|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Thu, 9 May 2019 21:48:18 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 5/9/2019 7:01 PM, John B. wrote: On Thu, 9 May 2019 12:22:14 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/8/2019 10:43 PM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 8 May 2019 19:03:17 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Wednesday, May 8, 2019 at 6:31:36 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Wed, 8 May 2019 14:17:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/8/2019 1:59 PM, Duane wrote: On 08/05/2019 1:52 p.m., wrote: Same here. I was riding along yesterday and a woman in a car wanted to drive onto the road from the right. I saw it coming and shook my head trying to say don't do that in a nice way. She nodded her head trying to 'yes I will' and yelling at me she is coming from the right and have right of way. I said you coming from a parking lot and have to give right of way to anybody on the road. You have to deal with this kind of situations at least once every ride. Funny how these things seem common to some of us but apparently there's a book you can read to solve it all. That statement is very similar to "Ya don't need to know algebra. All ya need is add and subtract." Funny, you know. My wife doesn't know algebra and is now in her 70's and hasn't yet seemed to need it. Would you care to elaborate why an elderly woman like her needs to know advanced math? Wow. Sometimes it's necessary to spell out the analogies in painstaking detail! I'm talking about math skills as a parallel to cycling skills. So does your wife need algebra? Does she need multiplication and division? Not if she's never going to do anything beyond shopping, balancing a check book, following a recipe book. How in the world are math skills a parallel to bicycle skills? Hmm. Note to self: John doesn't understand the concept of "analogy." Does knowing the square root of -1 equate to riding a bicycle? Please re-read above, where I used multiplication and division as well as algebra. I didn't get into irrational numbers, conic sections, trigonometry, differential equations, etc. But, as you say, it was an analogy. Don't you understand the concept of "analogy"? But I'm saying basic bike riding like my seven year old buddy does is one thing. Perhaps it's what you do, since you've mentioned riding only on highways with super-wide separated shoulders. Likewise, it's easy to ride just on bike paths or streets with near zero traffic. But Frank, over here there are hoards of people who use a bicycle for transportation. Ride early in the morning near any "open market" and you'll see them going and returning from their daily trip to buy the day's food. Why, I even see guys riding to work in the morning. My guess is that there are more (on a per capita basis) people riding bicycles in Thailand than there are in the U.S. And not a one of them have read your recommended book. If that's all one does and all one aspires to do, that's fine. They may be able to say they have no problems. But they shouldn't pretend to be expert. I don't pretend to be an expert. I have only commented that I've been riding a bike for about 20 years without an accident, or even an incident, and much of that time has been in a city with such chaotic traffic that most foreigners are literally afraid to drive here and in a country that usually leads the pack, or comes in second, as the country with the most traffic deaths in the world. See: http://driving-in-thailand.com/thai-...-in-the-world/ But we did better https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ There are also bike riders around here who creep along on the sidewalk, stopping frequently. If they take to the street at all, they stop each time a car comes by. I suppose that's fine too, if they are willing to put up with snail's pace transportation. Maybe you're like them, I don't know. But again, such a person may never have been in a crash. But they shouldn't pretend they know all there is to know. If you want to do more - explore cities by bike, or bike for real transportation, or travel on multi-day trips by bike, etc. - then more knowledge is valuable. And as with mathematics beyond first grade, nobody gets it by being a hubristic genius. In the second site I mention, above, the lead photo is entitled "Bangkok Traffic". Does your book tell me something I haven't already learned (after 20 years) about how to ride in "Bangkok Traffic"? Earlier, you talked about riding the six-foot shoulders or not riding at all. I don't see six foot shoulders in that photo. Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. Maybe you can tell me more about the conditions where you actually do ride. And why would someone dedicated to bicycling adamantly refuse to even read a book on the subject? If you'd saved the time you spent arguing here, you could have finished the book by now. Again I will mention the above "Bangkok Traffic" and ask, does your book tell me any secrets about how to cope with Bangkok Traffic? The book I'm talking the most about, _Cyclecraft_ by John Franklin, is aimed at cycling in "westernized" countries, like Britain, the U.S., Australia, Canada, France, Austria, Italy, Ireland, etc. I'll admit that rules, conditions and best practices in Thailand may be different. However, that doesn't mean the best way to learn to become a highly competent rider in Thailand is to bumble about by trial and error. If there are resources there, I would use them. Sure they got resources here. the traffic code which is quite specific... that bicycles and (small) motorcycles are to ride on the side of the road so as not to impede faster traffic. The Thai word used means the same as "side" does in English, a rather non-specific word which might be interpreted as "not in the middle". The bumbling alternative is like trying to learn Ohm's Law by disassembling a microchip. Ah... you have stolen my analogy that I used in another post except I had used the work transistor rather than microchip :-) -- cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Thu, 9 May 2019 11:53:59 -0400,
Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/9/2019 5:10 AM, Sepp Ruf wrote: Do not (overtly) look at traffic supposed to yield, don't slow down the cranks, just calculate emergency manoeuvers without showing. "Don't slow down the cranks" is one technique I learned. When I have the right of way, I want to make it visibly clear that I'm going to take it. I think it's more than giving an indication of intent to take the right of way. My experience is that drivers usually have a hard time judging the speed of cyclists, and somehow they get the impression the bike is moving faster if they see legs going than if they see it coasting. -- Ted Heise West Lafayette, IN, USA |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Thu, 9 May 2019 22:19:10 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 5/9/2019 8:07 PM, sms wrote: The most succinct critique of John Franklin's work that I saw was this: "If John Franklin’s aim was to keep cycling as a niche activity practised by a tiny minority of confident men, then congratulations! Success! Well done! You may now stop reading. If John Franklin’s aim was to help riding a bike become an activity which is easy for everyone — men and women, from toddlers to pensioners — then he has failed." Yes, I've seen the same diatribe hurled at others. The boors who do that are setting up a false premise. Franklin and others who educate about best riding practices don't have the objective of getting 25% of Americans or Brits to give up their cars. That daydream is confined to a completely different pack of dewey-eyed do-gooders. Instead, these educators are trying to help people ride competently and safely in the real world as it exists. Why? Because if you wait for the daydreams, you'll never ride much of anywhere. Here's a concrete example, using (shudder!) numbers. The dreamers are now saying "We need 'protected' bike lanes everywhere! Painted bike lanes don't work!" And BTW, they say that after decades of saying "We need painted bike lanes everywhere!" OK, there are over four million miles of roadway in America. At last count, there were less than 300 miles of "protected" bike lane in the entire country. So according to those fools, you can ride safely on only 0.01% of America's roads. I once calculated the amount of Bike lanes that would have to be constructed in the U.S. to equal the amount already built in The Netherlands, based on the amount of motor vehicle roads existing in each country. I believe that the number was one million miles of bike lanes to equal what Holland had at the time I made the calculation - perhaps a year ago. In other words, their message is: "Bicycling is too dangerous." And the obvious corollary is "Bicycling will be too dangerous until well after you have died of natural causes; and your children have died; and their children have died." IOW, we might as well crush all bikes for the scrap metal. (Too bad about the carbon fiber.) This is what I constantly see in my area. For the experienced cyclist, both men and women, following at least some of the precepts of "Vehicular Cycling" make sense, but it doesn't help get more people out of cars and onto bicycles. The latter requires some level of bicycle infrastructure, and all of Frank's "danger danger" rhetoric is not going to convince the majority of people to give cycling a try. Don't claim "Danger! Danger!" is MY rhetoric! You've been the one claiming we MUST have head protection, wear day-glo clothing, use daytime running lights, use horizontal flags on our bikes, install electric horns, build "protected" cattle chutes, etc. I'm the one who has pointed out that there are over ten million miles ridden between bike fatalities; that cyclists comprise only 0.6% of America's brain injury deaths; that every study on the subject has found that the benefits of bicycling outweigh its risks many times over. "The problem is that he opposes a type of road design which is proven to increase cycling rates and safety and which offers a better way of life for everyone, and not just for “cyclists” either." The type of road design Franklin opposes was installed on Summit Street in Columbus, Ohio. Car-bike crashes jumped from an average of two per year or less, to well over 12 per year. The type of road design Franklin opposes was studied carefully in Copenhagen, comparing the same roads before and after (unlike some propaganda papers that compared extremely dissimilar roads). The researchers found "protected" cycle tracks increased crashes markedly. Why the above results? Because forcing cyclists to ride far right and out of sight greatly complicates intersection interactions. Cyclists pop out into the path of motorists, yet still feel "protected." But the dewey-eyed, innumerate daydreamers can't understand this. Fortunately, there are few places in the world that subscribe to Franklin's point of view because of the effort to reduce motor vehicle traffic. You _cannot_ point to a place where segregated bike facilities have significantly reduced motor vehicle traffic, Scharf. After decades of stripes, bike boxes, green paint, bollards and rail-trails the American bike commuting mode fraction is the same as it always was. The best you can do is find places where motoring is strongly discouraged and dissuaded, but also (and incidentally) has bike facilities. Bike tracks alone simply don't get a significant number of people to stop driving. There is a problem with bike lanes, specifically unprotected bike lanes that are just painted lines. Today is "Bike to Work Day" in my area. As an elected official I rode around to several "Energizer Stations," two put on by Apple, one by Kaiser, and one by my city. I saw first hand the problem with unprotected bike lanes. In Sunnyvale, a Chevy Volt decided that a bike lane was the perfect place to park. But gosh, for dozens of years you've portrayed bike lanes as just wonderful! I'd suggest you get your act straight and develop some consistency. But I know that's not going to happen. -- cheers, John B. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
