drivers get.

This morning I had a bus do a right hook on me at the junction of Pile Alle and Frederiksberg Alle, so used to it now that when I hear a big diesel there I brake, hard, (darn it even Google Maps shows a bus cutting onto the cycle path early there, anyone who knows the area knows he can't see squat at that point because the tree blocks his view!) and that is supposed to be a 'professional driver'.

Thanks, this is good to know. In a month, I head to Copenhagen to live and work there for at least 3 months (maybe a year).

Thanks, this is good to know. In a month, I head to Copenhagen to live and work there for at least 3 months (maybe a year).

I hope you enjoy your visit, and do remember that once you get out of the city, you'll find most of us Danes are actually really quite friendly people, who can ride bikes, not only in straight lines, but can even negotiate the bendy bits in the road too!

I hope you enjoy your visit, and do remember that once you get out of the city, you'll find most of us Danes are actually really quite friendly people, who can ride bikes, not only in straight lines, but can even negotiate the bendy bits in the road too!

Do you think it would be worth shipping my $6000 carbon road bike? If I get out of Copenhagen, then is it fairly open so I can continue my longer training rides (anywhere from 30 to 75 miles)?

Do you think it would be worth shipping my $6000 carbon road bike? If I get out of Copenhagen, then is it fairly open so I can continue my longer training rides (anywhere from 30 to 75 miles)?

If you can afford a $6000 road bike, do you really need to ask this?

OK, I kid...

Do you know where you'll be living?

If it were me, I would definitely arrange to have a road bike. Whether that means shipping or buying is up to you. Renting an honest road bike will be hard -- they tend to be tourers and city bikes.

You can get a decent used bike (for example here (http://www.brugtecykler.dk/) -- or here (http://www.feltet.dk)) and sell it when you leave (I can link other sites, if you want more options). It may take a while before you find the right bike to buy this way.

If you ship it, you might end up paying serious import duties (up to 25%?), though with paperwork and such, you might not (or they might not charge you at all...it's hit and miss...). If you bring it with on the plane, you'll pay for excess baggage, but no import duties. Maybe you can swindle your work to ship it along with whatever else they might be shipping for you? Or spring for the excess baggage fee?

If you think a 53cm Lemond would fit you (steel, 8-speed Campy), let me know. I need to build new wheels for it (cheap), and I'm looking for investors...

EDIT: Click on 'brugt marked' in the second link, then 'salg', then just dig around. The first link has pages in English. Or just do a websearch for 'brugt cykler'

Do you think it would be worth shipping my $6000 carbon road bike? If I get out of Copenhagen, then is it fairly open so I can continue my longer training rides (anywhere from 30 to 75 miles)?

Unless you can be your own mechanic I'd leave that at home and buy something cheap and nasty when you get here. To the south and west (especially Glostrup) the cycle paths can be pretty hard on a bike. Perversely, cheap and nasty is strong enough for the task, and there're no hills to speak of, so the weight doesn't matter. Cycle paths are narrower than the road, so you can't exactly dodge the pot holes. Most of the fast long distance regular commuters I see are using modded city-bikes, heavier tires on cyclo-cross, or slicks on MTBs. See a good few people on racers, but they're normally way older, stronger models i.e. with more gap so as to fit thicker tires. Only seen a handful of these tight wheel fit modern racers and even fewer carbon, but they're generally soon after daylight savings makes the mornings lighter, and pretty much all disappear again after a week or so, (probably give up after a few flats, or their bike gets nicked.)

Do you think it would be worth shipping my $6000 carbon road bike? If I get out of Copenhagen, then is it fairly open so I can continue my longer training rides (anywhere from 30 to 75 miles)?

Hey you're in Europe... dash down to Italy and have something put together by the Campagnolo family.

Thanks for the replies. I may leave the carbon bike home and ship the aluminum bike, or I may just buy something once I'm there and leave it with my relatives in Deutschland once I leave Denmark.

My aluminum road bike is a 49cm Scott S30, my carbon road bike is a 52cm Scott CR1, and my aluminum tri bike is a 54" Cervelo P2K. So I think a 53cm Lemond would fit....

I plan to stay here: http://www.charlottehaven.com/en/, so at a rental apartment like that, I hope I can bring the bike inside. I am definitely not a bike mechanic, so that would be a consideration. I didn't think about any import duties if I am just staying temporarily, so that would be something I also need to consider now. As for airline fees, that would be covered by my employer, so that's not an issue.

Hey you're in Europe... dash down to Italy and have something put together by the Campagnolo family.

