The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored” • Hacker News Board

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#231

Post by jacquesm » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:21 AM UTC

jdietrich wrote: post #198

jacquesm wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more cyclists than young agile males. And your advice only applies to those. I'm trying to imagine a 60 year old lady on a bike applying this advice and fail to see any happy endings. And where I live old ladies on bikes are extremely common. Cycling advice should apply to all cyclists, not just to those giving the advice.

It's not about youth or agility, it's about skills and confidence. Young men innately have the confidence to ride assertively, but all cyclists should feel empowered to protect themselves. The obvious example is fatal accidents involving large goods vehicles and cyclists in London. Women are vastly disproportionately likely to be involved in this class of accident, despite being under-represented in overall accident…

Essentially all those cases are cases where the other traffic is clearly at fault for not being situationally aware. It's akin to victim blaming to suggest that one would need to ride 'assertively' in order to survive in traffic.

All you should have to do to survive in traffic is to obey the traffic rules and the onus is on the rest of the traffic to give you the space you require in order to be safe. Anything less simply won't do.

Is this article the source of your claim?

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/women-cycling-in-londo...

If so I'd expect something a little bit more substantial to be presented as 'the leading theory', it's just a news paper article repeating a claim by a sports cyclist.

Lorries should be equipped with mirrors overseeing the area to the immediate side of the vehicle. And contrary to the statement in the article the safest place to be is not in front of a lorry but behind it, as a cyclist you should never ever go beside a lorry unless it is stopped and unlikely to move in the next minute.

After all, in order to get out in front of the truck you're going to have to be beside it anyway for a while (and how long will depend greatly on how fast you are moving, something a professional racing cyclist might over-estimate for the general population of cyclists.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#232

Post by upofadown » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:22 AM UTC

deanclatworthy wrote: post #155

tluyben2 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also find it interesting the Dutch rarely ever wear helmets. Good or bad; I am Dutch and I would confidently say that all people I know would never ride a bike again if they have to wear those silly helmets. More likely if it would be mandatory, they just would refuse and not do it, but if largely enforced they would just not use bikes anymore.

Odd that you say this about helmets. It only takes one mistake, one cyclist not paying attention, one mechanical fault, one swerving car or an obstacle in the road - and you'll be landing face first into the tarmac wishing you wore a helmet. 185 cyclists died last year in the Netherlands [1]. I wonder how many of those weren't wearing a helmet. I also found this interesting article [2] going into a lot more detail on…

Well for better or worse, people don't like to wear helmets. Cyclists are actually pretty good with helmet use compared to pedestrians and car users.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#233

Post by Cthulhu_ » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:23 AM UTC

INTPenis wrote: post #188

It's weird to see this described as a workaround, or a deliberate method, when to me as a swede living in Malmö it's the most natural thing ever. It's up to drivers, and cab drivers, to warn their passengers to be careful when opening the door. Of course this is an imperfect system but from my perspective it has worked for as long as I've lived. Swedish traffic law dictates that the one opening the door is responsibl…

It's also the more ergonomic way of opening a door, no awkward angle between hand and door lever.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#234

Post by cr1895 » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:23 AM UTC

ptaipale wrote: post #190

et-al wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people in China don't wear helmets either. Helmets prevent brain injury, but generally you'd have to be going pretty fast, or get hit by a car really fast to land on your head to require one (and then you probably have other injuries to contend with). Also, we have bike light laws in California, but there are plenty of cyclists that don't use them. Personally, if I had to choose between riding without a helmet,…

> Helmets prevent brain injury, but generally you'd have to be going pretty fast, or get hit by a car really fast to land on your head to require one (and then you probably have other injuries to contend with). This is wrong. There's some research done on that over here (Finland). First of all, about two thirds of severe bicycle injuries happen without any third parties involved, cars or not. Head injuries are the wo…

Lights (rear and front) are compulsory by law in the Netherlands too, though many still do not use them.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#235

Post by Cthulhu_ » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:24 AM UTC

mooneater wrote: post #164

Great, a solution that boils down to "bikers can be safe from just one of many mortal dangers, if and only if every single driver learns this new habit and does it right every time". I want solutions in which safety doesn't depend on perfect behaviour from people at minimal risk (drivers), like physical separation of lanes.

