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 12-01-12, 12:13 PM   #251
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Bekologist
Some similariities between bicycles and motor vehicles in Holland and the USA are that both classes of vehicle must signal intent to turn or otherwise alter course with mechanical, electrical or hand signals, or be in violation of traffic laws and the corresponding rules of the road.

same as in this country. this should be obvious. nothing optional about it.

oh, that's right, let's not forget - those pesky Forestorian gyroscopic braking forces pitching Dutch cyclists with one hand on the bars wholesale into the canals must nudge the bicyclist crash rate over there into stratospherically incompetent levels.



Quote:
Originally Posted by hagen2456 View Post
To any competent cyclist mr. Forester's claims seem absurd. For heaven's sake, kids the age of 6 in Holland and Denmark know how to signal. Anyone who's not disabled can do it. Some can't or don't like to do it at high speeds, sure, but those are typically the elderly or smaller kids. Anyone else here can (and mostly does) signal.
It is Bek's claims that are absurd, because they are not what I have written. You have been misled by Bek's lies to believe that I have made absurd claims about the inability to safely signal, which I have never done.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 05:05 PM   #252
wsbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re; Excessive motor vehicle use related congestion: in U.S. cities such as those in the metro area, an example of which is the city of Beaverton, that I'm living in, this type of congestion is not occurring only on freeways, but also, on thoroughfares within the cities In fact, this type of decades long occurring congestion is, if I understand our local history correctly, one of the key reasons Portland back in the 70's, actively began providing space along major thoroughfares for at the time, the almost unheard of thing in our area...room for people to ride their bikes, instead of drive a motor vehicle: bike lanes.

A brief description of my neighborhood, Central Beaverton, which includes Downtown, in Beaverton, the suburban city I live in: pop; 15,000 out of a total city population of 90,000. Distance from one side of the neighborhood to the other: 2 miles, in other words...a distance that's walkable and bike-able. Four major, multiple lane, heavily used roads travel through this small area. One of the roads, Cedar Hills Blvd is its name, but thoroughfare probably describes it better...borders my neighborhood and the major multi-use mall....effectively a key component of Beaverton's Downtown...across from the neighborhood. Even with crosswalk signals, particularly during rush hour, motor vehicle activity on the road is intense, noisy, dirty, and dangerous for people crossing it or trying to ride the adjoining 4', maybe 5' wide bike lanes.

Leading from my neighborhood and the other neighborhoods around the downtown mall, the construction of generously designed, bike lanes and MUP's, either separate from or better protected from the very heavy traffic on Cedar Hills Blvd, would likely experience much use from people in the neighborhoods who like to walk or bike, but for whom the current traffic and infrastructure condition likely leads them to believe travel by motor vehicle is their only safe, practical option.

Last edited by wsbob; 12-01-12 at 05:12 PM.
wsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 06:28 PM   #253
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
The Tom-Tom data shown only the ratios between off-peak and peak travel times. Therefore, cities in which travel is almost equally slow at both times will not show on this list, regardless of their level of congestion. And the Tom-Tom data don't consider the other inconveniences of motoring in the older European cities, such as lack of parking at both origin and destination. And the Tom-Tom data are calculated from the whole urban motoring area, not separated from the urban center where most cycling is done.
Pah. Cycling isn't just about the urban centres. And what may be the cause of congestion doesn't really matter much.

Oh, and I think that that data is a bloody lot better than your impressions.

Last edited by hagen2456; 12-01-12 at 06:32 PM.
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 07:20 PM   #254
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by john forester
There is no point in then looking behind, because there ought to be no traffic approaching on his left.


Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
I see that you are ignorant of destination positioning, which is a crucial part of vehicular cycling.
traffic never overtakes vehicular cyclists on the left - who would've thunk it?

Quote:
It is commonly recognized that for any but the most gentle braking, if the deceleration force has to be applied through only one hand, that forces the steering into swerving the bicycle. Therefore, in situations when braking may be suddenly required, as when cycling in traffic, it is best to have both hands on the handlebars so that the deceleration force is balanced on each side.
it's best to not signal cycling in traffic because of the fear of gyroscopic forces trumps the legal requirement and safety advantages of hand signals.


