Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

99percentinvisible.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 612 posts

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

#381

Post by wobbleblob »

lucb1e wrote: post #377
wobbleblob wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> I had a bad crash after being hit in the eye by an insect How did that happen, did you reflexively close both eyes and jerk on the handlebar or something?

Is that strange? Are you confident you'll stay completely composed and in control with a live bug in your eye? I lost control while trying to get the source of pain in my eye to stop.

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

#382

Post by BoringCode »

School-Cotton wrote: post #118
BoringCode wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So where should the cars park then? Parking is a real issue in large cities and we won't solve it by removing even more spots. Other solutions (which are potentially more expensive) should be looked into before we consider removing street parking.

People shouldn't be trying to drive and park in major city centers. Exceptions can be made for deliveries. I live in a major city and I don't have a car. Parking is no issue for me at all :)

> I live in a major city and I don't have a car. Parking is no issue for me at all :)

So do I actually. But a lot of people do and for that reason it would be far too idealistic to think about removing cars from American cities.

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

#383

Post by mavroprovato »

alistairSH wrote: post #371
DavideNL wrote: post #368

So am i the only one who uses a different technique? I always look in the side mirror (the one on the driver side=left side) before i open the door, where i can perfectly see incoming bikes/etc passing my car. When i got my drivers license i was taught to do this and it became a habit, so i've been doing it ever since. Works very well. fyi i'm Dutch and i've never heard of the "Dutch reach" before.

I do that - seems obvious to me, but I'm also a cyclist. That said, when I'm in the back seat, I'm not sure if I do anything to avoid dooring.

> I do that - seems obvious to me, but I'm also a cyclist.

You don't have to be a cyclist. Another car may be coming and rip your door off. I think that using the mirror should be obvious to any driver

> That said, when I'm in the back seat, I'm not sure if I do anything to avoid dooring.

You could turn your head 180 degrees and look behind you I guess

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

#384

Post by lucb1e »

aexaey wrote: post #281
wobbleblob wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Indeed, Dutch view this two ways to use bicycle very differently. There are even completely different verbs to describe that: - fietsen i.e. literally "bicycling" would refer to riding an opafiets [1] bicycle, at moderate speed, without helmet or any sort of cycling attire; - wielrennen , i.e. literally "wheel running" instead describes sort of cycling that you would see in Tour de France race - racing bike, helmet,…

Interesting, I never realized this. I know wielrennen (obviously) but haven't yet needed the word in English so I didn't notice the lack. I guess I'd call it bike racing.

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

#385

Post by mankyd »

emodendroket wrote: post #380

I don't know why anyone would fling open the car door on a busy road without checking their mirrors anyway.

It's not that everyone does it all the time. It only has to happen, say 1% of the time. Combine that with the number of cyclists on the road, and the thousands upon thousands of car doors opened each day, and odds are it will happen. As the article states, it happens on average once per day in Chicago. It's not a lot, but it is a problem.

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

#386

Post by NetStrikeForce »

rwmj wrote: post #301
NetStrikeForce wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But wearing helmet doesn't cause more pollution, so I guess that statistic is very good for a different discussion :-)

You are partly wrong. Encouraging (or even worse, enforcing) cycle helmets is known to reduce the number of people cycling. Since they presumably still need to get around, they're going to use other forms of transport, some of which add pollution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet_laws#Effects_on...

Well, no. I'm not wrong: Using helmets does not increase pollution.

Forcing helmets onto people seems to increase pollution (by the reduced use of cycling), so the problem in fact should be: A lack of proper health and safety education leads (indirectly?) to more pollution.

That's why I think that statistic is very good for a different discussion - I don't think it should belong into "Should people wear helmets while cycling?", it belongs into "Should we force people to wear helmets while cycling?". The answer to those two questions could be YES and NO without being contradictory really.

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

#387

Post by nerdponx »

lucb1e wrote: post #374
djsumdog wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The amount of bicycles in The Netherlands is absolutely surreal. [...] I also find it interesting the Dutch rarely ever wear helmets. Perspective, perspective. The amount of bicycles in Germany (which is next-door) is surreal to me (so few) and I find it interesting that people wear helmets. They're such a bother and don't help your scraped arm or broken teeth if you land wrong. The odds of hitting your head on a c…

In New York City, sometimes the only way to bike safely is to attempt to match the speed of the traffic, which despite road congestion will still be well over 10 MPH.

At that speed, if you hit a pothole or get doored, or get hit by a car, you are going to go down very hard. I've crashed exactly 3 times on my bike in New York City, and every time I would've cracked my head open if I didn't have a helmet.

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

#388

Post by davedx »

juiced wrote: post #239

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".

I passed my driving exam in NL a couple of years ago, and I was taught to open my door this way. There was nothing about it being to protect cyclists in particular, though.

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

#389

Post by lucb1e »

wobbleblob wrote: post #381
lucb1e wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I had a bad crash after being hit in the eye by an insect How did that happen, did you reflexively close both eyes and jerk on the handlebar or something?

Is that strange? Are you confident you'll stay completely composed and in control with a live bug in your eye? I lost control while trying to get the source of pain in my eye to stop.

I'm not sure... I mean, I've had bugs fly in before but nothing big and bad. Thinking about it now (in a logical state of mind) I would say I'd just press my eyes tightly closed instinctively and press both brakes as hard as I can. If it takes more than a second or two to stop, I think I'd realize I can open one eye to see traffic (if I'm in traffic). But in a panic, there is no way to tell whether I'd do that.

It just seems excessive to go through the hassle of both glasses and a helmet every time you use a bike. Then you might as well get the car out.

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

#390

Post by tinco »

mpweiher wrote: post #331
tinco wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* Citation needed

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bicycle+helmets+not+safer&l=1

So you're going with "a neurosurgeon said", "motorists between Bristol and Salisbury drive closer to people with helmets" and a TedX talk that cites "some research shows". Solid citation.
Post reply on HN