Juha

Helsinki used to have a CityBike system where the bikes were up for grabs for anyone, no registration, no token fee, just take one and ride it. Quite a few of them ended up thrown in the sea, apparently, the rest were frequently beaten all out of shape. City gave up the program after a couple of summers. They have been planning a replacement, higher tech version with advertising company JCDecaux, who run such systems in many other European cities. I'd imagine the issue is the initial cost. Meanwhile, the city operates a repair center where one can get guidance from a pro bike mechanic and borrow tools for on-site repairs. The idea is to support people use their own bikes while bike share system is down.

Some grass roots initiatives have taken the stage as well. One of the larger Lutheran congregations in downtown Helsinki is preparing to leave pink beater bikes without locks in their general area, to see if vandalism is finally considered past season. Maintenance will be performed by volunteers. We'll see how that goes.

One problem with providing bike share services here is our mandatory helmet law. The question has been raised (pros/cons of helmet use aside), since we have such a law, is it OK for anyone to provide shared bikes and NOT provide the mandatory equipment that is required to ride one.

--J

Ekdog

Our system is run by JCDecaux, the same as Paris and Barcelona.

A mandatory helmet law would ruin bike sharing for me, because one of the best things about having bikes available to you is that you often grab one when you haven't planned on it, such as when you're in a pub, you end up staying longer than you'd planned and the buses are no longer running. Who's going to carry a helmet around 24/7?

Roody

I'm 110% against mandatory helmet laws. But if you're stuck with one, it seems like the bike share program would almost have to provide helmets along with the bikes. First, they need the good will of the local authorities who enforce the helmet law. Second, like ekdog said, users won't typically be carrying a helmet with them when they decide to rent a bike.

This problem is further proof that mandatory helmet laws are a tool used by the anti-bicycling lobby. They have nothing at all to do with safety.

B. Carfree

Bikeshare programs need quality maintenance programs and personnel. Unfortunately, one of the companies that has been involved here in the US, Alta (Mia Burke, infamous segregationist's company) has been notoriously bad at this and other key aspects of making bikeshare programs work.

Citi Bike Scrambling To Fix Backlog Of 900 Broken Bikes: Gothamist

Roody

Segregationist? That seems like a word you're hoping to start a flame war with! II guess you're going to use emotionalism to make your point. Too bad.

BTW, it's spelled "Mia Birk" in case anybody wants to look for some facts to back up their opinions. And no, I'm not defending Birk, and I'm aware of some alleged problems in bike share companies she has been involved with. (Of course, a lot of those accusations were made by automotivists, not by bike riders.) But let's try to keep it real!

Here's an article about Birk that gives both the good stuff and the dirt: https://www.wweek.com/portland/articl...-bikelash.html

Walter S

Helmets do a lot for head injury protection. Platitudes won't change that. The fact that helmets aren't cool or convenient won't change that. Inventive rationales won't change that. It just makes sense. Too bad.

Roody

Well, people on bikeforums have been arguing that one since the site opened. There's a lengthy thread (the 3rd or 4th one) on the topic stickied in the A&S subforum.. i really don't think there's much i can add that's new or different.

I-Like-To-Bike

Shared helmets equal instant fail due to hygiene problems; think head lice.

Machka 

Red Deer had a bike share program like that too ... got a whole bunch of beater bikes, tuned them up to a serviceable level, painted them all an ugly yellow colour and set them loose on the city streets.

And the inevitable happened ... they all disappeared or were beaten out of shape. It didn't take long before Red Deer gave up on that idea.


And regarding helmets (although I will note that I don't want to get into a pros and cons of helmet discussion here, for obvious reasons) ... Australia has a mandatory helmet law too.

Melbourne's Bike Share program provides helmets for free ... and requests that you leave the helmet with the bicycle when you're done.
Or you can purchase a helmet for $5.
Melbourne Bike Share | Helmet locations

I have no idea how well that works, but that's how they are handling it for now.


