The need for high tech traffic detectors

[Luke]

In article <[email protected]>, Greens
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me, to the
> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm seeing. IMO It
> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things to the
> front because that's what we're designed to do.
>
> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to ride next
> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle of doing
> something?

<snip>

What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing something'?
Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the chief
preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
something else.

 

[Wayne Pein]

Smokey wrote:

>> On Aug 28, 11:55 am, Wayne Pein <[email protected]> wrote:

>>If there is parking, even sporadic parking, on the road you should be
>>tracking 11 ft from the edge of the road at all times. This provides
>>clearance from the door zone. You shouldn't need to adjust your line.
>>
>>Your presence out in the lane induces caution in passing motorists. They
>>slow and move over.
>>
>>Wayne
>
>
> I've only been bike riding for a few years, but have been a
> motorcyclist for 35 years. In both cases, I believe it's very
> important to adjust your lane position to suit the traffic conditions.

This is true, but bicyclists generally do it wrong. In particular, they
are afraid of overtaking traffic, and react by riding as far right as
they can. This leads to several negative outcomes. Motorcyclists adjust
their lane position, but the default is in the left tire track and they
usually get it right.

Wayne

 

[Greens]

"Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:280820071530446521%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me, to the
>> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm seeing. IMO
>> It
>> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things to the
>> front because that's what we're designed to do.
>>
>> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to ride
>> next
>> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle of
>> doing
>> something?
>
> <snip>
>
> What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing something'?
> Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
> but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
> distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the chief
> preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
> something else.

When I talk about doing something else, I'm talking about monitoring some
other hazard. Things are constantly changing when you and traffic are moving
along. Parked cars are not the only thing to worry about. People can close
in from behind very fast, cars can pull up on sidestreets, cracks prove to
be a hazard once you near them.

Today I was on the way home, going downhill about 15 or 20mph. A garbage
truck and a recycling truck were parked facing the wrong way on the other
side. After I went by them, they caught up to me and passed me and then
stopped blocking nearly the whole right lane of a country road rated for 55
mph. If I took the shoulder I risked getting doored by someone getting out
the passenger side. I chose to go around into oncoming traffic as I had
pretty good visiblility. Had to check behind first, but there wasn't much
time. I had to slow as I passed them and then... sure enough the garbage
man got out the driver's door (probably thinking, "why didn't he go around
the shoulder where I left him room) (answer, I didn't trust him and had
little experience with garbage trucks on this kind of road.). Good thing I
slowed because this was not a careful opening of the door. It was wide open
with him proudly displaying himself. I was practically in the oncoming
shoulder. I blasted past and got back in the proper lane, took the first
side road.

Must have been half a dozen or more decisions to make in 20 seconds to
constantly changing surroundings.

 

[Wayne Pein]

Greens wrote:

> Why havn't car manufacturers invented some sort of device to let cyclist
> know that someone is in the front seat of a parked car? A parked car isn't
> going to open it's door unless someone is sitting in the seat. Sounds like
> it would be easy to rig up something to let passing cyclists know that this
> particular car posses some danger of dooring them.
>
> Even better would be a gadget that shows the door handle is being touched on
> the inside.
>

You falsely believe that somebody else is responsible for bicyclist
safety. YOU and you alone must be competent to reduce your risk. A basic
time honored way to do that is to never ride in the door zone. By
tracking 5 ft from car side, you ensure this. Riding at this position
also compels passing motorists to be more cautious, and it gives you
better sightlines and maneuvering space at junctions and from peds that
may dash out from between parked cars.

Unfortunately, moronic bike lane planners sometimes put bike lanes in
the door zone. This is gross negligence at the least.

Wayne

 

[Luke]

In article <[email protected]>, Greens
<[email protected]> wrote:

> "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:280820071530446521%[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me, to the
> >> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm seeing. IMO
> >> It
> >> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things to the
> >> front because that's what we're designed to do.
> >>
> >> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to ride
> >> next
> >> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle of
> >> doing
> >> something?
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing something'?
> > Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
> > but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
> > distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the chief
> > preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
> > something else.
>
> When I talk about doing something else, I'm talking about monitoring some
> other hazard. Things are constantly changing when you and traffic are moving
> along. Parked cars are not the only thing to worry about. People can close
> in from behind very fast, cars can pull up on sidestreets, cracks prove to
> be a hazard once you near them.
>
> Today I was on the way home, going downhill about 15 or 20mph. A garbage
> truck and a recycling truck were parked facing the wrong way on the other
> side. After I went by them, they caught up to me and passed me and then
> stopped blocking nearly the whole right lane of a country road rated for 55
> mph. If I took the shoulder I risked getting doored by someone getting out
> the passenger side. I chose to go around into oncoming traffic as I had
> pretty good visiblility. Had to check behind first, but there wasn't much
> time. I had to slow as I passed them and then... sure enough the garbage
> man got out the driver's door (probably thinking, "why didn't he go around
> the shoulder where I left him room) (answer, I didn't trust him and had
> little experience with garbage trucks on this kind of road.). Good thing I
> slowed because this was not a careful opening of the door. It was wide open
> with him proudly displaying himself. I was practically in the oncoming
> shoulder. I blasted past and got back in the proper lane, took the first
> side road.
>
> Must have been half a dozen or more decisions to make in 20 seconds to
> constantly changing surroundings.

A typical scenario for urban cyclists -- and rarely is there a
situation that isn't instructional.

From my understanding of your account there was another option
available to you -- one too rarely exercised by motorists and cyclists
alike: you could've stopped.

Now the decision on how to proceed is no longer time critical so take
the time you need. Making eye contact with the driver of the truck via
his rear view mirror and signalling your intent or he signalling his
would've avoided the near door prize. If mute communication was not
possible for whatever reason you could've simply waited for further
developments; after a few moments the driver exiting from his cab
would've removed the potentially hazardous variable your consideration.

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<280820071624139042%[email protected]>,
Luke <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:280820071530446521%[email protected]...
> > > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me, to the
> > >> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm seeing. IMO
> > >> It
> > >> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things to the
> > >> front because that's what we're designed to do.
> > >>
> > >> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to ride
> > >> next
> > >> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle of
> > >> doing
> > >> something?
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing something'?
> > > Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
> > > but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
> > > distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the chief
> > > preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
> > > something else.
> >
> > When I talk about doing something else, I'm talking about monitoring some
> > other hazard. Things are constantly changing when you and traffic are moving
> > along. Parked cars are not the only thing to worry about. People can close
> > in from behind very fast, cars can pull up on sidestreets, cracks prove to
> > be a hazard once you near them.
> >
> > Today I was on the way home, going downhill about 15 or 20mph. A garbage
> > truck and a recycling truck were parked facing the wrong way on the other
> > side. After I went by them, they caught up to me and passed me and then
> > stopped blocking nearly the whole right lane of a country road rated for 55
> > mph. If I took the shoulder I risked getting doored by someone getting out
> > the passenger side. I chose to go around into oncoming traffic as I had
> > pretty good visiblility. Had to check behind first, but there wasn't much
> > time. I had to slow as I passed them and then... sure enough the garbage
> > man got out the driver's door (probably thinking, "why didn't he go around
> > the shoulder where I left him room) (answer, I didn't trust him and had
> > little experience with garbage trucks on this kind of road.). Good thing I
> > slowed because this was not a careful opening of the door. It was wide open
> > with him proudly displaying himself. I was practically in the oncoming
> > shoulder. I blasted past and got back in the proper lane, took the first
> > side road.
> >
> > Must have been half a dozen or more decisions to make in 20 seconds to
> > constantly changing surroundings.
>
> A typical scenario for urban cyclists -- and rarely is there a
> situation that isn't instructional.
>
> From my understanding of your account there was another option
> available to you -- one too rarely exercised by motorists and cyclists
> alike: you could've stopped.
>
> Now the decision on how to proceed is no longer time critical so take
> the time you need. Making eye contact with the driver of the truck via
> his rear view mirror and signalling your intent or he signalling his
> would've avoided the near door prize. If mute communication was not
> possible for whatever reason you could've simply waited for further
> developments; after a few moments the driver exiting from his cab
> would've removed the potentially hazardous variable your consideration.

Excellent advice on stopping. I will reiterate.
In confusing situations, pull over and stop.
You then have an opportunity to assess and re-assess
the situation. Then you can make a good decision.
In future, that good decision will be available to you.

