chipcom 

Of course...we're all human and get as impatient as any driver. That's why I believe that age and experience make cycling, driving or anything else a bit less 'dangerous' because through experience we have learned to recognize potentially dangerous situations and through age we learn to slow down and not be in such a danged hurry.

RobertHurst

Indeed, passing such a vehicle on the left opens the rider to a whole new set of dangers, especially if it is done without an understanding of the blind spots that exist on that side as well, and the difficulty that a truck driver or any driver will have seeing a cyclist passing on their left. Waiting behind the truck is fraught with danger, and of course passing on the right can be dangerous.

Traffic is full of such seemingly simple obstacles for which there is no easy, ready-made solution. There may be no truly safe way for a cyclist to deal with such a situation. I worry most about those who claim there is, as it betrays a profound failure to grasp what's really going on out there.

Robert

chipcom 

Heck Robert, not even getting out of bed in the morning or eating my Wheaties is 'truly safe'.
We make our decisions based upon what is 'relatively safer' based upon our experience...or lack thereof.

RobertHurst

https://www.industrializedcyclist.com/

Thanks HH. it's a work in progress. I put up quite a few more links and pdfs on the Research Page last night. One in particular I thought you might like to look at: Conspicuity and Bicycle Crashes (preliminary results from a survey of NZ recreational riders).

First, of course, you said in extremely large letters that you would never pass a construction vehicle on the right just because its hazards were on; then you said you would. Fine. Your instinct is evolving as we speak.

But what really stands out in the above statement for me is your (1) assumption that there is a way to pass the truck on the right which would make the truck's running you over impossible and (2) apparent decision to ride at speed past the obstruction and into the intersection. Where I come from, that is the cause of frequent disaster.

Robert

invisiblehand

Either that or we are getting slower with age and experience and figure we are not getting there in a hurry regardless.

Helmet Head

I never said anything about stopping centered behind a truck. When i stop behind a vehicle, I stop in a spot where I can see their rear view mirror, of course. Again, you force yourself to do that (stop where you can see the rear view mirror) a few times, and next thing you know you're doing it automatically, without thinking about.

What I said I would never do was ride to the right in the particular situation you described. When you modified the situation, I agreed I might.

As to the sweet spot, I would not be in the sweet spot close enough and long enough to actually be in danger. It's about timing, as you know.

Helmet Head

(1) Well, certainly there are situations in which passing on the right, taking into account a truck's inability to move instantaneously, can be done. If that's not the case, then it might be time to get on the sidewalk.

(2) Of course I wouldn't come blasting out of a blind spot into an intersection.

Schwinnhund

More dangerous to whom? The operator, or other people?
There are different kinds of cycling, some obviously more dangerous than others. You're certainly more likely to have a spill riding Off-Road, than commuting. You would obviously have a greater chance of wrecking in a Race, than casual riding. Commuting/General Transportation would probably be somewhere in between. I don't think commuting is more dangerous to the operator than driving, and is probably safer. Biking is certainly safer for everyone else. A drunk on a bike would not be anywhere near the danger that a drunk driver would be. If I had a choice, I would rather be in a bike wreck than a car wreck, because I don't believe the injuries would be as bad.

And biking could be made much safer if our Government would spend less money on foreign wars, foriegn aid, domestic pork projects and other junk, and more on a National Bike Roadway system similar to the State Highway system. After all, the first paved highway in the country was built for bicycles and payed for by the League Of American Wheelmen, out of thier own pockets!

Semper Fi!

macteacher

Do you mean 400 million car trips per year? Otherwise, I don't see how this number was created. Canada's population is only 32 million. If each cnd. had two cars, we'd have 62 million cars on the road.. but that's not the case. Toronto's pop. is only 3.5 million. Please elaborate where you came up with 400 million cars for toronto in a year. Even if each citizen, babies, teens had a car, that only equates to 3.5 million cars.

chipcom 

1 million cars per day x 365 days per year = 365 million cars per year. The new math is kewl.

mr_nickos_jr

The bigger you are, the less likely you are to get hurt when/if you get hit. If we're saying it's more dangerous to drive, you're saying it's extremely more likely to get hit driving than biking? I don't know statistics, but I'd think it'd be more common simply because there are more people driving than there are biking.

I enjoy biking and will continue to bike, but when I was driving to work I never came close to getting hurt and I have a few times while biking, and by no fault of my own. People just like to ignore the little guy, or tend to ignorantly especially when it's not as light out.

RobertHurst

It's good policy, but do you understand how difficult it might be for a truck driver to see a cyclist in their mirror. Just because you can see the mirror, doesn't mean the driver can see you easily, or that the driver is even checking the mirror. My instinct tells me that a rider with a foot down behind a trash truck could easily get backed over before they can scramble out of the way.


It is about timing, but you have overestimated your own omnipotence again, thinking that you will not 'actually be in danger.' You will actually be in danger. People out there need to understand -- any time you're compromising yourself by passing a truck within ten feet or so on either side there is going to exist the possibility of that truck lurching into a turn at a certain precise time that will in fact put you on course for a collision or crushing that will be virtually impossible to avoid. Yes, the movement of the truck is limited by the physical laws of the universe. But trucks can jump to speed with surprising quickness, and once the worst-case-scenario timing initiates and the vectors are headed unluckily toward each other our ability to alter course and avoid is also limited by the physical laws of the universe.

Thank you for helping me to explain how even someone who is hyper-aware of the danger posed by potentially turning trucks could get crushed by one.

Robert

The Industrialized Cyclist

RobertHurst

I completely agree.

