Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > > >

Vehicular Cycling (VC) No other subject has polarized the A&S members like VC has. Here's a place to share, debate, and educate.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-05-06, 10:28 AM   #76
sbhikes
Dominatrikes
 
sbhikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Posts: 4,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sorry but drifting motorists does not have anything to do with being passed quickly and efficiency. And until I can be certain that motorists won't drift over the double-yellow line (which I see every single day--EVERY DAY! I'm not making this up.), I won't concern myself too much with wild rantings about drifting into the bike lane (which is something I almost never see).
sbhikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 10:34 AM   #77
LittleBigMan
Sumanitu taka owaci
 
LittleBigMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Bikes:
Posts: 8,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wonder if those who don't like bike lanes will ever convince those who do like them otherwise, or visa-versa.
__________________
No worries
LittleBigMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 10:38 AM   #78
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleBigMan
I wonder if those who don't like bike lanes will ever convince those who do like them otherwise, or visa-versa.
I don't like bike lanes, but I don't buy the 'inadvertent drift' theory either. From my own experience, drivers tend to drift into other traffic lanes just as much as they drift into bike lanes or shoulders...so from that standpoint I don't consider a bike lane any more dangerous than the traffic lane. This isn't a black-white issue and you can't categorize people into two neat little categories on the subject.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 10:38 AM   #79
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Posts: 14,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 430 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbhikes
And until I can be certain that motorists won't drift over the double-yellow line (which I see every single day--EVERY DAY! I'm not making this up.),
Intentional or due to inattention?
Many cyclists intentionally go over the double yellow on winding mountain decents.

Al
noisebeam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 10:40 AM   #80
LittleBigMan
Sumanitu taka owaci
 
LittleBigMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Bikes:
Posts: 8,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
This isn't a black-white issue and you can't categorize people into two neat little categories on the subject.
I agree with that, since I don't prefer bike lanes, but I figure it's a waste of time arguing about it. That's what lies beneath most of these discussions, a basic position for/against bike lanes.

I'm not saying it's a black-and-white issue, just that the pro/anti bike lane positioning can lie just beneath the surface of the argument.
__________________
No worries
LittleBigMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 12:18 PM   #81
Bikepacker67
Banned
 
Bikepacker67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ogopogo's shoreline
Bikes: LHT, Kona Smoke
Posts: 4,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
so from that standpoint I don't consider a bike lane any more dangerous than the traffic lane..
I'll assume you also don't consider it any safer as well.

Which is my whole point. BL's give a false sense of security (esp. for noobs). And also BL's imply (to most motorists) that we must STAY in the BL, regardless of debris, doors, stopped buses etc.
Bikepacker67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 12:44 PM   #82
flipped4bikes
ROM 6:23
 
flipped4bikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Coastal Maine
Bikes: Specialized Tricross Comp, Lemond Tourmalet, Bridgestone MB-5
Posts: 1,713
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen_52657
I don't think the fact that the victim was riding in a 'bike lane' had much to do with it. She could have just as easily been riding on the shoulder, not a 'bike lane' per say.

The old guy that hit her was not watching where he was going plain and simple. You could be standing in your front yard and get hit by some motorist who's not watching where they are going...
+1. So are you trying to see how painted lines are directly responsible for the deaths of cyclists?
flipped4bikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 08:13 PM   #83
Bruce Rosar
Senior Member
 
Bruce Rosar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Carolina, USA
Bikes: Road, Mtn, Tandem
Posts: 760
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikepacker67
Many motorists treat BL's just like they do breakdown lanes - drifting in and out at will.
For those who didn't already know, breakdown lane is a synonym for shoulder, which just so happens to be part of the 1998 MUTCD definition for Designated Bicycle Lane:
Quote:
A portion of a roadway or shoulder which has been designated for use by bicyclists…
__________________
Humantransport.org: Advocacy on behalf of humans traveling under their own power
Bruce Rosar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 08:29 PM   #84
Tom Stormcrowe
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
 
Tom Stormcrowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Posts: 16,118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Of course they missed seeing it, because their subconscious minds deemed the gorilla to be irrelevant to the task at hand (counting the number of passes), and did not bother to alert the conscious mind about it.