Those dutch just need to get on board with this forester cycling stuff - sounds like the cyclist ed the Dutch transport ministry has been waiting for for decades.

Last edited by Bekologist; 12-01-12 at 07:31 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 07:25 PM   #255
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
Bek is the one arguing that I say that it is not safe to ride one handed..
John! you're the one telling the forum

*cyclists don't have to legally signal turns

*that the laws requiring signals are anachronisms

*that cyclists shouldn't take a hand off the bars at slow speeds to signal out of fear of losing control from even moderate braking

* that riding in traffic is better done without hand signals

* that cyclists needn't even look before making a left turn because, you know, there shouldn't be traffic overtaking a cyclist on the left,

and, most stunningly,

*vehikular cyclists can operate with the belief lane position predicates they never get overtaken on the left so no sense looking OR using a hand signal before making a left turn in traffic.

righteeoo, John. I'm be surprised if the Dutch Transport Ministry hasn't already cut you a cheque.

Last edited by Bekologist; 12-01-12 at 07:30 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 08:14 PM   #256
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
traffic never overtakes vehicular cyclists on the left - who would've thunk it?



it's best to not signal cycling in traffic because of the fear of gyroscopic forces trumps the legal requirement and safety advantages of hand signals.


Those dutch just need to get on board with this forester cycling stuff - sounds like the cyclist ed the Dutch transport ministry has been waiting for for decades.
This posting by Bek is full of lies. And he is so ignorant that he talks about gyroscopic forces, which I never did.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 08:15 PM   #257
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
John! you're the one telling the forum

*cyclists don't have to legally signal turns

*that the laws requiring signals are anachronisms

*that cyclists shouldn't take a hand off the bars at slow speeds to signal out of fear of losing control from even moderate braking

* that riding in traffic is better done without hand signals

* that cyclists needn't even look before making a left turn because, you know, there shouldn't be traffic overtaking a cyclist on the left,

and, most stunningly,

*vehikular cyclists can operate with the belief lane position predicates they never get overtaken on the left so no sense looking OR using a hand signal before making a left turn in traffic.

righteeoo, John. I'm be surprised if the Dutch Transport Ministry hasn't already cut you a cheque.
This posting by Bek, just like the immediately previous one, is again full of lies.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-12, 08:22 PM   #258
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)
John, what you've been posting about cycling in this thread is pretty appalling, and a lot of us are noticing.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 04:40 AM   #259
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
This posting by Bek, just like the immediately previous one, is again full of lies.
I'm trying - really - to figure out what parts are lying, and I fail to find any. You may have not have been sufficiently clear when pointing out where/how, Bek is wrong about the parts from your writings that he quotes. I don't think I'm alone in thinking so.
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 04:49 AM   #260
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
I see that you are ignorant of destination positioning, which is a crucial part of vehicular cycling.
Er, no... I just happen to realize that to position oneself, one has to look behind to check for traffic, and one would be wise to signal. Turning one's head is not a signal, or at least not in any way a clear one. It can convey a number of impressions to drivers. That's hardly optimal.
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 06:57 AM   #261
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hagen2456 View Post
Er, no... I just happen to realize that to position oneself, one has to look behind to check for traffic, and one would be wise to signal. Turning one's head is not a signal, or at least not in any way a clear one. It can convey a number of impressions to drivers. That's hardly optimal.
That's the case for cyclists in the US, Holland or anywhere.

Signalling turns and intent with one hand should become ingrained in cyclists, and i think in most people that ride, signalling with a hand out easily becomes second nature. Here in the US, Holland or wherever, cyclists who want to stay safe and cooperate with other traffic use hand signals.

but not for cyclists who've learned a certain cycling method instructs riding in traffic is best done without hand signals, both hands on the bars, to deal with sudden de-acceleration forces of all but the most gentle braking.




It's surprising the Dutch Transport Ministry hasn't already signed up.