What worries me is the perception that some apparently have that the potential danger posed by a parked truck can be virtually eliminated simply by (almost, sort of) refusing to pass it on the right.

Robert

The Industrialized Cyclist

Allister

... or wait your turn like the rest of the vehicles on the road.

Kyle90

Well.. Personally.

I've been hit 5 times on my bike, one put me in the hospital. However, I've fallen a hundred times and have some pretty nice gashes.
I've been in like 8 car wrecks, one put me in the hospital. None of those were me driving.

50/50 for me.

Schwinnhund

8 Car Wrecks!!!!!!!!!!!!

5 Bike Wrecks!!!!!!!!!!

Have you considered becomming a full-time Pedestrian? You might live longer.

closetbiker

Don't count on it. Here in my province a pedestrian has a proportional death rate of 5 times that of a cyclist.

It doesn't matter if you bike, drive or walk, it's the individual, rather than the choice of transit, who makes a poor decision, who ends up with problems.

raleighrider75

"Oh,you can prove ANYTHING with statistics"-Homer Simpson

closetbiker

I suppose, but it's somewhat comforting to know after being in this same job with mostly the same people for the last 23 years, when I stack myself up to those automotive commuters, I'm the one who is the healthiest, have been late the fewest times, and have had amongst the least number of days missed from illness or injury of everyone here.

facial

In my bicycling experience of the past 4 years, I think that as long as you 1) wear a helmet and 2) obey traffic rules (that includes stopping at red lights), you will be safer than when driving with a seatbelt on.

Note that I actually omit "putting on rear lights" because I have actually fared fine for the past 4 years without any night lights; it's only been for the past 2 months that I have had a light installed, so I cannot make any conclusions about that.

Also note that I have nearly equal driving experience with biking experience.

genec

So you are stopping at red lights at night with no lights on yourself...

Good luck with that.

Helmet Head

If you can see the mirror, then you are off to the side, not directly behind the truck, or you are WAAAYYY back. Either way, if the truck suddenly backs up, you won't be hit, unless you're off to the side and his wheels are turned so that when he backs up he arcs into you (and continues into the adjacent lane or onto the sidewalk - depending on which side we're talking about).



I appreciate your concern, but I don't buy it. Before a truck "lurches into a turn" from a dead stop, you're likely to hear the transmission getting engaged, and the motor start to rev well before the truck actually starts moving, not to mention seeing the front tires turn in the intended direction of the turn. If you've got room to be 10 feet away, you've got room and time to avoid it, and you don't even have to be paying attention. You should be looking for those signs instinctively any time you pass any truck, and reacting to them immediately should they be manifested, before you even get a chance to think about it. Anyway, that's what I've observed in my own behavior. I know what my limits are, and I ride within them. To get hit by a car, much less a truck or a bus, frankly, I can hardly imagine what I would have to do to put myself into a situation where that might happen (short of the out-of-control drunk careening across the road from the other side, or something really unexpected like that).

The bottom line is that despite what Gene says, drivers are very predictable. There are really only 4 things they have control over: turning left, turning right, hitting the accelerator, hitting the brake. Well, and opening a door. That really really limits what a driver can do with a vehicle that might affect a cyclist. What he can and might do within the next second is very limited. As you get further into the future, the range of possibilities of what he might do get broader, but no less predictable. So essentially all you have to do is avoid being in a position that puts you in a necessary collision course with any driver out there given the possible range of where he might go. At any given moment, there are usually only 1 or 2, if any, drivers that even pose a potential threat within the next 10 seconds. So you adjust accordingly and 2 or so seconds later re-evaluate.

I recently went on a desert camping trip and did a little hiking. Reminded me of the time I used to spend, almost every weekend from fall through spring, out in the desert in the 90s. One time I lead a 2 day hike up and over a 4000 foot ridge and down a long canyon. It was only 12 miles or so, but it was all off-trail bushwhacking in the desert. All of the guys were experienced hikers and in decent shape, but it turned out a few had little to no experience hiking off-trail in the desert. The contrast with my buddies who did it all the time was remarkable. Here were guys who regularly ran 15 miles who were just beat to shinola. The reason? They had to THINK about every single step. They seemed to be drawn to every cactus spine and cat claw, while the experienced effortlessly glided through the stuff, enjoying the views and the terrain. There were tense and exhausted; we were relaxed, happy and energized.

And traffic cycling is the same. You have to force yourself to THINK about every little thing, at first, but with time it all becomes more and more automatic, and thoughtless. I wouldn't ride so close to a truck that I would be at risk of getting hit by it for the same reason that I would not depend fully on a rock that might be loose, or go close enough to a teddy bear cholla to get nailed by it: because my trained subconscious would not allow me to do it.

Bekologist

yep. you're the 'expert' hate to say it, head, but your 'experiences' in traffic sound suspiciously like armchair bicycling, head.

such prowess and skill...

Helmet Head

That's right Bek, "if some ba$tard breaks every law in the book and runs me over in the process, it will be my fault and nobody else's" (p. 65, 1st ed).

Bekologist

I'm sorry helemt, but the way you describe bicycling lacks the studied realism found in Robert Hurst's writings.

Just because you agree with his point of view about defensive bicycling doesn't make the way you write about bicycling any more realistic.

For example, and maybe it's just me, I don't know where, how often ,and in what company you're riding, but when you write like this you lose all legitimacy... "So essentially all you have to do is avoid being in a position that puts you in a necessary collision course with any driver out there given the possible range of where he might go. "

WTF? There is no way to get anywhere on public streets applying that maxim.
And you know what? I have no interest in your rebuttal.