This is what I believe happens when a driver's subconscious mind processes a sighting of a cyclist up ahead who is "out of the way' off to the side and/or in the bike lane. It deems the "out of the way" cyclist to be irrelevant to the task at hand - getting from A to B.

Now, a cyclist who is IN the driver's path up ahead, that's something else. When the subconscious mind processes this cyclist, it WILL alert the conscious mind. Once you have the driver's attention, then you move out of the way, so that as he passes you he is aware of your presence, and exceedingly unlikely to inadvertently drift into you.
This is one of the reason's I don't get offended about one of those drivers that seem to get off on "scaring" you by screaming an obscenity lor insult like "Get a job so you can afford a car!" At least I know he see's me!
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche

"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
Tom Stormcrowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-06, 08:46 PM   #85
nova
hill hater
 
nova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: norton ohio 5.5 miles from center road tow path trail head
Bikes: cannondale t400 1987 model and a raleigh gran prix from 1973
Posts: 2,127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Stormcrowe
This is one of the reason's I don't get offended about one of those drivers that seem to get off on "scaring" you by screaming an obscenity lor insult like "Get a job so you can afford a car!" At least I know he see's me!

Lol i had some dork yell that at me once he was in some barly legal beat up honda. I said somethign to the effect well my bike is worth more than your car. He looked over the bike and said you know your probably right and laughed.
nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-06, 12:29 AM   #86
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Rosar
For those who didn't already know, breakdown lane is a synonym for shoulder, which just so happens to be part of the 1998 MUTCD definition for Designated Bicycle Lane:
Yea, but you forgot to mention that it is 2006 (8 years in the future) and the MUTCD definition has been formally changed so that a bike lane is now not equivilent to a shoulder.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-06, 04:26 PM   #87
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
Yea, but you forgot to mention that it is 2006 (8 years in the future) and the MUTCD definition has been formally changed so that a bike lane is now not equivilent to a shoulder.
So finally some traffic engineer types really focusing on the issue understand the difference sufficiently to update the MUTCD accordingly.

Now, how many decades do you expect it to take for the general driving culture to catch up with the thinking now finally corrected in the MUTCD?

And as far as your comment (in the sensationalism thread) that you might agree with me if you lived where I lived, I bring to your attention the several incidents of bike lane deaths due to inadvertent drift that we've talked about on this forum, which took place in Portland and the surrounding area. If you think you're immune, you're fooling yourself. Now, it's true that the likelihood of it happening to you (or me) or any one cyclist is very low, but several cyclists are killed by this phenomenon every year. As far as I'm concerned, most if not all of them could have been prevented by minor adjustments in cyclist behavior alone. Why not promote a general acceptance among cyclists that reduces the chances of anyone falling vicitim to same-direction inadvertent drift, and, more importantly, to hooks and crosses from cross-traffic? What's the downside of promoting the Cyclecraft methodology (use a conspicuous centerish lane position during significantly long gaps in same-direction traffic, rather than keeping to the right or in the bike lane)?
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-06, 06:01 PM   #88
Bikepacker67
Banned
 
Bikepacker67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ogopogo's shoreline
Bikes: LHT, Kona Smoke
Posts: 4,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Why not promote a general acceptance among cyclists that reduces the chances of anyone falling vicitim to same-direction inadvertent drift, and, more importantly, to hooks and crosses from cross-traffic?
Well....
I'll take a bite at that apple.

It's easier to start threads that make HH out to be an arsehole?
Bikepacker67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-06, 08:52 PM   #89
brokenrobot
Sweetened with Splenda
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Brooklyn, Alabama
Bikes: Too many 80s roadbikes!
Posts: 2,335
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikepacker67
Well....
I'll take a bite at that apple.