Last edited by Bekologist; 12-02-12 at 07:10 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 08:51 AM   #262
yama
mizu no kokoro
 
yama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Frankfurt/Germany
Bikes:
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So let's take a look at the dark side of segregation. Join me on a virtual ride on a bicycle facility in Frankfurt a.M. in Germany: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4kg7m_ahSo

This is the german version of "going dutch"...
yama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 09:32 AM   #263
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yama View Post
So let's take a look at the dark side of segregation. Join me on a virtual ride on a bicycle facility in Frankfurt a.M. in Germany: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4kg7m_ahSo

This is the german version of "going dutch"...
Looks a lot like the cycling "ghettos" that get built in the US.

Here is an Oulu Finland version of "segregation."

genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 12:06 PM   #264
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
John! you're the one telling the forum

*cyclists don't have to legally signal turns
[JF: I have never written that, although I have referred to the standard American wording excluding the situation in which the cyclist requires both hands on the handlebars to control the bicycle.]

*that the laws requiring signals are anachronisms
[JF: I have never written that. I wrote that the old law required signalling in the event that any other driver would be affected by the intended movement. Only when all motor vehicles had been equipped with self-cancelling turn signals was the law changed to require continuous signalling always. The difference is no extra effort for motorists, but it might mean a lot to non-motorized drivers, for whom I consider that the older law should have been maintained.]

*that cyclists shouldn't take a hand off the bars at slow speeds to signal out of fear of losing control from even moderate braking
[JF: I have never written that. This point arose in a discussion of changing lanes in high-speed traffic, when the cyclist is pedaling hard and hard braking might become needed.]

* that riding in traffic is better done without hand signals
[JF: I have never written that.]

* that cyclists needn't even look before making a left turn because, you know, there shouldn't be traffic overtaking a cyclist on the left,
[JF: I have never written that. After all, any cyclist has to look where he is going. But Bek has even misquoted himself, by eliminating the qualifier "look behind". Any cyclist turning left under American law (I don't know what some European laws require) must already have positioned himself as far to the left as is allowed for traffic moving in his direction (except when occupying one of multiple left-turn-only lanes). Therefore, there is no longer need to look behind, while the cyclist ought to be concentrating on the traffic moving in the opposite direction, to whom the cyclist is required to yield.]

and, most stunningly,

*vehikular cyclists can operate with the belief lane position predicates they never get overtaken on the left so no sense looking OR using a hand signal before making a left turn in traffic.
[JF: I have never written this. This is just another of Bek's repetitions of the same lie as the one immediately before.]

righteeoo, John. I'm be surprised if the Dutch Transport Ministry hasn't already cut you a cheque.
I have written my comments as shown by my initials.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 01:55 PM   #265
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yama View Post
So let's take a look at the dark side of segregation. Join me on a virtual ride on a bicycle facility in Frankfurt a.M. in Germany: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4kg7m_ahSo

This is the german version of "going dutch"...
That's not even trying. Shoving cyclists onto the sidewalk. That's just ridiculous. And a lot worse than just about anything I've seen on photos or videos from GB or the USA.
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-12, 03:09 PM   #266
wsbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With dial-up, it's difficult for me to see much of any video's posted. The first 15 seconds I saw of the separated cycle track in Oulu Finland looked good. Appears to be kind of like the 15 mile long or so, Springwater Corridor trail in Portland, which was sited in part on a no longer used rail alignment. The Springwater gets a lot of use. I'm recalling that the city's count of trips over the trail last year was around 500,000. Link to an article from bikeportland: http://bikeportland.org/2009/01/08/f...reversed-13036
Excerpt from that article: "...According to official counts of daily bike traffic on the trail by the City of Portland in 2007, an estimated 2,500 people on bikes use the trail each day (that's based on a count done at the Oaks Bottom area during peak commuting hours and extrapolated over a 24-hour period. The same count found 1,800 daily riders pass by the trail at SE Spokane.). ..." jonathan maus/bikeportland
The Portland Metro area has other examples of separated MUP's. People seem to like them well enough, but to date, none of them have been built with the idea that they could realistically or sufficiently meet the need people riding bikes have, to use standard streets, roads and highways for travel. Though some people are able to use Portland area MUP's for commuting, they're mostly recreational infrastructure. With increased population density that seems to be commonly anticipated in this area, these recreational MUP's, I think, are gaining more recognition, interest and use.

