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

Post by Kim_Bruning » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 1:12 PM UTC

mafribe wrote: post #159

deanclatworthy wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Typical bicyle helmets don't help much with a face-first landing on the tarmac, your chin takes most of the pounding. I can confidently say that from repeated ... 'experiments'. In contrast, a motorcyle helmet that also wraps around the chin would be of great use in most bicycle accidents. 185 cyclists died A more interesting statistic would be: how many of those deaths would have been prevented by a bicycle helmet?

Post by Nav_Panel » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 1:14 PM UTC

vvpan wrote: post #110

Zanni wrote: post #51

The real answer is to get rid of street parking when you have a bike lane. They're incompatible. In fact, just get rid of street parking altogether. As a bicyclist, I've been doored. As a pedestrian, I find it difficult to see around parked cars to know if it's safe to cross the street in some locations. As a driver, I find it difficult to to see around parked cars to know if it's safe to enter the street AND I have…

That is unrealistic and has very bad consequences on the neighborhood. I've heard urban planners (in lectures) say that when there is not a row of parked cars between a street and the sidewalk, people are much less likely to walk and spend time there. So, for example, businesses close along a street when parking is suddenly prohibited. And, as others pointed out, in most cities it is unrealistic due to how little par…

Post by Scarblac » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 1:26 PM UTC

NetStrikeForce wrote: post #276

speleding wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wearing a helmet in your car would prevent a lot of injuries as well, and nobody does that. This is just a risk/reward trade off and I (as a Dutch cyclist) feel a few additional deaths on the total population is not worth the effort. And the things are uncomfortable and impractical: what are you going to do with it when you arrive on your destination? Lug it around all day? Bring a bag everywhere?

Don't you carry a bag around already? If your commute is one hour cycling in guessing you might sweat and need a shower? I cycle to work (in the UK, similar climate I guess) for about 15 minutes each way with no steep roads and I gotta be very careful with my pace if I don't want to sweat.

Post by mattmcknight » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 1:27 PM UTC

Symbiote wrote: post #176

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.

People cycling as fast as they can wear helmets, this is usually seen at the weekends when a few people swap their city bike for a racing bike and ride round the countryside. Motorists who enjoy racing also wear helmets when speeding round the race track, but don't wear them on the commute. No doubt deaths around be prevented if car occupants wore helmets, but it's not considered risky, just like routing cycling.

Post by ralfn » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 1:30 PM UTC

wobbleblob wrote: post #367

ralfn wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is true for the original statement (that helmets provide safety on a bike) as well. I mean, you would expect some improvement, but (as a Dutch citizen), i expect it to prevent harm in the same way wearing helmet during sex would prevent harm. In general: if you taking those kind of risks (as a car, as a bike, etc.) that people on a bike need a helmet, you don't belong in traffic here. The effect on mentality may…

> if car and a bike have an accident, by law, it is automatically the fault of the car, no matter what. Even if the person on the bike is drunk, driving in the wrong direction, etc. Both drivers and cyclists seem to believe this, but it is an exaggeration. The law says a court may decide to hold your (mandatory) liability insurance liable for some of the damage 'without having to prove your guilt'. It does not say yo…