It's easier to start threads that make HH out to be an arsehole?
But why bother, when he's so willing to do it himself?
brokenrobot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 03:27 AM   #90
CommuterRun
Conservative Hippie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wakulla Co. FL
Bikes:
Posts: 4,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's too bad the fear mongers on this forum derailled this thread. A comparison of crashes with regard to the cyclists road position would have been useful.

<falsetto "Oooh, I'm afraid of the big, bad cars and do everything I can to stay out of their way so I won't upset them. They might run over poor little me. All cyclists should ride this way, even if it isn't safer than VC.">
CommuterRun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 05:56 AM   #91
nova
hill hater
 
nova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: norton ohio 5.5 miles from center road tow path trail head
Bikes: cannondale t400 1987 model and a raleigh gran prix from 1973
Posts: 2,127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
So finally some traffic engineer types really focusing on the issue understand the difference sufficiently to update the MUTCD accordingly.

Now, how many decades do you expect it to take for the general driving culture to catch up with the thinking now finally corrected in the MUTCD?

And as far as your comment (in the sensationalism thread) that you might agree with me if you lived where I lived, I bring to your attention the several incidents of bike lane deaths due to inadvertent drift that we've talked about on this forum, which took place in Portland and the surrounding area. If you think you're immune, you're fooling yourself. Now, it's true that the likelihood of it happening to you (or me) or any one cyclist is very low, but several cyclists are killed by this phenomenon every year. As far as I'm concerned, most if not all of them could have been prevented by minor adjustments in cyclist behavior alone. Why not promote a general acceptance among cyclists that reduces the chances of anyone falling vicitim to same-direction inadvertent drift, and, more importantly, to hooks and crosses from cross-traffic? What's the downside of promoting the Cyclecraft methodology (use a conspicuous centerish lane position during significantly long gaps in same-direction traffic, rather than keeping to the right or in the bike lane)?

The point you choose to ignore and not respond to is a drift is a drift is a drift Do you realy think it would make one tiny bit of diffrence if those riders were in front of the car in the center of the lane? These drivers were not paying atention pure and simple. Had they been in the left turn strait lanes with a lane to their right for right turns they would have plowed a car. Likly also hittign the one directly infront of them. Ive seen these crashes many many times. Its not because the lane the cyclist was hit in was a bike lane its because the driver paid no attention to driving.

If ither/any of the deaths your useing to promote your case were in center of lane ahead of the car they would have still been hit its as simple as that. The driver was looking fooward seen no one took his atention off the road drifted and hit the cyclist. Put the cyclist in center lane same thing driver see nothign ahead do to cyclist being out of range or line of site he looks away drifts hits. Only diffrence is where the clyclist was hit. In one case its primarly from the left in another its on the right side.

This is just one more post that helmethead will choose to not reply to as it counters his argument directly and points out the fatal flaw of his argument.
nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 06:22 AM   #92
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nova, I think mr. HEAD is also going to completely ignore my question on page 3 RE: lane position after dark.......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist
..... I think visibility is more important than lane position after dark.

At night, which is more crucial for driver recognition and negotiation past cyclists? Visibility, or lane position?

Mr, HEAD, when is the last time YOU rode at night? Do you feel visibility, or lane position, is a more valuable tool for cyclist recognition after dark?
This is a downright disturbing and macabre thread, and one that deserves no debate with mr. HEAD & his overlay of antibike lane, anti 'inadverdant drift' notions from all his armchair bicycling experience-

-from the armchair, it is ALL notion.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 06:35 AM   #93
nova
hill hater
 
nova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: norton ohio 5.5 miles from center road tow path trail head
Bikes: cannondale t400 1987 model and a raleigh gran prix from 1973
Posts: 2,127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist
Nova, I think mr. HEAD is also going to completely ignore my question on page 3 RE: lane position after dark.......



