CliffordK

Hard to say if and when the car passed the E-Biker.

The video clip is long enough that the E-Biker is matching, and perhaps exceeding the speed of the driver and other traffic on the road for a half a block or so before the impact. Probably quite a bit longer. He might have even caught up with the traffic from the time he entered onto the road.

As far as not getting anywhere without passing on the right...

He was apparently riding the E-Bike 20+ MPH, and keeping up with traffic. If it was a car driving in the lane, it would have to also slow down for turning cars.

I'm not saying that passing on the right is always bad, or always good. But, one should try to ascertain why a vehicle is slowing down before passing. In this case, the rear car's brake lights turned on and a gap opened up between it and the lead car. A good sign that something important is about to happen on the road.

It is not that the following car simply let off the gas, but he hit the brakes and the brake lights came on... to indicate CAUTION!

Yeah, many things on the road happen quickly. The E-Biker had 1 or 2 seconds to react before "lights out"

mr_bill

Filtering forward in congested traffic on a bicycle

-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

Until you're sure the motorist won't turn right, yes, it's prudent to slow to stay behind and even stop (or pass on the left). It's easy. I do it all the time.

If it's a long line of cars with no where to turn right... that's different. Then it's reasonable to use the bike lane to move ahead, but still with caution. Someone might decide to pull to the curb.

Ninety5rpm

Agreed. I don't blame the cyclist. I blame the infrastructure. They'd never allow through traffic in a traffic lane to the right of a traffic lane that allows right turning traffic. It's insanity. You'd never see the sign below, and yet this is the implied configuration at most intersections where there are bike lanes and no dedicated right turn only lane for right turning motorists. My point is cyclists should be aware of this inherent design hazard, and ride accordingly.

mr_bill

Yeah, that's not blaming the person on the e-bike. One thing we do know, you don't blame the motorist.


But anyhow, you are wrong, again. Where the crash took place that's a median, a through lane, then a through-right turn diamond lane (through-right turn for bikes, right turn-only for general motor traffic).

Similar to THIS (through for bus, through-right turn for bike, right-turn only for general motor traffic).


-mr. bill

CliffordK

I highly dislike center bike lanes, with traffic lanes on both sides of me (right turn). Perhaps it is just that I'm not used to them. But, I'd much rather be to the right.

Nonetheless, for major intersections, moving the bike lane to the middle is not a bad thing.

However, in the case above, the car turned into a driveway, and not into a major side road, and probably wouldn't have benefited by using turn lanes to the right of bicycle lanes, depending on where the driveway is with respect to the intersection.

mr_bill

In Florida (where the crash occurred) you merge into the right lane, YIELDING TO TRAFFIC in the right lane, and then make the right turn from the right lane.

THAT INCLUDES BIKE LANES. See p. 29 and p. 40.

-mr. bill

avole

Once again, "blame the victim" thread. Motorists do have to take some responsibility, you know, especially if they are not following the rules of the road.

Sigh!

Ninety5rpm

I would assign responsibility for the crash about like this:

75% INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN
25% MOTORIST

The configuration of that road is: MEDIAN, THROUGH/TURN TRAFFIC LANE, THROUGH/TURN BIKE LANE

That is, the traffic lane allows turning as well as through travel. Just like the bike lane to the right of it. Insane! Ride accordingly!

The location shown in your link has a diamond lane which allows through or turning traffic, just like the Coconut Grove bike lane, but the enormous difference is that the lane to the left of it does not allow right turns. Motorists need to merge into the diamond lane before turning right.

Yes, I know, motorists are supposed to merge into the bike lane too before turning right, but compliance with this law is terrible - almost no motorists do it. They tend to turn right from the lane itself, exactly like the motorist in the video did. Decking out a shoulder with bike emblems and expecting totally different driver turning behavior as a result is unreasonable.

avole

Ah, so it is OK for motorists to break the law? What a strange country in which you live

Ninety5rpm

Huh?

It is not OK to open your door without looking first, but I still don't ride in door zones.
It is not OK to speed, but I still check for speeders before entering or crossing a street.
It is not OK to run red lights, but I still check for red light runners before entering on green.
It is not OK to turn without using your signals, but I still don't assume a car without signals won't turn.
It is not OK to turn right from the traffic lane without merging into the bike lane first, but I still done presume motorists won't cut across the bike lane.

Just because you're aware motorists make certain errors, and ride accordingly, doesn't mean you're okay with it.

mr_bill

Full stop.

-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

Even most cyclists I know conflate shoulders and bike lanes. I've seen cops refer to shoulders as bike lanes and vice versa. Almost nobody pays attention to the difference, yet the law with respect to how they are to be treated by right turning motorists is exactly opposite depending on whether it's a bike lane or shoulder.

I'm just saying, cyclists interested in their own safety should be well aware of this reality and its ramifications, and ride accordingly.

I don't understand why you object to this.

