3ft passing requirement revisited

"Cycle Carl" wrote in
:


"Barry Harmon" wrote in message
. 15.254...

... deleted stuff ...

A few final comments.

1. A large difference in relative speed makes for accidents,and
there is a lot of difference in speed between a car moseying along
and a bike moseying along. If you can't keep up with the traffic
flow, stay out of the road.

I think it's more complicated than Barry suggests.

I would consider that a car driving 45 on Interstate 5 is dangerous
because of the relative speed difference between it and the 70-80 mph
traffic flow.

I would also consider diamond lane traffic moving at 50 mph next to
cars at 15 mph in the regular lanes pretty dangerous, primarily
because of cars exiting or entering the diamond lane.

I don't think 50 mph traffic on Foothill Expwy (Los Altos, CA)
adjacent to 15 mph bicycles in the shoulder is dangerous to drivers or
cyclists.


But you were off the roadway. I said if you can't keep up with
traffic,stay off the road. you couldn't keep up with traffic and you
were off the road. We agree.

Actually, it's not more complicated than I suggest. It's very simple.
If all traffic is moving in the same direction and it's all moving at
about the same speed, things go along well. The greater the disparity
between cars in the traffic, the greater the potential for problems.
It's not speed that kills, it's the difference in speed.


2. Roads are designed for cars. There, I said it. Get over it.

I agree that roads are designed for cars. Barry seems to imply that
roads are designed exclusively for cars, which clearly is not the
case. Road (but not freeway) design must consider pedestrians,
emergency vehicles, and even bicycles.


You're right. They're also designed for trucks.

I just rode to work via Charleston Rd in Palo Alto, CA. Seems to me
that it was pretty well designed for bikes and cars.


3. Riding bikes on a busy, higher-speed road is dangerous.

I think riding on Foothill Expwy is not dangerous, but Barry is
entitled to his opinion.


Yes, we agree, because you were not on the road.

... deleted stuff...


6. John Forrester is delusional. Following his path will be
dangerous to some people's health.


Wow, he's not just wrong, he is delusional. I'll be sure to cross to
the other side of the street if I see him walking towards me.

--
Carl




I probably should have prefaced my remarks with the caveat that I was
talking about people riding in the traffic lanes, the ones "taking the
lane."

Barry Harmon

In article 54,
Barry Harmon wrote:
Actually, Frank, there are minimum speed provisions on most interstates.

Finally, there are prohibitions against bikes on most limited-access
highways. There must be something going on that you don't know about, eh?

The road where the buzz pass incident was described is not a limited
access freeway.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

In article ,
nmp wrote:
Wow. Where I live (.nl) drivers are required by law to make sure it is
safe to open their door before they do it. Makes sense if you ask me.

Such a law exists in many places...

I still keep a healthy distance from parked cars though.

A good idea. A bicyclist hugging the parked cars is hard to see by
someone in the traffic side of a parked car trying to check whether
it is safe to open the door (the current car design trend to smaller
windows and big pillars makes it worse).

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:
considered Fri, 22 Aug 2008 03:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
the perfect time to write:

more trolling drivel

I think your post is a good demonstration of why it is NECESSARY to
criminalise any driver passing closer than 1 ft per 10mph of vehicle
speed.

I think his post is probably an example of why you should killfile him,
as almost everyone in rb.misc has long previously.

--
Dane Buson -
If you can read this, you're in range of the demat gun

On Aug 22, 6:55*am, wrote:
You werent hit so get over it. *The driver might simply have been
"brushing you back" which is necessary when cyclists are not as far
right as possible or riding two abreast.

You just flunked reading comprehension 101. Go back and reread Mike's
original post.

John Kane Kingston ON Canada

On Aug 22, 10:23*am, Barry Harmon wrote:


1. *A large difference in relative speed makes for accidents,

I've heard this before but I've never seen anything to support it. Do
you have a decent cite for this?

John Kane Kingston ON Canada

"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote

[snip]

We were not only single file, but single file on the very edge
of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe just a
couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If
there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we
would have gotten it.

[snip]

It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't
deviate from its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6
inches? Could have even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE.

[snip]

Position in the road makes a very effective signal, much better than
the official hand signals. It's a common theory that your distance
from the edge of the road indicates to the motorists' subconscious
how much clearance you think you need for yourself, which results in
the motorists giving the same clearance to you as you give to the
curb.

