A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cycling in NJ video



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 6th 20, 04:27 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,205
Default Cycling in NJ video

https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/

Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Ads
  #2  
Old February 6th 20, 05:26 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ralph Barone[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 419
Default Cycling in NJ video

AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/

Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!


So New Jersey and Iowa are subtly different then...

  #3  
Old February 6th 20, 06:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,271
Default Cycling in NJ video

On 2/6/2020 10:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/


Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!


He's right on almost all of that. I don't react to motorist negativity
with his loud aggression, but I get far less negativity than he does
when I ride lane center.

I'm curious about his four crashes. From what I've seen, bike crashes
have a wide variety of causes. Without knowing details of his four
causes, we can't comment on what measures might have helped to mitigate
them.

But I'm very skeptical of the closing push for "protected" bike lanes. A
few months ago, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a
study of so-called "protected" bike lanes and found that except for
spots like bridges (with no possibility of crossing conflicts), the
"protected" bike lanes causes something like a dozen times as many
car-bike crashes as a major street with no bike lanes. A few years ago,
Columbus Ohio put in an up-to-date "parking protected" bike lane and saw
car bike crashes jump over 600%. Columbus also tried a different
"protected" lane in the 1970s and removed it within a year or two due to
increased crash counts. Davis, CA installed one in the 1960s and pulled
it within about a year for the same reason.

But boy, are they fashionable!

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #4  
Old February 6th 20, 11:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,655
Default Cycling in NJ video

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 12:57:42 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/6/2020 10:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/


Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!


He's right on almost all of that. I don't react to motorist negativity
with his loud aggression, but I get far less negativity than he does
when I ride lane center.

I'm curious about his four crashes. From what I've seen, bike crashes
have a wide variety of causes. Without knowing details of his four
causes, we can't comment on what measures might have helped to mitigate
them.

But I'm very skeptical of the closing push for "protected" bike lanes. A
few months ago, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a
study of so-called "protected" bike lanes and found that except for
spots like bridges (with no possibility of crossing conflicts), the
"protected" bike lanes causes something like a dozen times as many
car-bike crashes as a major street with no bike lanes. A few years ago,
Columbus Ohio put in an up-to-date "parking protected" bike lane and saw
car bike crashes jump over 600%. Columbus also tried a different
"protected" lane in the 1970s and removed it within a year or two due to
increased crash counts. Davis, CA installed one in the 1960s and pulled
it within about a year for the same reason.

But boy, are they fashionable!



I wonder...

Various studies of bicycle/auto collisions have shown that, in some
cases, as many as 60 percent of the collisions are the fault of the
bicycle. Is the increased crashes in protected bike lanes simply added
evidence that cyclists are their own worse enemy? That by segregating
them you simply eliminate the bike/auto collision factor leaving only
added evidence that so many of the collisions are the fault of the
cyclist?
--
cheers,

John B.

  #5  
Old February 7th 20, 02:11 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,392
Default Cycling in NJ video

On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 5:37:30 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 12:57:42 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/6/2020 10:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/


Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!


He's right on almost all of that. I don't react to motorist negativity
with his loud aggression, but I get far less negativity than he does
when I ride lane center.

I'm curious about his four crashes. From what I've seen, bike crashes
have a wide variety of causes. Without knowing details of his four
causes, we can't comment on what measures might have helped to mitigate
them.

But I'm very skeptical of the closing push for "protected" bike lanes. A
few months ago, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a
study of so-called "protected" bike lanes and found that except for
spots like bridges (with no possibility of crossing conflicts), the
"protected" bike lanes causes something like a dozen times as many
car-bike crashes as a major street with no bike lanes. A few years ago,
Columbus Ohio put in an up-to-date "parking protected" bike lane and saw
car bike crashes jump over 600%. Columbus also tried a different
"protected" lane in the 1970s and removed it within a year or two due to
increased crash counts. Davis, CA installed one in the 1960s and pulled
it within about a year for the same reason.

But boy, are they fashionable!



I wonder...

Various studies of bicycle/auto collisions have shown that, in some
cases, as many as 60 percent of the collisions are the fault of the
bicycle. Is the increased crashes in protected bike lanes simply added
evidence that cyclists are their own worse enemy? That by segregating
them you simply eliminate the bike/auto collision factor leaving only
added evidence that so many of the collisions are the fault of the
cyclist?


I think you have to look at the causes of individual crashes. One
is the Right Hook that happens when a bicyclist rides up in a bike
lane on the right of a motorist who is turning right. Assigning fault
is tricky and maybe random. Some investigators might say it's the
motorist's fault, for not craning his neck and checking his mirrors
and peering into a place where the cyclist is invisible before making
his turn. Another might say it's foolish for the cyclist to ride into
the blind spot in the first place. I'd say it's stupid of the designer
to lure a cyclist into such a dangerous space. Would you ever put a
straight-ahead car lane to the right of a right turn lane?

