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

How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 391 posts

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#331

Post by jdavis703 »

schlumpf wrote: post #209
bluejekyll wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drivers often make mistakes here, and especially bicyclists. A lot of cars try to turn from the middle lane, which makes passing on the left more dangerous for cyclists. On top of that, many cyclists attempt to pass on the right, while cars are turning right. You are absolutely correct, but so many people don’t know the rules well enough to even realize they’re breaking them.

Cyclists also willfully break traffic rules in SF with alarming regularity. Stop signs are generally regarded as ornamental, and even lightly traveled red lights. I am reminded of this every time my seven year-old cycling companion asks why such and such a person hasn't followed the rules when they blow past us. Both classes of vehicles have to be diligent.

Cars also willfully break traffic rules in SF with alarming regularity. Almost no one signals, cars rarely come to a full stop at crosswalks (instead inching forward, implying the pedestrian needs to hurry up), and even though I don't have a radar gun I'm pretty sure I see drivers operating at speeds far above the speed limit. Not to mention the drivers who shout out death threats at bikes for merely occupying the lane...

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#332

Post by eythian »

sharpercoder wrote: post #306
sAbakumoff wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US, it's simply too dangerous. well, while it's very safe to ride a bike here in Netherlands, sh*t still happens regularly and crazy drivers are there. Past year I had this accident : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUY7psClcbQ

In which the cyclist is at fault, as the minivan is on the intersection before the cyclist and thus has right of way. Right of way only counts when arriving at the same time , often neglected in analysis.

No, going straight has priority over turning traffic, a bike has priority over a minivan, and it's the responsibility of everyone to not cause a collision. The cyclist is right three times over.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#333

Post by eythian »

Elte wrote: post #283

> The Dutch use bikes as a tool to feed their transit system: 50 percent of all trips that take place on the transit system in the Netherlands begin with a bicycle ride. This is why I'm still waiting for Google Maps and the likes to include an "I have a bike and am willing to use it to get to the closest train/metro/bus station" option.

That'd be so handy. Especially when going somewhere where the connection is by train or whatever and half an hour of biking at the ends is no problem.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#334

Post by u801e »

jdavis703 wrote: post #330
u801e wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You would also fail your driver's test in SF if you don't check for bikers when making a right turn. Infrastructure shouldn't be designed in a way to cause these types of turning conflicts. The general rule of the road is that vehicles on the right make right turns. Vehicles on the left make left turns, and vehicles in the middle proceed straight through the intersection. Turning conflicts, like what you're describ…

There's no way to eliminate turn conflicts except for eliminating all grade crossings. Even on protected bike lanes the right hook is still a significant risk. Drivers need to have it drilled in to their head to look before turning. Even if a bike isn't entering from a protected lane, there could be a pedestrian using the crosswalk.

> Even on protected bike lanes the right hook is still a significant risk.

That's because the infrastructure design is deficient here (which is putting a straight through lane to the right of a right turn lane). Either the cyclist needs to stay in the lane that's meant for straight through traffic, or there needs to be some form of intersection control that only allows traffic to proceed in a phased fashion like a traffic light.

For the latter option, the light would only allow cyclists to proceed through the intersection or allow other vehicles to proceed through the intersection, but not both at the same time.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#335

Post by u801e »

magduf wrote: post #323
bluejekyll wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Idaho it is perfectly legal for bicycles to treat Stop signs as yields, and Red lights as stop signs. It was attempted to get a similar law passed in CA: AB 1103. https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-aler... Many cyclists would agree that a rolling stop allows them to get through, when there is no traffic, the intersection much faster and more safely due to the dangers of an intersection. I'm no…

Coming to a full stop on a bike is downright dangerous. The act of unclipping from your pedal, stopping, and then starting again and having to clip back into your pedal is far more dangerous than just slowing down sufficiently to make sure there's no oncoming traffic. You're more likely to fall over when transitioning between moving and stopped on a bike than any other time, and falling over at an intersection is ver…

I've never used clips on my pedals when commuting because of the fact that there are times I have to come to a stop where I may not have time to unclip.