Am 10.05.2019 um 05:31 schrieb John B.:
Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. You might need to either adjust your language or fine-tune your eyes. Shoulder: part of the road that is separated from the main roadway by a line. 6 foot: close to 2m, as wide as a high-end cars is without mirrors. What this picture shows is an overpass with 2 marked lanes (of 3-4m width) which are each split into virtual separate lanes for a car (2m) and a motorbike (1m). Rolf |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
John B. wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2019 21:48:18 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/9/2019 7:01 PM, John B. wrote: Frank Krygowski wrote: snipped I don't pretend to be an expert. I have only commented that I've been riding a bike for about 20 years without an accident, or even an incident, and much of that time has been in a city with such chaotic traffic that most foreigners are literally afraid to drive here and in a country that usually leads the pack, or comes in second, as the country with the most traffic deaths in the world. See: http://driving-in-thailand.com/thai-...-in-the-world/ But we did better https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ There are also bike riders around here who creep along on the sidewalk, stopping frequently. If they take to the street at all, they stop each time a car comes by. I suppose that's fine too, if they are willing to put up with snail's pace transportation. Maybe you're like them, I don't know. But again, such a person may never have been in a crash. But they shouldn't pretend they know all there is to know. If you want to do more - explore cities by bike, or bike for real transportation, or travel on multi-day trips by bike, etc. - then more knowledge is valuable. And as with mathematics beyond first grade, nobody gets it by being a hubristic genius. In the second site I mention, above, the lead photo is entitled "Bangkok Traffic". Does your book tell me something I haven't already learned (after 20 years) about how to ride in "Bangkok Traffic"? Earlier, you talked about riding the six-foot shoulders or not riding at all. I don't see six foot shoulders in that photo. Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, The standard Thai automobile is 12 ft wide, then. Whatever they made you inhale during the recent Royal Thai festivities, John, it didn't do you any good. and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. For our senior citizens, the full-size pic: https://coconuts.co/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/13730708213_902f8a90d3_h-1.jpg Isn't that a big fat overhead sign showing bicycles are not allowed on the overpass? There is a constant stream of two-wheelers on that wide outer lane, shoulder, whatever, on the extreme left. Of course you'd cycle there if "traffic" is slower in the rest of the traffic jam ... and you aren't thrill-seeking enough to race and weave in between lines of cars. Maybe you can tell me more about the conditions where you actually do ride. Apparently, he cannot. John prefers to divert by posting some semiliterate youtube "statistician." |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 11:31:36 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
Snipped Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. Snipped cheers, John B. Is it my imagination or does that sign in the upper left mean no motorcycles? Just curious because I see what appear to be motorcycles on that overpass. Cheers |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
Am 09.05.2019 um 14:35 schrieb Duane:
What I object to is telling me that my "primary" position should be one that puts me in the middle of the lane.Â* Maybe the term "primary" has some meaning that I don't understand.Â* I'll be there when I think it necessary but I understand that there's some risk to doing that. If it's just the wording, I might give some motivation. The majority of bike trips (at least outside the US) are transportational, and the majority of transportational trips is in town. In my classes I ran in the 1900's based on "Cyclecraft", I explained as follows: In situations of potential conflict in town, you should be in the "primary" position. Situations of potential conflict include - going straight when there is a significant chance of the car behind doing a near-side turn - going straight when there is a car coming from the near-side and you have priority - going straight when it is unsafe/inappropriate for a car to overtake you (e.g. pedestrian crossing, oncoming traffic on narrow roads) In Europe, this means that the "primary position" is recommended for 70-80% of the distance you cycle in town, so it is more helpful to teach "in town, take the primary position, and when you judge it is safe to be overtaken by the cars behind, change to the secondary position to let them pass". For cycling outside town, the situation is different: 1) a lot fewer points of conflict 2) lower traffic density means you won't be overtaken every 10s while riding in secondary position 3) higher traffic speed means the speed difference between cars and you is higher, and thus the "primary" position carries more risks. Rolf PS: it is extremely hard to have a language that is both precise and easily understood at the same time. For international communication, the precise language might be more appropriate but to reach the public you need an easily understood language even though this language might lead to misunderstandings in some other countries. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Fri, 10 May 2019 09:13:32 +0200, Rolf Mantel