Another one is a bi-directional "protected" lane that sends half the
bicyclists into an intersection going the wrong way - that is, riding
on the left side of the road. That is a serious, serious violation of
normal road rules; and resulting crashes are quite common. But that
weird design is one of the things most requested by bike advocates.
But do we blame the bicyclist for doing what the designer told him to do?

There are other problems, like motorists trying to exit side streets
or driveways and not being able to see if traffic is coming, until they
pull partly out into the bike lane. Cyclists don't expect that and
may be hidden from view. Another crash.

In summary, it's fashionable to design crap that violates common sense
and then tell bicyclists they are now "protected." The results should
not surprise.

- Frank Krygowski

  #6  
Old February 7th 20, 02:55 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,655
Default Cycling in NJ video

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 17:11:21 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 5:37:30 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 12:57:42 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/6/2020 10:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/


Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!

He's right on almost all of that. I don't react to motorist negativity
with his loud aggression, but I get far less negativity than he does
when I ride lane center.

I'm curious about his four crashes. From what I've seen, bike crashes
have a wide variety of causes. Without knowing details of his four
causes, we can't comment on what measures might have helped to mitigate
them.

But I'm very skeptical of the closing push for "protected" bike lanes. A
few months ago, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a
study of so-called "protected" bike lanes and found that except for
spots like bridges (with no possibility of crossing conflicts), the
"protected" bike lanes causes something like a dozen times as many
car-bike crashes as a major street with no bike lanes. A few years ago,
Columbus Ohio put in an up-to-date "parking protected" bike lane and saw
car bike crashes jump over 600%. Columbus also tried a different
"protected" lane in the 1970s and removed it within a year or two due to
increased crash counts. Davis, CA installed one in the 1960s and pulled
it within about a year for the same reason.

But boy, are they fashionable!



I wonder...

Various studies of bicycle/auto collisions have shown that, in some
cases, as many as 60 percent of the collisions are the fault of the
bicycle. Is the increased crashes in protected bike lanes simply added
evidence that cyclists are their own worse enemy? That by segregating
them you simply eliminate the bike/auto collision factor leaving only
added evidence that so many of the collisions are the fault of the
cyclist?


I think you have to look at the causes of individual crashes. One
is the Right Hook that happens when a bicyclist rides up in a bike
lane on the right of a motorist who is turning right. Assigning fault
is tricky and maybe random. Some investigators might say it's the
motorist's fault, for not craning his neck and checking his mirrors
and peering into a place where the cyclist is invisible before making
his turn. Another might say it's foolish for the cyclist to ride into
the blind spot in the first place. I'd say it's stupid of the designer
to lure a cyclist into such a dangerous space. Would you ever put a
straight-ahead car lane to the right of a right turn lane?


Here, of course, it is the left hook, and I have experienced it. When
stopping it is often sort of easy to run up almost to the edge of the
road and rest your foot on the edge of the raised sidewalk and just
sit there on the bike waiting for the light to change. Along comes a
bus that is going to turn left (right in your case) and of course he
moves to the side of the road and when he turns there won't be room
enough for both the bicycle and the bus so, logically, the bicycle
must wait for the bus.

And, I say logically as anyone with any sense at all can undoubtedly
figure out what is going to happen in the case of a bus/bicycle
collision...

The thing that makes me wonder is, if I can figure this out, can't
others? Am I so blindly intelligent that only I can perceive the
results of a bicycle/bus collision?

I don't think so.

Another one is a bi-directional "protected" lane that sends half the
bicyclists into an intersection going the wrong way - that is, riding
on the left side of the road. That is a serious, serious violation of
normal road rules; and resulting crashes are quite common. But that
weird design is one of the things most requested by bike advocates.
But do we blame the bicyclist for doing what the designer told him to do?

There are other problems, like motorists trying to exit side streets
or driveways and not being able to see if traffic is coming, until they
pull partly out into the bike lane. Cyclists don't expect that and
may be hidden from view. Another crash.

In summary, it's fashionable to design crap that violates common sense
and then tell bicyclists they are now "protected." The results should
not surprise.

- Frank Krygowski


I find it interesting that student pilots are told repeatedly to keep
their head moving... to be looking up down and sideways to see if
anything is there. Think of it. Way up there in the air and you keep a
constant lookout for other objects while cyclists riding in traffic
apparently don't bother with all that sort of foolishness.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #7  
Old February 7th 20, 04:45 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Steve Weeks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 50
Default Cycling in NJ video

On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 9:27:49 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/

Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!