Adelaide has a free bike program ...
Adelaide Free Bikes : BIKeSA

Their comment on helmets is this:
"As it is a requirement of the law to ride with a helmet, you will be provided with one (available in a range of sizes) as well as a bike lock, which means you can hop off your bike to shop or go for lunch confident that your bike will be where you left it when you return."

B. Carfree

Mia is on record as working to separate cyclists from motorists. Very few people in her home base of the PNW believe that her motivations are truly for the benefit of cyclists since the episode a few years ago in Portland where she threw a temper tantrum over a cyclist who was legally taking the lane while riding on a street a few blocks away from a designated "bike blvd". (For the record, she was in a car and felt the cyclist had inconvenienced her.) She then compounded this by (unsuccessfully) lobbying the legislature to expand Oregon's mandatory use law to require cyclists to stay off of roads that are within a quarter-mile of a road with bike lane facilities or a bike path. Good luck doing any shopping when you can't ride on the streets with the stores.

The only word that I can think of that adequately describes her views is segregationist, as in separate and unequal. Since she's not a party to this thread, a flame war is obviously not possible. Is this an emotional response from you I detect? There's nothing emotional about pointing out her style and motivations, it's just the way she rolls and it's rather nice that, in the case of Citi Bikes, there's someone there to clean up the mess she left. Back in Portland, the mess she left has been a part of the reason that the number of people riding bikes hasn't increased in five years (while other cities, including NYC, are seeing steady growth).

Ekdog

Redhatter

The other downside is how to provide them in a manner that is cost-effective and doesn't risk damage to the helmet in question.

Here in Brisbane we've got the CityCycle system… the bikes themselves appear to be 3-speed jobbies, never tried riding one myself but I walk past them regularly. (There's two stations within a block of my workplace.)

One thing I notice is the condition of the helmets. They are stored out in the open, sometimes just sitting in the front basket. So the shell is faded, there's no padding, and the foam looks a bit weathered. I wouldn't trust one as far as I could throw it. It's very much "tick a box" and nothing more.

Then there's vandalism.

Melbourne have a system where you buy one for $5, someone has to pay the difference, and I suspect that's the Melbourne residents. Not perfect, but at least the helmet you buy is likely to be in better condition.

Ekdog

I wouldn't participate in a system that required participants to share a helmet. As someone else has pointed out, it's unhygienic.

Roody

Good point.

Roody

I just think "segregation" is a very poor choice of words for a number of reasons. In the past, I have only heard the word used by Vehicular Cycling partisans (almost always recreational road riders), so it was interesting to see it used on a transportation cycling forum. Maybe another thread would be a good ides? Kind of segregate the segregationist talk?

Redhatter

Yeah, agreed. I'd sooner just get used to carrying a helmet around with me than share one. Sharing one with people you know is bad enough, but not with the general public. That said, you can mitigate that by what you wear between your head and the helmet.

A hood or legionaries cap would provide some separation, however not everyone appreciates the extra insulation around their heads (which radiates most body heat) and having anything hard protruding out from underneath the helmet (such as the peak of a cap) is a really bad idea since it's the first thing that will hit the ground if you come off.

Melbourne seems to have got the better deal in this regard, you pay the money and the helmet is yours. The downside is the cost of subsidising and administering the scheme.

harshbarj

Does your city or a nearby city have a Bike Share Program?
- Yes we do, just not covering much of the city. Though it's getting better. heartland.bcycle.com
- It's also not listed on the wiki page...


Have you used it?
- Nope. I have my own bike and the nearest station to me is 4 miles. Even at work, it's one block. If I am going to walk that one block to get a bike, I'm going to walk to my destination.
Does it appear to be used?
- In actuality, yes. In reality it's very lightly used. Most bikes will spend the full day unused.

Any other general impressions regarding things like cost, ease of use, etc.?
- Cost is fair. I would use it if it covered more of the city and there was a station on the block I worked at. Would be simple to add as the block is surrounded by parking spaces.

This list may not be up-to-date. Maybe your city or a nearby city has one but it isn't listed there yet?
- I can say it is not up to date. Omaha has had a bike share for several years, though most of that time it was 5 or 6 stations. Hardly a real program.