That's a very good point. What with the US$ and UK£ falling through the floor once you get to Denmark it'll be cheaper to buy one from England and have it shipped to you than bring your own over and pay import duties... Example: I saw a nice 2nd hand titanium in a shop: 15000Dkr, rushed home had a look on the net: same bike from England, brand new, this years components and higher spec'ed ones: 12000Dkr . I find ordering from somewhere like Wiggle (http://www.wiggle.co.uk) means parts also turn up faster than if you order in a shop over here, and that's if they can get it (remember it is a small country...)

Tax is something to look at. IANAA. Hope you have some good accountants 'cause you'll get creamed! If your employer is paying for your apartment, it'll cost you more in tax (benefit in kind) than if you paid it yourself out of wages (natural income), but if you're here for less than 183 days in any 12 months period, that's a moot point. If you can avoid getting a CPR number, lots of New Zealanders and Australians seem to have managed that trick, you're home free as the tax office computers can't even send you a tax demand! Dodging the tax is the Danish national sport, more do it on a daily basis than ride a bike, even a top level tax investigator has recently been sent down for fiddling their tax...

You gotta get on a Danish language course. Most Danes speak good English, unfortunately with many it's a bit of a charade, they're using linguistic tricks and there's often little communication actually happening. Don't worry, Danish isn't as hard as people like to make out, only 74% of the native Danes who took the Danish language exam last year failed.

Anyways, right hooks, a group of us were forced to a halt at Hedehusene last night, junction just before the railway bridge by a twit black-van right turning on us. His passenger, window down, slapped the outside of the door to gain our attention, as if he didn't have it already, and gave us all the finger. Classy. One of the other cycle commuters I see wears a miniature video camera. Think I'm going to start doing that, and post the results on YouTube.

Thanks for the replies. I may leave the carbon bike home and ship the aluminum bike, or I may just buy something once I'm there and leave it with my relatives in Deutschland once I leave Denmark.

My aluminum road bike is a 49cm Scott S30, my carbon road bike is a 52cm Scott CR1, and my aluminum tri bike is a 54" Cervelo P2K. So I think a 53cm Lemond would fit....

I plan to stay here: http://www.charlottehaven.com/en/, so at a rental apartment like that, I hope I can bring the bike inside. I am definitely not a bike mechanic, so that would be a consideration. I didn't think about any import duties if I am just staying temporarily, so that would be something I also need to consider now. As for airline fees, that would be covered by my employer, so that's not an issue.

Oh, wait. If you have multiple bikes, then it's a no-brainer: bring the Scott and get your employer to pay for shipping -- or even pay for it yourself.

I'm still willing to rent my Lemond -- say 600DKK -- for the three months (that would cover most of the cost of building new wheels). We can probably get it to fit you, but, again, if the Scott is all set up for you, I'd bring that. I live in Odense, though, so we'd have to work out a way to get it to you.

As for på beløb's tax concerns: if you're being paid American dollars (otherwise known as toilet paper over here) by an American company on temporary reassignment, you don't have to worry about Danish taxes. Just make sure you have global health insurance.

I can probably convince my employer that shipping my bike in lieu of renting me a car in Copenhagen will save them money (and it doesn't seem I'd need a rental car there anyway).

As for Copenhagen public transportation, is there a monthly pass I can purchase which covers everything (e.g. in Berlin, I bought monthly passes for €70 which covered all U-Bahn, S-Bahn and bus services)?

I can probably convince my employer that shipping my bike in lieu of renting me a car in Copenhagen will save them money (and it doesn't seem I'd need a rental car there anyway).

As for Copenhagen public transportation, is there a monthly pass I can purchase which covers everything (e.g. in Berlin, I bought monthly passes for €70 which covered all U-Bahn, S-Bahn and bus services)?

I cycle just about everywhere, and seriously if you're living and working central KPH you're probably quicker (and more reliable) on a bike. But for the public transport there are these klip-kort things and monthly passes. Klip-kort is a card you buy at kiosks and you put in a punch machine on the platform at the start of your journey. The monthly passes is a bit more complex to set up, but they can post you new passes each month etc. I have read there is some RFID system in the offing where you can just log in at the journey start and out at the other end. I keep a two zoner and a cykel klip kort with me. That way if my bike truely dies I can clip for 2, 4, 6 or 'all' zones and 1 or 2 for the bike, to get near enough home for a taxi the rest of the way. All taxis can take bikes. Although when a pedal seized last week I put the seat right down, took both pedals off and hobby-horsed the last 25km.:twitchy:

Although when a pedal seized last week I put the seat right down, took both pedals off and hobby-horsed the last 25km.:twitchy:

Hard core!

Hard core!
Sounds better than the reality: when the wind blows in the right direction out here in the country, you barely need to pedal, just sit up straight and away you go. Often wonder how some can manage to go so slowly...:roflmao2: