Another rider's take on bicycle safety

MichaelBluejay · 2018-02-20 10:50:21

Hard to believe that this year marks 20 years (!) since I wrote "How to Not Get Hit By Cars" and put it on BicycleSafe.com.

I've always had a very generous reprint policy, and another rider has made his own bike safety page, borrowing heavily from mine, but making his a lot more comprehensive, and making new versions of the graphics. (My 20-year-old graphics are *really* long in the tooth.) In fact, it's so comprehensive that I won't have time to examine it in detail, but it seems pretty good from a cursory review. What do you all think?

https://www.rydoze.com/bike-safety/

Jack · 2018-02-20 13:37:49

Thanks. It's not bad at all other than needing a bit of editing for spelling and what, I'd say with a quick read. Some of the phrasing makes me think maybe English is not the writer's first language. All in all, it gives a good intro to some basics lots of people don't observe, even among those who in fact ride a lot.

See also http://bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.htm and the illustrations at http://www.wright.edu/~jeffrey.hiles/es … g/ch4.html for more in the same vein.

The segment on staying to the right could benefit from more explanation on lane positioning and lane selection to suggest the reader/rider move left out of right turn only lanes, for instance, and discussion of when a bike lane might be a "too far right for safety" position (for example, when the bike lane encourages passing cars on the right side).

About this part: Yield to traffic in your destination lane
--When you’re about to cross an intersection, keep in mind your destination.
--For instance, if you aim for the right turn, stay focused on this direction and keep riding on the right.
--If you aim for the left turn, stay on the left. Similarly, if you want to take the straight route, ride between these positions.

I know what the writer means, but illustrations would be a lot clearer. See p. 19 here: https://bikeeastbay.org/sites/default/f … %20101.pdf

Last edited by Jack (2018-02-21 18:30:19)

bizikletari · 2018-02-21 11:57:09

I have not read it more than a quick scan so I just say that I think it's always good to have more resources for people to learn from. It does not impress me, but it looks ok. Perhaps one matter lacking is recognizing the sources s/he took material from.

RedFalcon · 2018-02-21 13:22:49

I just took a quick look. It seems pretty good, but I would like to see 'Wearing High Visibility Clothing' and 'Using Lights, Even in the Day' front and center. Not getting hit in the first place ought to come before wearing gloves and a helmet in case you do.

Also, if there is an image of a bike helmet, it would be nice if it had front and rear lights mounted on it to make it really useful. It is incredibly helpful to be able to aim a beam of light down a side street to let drivers know you are there. It's also good for checking out potential hazards like road debris or pot holes just off to one side. Also having a red light mounted on the back of your head puts it just a bit higher and so more visible to the driver in the car behind the car behind you.

Jack · 2018-02-21 18:09:29

RedFalcon wrote:

. . . I would like to see 'Wearing High Visibility Clothing' and 'Using Lights, Even in the Day' front and center. Not getting hit in the first place ought to come before wearing gloves and a helmet in case you do.
Also, if there is an image of a bike helmet, it would be nice if it had front and rear lights mounted on it to make it really useful. It is incredibly helpful to be able to aim a beam of light down a side street to let drivers know you are there. It's also good for checking out potential hazards like road debris or pot holes just off to one side. Also having a red light mounted on the back of your head puts it just a bit higher and so more visible to the driver in the car behind the car behind you.

No complaint about emphasizing visibility and I like having helmet mounted steady red rear and white front lights, but I'm not sure daytime lights are worth harping on--see http://cyclingsavvy.org/2018/02/daytime-running-lights/ and http://john-s-allen.com/blog/?p=7145

I do like to stress that a white front light is more important than a rear light in the dark--a cyclist is far less likely to be seen by cross traffic and turning traffic from the front than by traffic from the rear and, day or night. more collisions occur from dangers out front. But everyone seems to buy a light for the rear first and a headlight after.

Last edited by Jack (2018-02-21 18:10:41)

MichaelBluejay · 2018-02-21 18:26:13

You're right, Jack, if a rider has only one light, it's usually the rear light, even though the front light is more important.

Years ago I noted that if a cyclist had one of either a helmet or lights, it would be the helmet and no lights, though that seems to be changing, probably because the price of lights has plummeted and Amazon makes them easy to get.

I remember Adam Sandler's movie _Click_ in which he gave his kids their Christmas presents (bikes) in the wee hours of the morning, and of course they wanted to ride them right away, so they rushed out into the street dutifully wearing helmets (because if they hadn't, the producers would have gotten so much flak). But they had NO LIGHTS AT ALL, even though that's required by law and arguably more important for safety than helmets. But I bet nobody complained about that. The movie-going public just thought, "Okay, they have helmets, they're safe. Good job."

RedFalcon · 2018-02-21 19:11:46

Jack wrote:

No complaint about emphasizing visibility and I like having helmet mounted steady red rear and white front lights, but I'm not sure daytime lights are worth harping on--see http://cyclingsavvy.org/2018/02/daytime-running-lights/ and http://john-s-allen.com/blog/?p=7145

In that first article it says "Daytime running lights make you more visible, certainly." My point is not that it should be your first line of defense, but that they can help. The website is geared towards helping people who don't already know how to ride, so every bit helps. The article is correct about lane positioning and all that. But most people don't ride like some of us do (taking the lane etc), especially at first. So I think having daytime lights could help them, at least some of the time. But yeah, some of those lights people use are so anemic they aren't doing any good anyway and probably give a false sense of security. And, like it says, some are too bright and can make the situation worse. It would be better if we had some real standards around this stuff.

This line from the article made me laugh, though: "Remember, in normal lighting conditions, a cyclist in a black shirt is easy to see from 200 yards away. And all of us have an obligation to be looking when we drive." Yeah, well I wish Santa would bring me a train set and pony along with a world full of conscientious drivers. But, since that ain't gonna happen I'll use what ever edge I can get. I'm certainly not going to depend on anyone in Austin remembering that they have driving obligations.

Jack · 2018-03-06 17:16:53

Our new friend might include animated illustrations such as this http://cyclingsavvy.org/what-cyclists-n … ut-trucks/ (or links to them).

MichaelBluejay · 2018-03-06 19:45:10

Nice!

I am officially 20 years out of date.

Jack · 2018-03-07 11:35:32

. . . or timeless

Bicycle Austin forum

#1 2018-02-20 10:50:21

Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#2 2018-02-20 13:37:49

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#3 2018-02-21 11:57:09

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#4 2018-02-21 13:22:49

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#5 2018-02-21 18:09:29

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#6 2018-02-21 18:26:13

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#7 2018-02-21 19:11:46

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#8 2018-03-06 17:16:53

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#9 2018-03-06 19:45:10

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

#10 2018-03-07 11:35:32

Re: Another rider's take on bicycle safety

Board footer