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

Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 189 posts

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#131

Post by T-hawk »

kaikai wrote: post #119
taneq wrote: post #18

As a motorcyclist and defensive driver I find these kind of articles worrying, because they imply that riders are rolling around trusting other people not to hit them. The first rule of motorcycling, that you accept when you swing your leg over a bike, is that no matter whose fault any collision might be, it is your responsibility and yours alone to anticipate and avoid all such incidents. "But he pulled out in front…

I’m a motorcyclist, and I don’t get how this works for you in real life. If I’m riding down the road and there’s a car stopped at a stop sign or intersection, and we make eye contact, yes I assume they see me. I do not come to a full stop in the middle of the road to let them turn just in case they forget we looked at each other. There’s no way to ride that defensively and not get hit by car drivers behind me, or mak…

Cyclist rather than motorcyclist here, and that's correct. You read the body language of cars. If you pay attention - full attention with your head up on the situation, and not on your music or phone conversation - you can read what cars don't notice you, which ones do and will yield, and which ones do but will aggressively move first. You adjust your speed and path to accommodate for that as best as you can, case by case.

Holding to your line every time you know you have the right of way is stupid, because some drivers will violate it either intentionally or inadvertently. It should be the [motor]cyclist's right, but realistically it isn't because we're the ones not shielded by two tons of crumple zone. But defensively yielding every time is also stupid, because some drivers will indeed respect your right of way, and that impedes other users on your same right of way.

The right approach is to judge it case by case with your full attention on how best to react, which changes with every situation.

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#132

Post by dsfyu404ed »

T-hawk wrote: post #131
kaikai wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a motorcyclist, and I don’t get how this works for you in real life. If I’m riding down the road and there’s a car stopped at a stop sign or intersection, and we make eye contact, yes I assume they see me. I do not come to a full stop in the middle of the road to let them turn just in case they forget we looked at each other. There’s no way to ride that defensively and not get hit by car drivers behind me, or mak…

Cyclist rather than motorcyclist here, and that's correct. You read the body language of cars. If you pay attention - full attention with your head up on the situation, and not on your music or phone conversation - you can read what cars don't notice you, which ones do and will yield, and which ones do but will aggressively move first. You adjust your speed and path to accommodate for that as best as you can, case by…

>If you pay attention - full attention with your head up on the situation, and not on your music or phone conversation - you can read what cars don't notice you, which ones do and will yield, and which ones do but will aggressively move first. You adjust your speed and path to accommodate for that as best as you can, case by case.

Cannot agree more. I would go so far as to say the ability to anticipate what another party will do is a prerequisite to being a good driver/cyclist/pedestrian.

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#133

Post by superhuzza »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #7
FigmentEngine wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

like shisa kanko or "pointing and calling" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_and_calling

When i saw that for the first time (in a tram in Nagasaki, as I recall) I first thought the driver is a few fries short of a happy meal. It looks so weird to Western eyes. Then later reading up about it it actually makes a lot of sense. Some more material to read up on it: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/pointing-and-calling-j...

Lots of subway systems make the drivers do this. NYC does for sure, and I think Montreal as well. I'm sure there are loads of other ones.

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#134

Post by egypturnash »

brudgers wrote: post #99
falcolas wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting to me: As a fellow motorcyclist, I agree with your philosophy wholeheartedly. But most bicyclists (who are arguably at more risk from a car/truck than a motorcyclist) disagree with this just as wholeheartedly. I seriously wonder why this dichotomy exists, especially as bicycles are gaining electric motors capable of propelling them at higher and higher speeds.

Bicyclists suffer political disability under [typical US] traffic laws. Bicyclists are not afforded a full traffic lane when traveling. Bicyclists are prohibited from the highest quality roads. Bicyclists are required to ride on the shoulder. Even the best laid bike lanes don't give cyclists the right of way. Many many bike routes are shared with pedestrians. Motorcyclists on the other hand enjoy first class status u…

I think the rules of the road everywhere I’ve lived in the US (New Orleans, Los Angeles, Boston, and Seattle) has encouraged cyclists taking a lane rather than riding on the shoulder. I’ve seen more and more bike signs right in the middle of the right lane of traffic, too.

That said once night falls I usually adopt the attitude of “assume cars will try to kill me if they see me” and avoid them as much as possible by keeping to back roads and being extra paranoid when I have to cross major streets, despite having extra lights on my bike.