--
Michael Press

 

[Greens]

"Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Greens wrote:
>
>> Why havn't car manufacturers invented some sort of device to let cyclist
>> know that someone is in the front seat of a parked car? A parked car
>> isn't going to open it's door unless someone is sitting in the seat.
>> Sounds like it would be easy to rig up something to let passing cyclists
>> know that this particular car posses some danger of dooring them.
>>
>> Even better would be a gadget that shows the door handle is being touched
>> on the inside.
>>
>
> You falsely believe that somebody else is responsible for bicyclist
> safety. YOU and you alone must be competent to reduce your risk. A basic
> time honored way to do that is to never ride in the door zone. By tracking
> 5 ft from car side, you ensure this. Riding at this position also compels
> passing motorists to be more cautious, and it gives you better sightlines
> and maneuvering space at junctions and from peds that may dash out from
> between parked cars.
>
> Unfortunately, moronic bike lane planners sometimes put bike lanes in the
> door zone. This is gross negligence at the least.
>
> Wayne
>

"Tracking five feet from the door zone" I'm guessing that practically means
riding down the centerline of the road will get motorists ****** at you. Not
always the safest option. Legally, they can't run you down but...

 

[Greens]

"Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:280820071624139042%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:280820071530446521%[email protected]...
>> > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me, to
>> >> the
>> >> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm seeing.
>> >> IMO
>> >> It
>> >> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things to
>> >> the
>> >> front because that's what we're designed to do.
>> >>
>> >> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to
>> >> ride
>> >> next
>> >> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle of
>> >> doing
>> >> something?
>> >
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing something'?
>> > Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
>> > but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
>> > distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the chief
>> > preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
>> > something else.
>>
>> When I talk about doing something else, I'm talking about monitoring some
>> other hazard. Things are constantly changing when you and traffic are
>> moving
>> along. Parked cars are not the only thing to worry about. People can
>> close
>> in from behind very fast, cars can pull up on sidestreets, cracks prove
>> to
>> be a hazard once you near them.
>>
>> Today I was on the way home, going downhill about 15 or 20mph. A garbage
>> truck and a recycling truck were parked facing the wrong way on the other
>> side. After I went by them, they caught up to me and passed me and then
>> stopped blocking nearly the whole right lane of a country road rated for
>> 55
>> mph. If I took the shoulder I risked getting doored by someone getting
>> out
>> the passenger side. I chose to go around into oncoming traffic as I had
>> pretty good visiblility. Had to check behind first, but there wasn't much
>> time. I had to slow as I passed them and then... sure enough the garbage
>> man got out the driver's door (probably thinking, "why didn't he go
>> around
>> the shoulder where I left him room) (answer, I didn't trust him and had
>> little experience with garbage trucks on this kind of road.). Good thing
>> I
>> slowed because this was not a careful opening of the door. It was wide
>> open
>> with him proudly displaying himself. I was practically in the oncoming
>> shoulder. I blasted past and got back in the proper lane, took the first
>> side road.
>>
>> Must have been half a dozen or more decisions to make in 20 seconds to
>> constantly changing surroundings.
>
> A typical scenario for urban cyclists -- and rarely is there a
> situation that isn't instructional.
>
> From my understanding of your account there was another option
> available to you -- one too rarely exercised by motorists and cyclists
> alike: you could've stopped.
>
> Now the decision on how to proceed is no longer time critical so take
> the time you need. Making eye contact with the driver of the truck via
> his rear view mirror and signalling your intent or he signalling his
> would've avoided the near door prize. If mute communication was not
> possible for whatever reason you could've simply waited for further
> developments; after a few moments the driver exiting from his cab
> would've removed the potentially hazardous variable your consideration.

I did consider stopping. If I did, there were probably half a dozen other
times during the day I could have stopped and studied the situation. There's
also a bit of daredevil in most people. There's an exhileration you get from
making a fast decision and carrying it out. You don't get that by stopping
and most cyclists hate stopping. I sure hating stopping for every
intersection and light. I prefer to slowly roll through while sizing things
up rather than stand there and bake. Also, cars will just take whatever you
don't take. Don't expect them to see you as a vehicle once you've stopped.
If you're standing there, you're a pedestrian and an idiot in the middle of
the road. Get out of the way is all they're going to think. If you blast
past them, it lets them know you're not as dumb and sluggish as they are.
Pffft, tell me you've never thought of it that way.

