Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety > Vehicular Cycling (VC)
Reload this Page >

11 bicyclists crash into car

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

11 bicyclists crash into car

Old 10-09-07, 03:13 PM
  #276  
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Alister, I've watched Part 1, once. My initial comments:
See, this is why I have my doubts about your observation skills. My name has 2 l's, as clearly indicated in every post I make.

Watch the rest of the clips. Part 1 is the quietest part of the route.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
There are some HUGE gaps in same direction traffic! The next time I watch it I'll note how long the time gaps are, but I know there would have been plenty of time for me to spend much more time out further from the curb. Is this rush hour? During much of that entire clip, any shot from a satellite would show the roads to be near empty.
Rush hour, but during school holidays, which usually means significantly less traffic.

So, within that 10 minute clip, how many times would you move in and out of the lane?

Satellite photos are not a reliable reference for this kind of exercise. Take a look at the 'lanesplitting' clip in my youtube account, which shows typical commuting time conditions, and compare it to this image of the same road. See the difference?

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
You clearly do not adjust laterally for junctions. Do you at least glance back to make sure you're not going to be hooked?
Of course I check. You still seem to be assuming I'm some kind of amateur just because I don't agree with 'experts' such as yourself. I keep saying that just because I'm not weaving about doesn't mean I'm not aware, and it's still not sinking in.

Left hooks are exceedingly rare, and pretty easy to deal with if you keep your wits about you. No need to habitually hog the lane on the off chance. That's as much an irrational overreaction to a minor risk as kerb hugging.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I'll have to double-check, but I thought there was at least one instance in which oncoming traffic was present and simultaneously approaching the same junction - I would definitely have been further from the curb in that case to make myself more conspicuous, in case they decided to turn across my path without signaling.
And yet, miraculously, no-one hit me.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The position at which you ride in almost all of the time - a "safe" distance from the curb - is what John Franklin refers to as the "secondary position". You spend much more time in the secondary position than I would on those roads.
And yet, miraculously, no-one hit me.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
For the vast majority of motorists who pass you, you have no idea whether they've noticed your presence. There is no way you could know.
Nor do I need to know. The fact that they (miraculously) pass me safely is evidence enough.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
And at many times the gaps were long enough for a driver to decide the road is clear in front of him and decide to attend to a distraction, and then drift towards the curb into the unnoticed cyclist while attending to the distraction... Not very likely, but still...
That, as I've said many times, is such a minor risk that I'm not about to change my lane position out of fear of it. The pragmatism of riding in a way that doesn't require frequent lateral movements and doesn't require them from motorists unnecessarily overrides it by a long chalk.
Allister is offline  
Old 10-09-07, 03:23 PM
  #277  
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
HH, your entire commentary seems to pivot on your belief that:

(a) from behind collisions are extremely rare type of bicycle accident
(b) drift over collisions are more common than hit-from behinds
That's a huge misunderstanding, since (b) is a subset of (a).
Also, drifts usually occur on ruralish roads with no curbs and no parking.
In urban and suburban environments which are busier, drivers are more reluctant to take their eyes off the road long enough to drift from their intended path significantly.

This type of drift crash on these types of roads is all too common. Here's one example.

A veteran motorcycle officer, Norling was aware of the risks and dangers of pulling over drivers on Westpark.

On Monday, authorities said it appeared he'd taken every precaution when he stopped a driver along the outside shoulder of the eastbound lanes for an apparent traffic violation. He parked his motorcycle behind the car.

Moments later, a sport utility vehicle apparently swerved from the traffic lane onto the shoulder, hit the motorcycle, clipped the left rear of the stopped car and then hit Norling, who was standing at the driver-side window, officials said. The impact flung him in to the air and possibly as far as 90 feet, officials said.
The SUV driver apparently didn't notice the car and police motorcyclist in the shoulder. But he'd have no problem noticing a lone cyclist in the shoulder.

https://www.policeone.com/traffic-pat...icles/1359627/

Last edited by Helmet Head; 10-09-07 at 06:15 PM.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 10-09-07, 07:49 PM
  #278  
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The SUV driver apparently didn't notice the car and police motorcyclist in the shoulder. But he'd have no problem noticing a lone cyclist in the shoulder.
So who do you think is at fault there? The driver, or the policeman?