This is a downright disturbing and macabre thread, and one that deserves no debate with mr. HEAD & his overlay of antibike lane, anti 'inadverdant drift' notions from all his armchair bicycling experience-

-from the armchair, it is ALL notion.
Personaly i ride how ever i feel is safest. If theres a bike lane and its clean i ride it. Personaly ilike riding on the marked bike routes. Drivers tend to be more aware of cyclists than other places. And because the bike routes are often in or near park controlled land and roads its safer still do to driver awareness. Ive been on one thats 45 mph and been passed by cars doign 55. Never have i realy felt in danger riding alittle over from the right tire strip of a car.
Thn there are places where ill take the lane. Mostly when crossign bridges friend had a close call when on a bridge. He lost control when he hit some loose gravel just before the bridge and ended up hanging over the side while his bike landed in the grass median below. Takeing the lane on a bridge will help to lessen the chances of this happening.

Then in areas like south cleveland massilion road i ride almost exclusivly in the wide shoulder. Its clean and free of trash for most part. Drivers know im there (many friendly waves as they go by) So why on a road like that would i bother to take the lane? Driers know its a popular route for cyclists do to fact it leads to the tow path and if you take center road all the way out you got a local bike shop and a little further on south main and you got portage lake stat park.

Center road i take the lane to up my safty. It has alot of sweeping turns and visability isnt as high. Takign the lane beyound the gresse strip is just a good idea to make your self more visable. Drivers expect there to be a cyclist on this road and drive acordingly.

Ive dropped my chain a few times on that road and had drivers stop and ask if i needed any help.
nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 09:16 AM   #94
Bruce Rosar
Senior Member
 
Bruce Rosar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Carolina, USA
Bikes: Road, Mtn, Tandem
Posts: 760
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
... the MUTCD definition has been formally changed ...
Yep, Designated Bicycle Lane (DBL) was relabeled as Bicycle Lane (BL) in the 2000 edition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
... so that a bike lane is now not equivilent to a shoulder.
In curb & gutter sections (where shoulders don't exist for engineering reasons), BLs provide an equivalent path beside the travel lanes just for our favorite minority group (cyclists 8-).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
So finally some traffic engineer types really focusing on the issue understand the difference sufficiently to update the MUTCD accordingly.
The only authoritative explanation that I've found so far for the change is in an FHWA slideshow: "This term [BL] is similar in definition [to DBL]."

Last edited by Bruce Rosar; 05-08-06 at 10:08 AM.
Bruce Rosar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 10:11 AM   #95
markw
Steel is Real.
 
markw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lakeside, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 967
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I ride a mix of roads with bike lanes and without for my commute. Which just happens to be from downtown San Diego to Lakeside. Park Blvd and Adams ave, don't have bike lanes, and traffic and I get along just fine, mostly because park has a nice WIDE right lane, and Adams is 25-30mph most the way, and I can maintain the same speed as traffic fairly easily. Fairmont has bike lanes along with Mission Gorge road, traffic on these two roads is 50+ and thre is one spot on Mission Gorge that is scary, and that's eastbound just before Princess View by the Jack In The Box. The road narrows here and you have to take the lane with 50+ mph traffic, only for about a block, but you have to do it. My speed at this point is usualy around 25 give or take, and I'm usually praying for the light to change so people have to start slowing before I have to enter that lane. VC aside, on a road like that, I'd rather have a bike lane than not. On other roads on my commute, like Mast Blvd in Santee between Halberns and Cuyamaca, they've got a 9 foot wide traffic lane, a bike lane, and parked cars. That's a bike lane that can go away, and I'm surprised there hasn't been any accidents with that one. You see cars driving in the bike lane all the time since the traffic lane is so narrow. I take the traffic lane.

There are places where it's nice to have a bike lane, and places where it doesn't make a difference. I'd rather have the lane on fast roads, and not have it where there are cars parked on the side of the road and the speed limit is less than 35. I think a car drifting into a lane and hitting a cyclist isn't because the lane was there or not, it's because the driver was in-attentive, and probably would've hit the bike anyway. Lanes next to parked cars need to go away.
markw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 11:14 AM   #96
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Rosar
Yep, Designated Bicycle Lane (DBL) was relabeled as Bicycle Lane (BL) in the 2000 edition.