Using clips while riding in city traffic is like using cruise control while driving in city traffic.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#336

Post by adrianN »

nojvek wrote: post #322
adrianN wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, SF seems to have four-way stop signs at basically every intersection. I don't think we have four-way stop signs anywhere in Europe. Coming to a full stop and accelerating again every hundred meters slows you down a lot more on a bike. It's a pretty stupid road design for cars too, it kills your fuel economy.

Yep and the fact that only one car goes through at a time and drivers need to keep in mind whose turn it is. It’s a really awful design. Just have a roundabout. It flows traffic through a lot better.

Or remove all signs and rely on right-of-way. That's the cheapest solution and works pretty well. If traffic is too heavy install traffic lights.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#337

Post by cesnja »

magduf wrote: post #326
hfdgiutdryg wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generally agree, but I want to point out that there is a huge range of impact protection depending on the general shape (e.g. 'aero' vs 'skater' style), construction (hard shell downhill MTB helmet vs typical road helmet) and fit. I can't count the number of times I've seen a cyclist with a terribly ill-fitting, poorly positioned helmet. I've seen many completely exposed foreheads, thanks to too much rearward tilt,…

Personally, though I ride a road bike, I wear a fairly standard MTB helmet. Really, I like the visor more than anything, but I do think it has better protection all-around. I also use MTB (Shimano SPD) pedals: they're easy to clip in and out of, and I can wear normal-looking shoes that I can actually walk normally in. The racing stuff is just ridiculous: it gets you a tiny improvement in performance at a huge penalty…

Some "racing" bike helmets are wonderful though - they block minimal airflow and are very lightweight, so you don't even notice wearing them.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#338

Post by bigato »

magduf wrote: post #323
bluejekyll wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Idaho it is perfectly legal for bicycles to treat Stop signs as yields, and Red lights as stop signs. It was attempted to get a similar law passed in CA: AB 1103. https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-aler... Many cyclists would agree that a rolling stop allows them to get through, when there is no traffic, the intersection much faster and more safely due to the dangers of an intersection. I'm no…

Coming to a full stop on a bike is downright dangerous. The act of unclipping from your pedal, stopping, and then starting again and having to clip back into your pedal is far more dangerous than just slowing down sufficiently to make sure there's no oncoming traffic. You're more likely to fall over when transitioning between moving and stopped on a bike than any other time, and falling over at an intersection is ver…

I ride clipped all the time in the city and don't have this problem. If you can't safely use clips in the city, it's your choice to use them anyway. Saying that due to clips, "Coming to a full stop on a bike is downright dangerous" may be precise for you and your usage, but it's not a general rule as you made it sound.

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#339

Post by u801e »

bunderbunder wrote: post #35
watwut wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helmet does not help in high speed crash with car and is not designed for it. It helps in small falls.

I've seen that stated many times. As far as I can tell, it traces back to a news article that did fun things like cherry picking individual observations from a study to support a claim even though the study's overall findings were contradictory. My own sense is that the science seems pretty clear that, provided you are in a wreck, wearing a helmet greatly reduces your risk of serious injury and death. Helmets aren't…

> I've seen that stated many times.

The Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) impact testing procedure for bicycle helmets does not account for collisions with motor vehicles [1]

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/16/1203.17

Re: How the Dutch created a casual biking culture

#340

Post by jimmaswell »

cr1895 wrote: post #13

It wasn’t always this way. There’s an interesting clip from a documentary in 1972 about the neighborhood De Pijp in Amsterdam, when it was still very much a car-centric city. At the time children in the area protested how dangerous the streets had become and how they lacked safe areas to play. https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/amsterdam-chil... Compared to the situation now, it’s vastly improved. Fortunat…

How would a highway in the middle have destroyed it?

Why did the kids want to play on the streets instead of parks or something?

Post reply on HN