Maybe the cop should've pulled the driver over in the lane rather than to the side, to really grab driver's attention.
Allister is offline  
Old 10-09-07, 08:24 PM
  #279  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
That's a huge misunderstanding, since (b) is a subset of (a).
That anything is a "subset" affects no relevance. These are your premises (or premise), and since you are unable to back them (it) up with any evidence, I cannot entertain any of your arguments that follow.


Originally Posted by Helmet Head
In urban and suburban environments which are busier, drivers are more reluctant to take their eyes off the road long enough to drift from their intended path significantly.
Which is why.... there are so "few" rear-end collision accidents in urban areas???

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
This type of drift crash on these types of roads is all too common. Here's one example.
And how does this anecdote provide any evidence that from-behind collisions are less common than drift-overs?

And if what you suggest is correct (and I think it isn't) why isn't the cyclist taking the lane at added risk from right-drifting vehicles in the passing lane?
ghettocruiser is offline  
Old 10-09-07, 10:45 PM
  #280  
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
That anything is a "subset" affects no relevance. These are your premises (or premise), and since you are unable to back them (it) up with any evidence, I cannot entertain any of your arguments that follow.
For bicyclists, yes, (b) drift over collisions are more common than flat on hit the cyclist right in front of you hit-from behinds. The latter are virtually unheard of.

Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
Which is why.... there are so "few" rear-end collision accidents in urban areas???
Rubber-necking - paying attention to something else while the driver in front of you slows or stops - is the main cause of rear-enders. It's not that they didn't notice the bus, it's that they didn't notice it slowed and stopped (at least not before it was too late). Again, I think bicyclists (and motorcyclists) are much less prone to these than are auto drivers because:

a) drivers are less careless when a cageless human is in front of them
b) when traffic slows cyclists tend to filter in between lines of auto traffic


Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
And how does this anecdote provide any evidence that from-behind collisions are less common than drift-overs?
Why would you expect me to provide evidence for a contention that I don't hold: that from-behind collisions are less common than drift-overs? From-behind crashes usually include right hooks, sideswipes, cyclist swerves into path of overtaking vehicle, and even motorist drifts, as well as the extremely rare flaton hit the cyclist who is straight ahead in the motorist's path from behind. I've never claimed that all those together, known as "from-behind collisions", are less common than drift-overs alone. I think we've had more drift collisions from the Portland area alone discussed on this forum in the last couple of years than flat on from-behinds from the rest of the country combined.

It's the very rare flat on driver hits a cyclist right in front of him in his path type of crash that I believe is much rarer than the drift type. Evidence? The dearth of newspaper articles describing such crashes, in contrast to the all-too-many drift types.

What if we start a thread entitled "flat on from-behind vs. drift from-behind crashes", in which any time anyone hears of a cyclist death of either type in the U.S., an article would be posted. Right hooks and sideswipes would not count.

Look, I'm ready to change my mind, and I would, if someone could point to a few crashes describing flat on from-behind types. And I'm not saying they never happen, just that they are very rare, in particular as compared to drift types of from-behind crashes. Many collisions seem to be of that type, but usually turn out to be drifts or right hooks into a cyclist who was riding in the margin, not in the main travel area for through vehicular travel.

Originally Posted by ghettocruiser
And if what you suggest is correct (and I think it isn't) why isn't the cyclist taking the lane at added risk from right-drifting vehicles in the passing lane?
Because adjacent lane space is relatively relevant to most drivers, shoulders and bike lanes are relatively irrelevant.

"All drivers give most attention to those parts of the highway where there is risk to themselves, and see much less easily anything, or anyone, outside of a quite narrow field of vision. A cyclist is safest riding within this zone of maximum surveillance, not outside it." - John Franklin, https://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/vc99.html

There is potential risk to the driver in the adjacent lane (a car or truck); there is very unlikely to be any potential risk to the driver in the adjacent shoulder. That's why a cyclist in an adjacent traffic lane, where threats are expected, is much more likely to be noticed than a cyclist in an adjacent shoulder or bike lane, where threats are not expected.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 10-09-07, 11:28 PM
  #281  
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hey, Allister (better?), in your lanesplitting video yeah, that's some pretty heavy traffic. But it's mostly slow or stopped, and narrow lanes. Good video of filtering. Certainly rush hour in many places is like that, I've never denied it. I'm just saying that's an exception, not the norm. The video is of course cherry picking during heavy commute traffic. The satellite video on the other hand is random and shows what is likely to be more typical. Obviously, the wide lane methodology has no application here.