My strong impression though, is that this increased attention in my area to MUP's and cycle tracks, does not mean that this infrastructure having some things in common with active transportation infrastructure built in Holland and Denmark, will necessarily lead it to become the predominant type of road and street infrastructure that people traveling by bike in our area will use to get around their cities and towns. At least, not anytime soon, probably most readily due to lack of money and the logistics of designing, securing right of way, etc. It will continue to be a bit by bit thing.

Last edited by wsbob; 12-02-12 at 03:18 PM.
wsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 05:42 AM   #267
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester
nd". Any cyclist turning left under American law (I don't know what some European laws require) must already have positioned himself as far to the left as is allowed for traffic moving in his direction (except when occupying one of multiple left-turn-only lanes). Therefore, there is no longer need to look behind...
ah, the magic of vehikular cycling! no need to look behind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester
[JF: I have never written that [cyclists shouldn't take a hand off the bars at slow speeds to signal out of fear of losing control from even moderate braking] This point arose in a discussion of changing lanes in high-speed traffic, when the cyclist is pedaling hard and hard braking might become needed.
Come on, John.Your book specifically details the fear of signalling in the midst of SLOW SPEED TRAFFIC. It's in the section of your book on changing lanes in LOW SPEED TRAFFIC.

you HAVE written this advice, and committed it to print in multiple editions of the Forester magical cycling method.

'Don't use hand signals riding in slow speed traffic - hand signals do no good, so feel comfortable about breaking the law, and besides -you might crash from sudden braking forces so hold on for dear life, heavens don't signal! ' summarizes the trademarked Forester slow speed traffic negotiation technique.

there's no sense trying to deny you've given this advice - it's in black and white IN YOUR BOOK.

On all appearances, quite lousy cycling advice in the US that would also be lousy advice in Holland.

-and the Dutch Transport Ministry hasn't seen fit to contact you to run their national cycling education programme yet?

Curious.

Last edited by Bekologist; 12-03-12 at 05:54 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 06:02 AM   #268
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)
if people google "dutch sustainable safety principles" or 'swedish vision zero traffic safety' you will bring up some valuable reading on the driving forces behind transportation design in countries that far more effectively deal with bicycle traffic.

showing you what NL cycling is all about
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 06:06 AM   #269
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Bek, I think it's somewhat unclear what Forester is actually saying. I can understand that he feels that you don't have to look behind you, once you've placed yourself in the proper lane. IMO it would still be a very good idea to signal, though. However, to get into the proper lane it's extremely important to both check behind you and signal clearly and unambiguously. If that is what Forester denies, you're right in feeling that he's not in a position to teach anyone about traffic. But to be honest I'm not sure that the two of you are talking about the same thing.

Last edited by hagen2456; 12-03-12 at 06:12 AM.
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 06:11 AM   #270
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
if people google "dutch sustainable safety principles" or 'swedish vision zero traffic safety' you will bring up some valuable reading on the driving forces behind transportation design in countries that far more effectively deal with bicycle traffic.

showing you what NL cycling is all about
The Swedes are mostly talk and almost no walk when it comes to cyclist safety, as illustrated here: http://www.cyklistbloggen.se/2012/03...cit-i-holland/ (in Swedish, but perhaps Google Translate can help).
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 06:12 AM   #271
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hagen
However, to get into the proper lane it's extremely important to both check behind you and signal clearly and unambiguously. If that is what Forester denies, you're right in feeling that he's not in a position to teach anyone about traffic.

no where in the Forester method are hand signals considered appropriate. his book explicitly instructs cyclists changing lanes in slow speed traffic to not use hand signals and rely on head movements, eye contact, and slow lateral nudges of the bike to signal intent. The second reason he gives, after 'hand signals are legal anachronisms', is that fear of losing control of the bike makes both hands on the bars more important than signalling..... in slow speed traffic.