In curb & gutter sections (where shoulders don't exist for engineering reasons), BLs provide an equivalent path beside the travel lanes just for our favorite minority group (cyclists 8-).

The only authoritative explanation that I've found so far for the change is in an FHWA slideshow: "This term [BL] is similar in definition [to DBL]."
First, since the MUTCD is all about definitions, how do you criticize a document like this for "only" making a change in definition? Every explanation you give for why this change in definition is irrelevent involves a circumlocutation which encompasses nearly the entire section and involves several steps using an "if this, then this" type interpretation which no engineering document is ever subject to.

Second, perhaps in NC there is no difference, but here in Oregon, BL's are marked, signed and swept, whereas shoulders are neither marked, nor signed, nor swept. This is a huge practical distinction between a shoulder and a bike lane. Personally, I think you are splitting hairs, looking for deliberate, malevolent discrimination where none exists simply to perpetuate an air of persecution.

We need to get past the "everyone's out to get us" knee jerk attitude if cycling is ever going to become more prevailent and more accepted. One of the most frequent complaints about cyclists as an interest group is that we are so very reactionary, bringing our big cannons out to swat at every fly. It becomes tedious to the public at large and trickles down to how we are treated on the road on a personal level. If we dial it down half a notch, focusing on more on the practical and less on the theoretical, we would achieve the same or better results with less backlash against individual cyclists.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 11:24 AM   #97
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nova
The point you choose to ignore and not respond to is a drift is a drift is a drift
You've got to be kidding.


Quote:
Do you realy think it would make one tiny bit of diffrence if those riders were in front of the car in the center of the lane?
Yes, I do.


Quote:
These drivers were not paying atention pure and simple.
I have no reason to believe it's that simple.


Quote:
Had they been in the left turn strait lanes with a lane to their right for right turns they would have plowed a car.
I doubt it. Almost all of these drifts occur on long stretches between intersections. At intersection approaches (where there would be a right turn only lane), motorists rarely choose to take their eyes off the road to attend to a distraction.


Quote:
Likly also hittign the one directly infront of them. Ive seen these crashes many many times. Its not because the lane the cyclist was hit in was a bike lane its because the driver paid no attention to driving.
That's very simplistic, Nova. Again, I have no reason to believe it's that simple. I believe the following factors are all relevant. If you have issues with any of them, please let me know.
  1. All drivers don't drift most of time.
  2. All drivers drift from time to time.
  3. Some drivers are more inclined to drift than others.
  4. Drift usually occurs while the driver is attending to a distraction (unwrapping a burger, changing the radio station, answering the phone, etc.)
  5. Whether a driver chooses to attend to a distraction depends on his assessment of the current situation. For example, a driver is much more likely to choose to attend to a distraction that take his eyes off the road for more than a second or two while driving down an empty road than when tailgating in 50 mph traffic.
  6. Drivers who choose to take their eyes off the road to attend to a distraction often know that they might drift, and take precautions to make sure that if they drift, they drift in the "safe" direction (into the shoulder as opposed to into the oncoming traffic lane).
  7. Harmless drift is so common we often tune it out and don't even notice it when others do it right in front of us. Start looking for it, and you'll find it occuring more often than you may have realized.
  8. When a driver assesses a current situation to decide whether to attend to a distraction now, or to wait, an out-of-the-way cyclist up ahead (say, in a bike lane) is much less likely to be noticed than is a cyclist up ahead riding in the driver's intended path. Therefore, a cyclist in the bike lane is less likely to cause a driver to keep his eyes on the road (and his vehicle in his lane) than is a cyclist riding in a more centerish position.
  9. Though probably helpful in reducing the likelihood of falling victim to an inadvertent drift, the conspicuity advantages of the centerish out-of-the-bike-lane position during gaps in same-direction traffic are much more important for preventing hooks and crosses from cross-traffic, which is a much more likely type of car-bike collision. Either way, bike lanes discourage cyclists from using a more conspicuous roadway position during gaps in same-direction traffic.