Ekdog

Is there an organized effort to have the mandatory helmet law rescinded?

wilfried

NYC went through a major period of "bikelash" when Citi Bike was announced, with people going to batsh$! crazy over the prospect of bike share, and by extension, bikes in general. The system was on the one hand going to be an utter failure and a boondoggle, as no one would use it, and at the same time, there would be blood running in the gutters from all the added crazy cyclists crashing and mowing people down. Needless to say, none of this came to pass. Citi Bike has been wildly successful, despite lots of technical glitches and problems with Alta, the company that ran the system. And like just about every bike share system, it has also had an excellent safety record.

In the midst of the hysteria, there was a rehash of the helmet debate. It was very clear that the people advocating for helmet were the people that didn't want bikes on the street in the first place. I believe a city councilman introduced a bill for a helmet law. He was a well known opponent of just about any street improvements meant to improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists, but there he was crying crocodile tears about bike safety. People who want to mandate helmets are the ones who don't want bikes, and they knew full well that a helmet law would be the surest way to kill bike share, and cycling in general.

Just for the record, I wear a helmet when I ride my own bikes, but not when I ride bike share. If I'm schlepping my bike, also schlepping a helmet isn't such a big deal, but carrying a helmet when I'm just trying to grab a bike and go is more trouble than it's worth. I have to admit that I think I ride more safely on a city bike than on my own bike. Riding a Citi Bike is like riding a Sherman tank in first gear. They're big, heavy, ponderous, and geared really low, so you can only go so fast even when spinning like a madman, so there's less temptation to try to squeeze into small spaces, or dart around traffic. The bikes are also very stable, you sit stock upright, and they have big fat tires, so I'm less worried about getting sent over the handlebars by an errant pothole or something. I fine they encourage a more Zen-like style of riding: sit, spin, go with the flow, and eventually you'll get there.

Redhatter

Not that I know of, and I'm not sure I'd support such a move either.

Last I recall anyone bringing it up as an issue, it was the Democratic Labor Party during the 2007 election, one of their policies was to abolish what they called "victimless crimes", one of the examples being failing to wear a helmet when riding a bicycle or motorcycle.

Sadly, as much as having a block of foam strapped to my head can be a nuisance at times, where a crash is concerned, physics is not on my side. Numerous studies into the dynamics of road accidents have shown the human skull to be insufficiently thick enough to protect against collisions with hard surfaces. So to my mind, it's the lesser of two evils.

Machka 

+1

Machka 

Anyway ... enough about helmets, and more about bike share programs.

Ekdog

I won't get into whether or not helmets are effective in protecting one's head in a fall, because such discussions are not allowed here. I'm just interested in how cyclists in your country react to mandatory helmet laws. When our government tried to impose one, there was strong opposition to it from cycling organizations, who saw it as an anti-cycling measure. One of the many arguments against it was the effect if would have on bike-share programs. The law was passed in a watered-down version. In the cities it now applies only to children, and outside the city limits it applies to everyone. From what I've seen, cyclists of all ages widely flout it, and I've yet to see the police harass helmetless riders. As soon as a more progressive government is in power, I'm sure it will be repealed.

rhm

I've been using the NYC Citibike program for over a year. My office is only a few blocks from Penn Station, and I can walk the distance almost as fast as riding it, but I ride so much anyway that I feel safer on the bike than walking among the tourists on the sidewalk.

Ironically, though I've been wearing a helmet almost religiously for all my cycling since the late 70's, I don't wear a helmet when I use the Citibike. I don't have it with me.

The bikes are good and generally in good riding condition, but the rubber grips on the handlebar are always sticky. I don't know if it's a real hygiene issue or what, but the stickiness is real. I now carry plain t cotton gloves with me and put them on to ride the bike.

rm -rf

A new Hour Record on a bikeshare bike. Nice suit and tie! At the Boulder CO velodrome, 29.45 kph or 18.3 mph. He must have been really spinning 3rd gear to hold that speed.

Ow, that seat is just not designed for an hour long ride!