This is the Forester method in print. . And john's alluded to, confirmed some of this awful advice in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by john forester
....for any but the most gentle braking, if the deceleration force has to be applied through only one hand, that forces the steering into swerving the bicycle. Therefore, in situations when braking may be suddenly required, as when cycling in traffic, it is best to have both hands on the handlebars
"all but the most gentle braking forces really makes it best to keep both hands on the bars instead of using a hand signal when cycling in traffic" - the forum discussed the failings of this method a few pages back.

that's his advice verifiable in this thread, It's incredulous John is trying to deny hard copy, at the library, published cycling methods of his -the incredulity and feigned denials are absurd.

this "no need to even look behind you" is a new development from the Fantasy Cycling League.

The Forester method does recommend no signals of any kind from the cyclist in traffic going 15mph faster than the cyclist, maybe the 'failure to look' method has now percolated to all traffic speeds in which the cyclist is negotiating turns and lane changes.

Maybe all these 'vehicular cycling' methods have been flying under the radar of the Dutch Transport Ministry, which would explain some things about how the Dutch plan for bikes.

....far better to get Dutch Cyclists out there mixing it up, 'taking the lane' and not using hand signals in traffic out of fear of all but the most gentle braking forces, eh. Besides, traffic wold never overtake on the left..

Last edited by Bekologist; 12-03-12 at 06:44 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 12:22 PM   #272
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hagen2456 View Post
Bek, I think it's somewhat unclear what Forester is actually saying. I can understand that he feels that you don't have to look behind you, once you've placed yourself in the proper lane. IMO it would still be a very good idea to signal, though. However, to get into the proper lane it's extremely important to both check behind you and signal clearly and unambiguously. If that is what Forester denies, you're right in feeling that he's not in a position to teach anyone about traffic. But to be honest I'm not sure that the two of you are talking about the same thing.
It is very clear, Hagen, that you are criticizing vehicular cycling without having read the book that describes it. All you seem to know are the misleading falsehoods published by Bek. You should restrict your criticism to what you know.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 12:44 PM   #273
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
It is very clear, Hagen, that you are criticizing vehicular cycling without having read the book that describes it. All you seem to know are the misleading falsehoods published by Bek. You should restrict your criticism to what you know.
John, can I critisize the book... I've read it, I practice vehicular cycling.

While I find the basic premise of the book somewhat true for cyclists traveling in low speed traffic, I do find many many details of the book rather dated, full of "superstition" and personal conjecture.

I think Bek is guilty of beating a dead horse, and you are guilty of fostering superstition and half truths while resting on your laurals.

Franklin delivers about the same message is vastly fewer pages. I find Hurst's book also more informative, without the self congradulatory blather found in your book.

Sir, may I suggest that it is either time to step down from your metaphorical lofty throne, or write a new book with updated research; including actually visiting and using cycling infrastructure in places like Davis, Portland, NYC, Holland, Copenhagen, Finland, and of course London. You may be surprised with what what is available and works, vice what you imagine from your armchair.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 12:57 PM   #274
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
no where in the Forester method are hand signals considered appropriate. his book explicitly instructs cyclists changing lanes in slow speed traffic to not use hand signals and rely on head movements, eye contact, and slow lateral nudges of the bike to signal intent. The second reason he gives, after 'hand signals are legal anachronisms', is that fear of losing control of the bike makes both hands on the bars more important than signalling..... in slow speed traffic.

This is the Forester method in print. . And john's alluded to, confirmed some of this awful advice in this thread.



"all but the most gentle braking forces really makes it best to keep both hands on the bars instead of using a hand signal when cycling in traffic" - the forum discussed the failings of this method a few pages back.

that's his advice verifiable in this thread, It's incredulous John is trying to deny hard copy, at the library, published cycling methods of his -the incredulity and feigned denials are absurd.

this "no need to even look behind you" is a new development from the Fantasy Cycling League.

The Forester method does recommend no signals of any kind from the cyclist in traffic going 15mph faster than the cyclist, maybe the 'failure to look' method has now percolated to all traffic speeds in which the cyclist is negotiating turns and lane changes.

Maybe all these 'vehicular cycling' methods have been flying under the radar of the Dutch Transport Ministry, which would explain some things about how the Dutch plan for bikes.