What other reason could you have for huddling close to the edge of
the road but to indicate to motorists behind that you want to share
not just the road, but the lane you are in as well. You are telling
the motorists that you want them to pass **in your lane**.

By implication, you are telling the motorists that you think it is
safe for the motorists to do so. What other reason could you have
for sending out the signal.

Jeremy Parker

When I participated in Paris Brest Paris last year, the French must have
some sort of law or it was the custom to give every bike about a meter
cushion. It was one of the best things that I experienced.

The cushion made it safer for the cyclist. It also had a very interesting
side effect that I observed. The tensions between cyclists and driver were
diminished. Only conflict I had was with another cyclist who thought I
should have done something else differently. As he only spoke French, I
can't tell you what it was and it was like at the 80 hour point so I didn't
care. Point is that everyone got along much better. It was a safer and
more friendly environment. Drivers would pull up behind you, turn on their
signal light, pass when it was safe, signal in the other direction and get
back into the proper lane. It was amazing and this was repeated time and
time again. The traffic circles were a bit different and I was just talking
about the stop lights with a friend who just returned from France earlier
this week. Again, this cushion worked. It worked well. We should revisit
it.

"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
news
I've wondered whether cyclists really need a law that requires cars to
pass us no closer than 3 feet. I generally don't have too many issues out
on the road, and it would seem that common sense and courtesy go a long
way towards making the world a reasonable place to drive and bike.

Until today.

I didn't even really know what happened until I played it back in mind
mind immediately afterward. Karl, Kevin and I were on the return leg of
our usual Tuesday/Thursday morning ride, heading north on 84 in Woodside,
approaching Tripp Road. We were not only single file, but single file on
the very edge of the road... I mean riding in tight formation, with maybe
just a couple inches (really) of pavement to the right of our wheels. If
there was a "good citizen" award for cyclists sharing the road, we would
have gotten it. No reason for us to impede cars if we don't have to (the
shoulder's in pretty good shape there, and being the first day of school
for many, there was more traffic than usual).

And then the black SUV went past us.

It didn't blast its horn. It didn't swerve. It simply didn't deviate from
its course. And it passed each of us by maybe, what, 6 inches? Could have
even been a bit less. It was RIGHT THERE.

If one of us had had to swerve for an obstacle, it would have been game
over. If the car had had to move over just a little bit to let a wide car
pass in the other direction, game over. If one of us had chosen that exact
time to look back and check traffic, and moved out into the road just a
little bit (as often happens when you look back), it might have been game
over.

As it was, there was this immediate sense of marvel at the precision with
which the car passed us, the three of us riding perfectly straight, with
the car just inches away from our left hands. It was an almost
unbelievable experience. But within seconds that amazement was replaced
with one of those "What just happened?" feelings, and the more I play it
back in my mind, the more upset and annoyed I become.

That car should not have passed us in that manner, which means it should
have waited until it was clear in the other direction so it could give us
a bit more room, instead of assuming that "Share the road" means making
assumptions of a perfect world at 24 miles per hour.

So I'm changing my tune, and not just asking for a 3 foot passing law for
cyclists, but demanding it. A relatively-narrow two-lane road (like 84
near Tripp, specifically right near the "singing gas pipes" on the west
side of the road) is no place for 3 bikes & two cars to share the same
strip of road. The car should have waited until it could pass us with
reasonable clearance, and there obviously needs to be a law defining what
"reasonable clearance" is because I doubt that particular driver thought
he or she was doing something reckless.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

I think your post is a good demonstration of why it is NECESSARY to
criminalise any driver passing closer than 1 ft per 10mph of vehicle
speed.

I think his post is probably an example of why you should killfile him,
as almost everyone in rb.misc has long previously.

--
Dane Buson -

I'll second that. For a bit, I didn't understand to whom you were
responding. Out of sight, out of mind.

Pat in TX

When I participated in Paris Brest Paris last year, the French must have
some sort of law or it was the custom to give every bike about a meter
cushion. It was one of the best things that I experienced.

I rode the Katy Trail across Missouri this Spring, and when I rode between
Warrensburg and Clinton, every single motorist gave me that much room or
more. Every single one of them changed lanes. No yellling, no cursing, just
good manners. And, at the while, I was riding in a little portion of the
road on the right side of the white line, a space of about 4 feet.

Pat in TX