 

[Greens]

"Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Greens wrote:
>
>> Why havn't car manufacturers invented some sort of device to let cyclist
>> know that someone is in the front seat of a parked car? A parked car
>> isn't going to open it's door unless someone is sitting in the seat.
>> Sounds like it would be easy to rig up something to let passing cyclists
>> know that this particular car posses some danger of dooring them.
>>
>> Even better would be a gadget that shows the door handle is being touched
>> on the inside.
>>
>
> You falsely believe that somebody else is responsible for bicyclist
> safety. YOU and you alone must be competent to reduce your risk. A basic
> time honored way to do that is to never ride in the door zone. By tracking
> 5 ft from car side, you ensure this. Riding at this position also compels
> passing motorists to be more cautious, and it gives you better sightlines
> and maneuvering space at junctions and from peds that may dash out from
> between parked cars.
>
> Unfortunately, moronic bike lane planners sometimes put bike lanes in the
> door zone. This is gross negligence at the least.
>
> Wayne
>

Do seatbelts and airbags put motorist safety in the hands of someone besides
the driver? Yea. What's wrong with that? All kinds of safety devices have
come into common use. They all enhance safety and take the burden off
drivers. Things like stop signs, turn signals, headlights, brake lights.
Having a light that warns cyclists of a potential dooring hazard is no
worse.

 

[Bill Sornson]

Wayne Pein wrote:

> If there is parking, even sporadic parking, on the road you should be
> tracking 11 ft from the edge of the road at all times.

Damn! Wish I'd read this before today's 30-mile ride. I FORGOT TO BRING A
TAPE MEASURE!

ROTFL

 

[Luke]

In article <[email protected]>, Greens
<[email protected]> wrote:

> "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:280820071624139042%[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:280820071530446521%[email protected]...
> >> > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me, to
> >> >> the
> >> >> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm seeing.
> >> >> IMO
> >> >> It
> >> >> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things to
> >> >> the
> >> >> front because that's what we're designed to do.
> >> >>
> >> >> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to
> >> >> ride
> >> >> next
> >> >> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle of
> >> >> doing
> >> >> something?
> >> >
> >> > <snip>
> >> >
> >> > What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing something'?
> >> > Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
> >> > but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
> >> > distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the chief
> >> > preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
> >> > something else.
> >>
> >> When I talk about doing something else, I'm talking about monitoring some
> >> other hazard. Things are constantly changing when you and traffic are
> >> moving
> >> along. Parked cars are not the only thing to worry about. People can
> >> close
> >> in from behind very fast, cars can pull up on sidestreets, cracks prove
> >> to
> >> be a hazard once you near them.
> >>
> >> Today I was on the way home, going downhill about 15 or 20mph. A garbage
> >> truck and a recycling truck were parked facing the wrong way on the other
> >> side. After I went by them, they caught up to me and passed me and then
> >> stopped blocking nearly the whole right lane of a country road rated for
> >> 55
> >> mph. If I took the shoulder I risked getting doored by someone getting
> >> out
> >> the passenger side. I chose to go around into oncoming traffic as I had
> >> pretty good visiblility. Had to check behind first, but there wasn't much
> >> time. I had to slow as I passed them and then... sure enough the garbage
> >> man got out the driver's door (probably thinking, "why didn't he go
> >> around
> >> the shoulder where I left him room) (answer, I didn't trust him and had
> >> little experience with garbage trucks on this kind of road.). Good thing
> >> I
> >> slowed because this was not a careful opening of the door. It was wide
> >> open
> >> with him proudly displaying himself. I was practically in the oncoming
> >> shoulder. I blasted past and got back in the proper lane, took the first
> >> side road.
> >>
> >> Must have been half a dozen or more decisions to make in 20 seconds to
> >> constantly changing surroundings.
> >
> > A typical scenario for urban cyclists -- and rarely is there a
> > situation that isn't instructional.
> >
> > From my understanding of your account there was another option
> > available to you -- one too rarely exercised by motorists and cyclists
> > alike: you could've stopped.
> >
> > Now the decision on how to proceed is no longer time critical so take
> > the time you need. Making eye contact with the driver of the truck via
> > his rear view mirror and signalling your intent or he signalling his
> > would've avoided the near door prize. If mute communication was not
> > possible for whatever reason you could've simply waited for further
> > developments; after a few moments the driver exiting from his cab
> > would've removed the potentially hazardous variable your consideration.
>
> I did consider stopping. If I did, there were probably half a dozen other
> times during the day I could have stopped and studied the situation. There's
> also a bit of daredevil in most people. There's an exhileration you get from
> making a fast decision and carrying it out. You don't get that by stopping
> and most cyclists hate stopping. I sure hating stopping for every
> intersection and light.