....far better to get Dutch Cyclists out there mixing it up, 'taking the lane' and not using hand signals in traffic out of fear of all but the most gentle braking forces, eh. Besides, traffic wold never overtake on the left..
I stated that once the cyclist has established the proper lateral position for turning left he no longer has need to look over his left shoulder for overtaking traffic. Bek has now lied about my statement to say that I denied the need to look when changing lateral position to get in the appropriate position for turning left. That is clearly contrary to what I have always written about changing lateral position.

I stated that when significant braking is likely to be needed I recommend keeping both hands on the handlebars because steering one-handed during significant braking caused swerving, at least. Bek has now lied about my statement to say that I instruct cyclists to always keep both hands on the handlebars whenever cycling in traffic. That's not what I have written. Furthermore, I am known for writing my views. If it were my view that cyclists in traffic should always keep both hands on the handlebars, I would have so given the specific instruction to do so, which Bek has not found because it is not there.

Bek keeps trying to find ways to support his ideology of incompetent cycling on bikeways (he has written often enough about that) by seeking ways to use words taken from my works to convince gullible readers that I have written things contrary to what I have written. It is strange that in many years of instruction, by me and by other instructors, none of the supposed issues that Bek thinks he has raised were ever mentioned as difficulties, which surely would have occurred if they were real difficulties.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-12, 01:06 PM   #275
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
I stated that when significant braking is likely to be needed I recommend keeping both hands on the handlebars because steering one-handed during significant braking caused swerving, at least.....
huh? what happened to 'all but the most gentle' braking causing swerving so those Dutch best keep both hands on the bars for fear of losing control of their bikes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester
It is commonly recognized that for any but the most gentle braking, if the deceleration force has to be applied through only one hand, that forces the steering into swerving the bicycle. Therefore, in situations when braking may be suddenly required, as when cycling in traffic, it is best to have both hands on the handlebars so that the deceleration force is balanced on each side.
Such contradictions, overlaid on a foundation of inferiority laden techniques.

And this bluff?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester
f it were my view that cyclists in traffic should always keep both hands on the handlebars, I would have so given the specific instruction to do so, which Bek has not found because it is not there.
john. it's getting tiresome having to repeat your published advice about not using a left hand signal in slow speed traffic -it's right in your book for anyone that can stand to look.

right on page 309, describing making turns in SLOW SPEED TRAFFIC, you instruct cyclists to not signal their turns with hand signals. your reasoning you give, and have reiterated in this thread, are that hand signals are anachronisms and should be written out of the vehicle code, and because the fear of crashing overrides making a hand signal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Foresters book, pg 309
John Forester's book, pg 308
Notice that you have obeyed the spirit of of the vehicle code while disregarding its specific requirement to make the left-arm signal........the traffic situation might suddenly require both hands on the handlebars and brakes....
did you not notice when you wrote the instructions in that book of yours that you instructed cyclists to disregard traffic laws and not using hand signals in slow speed traffic?

Heaven forbid the cyclists that learn the techniques, then have to try and change lanes in traffic moving 15mph faster - taught there's no value signalling in any way shape or form - they have learned under the auspices of the forester method of traffic cycling to simply pick a gap and swerve from one edge of the lane to the other, instructed to never get in front of traffic moving faster than the bicyclist.

(which drives my sneaking suspicion about some of the reports of 'the cyclist swerved and didn't signal' collisions of supposedly seasoned cyclists. These cyclists, RIP, could have been executing the trademarked Forester lane change for traffic moving 15mph faster and up)

this is all in your book, for anyone that can stand to look. I've read it.



Did you think cyclists wouldn't notice the deplorable techniques embodied in the forester method, and maybe ask you about them in the context of a thread about public criticisms by vehikular cyklists about Dutch cycle planning ?

Perhaps the Dutch Transport ministry has been asleep at the wheel regarding what truly constitutes competent cyclists, eh.



Quite the muddled, self-styled morass.

Last edited by Bekologist; 12-03-12 at 01:39 PM.
Bekologist 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 05:54 PM.