I haven't seen that level of hostility, but I'm only commuting to and from work, not cycling around all day. I'm in Chocago, BTW. When I started bike commuting about 18 years ago, I would get honked or yelled at a couple times a week; that hasn't happened in years.
What I *do* complain about is the "protected" bike lanes. The bollards may provide some level of protection from cars, but they also prevent the bike lanes from being plowed. Sometimes the bike lane isn't plowed even when there are no bollards (only painted lines, the so-called "buffered" bike lane)..
When the bike lane isn't clear, I am forced to take the car lane because there's not enough space for a car and bike to occupy the car lane at the same time (one of the times when, according to municipal code, a bike may legally take the entire lane). The car drivers mostly seem to understand why I'm in their way, though once in a while a hot-dog will blast by in the opposing lane.
  #8  
Old February 7th 20, 07:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,271
Default Cycling in NJ video

On 2/6/2020 8:55 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 17:11:21 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote:


I think you have to look at the causes of individual crashes. One
is the Right Hook that happens when a bicyclist rides up in a bike
lane on the right of a motorist who is turning right. Assigning fault
is tricky and maybe random. Some investigators might say it's the
motorist's fault, for not craning his neck and checking his mirrors
and peering into a place where the cyclist is invisible before making
his turn. Another might say it's foolish for the cyclist to ride into
the blind spot in the first place. I'd say it's stupid of the designer
to lure a cyclist into such a dangerous space. Would you ever put a
straight-ahead car lane to the right of a right turn lane?


Here, of course, it is the left hook, and I have experienced it. When
stopping it is often sort of easy to run up almost to the edge of the
road and rest your foot on the edge of the raised sidewalk and just
sit there on the bike waiting for the light to change. Along comes a
bus that is going to turn left (right in your case) and of course he
moves to the side of the road and when he turns there won't be room
enough for both the bicycle and the bus so, logically, the bicycle
must wait for the bus.

And, I say logically as anyone with any sense at all can undoubtedly
figure out what is going to happen in the case of a bus/bicycle
collision...

The thing that makes me wonder is, if I can figure this out, can't
others? Am I so blindly intelligent that only I can perceive the
results of a bicycle/bus collision?

I don't think so.


I think we in this group sometimes forget that we're much different from
average. That's both in knowledge of riding techiques and in knowledge
of mechanical techniques.

Several years ago when London had a sudden cluster of bike fatalities,
the situation you describe was a very common cause, mostly affecting
women, and made worse by curbside barriers meant to dissuade "jay
walkers." The women were enticed by green paint to be at the curb side
of turning vehicles, and the barriers prevented fleeing. I can't imagine
the terror they must have felt in their last moments.


Another one is a bi-directional "protected" lane that sends half the
bicyclists into an intersection going the wrong way - that is, riding
on the left side of the road. That is a serious, serious violation of
normal road rules; and resulting crashes are quite common. But that
weird design is one of the things most requested by bike advocates.
But do we blame the bicyclist for doing what the designer told him to do?

There are other problems, like motorists trying to exit side streets
or driveways and not being able to see if traffic is coming, until they
pull partly out into the bike lane. Cyclists don't expect that and
may be hidden from view. Another crash.

In summary, it's fashionable to design crap that violates common sense
and then tell bicyclists they are now "protected." The results should
not surprise.

- Frank Krygowski


I find it interesting that student pilots are told repeatedly to keep
their head moving... to be looking up down and sideways to see if
anything is there. Think of it. Way up there in the air and you keep a
constant lookout for other objects while cyclists riding in traffic
apparently don't bother with all that sort of foolishness.


Interestingly, I once did an article for our bike club's newsletter,
titled something like "Advice for the Timid." I know there are riders
who are afraid enough of traffic that they'll sneak through parking
lots, etc.

One of my points was that parking lots are "No Rules!" areas, with cars
and pedestrians coming from any direction at all. And just as you said,
I advised them to keep their heads on a swivel "just like a fighter pilot."

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #9  
Old February 7th 20, 07:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,271
Default Cycling in NJ video

On 2/7/2020 10:45 AM, Steve Weeks wrote:
On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 9:27:49 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/

Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!

I haven't seen that level of hostility, but I'm only commuting to and from work, not cycling around all day. I'm in Chocago, BTW. When I started bike commuting about 18 years ago, I would get honked or yelled at a couple times a week; that hasn't happened in years.


I remember the same improvement some time after I began (near) daily
commuting back in the 1970s. I think the motorists begin to recognize
you as a legitimate road user after they become familiar with you. At
least, if you're riding like a legitimate road user.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #10  
Old February 8th 20, 02:54 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Steve Weeks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 50
Default Cycling in NJ video

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 12:39:37 PM UTC-6, Frank Krygowski wrote:

At least, if you're riding like a legitimate road user.


Yes, I am one of those. :-)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best cycling video ever Simon Jester UK 10 February 27th 18 12:15 AM
Cycling video Mr Pounder UK 31 March 11th 14 11:17 AM
Cycling Video to End all Cycling Videos Paul B. Anders Racing 7 August 20th 09 08:16 PM
Old cycling video wafflycat UK 7 May 24th 06 12:15 AM
NY cycling video Graeme UK 21 August 5th 04 09:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.