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: almost actual science



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 10th 19, 05:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Cycling: almost actual science

https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Ads
  #2  
Old May 10th 19, 08:32 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On 5/10/2019 12:39 PM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


I heard about that elsewhere. So it's another claim that striped bike
lanes are dangerous. In other words, the segregation advocates that have
been touting those lanes for decades are now admitting they were wrong.
But they want barrier separations everywhere. Even though any rational
analysis shows they are impossible to build on even 1% of our roads.

And they are ignoring the studies that have clearly shown significant
increases in crashes from "protected" bike lanes, like this one from Ohio:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineeri...oorhead_72.pdf

Or the pile of studies collected by John Franklin. See
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html



--
- Frank Krygowski
  #3  
Old May 10th 19, 09:22 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On 5/10/2019 2:32 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/10/2019 12:39 PM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/



I heard about that elsewhere. So it's another claim that
striped bike lanes are dangerous. In other words, the
segregation advocates that have been touting those lanes for
decades are now admitting they were wrong. But they want
barrier separations everywhere. Even though any rational
analysis shows they are impossible to build on even 1% of
our roads.

And they are ignoring the studies that have clearly shown
significant increases in crashes from "protected" bike
lanes, like this one from Ohio:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineeri...oorhead_72.pdf


Or the pile of studies collected by John Franklin. See
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html



Anyone who's seen an inside fastball brush a batter only to
have a strike called will question the 'methodology' of
evaluating close passes.

I have no idea but I doubt the 'researchers' do either.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #4  
Old May 10th 19, 10:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On 5/10/2019 9:39 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


Interesting.

The photo implies that they're talking about the trend to paint bike
lanes. In my area it's green, apparently in Australia it's blue. Or are
they talking about just a bike lane that has a stripe between the
vehicle lanes and the shoulder, with the shoulder serving as an
unpainted bike lane? It's not clear.

What I see with the non-separated bike lanes is that the safety issue is
that vehicles constantly intrude on the bike lane for various purposes,
mostly illegal (as I pointed out in a post yesterday, complete with
photos). It would be nice if paint were sufficient to keep vehicles out,
but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.

In any case, I'm glad that the people that have been opposing separated
infrastructure, for whatever strange reason, have been proven wrong (by
at least one study). The two Johns are not going to be happy! Not that
it's going to stop their believers from screaming "danger danger" at
every opportunity!
  #5  
Old May 10th 19, 10:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,546
Default Cycling: almost actual science

sms wrote:
On 5/10/2019 9:39 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


Interesting.

The photo implies that they're talking about the trend to paint bike
lanes. In my area it's green, apparently in Australia it's blue. Or are
they talking about just a bike lane that has a stripe between the
vehicle lanes and the shoulder, with the shoulder serving as an
unpainted bike lane? It's not clear.

What I see with the non-separated bike lanes is that the safety issue is
that vehicles constantly intrude on the bike lane for various purposes,
mostly illegal (as I pointed out in a post yesterday, complete with
photos). It would be nice if paint were sufficient to keep vehicles out,
but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.



Last time I went down was because the guy in front of me did a Frome on
some paint on a wet road. Not my favourite idea.

In any case, I'm glad that the people that have been opposing separated
infrastructure, for whatever strange reason, have been proven wrong (by
at least one study). The two Johns are not going to be happy! Not that
it's going to stop their believers from screaming "danger danger" at
every opportunity!




--
duane
  #6  
Old May 11th 19, 02:00 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On Fri, 10 May 2019 15:22:47 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/10/2019 2:32 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/10/2019 12:39 PM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/



I heard about that elsewhere. So it's another claim that
striped bike lanes are dangerous. In other words, the
segregation advocates that have been touting those lanes for
decades are now admitting they were wrong. But they want
barrier separations everywhere. Even though any rational
analysis shows they are impossible to build on even 1% of
our roads.

And they are ignoring the studies that have clearly shown
significant increases in crashes from "protected" bike
lanes, like this one from Ohio:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineeri...oorhead_72.pdf


Or the pile of studies collected by John Franklin. See
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html



Anyone who's seen an inside fastball brush a batter only to
have a strike called will question the 'methodology' of
evaluating close passes.

I have no idea but I doubt the 'researchers' do either.


One study was done in England, I believe, using some sort of
ultrasonic distance sensor. See
http://drianwalker.com/overtaking/

In another study he makes an interesting comment about bicycle
helmets:
" suggesting that bicyclists must buy and wear protective devices to
remain safe is no different from suggesting non-smokers must buy and
wear gas-masks as a solution to passive smoking. In both cases, these
are solutions that technically "work", but they place all the
responsibility for action - and a financial burden - on the
non-consenting injured party. In the case of bicycle helmets, it is,
moreover, a "solution" that serves to maintain a status quo in which
people choosing a healthy, clean and socially responsible mode of
travel are systematically marginalised in their competition for
limited public space with those who have chosen to use motor
vehicles".
--
cheers,

John B.

  #7  
Old May 11th 19, 02:16 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AK[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 226
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On Friday, May 10, 2019 at 8:00:58 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2019 15:22:47 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/10/2019 2:32 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/10/2019 12:39 PM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


I heard about that elsewhere. So it's another claim that
striped bike lanes are dangerous. In other words, the
segregation advocates that have been touting those lanes for
decades are now admitting they were wrong. But they want
barrier separations everywhere. Even though any rational
analysis shows they are impossible to build on even 1% of
our roads.

And they are ignoring the studies that have clearly shown
significant increases in crashes from "protected" bike
lanes, like this one from Ohio:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineeri...oorhead_72.pdf


Or the pile of studies collected by John Franklin. See
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html



Anyone who's seen an inside fastball brush a batter only to
have a strike called will question the 'methodology' of
evaluating close passes.