So do I and often I don't. But even more I hate ending up as a hood
ornament or embedding myself in the open door of a truck's cab.

> I prefer to slowly roll through while sizing things
> up rather than stand there and bake. Also, cars will just take whatever you
> don't take. Don't expect them to see you as a vehicle once you've stopped.

I do expect them to see me as a vehicle once I'm stopped. In your case,
with the sanitation engineers parked in front, do you really expect the
motorists behind to 'take' what's yours, i.e., your space? In order to
do what exactly, perform a four wheeled colonoscopy up the ass end of
garbage truck?

> If you're standing there, you're a pedestrian and an idiot in the middle of
> the road. Get out of the way is all they're going to think. If you blast
> past them, it lets them know you're not as dumb and sluggish as they are.
> Pffft, tell me you've never thought of it that way.

Sure, I've thought that, and many other foolish things besides.

 

[Greens]

"Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:280820071729042419%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Greens
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:280820071624139042%[email protected]...
>> > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> news:280820071530446521%[email protected]...
>> >> > In article <[email protected]>, Greens
>> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I have a mirror, but I find that it takes time to scan behind me,
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> sides and front and to be sure that I'm right about what I'm
>> >> >> seeing.
>> >> >> IMO
>> >> >> It
>> >> >> takes more time to scan things behind than it does to scan things
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> front because that's what we're designed to do.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You've never had to change your plans? You've never been forced to
>> >> >> ride
>> >> >> next
>> >> >> to a car door because things changed while you were in the middle
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> doing
>> >> >> something?
>> >> >
>> >> > <snip>
>> >> >
>> >> > What do you mean by 'while you were in the middle of doing
>> >> > something'?
>> >> > Sure unforeseen hazards can quickly arise, requiring evasive action,
>> >> > but you make it sound as if the act of riding is just one of many
>> >> > distractions while astride the bicycle. How about making it the
>> >> > chief
>> >> > preoccupation? Then you'll benefit by fewer surprises when doing
>> >> > something else.
>> >>
>> >> When I talk about doing something else, I'm talking about monitoring
>> >> some
>> >> other hazard. Things are constantly changing when you and traffic are
>> >> moving
>> >> along. Parked cars are not the only thing to worry about. People can
>> >> close
>> >> in from behind very fast, cars can pull up on sidestreets, cracks
>> >> prove
>> >> to
>> >> be a hazard once you near them.
>> >>
>> >> Today I was on the way home, going downhill about 15 or 20mph. A
>> >> garbage
>> >> truck and a recycling truck were parked facing the wrong way on the
>> >> other
>> >> side. After I went by them, they caught up to me and passed me and
>> >> then
>> >> stopped blocking nearly the whole right lane of a country road rated
>> >> for
>> >> 55
>> >> mph. If I took the shoulder I risked getting doored by someone getting
>> >> out
>> >> the passenger side. I chose to go around into oncoming traffic as I
>> >> had
>> >> pretty good visiblility. Had to check behind first, but there wasn't
>> >> much
>> >> time. I had to slow as I passed them and then... sure enough the
>> >> garbage
>> >> man got out the driver's door (probably thinking, "why didn't he go
>> >> around
>> >> the shoulder where I left him room) (answer, I didn't trust him and
>> >> had
>> >> little experience with garbage trucks on this kind of road.). Good
>> >> thing
>> >> I
>> >> slowed because this was not a careful opening of the door. It was wide
>> >> open
>> >> with him proudly displaying himself. I was practically in the oncoming
>> >> shoulder. I blasted past and got back in the proper lane, took the
>> >> first
>> >> side road.
>> >>
>> >> Must have been half a dozen or more decisions to make in 20 seconds to
>> >> constantly changing surroundings.
>> >
>> > A typical scenario for urban cyclists -- and rarely is there a
>> > situation that isn't instructional.
>> >
>> > From my understanding of your account there was another option
>> > available to you -- one too rarely exercised by motorists and cyclists
>> > alike: you could've stopped.
>> >
>> > Now the decision on how to proceed is no longer time critical so take
>> > the time you need. Making eye contact with the driver of the truck via
>> > his rear view mirror and signalling your intent or he signalling his
>> > would've avoided the near door prize. If mute communication was not
>> > possible for whatever reason you could've simply waited for further
>> > developments; after a few moments the driver exiting from his cab
>> > would've removed the potentially hazardous variable your consideration.
>>
>> I did consider stopping. If I did, there were probably half a dozen other
>> times during the day I could have stopped and studied the situation.
>> There's
>> also a bit of daredevil in most people. There's an exhileration you get
>> from
>> making a fast decision and carrying it out. You don't get that by
>> stopping
>> and most cyclists hate stopping. I sure hating stopping for every
>> intersection and light.
>
> So do I and often I don't. But even more I hate ending up as a hood
> ornament or embedding myself in the open door of a truck's cab.
>
>> I prefer to slowly roll through while sizing things
>> up rather than stand there and bake. Also, cars will just take whatever
>> you
>> don't take. Don't expect them to see you as a vehicle once you've
>> stopped.
>
> I do expect them to see me as a vehicle once I'm stopped. In your case,
> with the sanitation engineers parked in front, do you really expect the
> motorists behind to 'take' what's yours, i.e., your space? In order to
> do what exactly, perform a four wheeled colonoscopy up the ass end of
> garbage truck?
>
>> If you're standing there, you're a pedestrian and an idiot in the middle
>> of
>> the road. Get out of the way is all they're going to think. If you blast
>> past them, it lets them know you're not as dumb and sluggish as they are.
>> Pffft, tell me you've never thought of it that way.
>
> Sure, I've thought that, and many other foolish things besides.

