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

321–330 of 612 posts

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

#321

Post by Reason077 »

Angostura wrote: post #258
tluyben2 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also find it interesting the Dutch rarely ever wear helmets. Good or bad; I am Dutch and I would confidently say that all people I know would never ride a bike again if they have to wear those silly helmets. More likely if it would be mandatory, they just would refuse and not do it, but if largely enforced they would just not use bikes anymore.

I'm strongly against mandatory helmets for the reason that you suggest. But I'm one of the people (Im in the UK) who now wears helmets for both skiing and cycling. My cycle helmet almost certainly saved my life when a car gave me a knock and my head went onto the kerb. This was a slow collision in London traffic - probably doing about 10-12 MPh.

Right. There's no doubt that wearing a helmet makes you safer. Helmet use should be encouraged. However, the outcomes for society are considerably worse if helmets are made mandatory.

This has been demonstrated by the experience of New Zealand where helmet use was made compulsory in the 1990s. Not only did cycling rates decline by more than 50%, the rates of serious cycling injuries and deaths actually increased. It turns out that when there are less cyclists on the road, remaining cyclists are more vulnerable - helmet or not.

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

#322

Post by misja111 »

freshflowers wrote: post #293
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".

No bullshit. I was taught this. It's standard practice. You may have just had a shitty instructor.

Well I wasn't taught the 'Dutch Reach' either when I got my driving lessons. I also have never heard the term before and it certainly is not standard practice.

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

#323

Post by cowsandmilk »

kristofferR wrote: post #296
tinco wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is important in how it shows biking is totally different in The Netherlands. The first type of bike most non-Dutch think of when they hear 'bicycle', where the rider sits hunched forward poised to race is not even considered a regular bike here. If you go faster than 15mph you are basically considered to be comparable to a moped and doing it without a helmet is frowned upon even here. When you are not in…

> "When you are not in The Netherlands you should most definitely wear a helmet no matter what kind of bike." Why? It's actually not statistically safer.

so that if you are in an accident, the reaction of everyone else isn't "he should have been wearing a helmet".

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

#324

Post by tqkxzugoaupvwqr »

mcv wrote: post #297
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…

It's not just how you're treated. Research has shown that cyclists wearing helmets tend to put more trust in their helmet, whereas cyclists without helmet tend to be more careful.

There is also a study that shows other traffic participants engage in riskier overtaking when a cyclist wears a helmet. Instead of leaving 1.5 m space when the cyclist is on the side of the car, drivers leave an average of 0.5 m space for cyclists wearing a helmet.

If I remember correctly, drivers see helmets as increased safety for the cyclist and feel they can engage in less safe behavior because it evens out.

Edit: For exact distances, see the paper (doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2006.08.010).

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

#325

Post by scottishfiction »

jacquesm wrote: post #256
scottishfiction wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comments suggest someone who doesn't do a lot of cycling in traffic. Correct me if I'm wrong. You say that young or old cyclists will get 'clobbered' - what do you mean by this? That a car approaching from the rear will see them riding assertively and simply plow in to them? If not that then what? That the cars will pass them closely as they are forced to move further in to the other lane? If that's your asserti…

> Your comments suggest someone who doesn't do a lot of cycling in traffic. If that's what you got out of it then you're entirely wrong. I cycle a few thousand Km / year. > Correct me if I'm wrong. You say that young or old cyclists will get 'clobbered' - what do you mean by this? That the only way in which you can keep cyclists - of all ages - safe is by separating the various traffic streams. By forcible mixing the…

The point is that the non-assertive position isn't 'playing it safe'. You're no more out of the flow of traffic unless the lane is extra wide, you're signalling to following cars that they are welcome to overtake, and you have robbed yourself of any margin for error when a car misjudges their pass and squeezes you in to a parked car or railing.

You're right that the assertive approach is no substitute for segregated infrastructure, but in an imperfect world of mixed-use roads, it's the best way to stay safe, and is the method taught and recommended by many bodies here in the UK.

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/knowledge/skills/article/i...