wrote: Am 10.05.2019 um 05:31 schrieb John B.: Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. You might need to either adjust your language or fine-tune your eyes. Shoulder: part of the road that is separated from the main roadway by a line. 6 foot: close to 2m, as wide as a high-end cars is without mirrors. What this picture shows is an overpass with 2 marked lanes (of 3-4m width) which are each split into virtual separate lanes for a car (2m) and a motorbike (1m). Rolf Actually, that isn't quite correct. :-) If you look at the upper R.H. side of the photo you can make out a white sign with some markings on it. One of which, the lower R.H. one, bans motorcycles from using the overpass. So a motorcycle lane is rather doubtful :-( -- cheers, John B. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Fri, 10 May 2019 00:40:55 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 11:31:36 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: Snipped Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. Snipped cheers, John B. Is it my imagination or does that sign in the upper left mean no motorcycles? Just curious because I see what appear to be motorcycles on that overpass. Cheers Yup. It says no motorcycles, no trucks, no trailers and no bicycles. As for bicycles on the overpass? Well the "Thai" in the word "Thailand" literally means "free" and the motorcycles seem to take that as freedom to do as they please :-) -- cheers, John B. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Ineffective Cycling
On Fri, 10 May 2019 09:32:41 +0200, Sepp Ruf
wrote: John B. wrote: On Thu, 9 May 2019 21:48:18 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/9/2019 7:01 PM, John B. wrote: Frank Krygowski wrote: snipped I don't pretend to be an expert. I have only commented that I've been riding a bike for about 20 years without an accident, or even an incident, and much of that time has been in a city with such chaotic traffic that most foreigners are literally afraid to drive here and in a country that usually leads the pack, or comes in second, as the country with the most traffic deaths in the world. See: http://driving-in-thailand.com/thai-...-in-the-world/ But we did better https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ There are also bike riders around here who creep along on the sidewalk, stopping frequently. If they take to the street at all, they stop each time a car comes by. I suppose that's fine too, if they are willing to put up with snail's pace transportation. Maybe you're like them, I don't know. But again, such a person may never have been in a crash. But they shouldn't pretend they know all there is to know. If you want to do more - explore cities by bike, or bike for real transportation, or travel on multi-day trips by bike, etc. - then more knowledge is valuable. And as with mathematics beyond first grade, nobody gets it by being a hubristic genius. In the second site I mention, above, the lead photo is entitled "Bangkok Traffic". Does your book tell me something I haven't already learned (after 20 years) about how to ride in "Bangkok Traffic"? Earlier, you talked about riding the six-foot shoulders or not riding at all. I don't see six foot shoulders in that photo. Look again, you must have missed it https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/tha...t-world-atlas/ Look at the overpass, there is a shoulder, roughly half the width of an automobile, The standard Thai automobile is 12 ft wide, then. Whatever they made you inhale during the recent Royal Thai festivities, John, it didn't do you any good. and certainly wide enough for motorcycle to ride in on both sides, with no problems. For our senior citizens, the full-size pic: https://coconuts.co/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/13730708213_902f8a90d3_h-1.jpg Isn't that a big fat overhead sign showing bicycles are not allowed on the overpass? There is a constant stream of two-wheelers on that wide outer lane, shoulder, whatever, on the extreme left. Of course you'd cycle there if "traffic" is slower in the rest of the traffic jam ... and you aren't thrill-seeking enough to race and weave in between lines of cars. Maybe you can tell me more about the conditions where you actually do ride. Apparently, he cannot. John prefers to divert by posting some semiliterate youtube "statistician." Goodness! You mean it wasn't true? And you know this how? Because "everyone knows" or maybe "there have been numerous studies" or some other wild eyed pronouncement with no evidence whatsoever provided? We had one guy here that used those sort of pronouncements to prove his statements and, apparently, now we have two. -- cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mountain Cycling in Bali! Cycling Tours that offer true off roadmountain bike riding | [email protected] | Mountain Biking | 0 | July 5th 08 05:41 AM |
Exercise Ineffective for Weight Loss? | Prisoner at War | General | 7 | November 5th 07 06:13 PM |
Amy Gillett Safe Cycling Foundation - Husband asks cycling legend to lend a hand | cfsmtb | Australia | 1 | September 16th 05 06:25 AM |
L.E. Cycling Prints benefit non-profit Cycling Group | Gary Coles | UK | 2 | April 3rd 05 08:59 PM |
Cycling Art prints benefits non-profit Cycling Group | Gary Coles | Unicycling | 0 | April 3rd 05 08:09 PM |