So you would have stopped as in complete stop and get off the bike behind
the last garbage truck, give it some thought and then... what? By then they
would have started up again and you'd have to repeat the next time they
stopped.

Or do you mean slow way down, size things up and pass on the left like I
did? I didn't want to get too close. I can't see when I'm behind them and I
wanted to pass before they started going again so I slowed.

 

[Wayne Pein]

Greens wrote:


>
>
> "Tracking five feet from the door zone" I'm guessing that practically means
> riding down the centerline of the road will get motorists ****** at you. Not
> always the safest option. Legally, they can't run you down but...
>

OK. I give up. Ride however you want.

Wayne

 

[Wayne Pein]

Greens wrote:

>> "Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>You falsely believe that somebody else is responsible for bicyclist
>>safety. YOU and you alone must be competent to reduce your risk. A basic
>>time honored way to do that is to never ride in the door zone. By tracking
>>5 ft from car side, you ensure this. Riding at this position also compels
>>passing motorists to be more cautious, and it gives you better sightlines
>>and maneuvering space at junctions and from peds that may dash out from
>>between parked cars.
>>

> Do seatbelts and airbags put motorist safety in the hands of someone besides
> the driver? Yea. What's wrong with that? All kinds of safety devices have
> come into common use. They all enhance safety and take the burden off
> drivers. Things like stop signs, turn signals, headlights, brake lights.
> Having a light that warns cyclists of a potential dooring hazard is no
> worse.

A light that gives bicyclists the OK to ride in the door zone is not a
good idea. Better to use your brain and not ride in the door zone. If
you do that, then there is no potential dooring hazard. If your idea is
so good, submit it to NHTSA, the car companies, insurance companies, etc.

Further, as I pointed out earlier, riding further away from the parked
cars gives better sight lines and maneuvering space at junctions and
from peds. Do you have a bad invention to deal with that as well?

Wayne

 

[Wayne Pein]

Bill Sornson wrote:

> Wayne Pein wrote:
>
>
>>If there is parking, even sporadic parking, on the road you should be
>>tracking 11 ft from the edge of the road at all times.
>
>
> Damn! Wish I'd read this before today's 30-mile ride. I FORGOT TO BRING A
> TAPE MEASURE!
>
> ROTFL
>
>

Stalking Ignoramus,

11 ft provides clearance from the door zone. It is not an absolute.

Wayne

 

[Luke]

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:56:08 -0400, "Greens" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>So you would have stopped as in complete stop and get off the bike behind
>the last garbage truck, give it some thought and then... what? By then they
>would have started up again and you'd have to repeat the next time they
>stopped.