CliffordK

Not blaming the victim... Crash was driver's fault.

But, in Advocacy/Safety, one can learn about defensive cycling techniques. So, that one is less likely to get smashed by cars.

What should the defensive cyclist do and look for in order to be safe.

And, of course, remind cyclists of potential road hazards that they might not be paying attention to.

I suppose the alternative is just to put on horse blinders and ride, hoping that one's personal space is never compromised.

mr_bill

There’s situational awareness, and then there is Don’t pass on the right, the TITLE of this thread.

The antithesis of defensive.

It’s dogmatic, reactionary and stupid.

With a good bit of “Vehicular Cyclist Exceptionalism.” (Thank you coiner of salmon and shoaling.)

-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

I thought it was obvious in the OP that the title, "don't pass on the right", only applied where it matters - where vehicles may be turned right. I clarified this in Post #19, in bold: "don't pass cars on the right that can and might be turned right". I also reiterated this point in #29: "If it's a long line of cars with no where to turn right... that's different. Then it's reasonable to use the bike lane to move ahead, but still with caution. Someone might decide to pull to the curb." But I can update the OP for clarity; apparently that's necessary.

The other key factor in this incident, as I clearly pointed out in the OP, is that the motorist was slowing down as the vehicle approached a place where a right turn was possible. How obvious does it have to be?

sirkaos

Did anyone see an indication in the drivers right side mirror that the bike rider had an appropriate daytime headlight on? No mention if the driver was driving distracted either. From the drivers point of view, the small side mirror would offer not much contrast detail. A flashing or pulse headlight in that case would certainly help. This purely was the fault of the driver. But I also think, anything I can do to make myself visible would help this inattentive driver double check his actions before cutting across the bike lane.

CliffordK

At dusk, one can see flashing lights reflecting off of everything. I don't know about daylight, but I'm guessing the cyclist isn't using bright flashing lights. I can't tell if a steady light is on.

That may be, however, a good point. With the increased speed of E-Bikes, as well as battery availability, perhaps there should be daytime/nightime lights mandated on E-Bikes, somewhat like motorcycles.

mr_bill

Heal thyself.

I've seen *YOU* call a bikelane a shoulder.

-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

Perhaps, but I don't know what you're talking about. That street view is not familiar to me (doesn't mean I've never seen it; just don't recall).

mr_bill

Turn around. This is the beginning of the video.

We are used to you not knowing what you are talking about.


-mr. bill

Ninety5rpm

I watched that video once or twice. I did not pay attention to the surroundings enough to recognize the street view is from the same area. So what? You're still not making any sense.

What does any of this have to do with me supposedly referring to a bike lane as a shoulder? Even if I did, that would only bolster my larger point anyway: people often conflate shoulders and bike lanes, so it's unreasonable to expect people to treat them differently.

robertorolfo

That video depicts an entirely different scenario. And, beyond that, the guy in the video is being insanely conservative in his riding. He keeps claiming his decision not to pass on the right avoided collisions (with a car, then a pedestrian), but that's a bit disingenuous.

It's not like there are only two options, 'Pass on the right at full speed, or don't pass at all,' which is also what the title of this thread implies. Had the guy in the video link above slowed down to just a few mph (or whatever your measure), he could have moved past a few vehicles and still have plenty of time to stop for the eventual hazards. What is the breaking distance of a bike going 5mph? A few feet at most?


If you pass on the left in a situation like that, on a road like that, you are taking a big risk. People turning from the wrong lane is an incredibly dangerous phenomenon for exactly this reason. Undertaking is dangerous because the driver is going into your path. Overtaking is dangerous because you have limited time to make sure nobody is coming from behind into the space you want to take to go around. Stopping is also bad because you are at risk of being rear-ended due to the unexpected position of the turning car.

It's all bad, an it's all the drivers fault.

I'll say, though, that if I was riding an e-bike and keeping up with, or, as the video shows, generally going faster than the automobile traffic, I wouldn't be in the bike lane. I'd just ride in regular traffic.

Ninety5rpm

I didn't think it was necessary to note that you would only overtake on the left after first looking back and ensuring it's safe to move out there to do so. I do it all the time - it's not a problem. Usually I can do it without slowing down. As soon as I see a motorist ahead slowing prior to a place where they can turn right, I look back and start planning my overtake. Within seconds I'm passing. Occasionally I need to signal/negotiate for right of way, but I can do that often without slowing as well. If you're deliberate and obvious about what you're doing, motorists behind get it and cooperate immediately. That's my experience.

mr_bill

You've never encountered the SUV driver left or the SUV driver right? Worst when an SUV driver downsized to a car, but kept the habit.

They slow down, position on either side of part of the road (far right or as far left as practical) and then turn the opposite way.

(There's also the related Autocross/Solo left and right, where the driver drives like they are all alone on the course. Turn-in to the apex.)

-mr. bill