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

The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 196 posts

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#141

Post by BrandoElFollito »

agumonkey wrote: post #64
jernfrost wrote: post #58

I think the key to safety for bikers in the Netherlands is simply the sheer number of them. When you visit the Netherlands. Within 15 minutes you have gotten used to scanning for bikers everywhere. There are so many of them and they come so frequently that you cannot not get into the habit of looking for them. The importance of numbers is something often overlooked. I read an article discussing the different approach…

Cultural importance too. When so many people you may know are bikers, including you, you might empathize a lot more with them rather than see them as anonymous frail annoyances to pass.

This is a good point.

When I turn right I always check my right mirror. This is not something I was specifically taught, this is something I do because I also bike a lot and am often on the bike lane on the right.

(yes, the design of the lens is such that this should not be an issue but a lot of cyclists will still stupidly cross the crosding instead of following the U shaped path)

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#142

Post by Xylakant »

buschkowitz wrote: post #134
Xylakant wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you wear helmet while driving a car? What’s the burden of wearing one vs. having some protection in case you have an accident? Car drivers are much more likely to die of head injuries than cyclists. Do you also wear a helmet while walking, especially in winter? What’s the burden of wearing one vs. having some protection in case you slip and fall? Why don’t we do that? Because while the burden is low - it’s mostly…

Wearing a helmet in a steel cage seems kind of redundant. Wearing a helmet walking at 5 km/h pace, likewise. I am wearing a helmet commuting daily, travel speed around 30 km/h. If you don't want to destroy your haircut, fair it's your choice. Edit: To be clear, I was riding years without a helmet until a crash made me reconsider my priorities. Also, I am not in favor of mandating helmet usage on bikes.

> Wearing a helmet in a steel cage seems kind of redundant.

All kinds of race car drivers were helmets - and their steel cages are much much more sturdy than the ones that commuters have. Statistics als indicate that many car drivers suffer head injuries. So by all available evidence, wearing a helmet in a car is not redundant. Still, people don’t do it - unless they engage in particularly dangerous activities.

The parent poster that you refer to explicitly gave his speed as about 20km/h for commuting, which is neither particularly fast nor particularly dangerous on good infrastructure. So why wear a helmet?

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#143

Post by e12e »

jernfrost wrote: post #58

I think the key to safety for bikers in the Netherlands is simply the sheer number of them. When you visit the Netherlands. Within 15 minutes you have gotten used to scanning for bikers everywhere. There are so many of them and they come so frequently that you cannot not get into the habit of looking for them. The importance of numbers is something often overlooked. I read an article discussing the different approach…

> I will probably still use a helmet in Norway due to the terrain, but it is still food for thought I think.

I wonder if there are accident statistics taking terrain into account. It's a lot more difficult to harm yourself on flat ground than coming down a steep hill.

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#144

Post by Symbiote »

tomglynch wrote: post #138
ygra wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on how the bike's mass distribution looks like. If the rear isn't very heavy, braking hard on the front will flip over the bike and you. For me it's anon-issue most of the time, as I have panniers which increase the rear weight so that doesn't happen, but when I don't have them I sometimes forget to adjust braking force. Might also not be an issue for e-bikes, as those are generally heavier and probably les…

As a cyclist (I commute daily + ride recreationally offroad and race) I disagree. By keeping your weight back you can slam the front brake without flipping.

That surely a on the mass of the rider.

I'm less than 60kg, and can start to flip a bike if I try.

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#145

Post by buschkowitz »

Xylakant wrote: post #142
buschkowitz wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wearing a helmet in a steel cage seems kind of redundant. Wearing a helmet walking at 5 km/h pace, likewise. I am wearing a helmet commuting daily, travel speed around 30 km/h. If you don't want to destroy your haircut, fair it's your choice. Edit: To be clear, I was riding years without a helmet until a crash made me reconsider my priorities. Also, I am not in favor of mandating helmet usage on bikes.

> Wearing a helmet in a steel cage seems kind of redundant. All kinds of race car drivers were helmets - and their steel cages are much much more sturdy than the ones that commuters have. Statistics als indicate that many car drivers suffer head injuries. So by all available evidence, wearing a helmet in a car is not redundant. Still, people don’t do it - unless they engage in particularly dangerous activities. The p…

So now you are comparing race car drivers to the typical commuter driver, apples to apples. You can cite all the evidence you want. When shit hits the fan and you don't have protection, you can only wish for not regretting your decisions.

For me this discussion is done. I have this particular perception, you have yours. We are both happy with it. Stay safe.

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#146

Post by bastijn »

microtonal wrote: post #115
bastijn wrote: post #113

In NL this is not common either. This is not what keeps us safe. We use the mirror like any other country (but we do not forget). This topic has reached FP before. Original article and comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12674533

We use the mirror like any other country (but we do not forget). Except that passengers in the back seats do not have mirrors. Although I never learned the Dutch Reach (but I don't have a driver's license), my dad always warned us as a kid that we should check for cyclists before opening the door.

Indeed. They can turn around or the driver signals to wait. Anyway, point is, Dutch reach is despite its name not a common thing in NL.

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#147

Post by dan-robertson »

avip wrote: post #137
jernfrost wrote: post #58

I think the key to safety for bikers in the Netherlands is simply the sheer number of them. When you visit the Netherlands. Within 15 minutes you have gotten used to scanning for bikers everywhere. There are so many of them and they come so frequently that you cannot not get into the habit of looking for them. The importance of numbers is something often overlooked. I read an article discussing the different approach…

@200 [fatalities/year] I'm not sure it's factual to deem the Netherlands safe for bikers (yes we need to adjust for population and mileage, but it's surely not obviously safer than other places).

If the Netherlands had driving fatalities at the same rate as the U.K. there would be about 470 per year, although I think the U.K. figure includes cyclists being hit by cars

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#148

Post by dang »

Theodores wrote: post #5

When the Dutch were rolling out the education programme to get motorists to unlock their seat belts in this special cyclist-conscious way that the American public were getting airbags. The original premise of the airbag was that motorists would not need seat belts, that the airbag would kick into action and save the day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbag#As_a_substitute_to_seat... This is quite indicative of cultu…

Nationalistic swipes will get you banned here, regardless of which nations you favor or disfavor. Please refrain from posting like this in the future.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#149

Post by Tharkun »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #65
jernfrost wrote: post #58

I think the key to safety for bikers in the Netherlands is simply the sheer number of them. When you visit the Netherlands. Within 15 minutes you have gotten used to scanning for bikers everywhere. There are so many of them and they come so frequently that you cannot not get into the habit of looking for them. The importance of numbers is something often overlooked. I read an article discussing the different approach…

I think there's some direction of causation issues here. The Netherlands has invested in road design that makes cycling safer; Therefore -> A) more people ride bikes. B) Less people wear helmets. A and B are correlated, but this is due to a 3rd external cause. They do not cause each other.

Mandatory helmet usage reduces ridership. The inverse is not necessarily true.

Re: The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

#150

Post by air7 »

jernfrost wrote: post #58

I think the key to safety for bikers in the Netherlands is simply the sheer number of them. When you visit the Netherlands. Within 15 minutes you have gotten used to scanning for bikers everywhere. There are so many of them and they come so frequently that you cannot not get into the habit of looking for them. The importance of numbers is something often overlooked. I read an article discussing the different approach…

I remember reading a study that concluded that wearing a helmet actually increases a bikers chance of being in an accident because drivers pass closer to then.

* found it* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17064655

Post reply on HN