Do bicycles and cars mix?

"Timothy J. Lee" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Golightly F. wrote:
Three times in the past six months or so... I've had car drivers look me
right in the eye as I approach an intersection (25 mph or more) and they
have pulled out right in front of me each time... even though they have
looked right at me. I don't have room to stop so I have to pass them on
either the right or left... depending on a "split second" decision to
avoid
a crash.

This behavior *can't* be explained.

It is explainable (but not excusable) by the likelihood that the
motorist has become conditioned to 5mph child bicyclists and the
like, rather than 25mph bicyclists. I've even had a bicyclist
do that in front of me while I was on a bicycle (but that bicyclist
was obviously unskilled in terms of rules of the road, since he was
also on the wrong side of the road he was coming from).

Some other motorist errors may also be due to absent-mindedly
thinking that a bicyclist is going much slower than s/he actually
is going (e.g. passing on the left of and then turning right in
front of a bicyclist).

Don't forget to include the fact that some motorists think they have the
right of way over a bicyclist, regardless of the road situation.



--
Robin Hubert

"mark" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"wafflyDIRTYcatLITTERhcsBOX" wrote in message
...
By divided, limited access highways, I meant what are called motorways
in
Great Britain, and Interstate highways, freeways, etc. here in the US.
Bicycles are not banned from divided roads in the US unless the road is
built like a motorway. Sorry if I wasn't completely clear.

Okay :-)

But, I don't know if you are aware (so apologies if this sounds like
teaching
my granny to suck eggs!) but we have A roads which are motorways in all
but
name & designation - dual carriageways - with the same speed limit as a
motorway and cyclists are not banned from these. Dual width road each
side
of a
central reservation area dividing the opposing flows of traffic. They
can
be
great for time trials :-)

Cheers, helen s

I wasn't aware of this. AFAIK, roads like this in the US are usually off
limits to cyclists, unless there are some cross roads intersecting.

Err, I've ridden on divided highways/dual carriageways. they aren't
expressly forbidden to cyclists the way Interstate Highways/motorways are.

In article ,
(Tom Keats) wrote:

In article ,
(R15757) writes:

I know this stretch, and have ridden it myself. Narrow lane, and
the only thing on the right is sidewalk, and then concrete barrier.
No shoulder, no verge. This is definitely entire-lane-taking
territory. Riding on there is truly "threading the needle". And
Bernie forgot to mention the killer diagonal RR tracks.

It is better to ride like you're not seen than to ride to be seen. Most of
the
time, you can't do both.

In this particular stretch, I opt for the latter. Actually,
there's not even an option. On Front St, ya bloody well *gotta*
make sure you're seen.

Front Street in New West? Why even bother? When that route was on my
commute, I happily took Columbia Street instead, which parallels Front
for its entirety.

Columbia is a far saner road, even on that harrowing climb towards the
traffic light at McBride (or whatever that little stub street that
connects Columbia to Royal and McBride is called).

I agree that if you're going to ride Front, ride down the bloody middle
of the street and just **** off the trucks, because that's the only way
you'll be safe (too narrow, no verge, bad sight lines due to the
concrete pillars), but I won't drive down Front in my car if I have a
choice. Why would you choose to ride a bike down Front?

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

"Luigi de Guzman" wrote
Err, I've ridden on divided highways/dual carriageways. they aren't
expressly forbidden to cyclists the way Interstate Highways/motorways are.

Oops.
--
mark

In article ,
Ryan Cousineau writes:

I agree that if you're going to ride Front, ride down the bloody middle
of the street and just **** off the trucks, because that's the only way
you'll be safe (too narrow, no verge, bad sight lines due to the
concrete pillars), but I won't drive down Front in my car if I have a
choice. Why would you choose to ride a bike down Front?

Looking on Front from around the Quay toward the northeast,
sometimes there's /such/ an enticing break in the traffic
between sets of traffic lights. One thinks: "I can make
use of that break, if I just step on it and stay ahead of
the traffic as much as possible."

As Bernie mentioned, it's just a short run before dodging
right to get to the refuge of the RR track ROW.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Tom wrote:

It is better to ride like you're not seen than to ride to be seen. Most of
the
time, you can't do both.

In this particular stretch, I opt for the latter. Actually,
there's not even an option. On Front St, ya bloody well *gotta*
make sure you're seen.


Good luck with that. Deck yourself out in neon lycra. Put a big orange flag on
your bike. Strap 14 flashing reflector lights to your backside. Dominate the
lane.

No matter what you do, there is no way to make sure you're seen.

Robert

Eric S. Sande wrote:

I can manage my position in traffic to maximize visibility and
opportunity.

Look at it this way. He's in the truck's blind spot and he wants to
turn right, but he hasn't got the lane.

The first thing to do is to make sure the truck knows he's back there.

That's a simple left drift to pick up the truck's mirror.

A basic maneuver.

The car behind shouldn't have an incentive to pass then.

The car may drop under him to the right. He brakes, falls back,
and merges behind the car to get the right turn.

If the car doesn't drop under him he can merge right and get the
turn behind the truck and ahead of the car.

Easy as pie.