I would've stopped and while still astride the bike tried to make eye
contact with the drive to determine his and/or signal my intent.
Failing that, once the driver exited the vehicle and the way was clear
I would've passed the truck. I don't anticipate a repetition of the
routine is required; my experience is that even a leisurely cyclist
can stay ahead of a garbage truck making pickups.

 

[Greens]

"Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Greens wrote:
>
>>> "Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message You falsely believe that
>>> somebody else is responsible for bicyclist safety. YOU and you alone
>>> must be competent to reduce your risk. A basic time honored way to do
>>> that is to never ride in the door zone. By tracking 5 ft from car side,
>>> you ensure this. Riding at this position also compels passing motorists
>>> to be more cautious, and it gives you better sightlines and maneuvering
>>> space at junctions and from peds that may dash out from between parked
>>> cars.
>>>
>
>> Do seatbelts and airbags put motorist safety in the hands of someone
>> besides the driver? Yea. What's wrong with that? All kinds of safety
>> devices have come into common use. They all enhance safety and take the
>> burden off drivers. Things like stop signs, turn signals, headlights,
>> brake lights. Having a light that warns cyclists of a potential dooring
>> hazard is no worse.
>
> A light that gives bicyclists the OK to ride in the door zone is not a
> good idea. Better to use your brain and not ride in the door zone. If you
> do that, then there is no potential dooring hazard. If your idea is so
> good, submit it to NHTSA, the car companies, insurance companies, etc.
>
> Further, as I pointed out earlier, riding further away from the parked
> cars gives better sight lines and maneuvering space at junctions and from
> peds. Do you have a bad invention to deal with that as well?
>
> Wayne
>
>

It sounds like you're getting really aggravated with me, Wayne. Sometimes
people who consider themselves authorities and "the last word" on subjects
will get that way when I offer suggestions. No. I didn't spend a lot of time
coming up with that idea. It's not fully tested, but has the NHTSA really
given the dooring problem any thought over the last 50 years? Probably not
and they get paid to make highways safer for everybody so I don't see why
you'd be mad at me.

They could do a lot of things like put up signs reminding motorists that
cyclists have the right to be in the road. They could put PSA's on the tv
and radio offering motorists safety tips that remind them that they're not
the only ones on the road. They could encourage courtesy and understanding
instead of hostility. After all cyclists don't burn gas. That means more
gas, cheaper gas for motorists. They should love us and you should love me,
Wayne, as a brother of the wind and a fellow newsgrouper looking for
solutions to our shared sport.

 

[Bill Sornson]

Wayne Pein wrote:
> Greens wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> "Tracking five feet from the door zone" I'm guessing that
>> practically means riding down the centerline of the road will get
>> motorists ****** at you. Not always the safest option. Legally, they
>> can't run you down but...
>
> OK. I give up. Ride however you want.

FINALLY!

LOL

 

[Bill Sornson]

Wayne "What-a" Pein wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Wayne Pein wrote:

>>> If there is parking, even sporadic parking, on the road you should
>>> be tracking 11 ft from the edge of the road at all times.

>> Damn! Wish I'd read this before today's 30-mile ride. I FORGOT TO
>> BRING A TAPE MEASURE!
>>
>> ROTFL


> Stalking Ignoramus,
>
> 11 ft provides clearance from the door zone. It is not an absolute.

Then you should stop making categorical statements. Absolutely.

 

[Luke]

In article <[email protected]>, Greens
<[email protected]> wrote:

> They could do a lot of things like put up signs reminding motorists that
> cyclists have the right to be in the road.

What good are they if cyclists are so concerned with irritating
motorists they decline to exercise that right.

> They could put PSA's on the tv
> and radio offering motorists safety tips that remind them that they're not
> the only ones on the road. They could encourage courtesy and understanding
> instead of hostility. After all cyclists don't burn gas. That means more
> gas, cheaper gas for motorists. They should love us and you should love me,
> Wayne, as a brother of the wind ...

A fellow flatulator? Being one, a brother that is, I can attest: no one
fights like 'em -- with the exception of sisters of course. As a
citizen of the city of brotherly love I'm certain you agree.

> ... and a fellow newsgrouper looking for
> solutions to our shared sport.


The solution exists: if you don't want get a door prize don't ride in
the door zone.