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#135

Post by scarejunba »

scarface74 wrote: post #121
scarejunba wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's not true. Take the simple case, you're not belted in (therefore disobeying laws, let's choose California, for example) and the light turns green but it turned for both you and the other side because of a malfunction. You would be marked down as no one at fault.

You were both obeying the traffic laws. In the case of lane splitting where it is illegal - one person clearly wasn’t. Not wearing your seat belt didn’t cause the accident.

Oh no, one person wasn't following the laws: no belt. You'll get ticketed for that in CA (where the scenario is set).

That's to illustrate precisely the idea you mentioned. The violation of laws must contribute to the accident for it to count towards fault.

Now that it's clear to me that you agree with that, I'm happy to close the discussion.

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#136

Post by [deleted] »

kaikai wrote: post #119
taneq wrote: post #18

As a motorcyclist and defensive driver I find these kind of articles worrying, because they imply that riders are rolling around trusting other people not to hit them. The first rule of motorcycling, that you accept when you swing your leg over a bike, is that no matter whose fault any collision might be, it is your responsibility and yours alone to anticipate and avoid all such incidents. "But he pulled out in front…

I’m a motorcyclist, and I don’t get how this works for you in real life. If I’m riding down the road and there’s a car stopped at a stop sign or intersection, and we make eye contact, yes I assume they see me. I do not come to a full stop in the middle of the road to let them turn just in case they forget we looked at each other. There’s no way to ride that defensively and not get hit by car drivers behind me, or mak…

[deleted]

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#137

Post by pkalinowski »

Driver is used to look for wide vehicles with two headlights. It’s easy to overlook a motorcycle. I have something similar with street lights - sometimes after passing through intersection I realize I had no idea if it was red or green light. It was green obviously, but processing happened in my lizard brain, not the conscious one.

Since I know how this works, I’m more vigilant on my motorcycle. I always slow down before the intersection, sometimes well below the speed limit if it’s crowded. I don’t look at drivers, I look at wheels. I can see wheel rotation quicker than whole car movement.

Didn’t die yet, so I assume it works.

Re: Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

#139

Post by walterstucco »

nguoi wrote: post #106
asjw wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why don't drivers? They do in fact. This is the list of the mandatory safety measures in Europe for motor vehicles, it's 24 pages long https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32... > Driving is the biggest killer of young people It is not driving, it's road traffic injuries, which includes biking. Anyways it's worse in US than Europe and it's much worse for male than for female. One could conclude…

>It is not driving, it's road traffic injuries, which includes biking. It's not from being hit by cyclists. >This is the list of the mandatory safety measures in Europe for motor vehicles, it's 24 pages long Quite a lot of it isn't, read articles 6 and 7 and the lists of implementation dates. >Why are cyclist so afraid of protecting themselves? After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front o…

> It's not from being hit by cyclists.

cars are just the most common vehicle.

For example in Australia 19.1% of all the transport related hospitalisations are for bike incidents.

It's the same percentage for car related accident.

Now count the total amount of miles traveled and the total number of each mean of transport and do the math.

> Quite a lot of it isn't, read articles 6 and 7 and the lists of implementation dates.

That just proves that car safety is taken more seriously than bike safety.

> After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front of them, it's quite patronising to have them assume you're riding unsafely

This doesn't answer the question "Why are cyclist so afraid of protecting themselves?" though.

> . People in other countries manage much better safety records through infrastructure and education

What other countries?

Can you provide names and numbers?

> On the contrary, I don't think there's any safety clothing I can wear that will save me if a car crashes into me

And you are wrong.

For example in Australia only 2% of the transport related hospitalisations are for motorbikes accident. Because they usually wear protections.

> You've accused cyclists of being afraid of protecting themselves

I think it was a question, and you proved the poster right: why talking about protection for cyclists triggers this kind of emotionally charged responses?

> The tribalism makes you think of the other party as less important.

I don't even own a car, I live in a city where most of the transport do not happen using motor vehicles, bikers don't usually wear protection and don't make their kids wear protections.

Why? What are they afraid of?

It's a simple question.

> Accusing me of being afraid of protecting just gives me the impression that you feel I have to earn the right for you to tolerate me in the road.

That's always true, you have to tolerate and be tolerated.

It's a shared infrastructure, it doesn't belong to anyone.

> or manoeuvres assuming a cyclist won't be in their path

If that's true, why don't you wear protections then?

I don't understand.

Post reply on HN