I have no idea but I doubt the 'researchers' do either.


One study was done in England, I believe, using some sort of
ultrasonic distance sensor. See
http://drianwalker.com/overtaking/

In another study he makes an interesting comment about bicycle
helmets:
" suggesting that bicyclists must buy and wear protective devices to
remain safe is no different from suggesting non-smokers must buy and
wear gas-masks as a solution to passive smoking. In both cases, these
are solutions that technically "work", but they place all the
responsibility for action - and a financial burden - on the
non-consenting injured party. In the case of bicycle helmets, it is,
moreover, a "solution" that serves to maintain a status quo in which
people choosing a healthy, clean and socially responsible mode of
travel are systematically marginalised in their competition for
limited public space with those who have chosen to use motor
vehicles".
--
cheers,

John B.


"Finally, when the (male) experimenter wore a long wig, so that he appeared female from behind, drivers left more space when passing."

I may start wearing a wig. :-)

Andy
  #8  
Old May 11th 19, 02:41 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On Fri, 10 May 2019 18:16:54 -0700 (PDT), AK
wrote:

On Friday, May 10, 2019 at 8:00:58 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2019 15:22:47 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/10/2019 2:32 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/10/2019 12:39 PM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


I heard about that elsewhere. So it's another claim that
striped bike lanes are dangerous. In other words, the
segregation advocates that have been touting those lanes for
decades are now admitting they were wrong. But they want
barrier separations everywhere. Even though any rational
analysis shows they are impossible to build on even 1% of
our roads.

And they are ignoring the studies that have clearly shown
significant increases in crashes from "protected" bike
lanes, like this one from Ohio:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineeri...oorhead_72.pdf


Or the pile of studies collected by John Franklin. See
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html



Anyone who's seen an inside fastball brush a batter only to
have a strike called will question the 'methodology' of
evaluating close passes.

I have no idea but I doubt the 'researchers' do either.


One study was done in England, I believe, using some sort of
ultrasonic distance sensor. See
http://drianwalker.com/overtaking/

In another study he makes an interesting comment about bicycle
helmets:
" suggesting that bicyclists must buy and wear protective devices to
remain safe is no different from suggesting non-smokers must buy and
wear gas-masks as a solution to passive smoking. In both cases, these
are solutions that technically "work", but they place all the
responsibility for action - and a financial burden - on the
non-consenting injured party. In the case of bicycle helmets, it is,
moreover, a "solution" that serves to maintain a status quo in which
people choosing a healthy, clean and socially responsible mode of
travel are systematically marginalised in their competition for
limited public space with those who have chosen to use motor
vehicles".
--
cheers,

John B.


"Finally, when the (male) experimenter wore a long wig, so that he appeared female from behind, drivers left more space when passing."

I may start wearing a wig. :-)

Andy


I believe that the best incentive was a jacket with "POLICE" on the
back.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #9  
Old May 11th 19, 09:35 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,231
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On Friday, May 10, 2019 at 2:28:59 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 5/10/2019 9:39 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/painted...science-paper/


Interesting.

The photo implies that they're talking about the trend to paint bike
lanes. In my area it's green, apparently in Australia it's blue. Or are
they talking about just a bike lane that has a stripe between the
vehicle lanes and the shoulder, with the shoulder serving as an
unpainted bike lane? It's not clear.

What I see with the non-separated bike lanes is that the safety issue is
that vehicles constantly intrude on the bike lane for various purposes,
mostly illegal (as I pointed out in a post yesterday, complete with
photos). It would be nice if paint were sufficient to keep vehicles out,
but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.

In any case, I'm glad that the people that have been opposing separated
infrastructure, for whatever strange reason, have been proven wrong (by
at least one study). The two Johns are not going to be happy! Not that
it's going to stop their believers from screaming "danger danger" at
every opportunity!


My experience is that while there are drivers that drive in dangerous manners, that is an enforcement failure and not that of bike lanes. Most drivers will give bicyclists FAR more room on a road with bike lanes than nothing or "sharrows". There is a local road that has a bike lane on it that just peters out. The road width does not change but as soon as that lane ends you can see the cars drifting over and away from the lane divider.

Having done the Tierra Bella and a couple of weeks later suffered on the Grizzly Peak metric which I was forced to reduce to the half century the problem was not drivers on either of those rides but moronic bicyclists who believe that they are in a peleton and will almost touch elbows passing. Locally on the South end of Skyline Blvd, there are two lanes with a three foot divider and two the opposite direction. There are no bicycle lanes there though over a large part of it there is enough room. Though traffic is light they will very seldom use the middle lane to pass - they will pass in the lane the bicycle is riding on the right of.

So it is my belief that bike lanes have a very positive value.

Perhaps this pertains more to Aussies who are in general large pains in the butts to begin with?
  #10  
Old May 12th 19, 04:24 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Joy Beeson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,638
Default Cycling: almost actual science

On Fri, 10 May 2019 18:16:54 -0700 (PDT), AK
wrote:


"Finally, when the (male) experimenter wore a long wig, so that he appeared female from behind, drivers left more space when passing."

I may start wearing a wig. :-)


Perhaps I should stop braiding my hair -- but loose hair is an
enormous nuisance and may even obscure one's vision.

I'll stick to wobbling to the left as soon as the driver is close
enough to see me do it.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/`

 




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
An actual cycling question - plagued by flats lately Anton Berlin Racing 8 May 25th 10 10:27 AM
new blog post - the science of cycling position TriAdmin Racing 0 March 22nd 08 09:10 PM
new blog post - the science of cycling position TriAdmin Rides 0 March 22nd 08 09:10 PM
Cycling News Science [email protected] Racing 3 September 28th 05 07:44 PM
actual cycling caps davek UK 10 May 6th 05 03:52 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.