Quote:
If ither/any of the deaths your useing to promote your case were in center of lane ahead of the car they would have still been hit its as simple as that.
That assumes that a) the motorist is not even paying attention to what is directly in front of him, and b) that the cyclist will not move aside as the motorist approaches. While (a) is possible, it's much less likely than a motorist not noticing a cyclist outside of his intended path. (b) is contrary to the method I promote.


Quote:
This is just one more post that helmethead will choose to not reply to as it counters his argument directly and points out the fatal flaw of his argument.
You've said nothing new in here that I have not already addressed countless times before, and just did again.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 11:26 AM   #98
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
So finally some traffic engineer types really focusing on the issue understand the difference sufficiently to update the MUTCD accordingly.

Now, how many decades do you expect it to take for the general driving culture to catch up with the thinking now finally corrected in the MUTCD?
Less then you think. Driving behavior has markedly changed (for the better) in the Beaverton (Portland suburb) area in the 5 years since I started cycling here. This has been clearly helped by new road construction which has lessened the frustrations of motorists and cyclists alike. In the same period of time, the number of cyclists has increased, and not all of them are on Trek bicycles.

Quote:
And as far as your comment (in the sensationalism thread) that you might agree with me if you lived where I lived, I bring to your attention the several incidents of bike lane deaths due to inadvertent drift that we've talked about on this forum, which took place in Portland and the surrounding area. If you think you're immune, you're fooling yourself. Now, it's true that the likelihood of it happening to you (or me) or any one cyclist is very low, but several cyclists are killed by this phenomenon every year. As far as I'm concerned, most if not all of them could have been prevented by minor adjustments in cyclist behavior alone. Why not promote a general acceptance among cyclists that reduces the chances of anyone falling vicitim to same-direction inadvertent drift, and, more importantly, to hooks and crosses from cross-traffic? What's the downside of promoting the Cyclecraft methodology (use a conspicuous centerish lane position during significantly long gaps in same-direction traffic, rather than keeping to the right or in the bike lane)?
I agree; teach, teach, teach. I will do the same. However, I simply think that things can be done in parallel. And they are. In my paragraph you are refering to, I am simply telling of my observations as a cyclist. I have never witnessed an "inadvertent drift" which ever put me in danger in the slightest when in a bike lane. Obviously it happens, but my point is that it does not happen very often.

Yes, we teach defensive cycling, but in the big picture if we allow nothing to be done regarding the cause of the problems, then we achieve nothing but an escalation. We teach people how to stand and ward off an assault, but we also need to ensure that the assaults don't happen in the first place. Defenses don't always work. The less they need to be employed, the less the chance that something goes wrong.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 11:35 AM   #99
Brian Ratliff
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
Posts: 10,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
BTW, has there been more than one of these "inadvertent drift" accidents in the Portland area? I only remember the single one in Sherwood. And there, the driver quite possibly fell asleep.

And in the words of the famous Helmet Head: I have no reason to believe that the reason why motorists drift is more complicated than the simple fact that they were distracted. After all, the lanes on a road are simply separated by paint, and sometimes drivers can and do inadvertently drift over them. I have no reason to believe that incidents of cyclists being killed due to this type of accident are more numerous in either numbers or percentages to the number of drivers being killed due to the same type of accident.

I have no reason to believe that this is a problem limited to cyclists.

(ain't the phrase "I have no reason to believe..." a great phrase. It totally cuts through any attempts at rational discussion from the get go. There's no arguing for what people "...have no reason to believe", since apparently it is a matter of belief; not up for discussion.)
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

Last edited by Brian Ratliff; 05-08-06 at 11:41 AM.
Brian Ratliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-06, 12:21 PM   #100
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
Yes, we teach defensive cycling, but in the big picture if we allow nothing to be done regarding the cause of the problems, then we achieve nothing but an escalation. We teach people how to stand and ward off an assault, but we also need to ensure that the assaults don't happen in the first place. Defenses don't always work. The less they need to be employed, the less the chance that something goes wrong.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:40 PM.