This is ridiculous Eric. Drifting to the left to let the truck driver know
you're there does the rider no good whatsoever. The truck driver and the car
driver both will then of course figure the cyclist is turning left. And then
the rider will disappear from truck guy's view, confusing the hell out of
him--where'd that guy go?? If you're going to be using so-called vehicular
cycling, at least ride in a predictable fashion.

The rider should stay behind the truck, yes in the blind spot, and observe.
Makes no difference if the truck driver sees him or not. Probably better if he
doesn't. Never attempt to squeeze past any vehicle on the right if that vehicle
may be turning right, especially a big truck.

Riding to be seen is a fool's game. It will work 99 out of 100 times, then that
100th time it won't work, you won't be seen, and you'll be in exactly the worst
place on the road. Take responsibility for your own safety instead of pawning
it off on other drivers.

Robert

If you're going to be using so-called vehicular cycling, at least ride
in a predictable fashion.

I've got enough time here so I'll answer your post in detail.

You'll have to forgive me if I cut and paste to redefine some points.

First of all, vehicular cycling is all about safety and predictability
in operation. Every road user has an obligation to ensure this.

I know what the Uniform Vehicle Code says about bicycle operation,
and I understand that it places responsibility on all road users.

The UVC is the model code for most US states, and even though the road
in question is in Canada, I understand that the rules are pretty
similar there too.

Second, the general phraseology of most bicycle regulations allows for
exceptional circumstances. You seem to favor a rigid interpretation
of "ride to the right" without exception. I quote:

This sounds like a road with a lot of space on the right. It is better
to ride a consistent line to the right, where it doesnt matter if you're
seen or not, than to ride left and cut right.

In fact it wasn't a road with a lot of space to the right, as Bernie's
original post and Tom's comment showed. It was a narrow road with
plenty of truck traffic.

Tom later pointed out that it included other hazards (the diagonal tracks),
and that will become important later on.

Third, Bernie's original post stated that he didn't punish the car for a
close pass. I thought he could have been riding further out given the
stated conditions, and in my opinion the close pass would not have
happened had he done so.

I should say that my opinion of the situation was totally based on
Bernie's report (which was clear and concise) and my own traffic
experience.

Based on that experience I feel it is far better to control the road
situation in one's own favor than to rely on the kindness of strangers.

Now let's get down to cases.

This is ridiculous Eric. Drifting to the left to let the truck driver
know you're there does the rider no good whatsoever.

It does no good? Nah. It gives the cyclist maneuver room, it prevents
the car from executing the unsafe pass that Bernie objected to, and it
lets the truck driver know the cyclist is back there.

That's three good things. Since we didn't know about the railroad
tracks until later, we can't count the maneuver advantage as more
than a "half" a good thing.

I could point out that if you were hard right on that road the tracks
would have been a surprise.

The rider should stay behind the truck, yes in the blind spot, and
observe.

Observe what? What can you see with a freaking truck in front of you?

Makes no difference if the truck driver sees him or not. Probably
better if he doesn't.

You appear to be afflicted with the belief that cyclists aren't part
of traffic.

Riding to be seen is a fool's game. It will work 99 out of 100 times,
then that 100th time it won't work, you won't be seen, and you'll be
in exactly the worst place on the road.

Some of your ideas are actually dangerous and shouldn't be posted
with such conviction. All I can hope for is that you actually have
the real world experience to back your reckless suggestions.

Take responsibility for your own safety instead of pawning it off on
other drivers.

Get out of the gutter and learn how to ride safely and responsibly.


--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
in.edu__________

The rider should stay behind the truck, yes in the blind spot, and
observe.

Observe what? What can you see with a freaking truck in front of you?



Observe whether this truck is going to turn or not. Don't want to find this out
when you're on the truck's right.

Some of your ideas are actually dangerous and shouldn't be posted
with such conviction. All I can hope for is that you actually have
the real world experience to back your reckless suggestions.



I feel that way about your suggestions and any suggestion that a cyclist can
always "control" the flow of traffic by riding a certain way. The problem with
so-called "vehicular cyclists" ("so-called" because they disregard traffic laws
whenever it suits them, for instance, to filter between cars at lights and in
traffic jams) is they put their safety into the hands of drivers, even though
they claim they are doing the opposite. They assume they are seen. They assume
they will not be "passed close", as if this were the worst thing that could
happen to them, just by riding out in the lane. They may eliminate their own
mistakes but will be vulnerable to the mistakes of others.

I am not suggesting that cyclists should always ride to the right. They should
ride using the entire available road surface to maximize their own personal
safety. Sometimes they should consider riding in the gutter. Sometimes they
should ride right down the middle of the ****in street. About the only
principle that cyclists should live by is one of total flexibility.

My suggestions are not reckless. They are based on experience. Lots of
experience. 10+ years bicycle messenger, different cities. That's about 6 hours
per day 250 days per year 10 years on the bike in heavy traffic. 15,000 hours
and about 150,000 miles in heavy traffic. How much experience do you have?

But don't take my word for it. Find out for yourself. A few trips to the MRI
room should be enough to make you adopt a more careful and less trusting style.

Robert

You sound like a fool with that talk. I agree with Eric 110%.



--
Robin Hubert



Good for you, Robin! I disagree with him 120%

Robert