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

#326

Post by tinco »

kristofferR wrote: post #296
tinco wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is important in how it shows biking is totally different in The Netherlands. The first type of bike most non-Dutch think of when they hear 'bicycle', where the rider sits hunched forward poised to race is not even considered a regular bike here. If you go faster than 15mph you are basically considered to be comparable to a moped and doing it without a helmet is frowned upon even here. When you are not in…

> "When you are not in The Netherlands you should most definitely wear a helmet no matter what kind of bike." Why? It's actually not statistically safer.

* Citation needed

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

#327

Post by jacquesm »

314 wrote: post #305
jacquesm wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 'slamming on the brakes' is not an option for older cyclists, slamming on the brakes (especially on a wet road) is a small step away from falling for an older cyclist. They can however coast to a stop while braking. They can't swerve either and they can be forgetful (forget to indicate, forget to look around them). And still they are perfectly valid cyclists and should not have to worry about arriving in one…

Nobody should be travelling at a speed that is beyond their own ability to stop. Cycling at a speed beyond any individual's threshold for safely braking is putting themselves in danger. This applies equally across all levels of training, ability, age and gender. People who cycle on roads expecting cars to take full responsibility for their safety are unlikely to last very long. A cyclist needs to operate within their…

That's total nonsense. If someone throws a door in your way you're going to get hurt, no matter what, which was what started this whole discussion in the first place. See, 'safe braking' makes some assumptions about what other people will do and when they don't all bets are off. That's why we call them accidents to begin with. Cars turning without signaling, doors, swerving into the space occupied by a cyclist and so on. There is absolutely no way to protect against any or all of that.

If everybody would be traveling at their 'individual threshold for safe braking' there wouldn't be any cyclists at all.

> People who cycle on roads expecting cars to take full responsibility for their safety are unlikely to last very long. > A cyclist needs to operate within their own safety tolerances, rather than expect others to provide safety to them.

And that attitude is the heart of the problem right there. Cyclists can expect other traffic, especially armored guided projectiles to take their fragility into account.

I sincerely hope you're not a driver. And if you are that you stay away from my country, it took a few decades to get rid of that attitude here and the number of accidents dropped in spite of more people in traffic, including kids and the elderly.

Cyclists absent other traffic have a very good safety record, as soon as you mix traffic at different speeds the situation gets dangerous especially if the stronger of the two parties expects cyclists to provide their own safety, by nature of being unprotected humans they need cooperation from other traffic.

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

#329

Post by Symbiote »

grogenaut wrote: post #224
ricardobeat wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a completely different situation than the average Dutch cyclist faces. First, there are no hills to be seen, so not that easy to pick up speed. Especially on a city bike which is 99% of the fleet. It's unusual to even reach 20km/h. People carry their shopping, kids, furniture and pets in them. They cycle in whatever they are wearing - suits, skirts, jeans, whatever; the fact you can just hop on a bike without…

I'm not talking about Dutchland, I'm talking about where I ride. :)

The article is about the Netherlands, and I was referring to Denmark, though I forgot to write that.

Most people aren't "sport" cyclists here, and therefore most don't wear helmets.

I wouldn't wear a helmet to walk up the stairs, but if I go rock climbing I do. Same difference.

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

#330

Post by cerebellum42 »

Etheryte wrote: post #163
carterehsmith wrote: post #106

Perhaps we could add radars that block the door if there is a risk of dooring, either by a bike, or another car. The car manufacturers have just agreed to put collision mitigation systems in all cars (by 2020 or something), and that requires radars and cameras. Even better, some cars have radars in the back, too, to identify cross traffic & c. So, identifying potential dooring event as well, might be quite doable usi…

While this could prevent some of the accidents, I'm not sure if the sum effect would be better. Allow me to explain: According to Google, the average cycling speed is 15.5km/h and the average car length is 4.5m. Surely these will differ a lot from area to area, but they're good for a ballpark measure. This means it takes a cyclist about one second (4.5m / 15.5kmh = 1.05s) to pass a parked car. Even if you have a car…

>According to Google, the average cycling speed is 15.5km/h

That sounds like a speed averaged over a whole trip - including the phases of deceleration and acceleration before/after traffic lights. From my experience, most people are closer to 17-20km/h when traveling, with plenty of fit people going at 24+.

Post reply on HN