The only real thing then is to ban bicycles. or cars. Both parties need to learn to co-operate, because while separated lanes will help improve safety, the fact remains that the two will always need to share roads, just like pedestrians do in many ways (think crossings)

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#236

Post by wobbleblob » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:28 AM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #132

smartbit wrote: post #55

It is true that getting doored is not part of the Dutch vocabulary as it is not something that happens often. But there are more reasons than grabbing the handle with the opposite hand. A non extensive list: 1) Dutch car drivers all have been bicyclist before they get their driver license, everyday to school more than an hour being nothing being frowned on. 2) Major transit bike routes have separate bike lanes, the t…

The amount of bicycles in The Netherlands is absolutely surreal. Both in major cities and out in the suburbs, bicycles are everywhere. I also find it interesting the Dutch rarely ever wear helmets. Large cities in Germany or the UK or anywhere else I've seen cannot compare to the magnitude of people on bicycles in The Netherlands.

If you've tried driving in the Netherlands, you know why so many people prefer to ride a bike instead. Well maintained, but narrow and extremely busy roads, densely packed with tiny vehicles. Wearing a helmet while cycling in the Dutch bike lanes is a bit like wearing a helmet while walking on the side walk. I used to only wear it while racing.

Since I had a bad crash after being hit in the eye by an insect, I wear a helmet and cycling glasses on my commute as well. This has a remarkable effect on how you are treated in traffic. Gone is the usual friendly coexistence between cyclists, pedestrians, drivers and even scooters. Without the helmet, I'm just one of the thousands riding their bike to work, but wearing it, apparently now I'm an asshole bike racer who needs to be taught a lesson, much the way cyclists in general seem to be treated in cycling-hostile countries. A helmet doesn't really make you feel safer if it changes the way you're treated by the rest of traffic.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#237

Post by cr1895 » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:31 AM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #193

School-Cotton wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where the interests of cyclists and drivers conflict, we should prioritize cycling, because it has no negative externalities, requires much cheaper infrastructure, is good for health, etc.

Making driving worse has the pretty significant negative externality of decreasing the n minutes to downtown land area, forcing people to spend more money on housing or more time in transit.

At least in the context of Amsterdam, it's already a terrible city for driving. The housing market in Amsterdam is (and will continue to get more) ridiculous, but certainly not due to lack of parking or cycling-prioritized city planning.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#238

Post by pjmlp » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:31 AM UTC

johanvts wrote: post #228

pjmlp wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only in The Netherlands, in most European cities actually. And if you go down to the Mediterranean countries even on motorbikes, not everyone wears on at least on city traffic. Regarding bike helmets, they usually only protect if you fall vertically on your head, making their protection capability highly questionable. They offer zero protection over getting hit by a car or falling off the bike.

That is simply not true, the helmet will be the first part of you head that touch the ground in almost any fall. Especially if you are using one of the more covering "skate" helmets. If you get hit by a car head on the helmet will also most likely be the first part of you head to hit the car. I would reverse your statement and say the helmet will only not protect your head if you fall at a horisontal, actually upward…

I had a few bicycle accidents, and was quite lucky to not have injured my head, but my legs and arms have the scars to tell the stories.

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#239

Post by juiced » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:31 AM UTC

Bullshit. I'm Dutch, never heard of or exercised this "Dutch Reach" behaviour and I was not tested for it when getting my driver's license. Instead, you just look around and in your mirrors to see if other traffic is coming before blindly and like an asshole opening your door, it doesn't matter how you open the door after you became aware of what is going on around you. I call this behaviour the "Dutch Common Sense".

Re: The Dutch Reach: Clever Workaround to Keep Cyclists from Getting “Doored”

#240

Post by Asooka » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 8:36 AM UTC

We don't let people do drugs, so why do we let them ride bikes on roads? It's the exact same kind of self-harm, brought on by poor life choices. All the problems in the article can be solved simply by having everyone be in a large sturdy steel frame, i.e. a car. Cars are cheap safe convenient and easy to use, so why is everyone getting on these two wheeled death traps?