A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads • Hacker News Board

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#71

Post by chooseaname » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

mitko wrote: post #3

This was eye opening (pun not intended) and make me a bit worried as a recreational cyclist - many of my clothes are dark and it seems worth investing in brighter ones. As a driver, I found that using BGE setting of the side mirrors (it's wider out, slightly overlapping with rearview mirror), coupled with keeping an eye on the road gives me a much better situational awareness, and prevents the need to turn my head in…

I always use BGE. My dad basically nagged me into remembering it always. I tell people who have never done it, go find a parking lot with just a few cars in it and convince themselves that it works and that it is safer than twisting their head around to see backwards.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#72

Post by chooseaname » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

nsnick wrote: post #42

mitko wrote: post #3

This was eye opening (pun not intended) and make me a bit worried as a recreational cyclist - many of my clothes are dark and it seems worth investing in brighter ones. As a driver, I found that using BGE setting of the side mirrors (it's wider out, slightly overlapping with rearview mirror), coupled with keeping an eye on the road gives me a much better situational awareness, and prevents the need to turn my head in…

Saying cyclists should wear bright clothing is blaming the victims of vehicle violence. https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/stop-victim-blaming-cy...

Is it? Is it really victim blaming or is it simply making a strong recommendation?

We make strong recommendations for other things, like telling people not to walk alone in the dark. That's not considered victim blaming.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#73

Post by mitchty » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:32 PM UTC

TheGrumpyBrit wrote: post #19

ruddct wrote: post #5

Interesting read, up until this point. “[As a cyclist], look at the head of the driver that is approaching or has stopped. The head of the driver will naturally stop and centre upon you if you have been seen.“ Please, please do not rely on this. Correlation is not causation, a driver’s head might face your direction for lots of reasons (focusing on something behind/in front of you, spacing out, looking at their phone…

If I'm approaching a junction where a vehicle is waiting to pull into my path, I watch their front wheels. I find this often gives an earlier indication that the driver is about to move than their head or eye movements, as you can see the change in weight distribution when a driver prepares to move away.

As a motorcyclist this is exactly what I do too. Its impressive how often people will telegraph a turn before they ever really turn.

Managed to not get into many an accident by watching the heads and front wheels of cars. Also, look for signs of them being on a phone, if so remove yourself from their area asap.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#74

Post by blub » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:41 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #69

rjsw wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't remember the last time I saw a cyclist with lights. They seem to think that they don't need them if in a cycle lane, even when there is nothing separating it from the rest of the road.

Are they wrong? Other vehicles have no business being in a bike lane, by definition (short of an emergency like avoiding an imminent collision).

They are wrong. The law in some (all?) EU countries fortunately mandates lighting.

I have seen bike lanes where it's expected that cars will at least partially drive onto the lane because the road is too narrow.

And it's kinda ironic: pedestrians will likely blunder into the bike lane without looking, just like bikers sometimes suddenly pop before cars without the slightest care in the world.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#75

Post by duggan » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #69

rjsw wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't remember the last time I saw a cyclist with lights. They seem to think that they don't need them if in a cycle lane, even when there is nothing separating it from the rest of the road.

Are they wrong? Other vehicles have no business being in a bike lane, by definition (short of an emergency like avoiding an imminent collision).

Where I live, there are laws mandating the minimum distance a vehicle has to be from a cyclist when passing (1.5m) - this distance is not covered by the available clearance in the cycling lane.

If you can't see a cyclist is in the lane, it's difficult to give them safe clearance, and driving as though you are always giving clearance to cyclists means driving closer to the other traffic lane, increasing risk of vehicular collision.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#76

Post by mcguire » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:48 PM UTC

isostatic wrote: post #59

mitko wrote: post #3

This was eye opening (pun not intended) and make me a bit worried as a recreational cyclist - many of my clothes are dark and it seems worth investing in brighter ones. As a driver, I found that using BGE setting of the side mirrors (it's wider out, slightly overlapping with rearview mirror), coupled with keeping an eye on the road gives me a much better situational awareness, and prevents the need to turn my head in…

None of those cyclists are riding in a particularly sensible position, it's patently unclear where they are going, are they in lane 1 or lane 2, or moving from one to another?

In the NHTSA pdf? They're roughly in the middle of the lane.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#77

Post by scott_s » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:52 PM UTC

> Not convinced? Okay, go to a mirror and look repeatedly from your right eye to your left eye. Can you see your eyes moving? You cannot. Now have a friend or partner do the same thing while you watch them. You will see their eyes moving quite markedly. The reason you couldn’t see your own eyes move is because your brain shuts down the image for the instant that your eyes are moving. Experiments have shown that it is impossible to see even a flash of light if it occurs within a saccade.

When you have your phone in selfie mode, the latency is low enough that it can feel like a mirror. When you move, you see yourself in the camera app move. But if you do the above experiment, you can definitely catch your eyes moving. Then you can shut the screen off and do the above experiment using the screen as a mirror and you cannot. It's a neat demonstration of the latency.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#78

Post by rjsw » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 2:54 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #69

rjsw wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't remember the last time I saw a cyclist with lights. They seem to think that they don't need them if in a cycle lane, even when there is nothing separating it from the rest of the road.

Are they wrong? Other vehicles have no business being in a bike lane, by definition (short of an emergency like avoiding an imminent collision).

Yes they are wrong, they are required by law to have lights. The cycle lane isn't continuous, there are breaks in it at every junction.

A car travelling in the opposite direction has to cross the path of the cycle lane to turn into a cross street. Not being able to see that a cycle is coming towards you isn't going to end well for the cyclist.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#79

Post by icc97 » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 3:09 PM UTC

beepbeepbeep1 wrote: post #44

icc97 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if every vehicle had lights on you would no longer stand out From reading this article I don't think that applies. It's typically only one car or bicycle that needs contrast against the background so that you don't miss them. It's not about trying to pick out one car amongst a sea of other cars. Even then as long as you're aware there's something there you can avoid the psychological problem of assuming nothing is…

Effectiveness of daytime motorcycle headlights in the European Union, 43 page report https://www.swov.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/rapport/... . In the summary section it says the conspicuity of motorcycles is improved with daytime lights although may be less if cars have daytime lights. It’s been a long time since I read that report but it has lots of real data and research. Cars are easier to spot regardless…

Interesting, thanks for the link.

Your comments don't seem to answer the question of cars having their lights on making it harder to spot motorcycles.

At night time cars will have lights on anyway, so I think it comes down to if cars having their lights on makes it harder to spot a motorcyclist in traffic.

Doesn't it also apply the other way though? Motorcyclists are more likely to spot cars with lights in their periphery? I don't know how much of a non-issue it would be given how restricted the view is from a motorcycle helmet.

Re: A Fighter Pilot’s Guide to Surviving on the Roads

#80

Post by jtbayly » Tue, Sep 04, 2018, 3:12 PM UTC

mitko wrote: post #3

This was eye opening (pun not intended) and make me a bit worried as a recreational cyclist - many of my clothes are dark and it seems worth investing in brighter ones. As a driver, I found that using BGE setting of the side mirrors (it's wider out, slightly overlapping with rearview mirror), coupled with keeping an eye on the road gives me a much better situational awareness, and prevents the need to turn my head in…

Just to be clear, you still have to look over before you do change lanes. It's just that you don't have to look as often to figure out that you can't change lanes yet.