Anyway, after about the 5:45 point, up to around 7:00, there are some very close passes, or at least it looks that way to me. Why aren't you further away from the curb in that section? Your positioning seems to invite a whole series of close passes there.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 10-10-07, 12:41 AM
  #282  
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Hey, Allister (better?), in your lanesplitting video yeah, that's some pretty heavy traffic. But it's mostly slow or stopped, and narrow lanes.
So? I was using it as an example of the unrealiability of satellite images.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Good video of filtering. Certainly rush hour in many places is like that, I've never denied it. I'm just saying that's an exception, not the norm.
It's the norm for me, mate.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
The video is of course cherry picking during heavy commute traffic. The satellite video on the other hand is random and shows what is likely to be more typical. Obviously, the wide lane methodology has no application here.
The video shows fairly typical commute time traffic - the time that I most usually ride it. The only thing that really varies from day to day is the length of the tailback.

The satellite image may show typical traffic, but only for that particular time of day/week. Without knowing what that time is, it's useless as a reference for traffic conditions. Satelite imagery can be useful to determine road conditions, as they stay fairly constant, but not for traffic conditions. Your reasoning that random=typical doesn't get any more convincing with repetition.

Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Anyway, after about the 5:45 point, up to around 7:00, there are some very close passes, or at least it looks that way to me. Why aren't you further away from the curb in that section? Your positioning seems to invite a whole series of close passes there.
Yeah, they probably do look close to you.

Last edited by Allister; 10-10-07 at 12:50 AM.
Allister is offline  
Old 10-10-07, 08:12 AM
  #283  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Edit:moved to appropriate thread

Last edited by ghettocruiser; 10-10-07 at 11:29 AM. Reason: moved to appropriate thread
ghettocruiser is offline  
Old 10-10-07, 11:15 AM
  #284  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
^^^ I'll move on to that thread, as it's the same friggen topic, again.
ghettocruiser is offline  
Old 10-10-07, 03:31 PM
  #285  
Arizona Dessert
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030

Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex

Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times in 1,288 Posts
This is an editorial about actually doing something about landscaping that causes driveway blindspots. Of course temporarily parked cars where they normally are not is different, but there is a relation to this and the original accident:
https://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...-edit1011.html

Al
noisebeam is offline  
Old 10-15-07, 10:48 AM
  #286  
Junior Member
 
JimSanDiego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5

Bikes: lots

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In similar incidents of crashes of groups of bicyclists, the riders behind the leading riders were considered to have been increasingly "at fault" due to following too closely... those farther behind were more likely to be considered more at fault. Those at the front were not.
JimSanDiego is offline  
Old 10-15-07, 10:56 AM
  #287  
Junior Member
 
JimSanDiego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5

Bikes: lots

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In some similar crashes involving groups of cyclists in So.Calif, those following other bicyclists were considered to have been increasingly "at fault" depending on how far back they were in the group... following too closely was the determination.
JimSanDiego is offline  
Old 08-24-08, 07:08 PM
  #288  
Senior Member
 
Pieralberto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Another sad story

This is very sad, I have done that ride many times without any problems but there is always the risk of some AH specially on a weekend in Miami where many drivers at that time, in the morning and on that area are probably high on something.... Looking forward to ride with them....kuddos to Bianchi and the whole team,

https://www.nbc6.net/news/17279985/de...l?dl=mainclick

https://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/local/MI95087/

Pieralberto
Pieralberto is offline  
Old 08-24-08, 07:10 PM
  #289  
Senior Member
 
Pieralberto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Not on this case

Hello,

Definetly not in this case, the driver was sleeping!

https://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/local/MI95087/
Pieralberto is offline  
Old 08-25-08, 06:57 PM
  #290  
Senior Member
 
Pieralberto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Wrong photo

TOTALLY WRONG PICTURE MY FRIEND....AND YOU CAN TAKE IT FROM A LOCAL

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=...cF4s_jAA0jmvlw
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
untitled.JPG (87.8 KB, 18 views)
Pieralberto is offline  

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.