The concrete barrier industry moves at a fast pace (so to speak). I wonder how much of this stuff from 2000 is still relevant? Back then moor anchor law was still in full swing, for one thing.
What is "moor anchor law"?
Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
41–50 of 84 posts
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#42No post body was provided.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do ban pedestrians from the streets; that’s what sidewalks are for.
Sidewalks don't mean you're not allowed to walk on the street. Streets are for everyone, including cyclists and pedestrians.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, we can start improving car infrastructure right away because, on the types of roads that have guardrails, cars are like 98% of the traffic or more. And the rare roads that have both guardrails and sidewalks should probably have the sidewalks on the far side of the guardrails, at which point improved guardrails also protect pedestrians. Purely from a safety standpoint, outright prohibiting bicycle traffic on motor…
Purely from a safety standpoint, outright prohibiting bicycle traffic on motorized roads would be a massive improvement at the expense of inconveniencing a small minority of people (while improving the convenience for everyone else). I'm kind of surprised more states haven't done it yet. But then you have the self-perpetuating problem of stigmatising cycling and promoting car use. Given the numerous advantages of pro…
It’s not a problem IMO. Bicycles aren’t very useful vehicles compared to cars, which is why a very small share of the US population uses them on the roads in the first place. Unfortunately that tiny minority of people are very outspoken about attempting to socially and physically engineer the world to cater to their preferences.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Purely from a safety standpoint, outright prohibiting bicycle traffic on motorized roads would be a massive improvement at the expense of inconveniencing a small minority of people (while improving the convenience for everyone else). I'm kind of surprised more states haven't done it yet. But then you have the self-perpetuating problem of stigmatising cycling and promoting car use. Given the numerous advantages of pro…
It’s not a problem IMO. Bicycles aren’t very useful vehicles compared to cars, which is why a very small share of the US population uses them on the roads in the first place. Unfortunately that tiny minority of people are very outspoken about attempting to socially and physically engineer the world to cater to their preferences.
> Bicycles aren’t very useful vehicles compared to cars
I find this point of view amusing because it is so contradictory to my personal experience. In my case, I started commuting by bike after years of being tired to spend an unpredictable amount of time stuck on traffic, looking through the window at cyclists merrily passing by. Since becoming one of these cyclists, I feel a bit of pity every time that I see people stuck in their useless cars.
I concede that cars can be more useful than bicycles in some circumstances. There are also people like you who legitimately seem to love using cars, and there's nothing wrong with that. But at least in my country:
- there are more bikes than cars
- there are more people who can drive bikes than cars
- every year, more bikes are sold than cars
- most car trips are less than 10km
- most of those cars only carry a single person
- most people would prefer to take the bike than the car if they could
Why do most people still use cars, then? Because there is no safe infrastructure for cycling, and that is the main problem. Improving cycling infrastructure would be a net benefit for everybody, especially for car lovers who would then find their streets liberated of other drivers who just hate being there.
Another problem with cars is that they are ridiculously space-inefficient. Especially when they carry a single person, which is most of the time. A street with 20 people in 20 cars is crowded in dense traffic. The same 20 people cycling or walking are almost invisible, low density occupation of the same space.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
You weren't hydroplaning. Hydroplaning is when there's so much water your tires can't funnel that water out and you're driving on the surface of the water. You "just" lost traction. And yes the first rains of the season that bring up all the c*ap from the road are notorious for being slippery. In situations like that you can try to regain traction by making sure the wheels are pointing at the same direction you are t…
> You can also take lessons... In my part of Europe (Slovenia) they now make you take a “safety driving” course within 2 years of getting your license. Skid plates, hydroplaning, all the fun stuff. My sister got to do it. I missed the fun by a few years and instead practiced with lots of late night drifting fun on fresh snow (don’t tell mom :P)
Same in Austria. It is so helpful to learn how to handle a (your) car in extreme situations, before having to encounter these in the wild.
I loved the skid plates — for those who don't know: this is basically a "moving floor" that yerks your rear wheels randomly left or right when you drive over it. This happens right before a wet section of track and depending on the speed you have while going over it recovering can be quite a challenge.
My car did not have ABS, so I had a lot of fun doing this.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#47So, that little slope probably saved my life once. I was trucking up 44 at a fairly moderate pace (I'm not a big speeder) around a curve when there was suddenly a car in my lane, so I jerked the wheel to the right lane ... where there was another car, I twitch back to the other lane and begin, well, hydroplaning or whatever it is when you have just a touch of rain to bring up the oil from the road. Brakes were not ef…
Hydroplaning below 80 km/h ~49 mp/h is rare and the risk of the wheels loosing contact to the ground increases with speed. So not sure if this was really hydroplaning.
As a tip for others: If you ever encounter hydroplaning make sure not to keep your steering wheel straight (or at least: know why you are doing what you are doing) and step off the gas pedal.
In hydroplaning your wheels don't have contact with the road surface, so turning the wheel won't do shit. But as you loose momentum your wheels will regain contact appruptly again at some point. At that point it really matters how your front wheels are oriented when you do so.
If your front wheels point hard left and there is a dry part of the street you will be yerked directly into oncoming traffic for example.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#48From the article:
The basic principles of concrete barriers are not generally known or understood. Concrete barriers appear to be simple and uncomplicated, but in reality, they are sophisticated safety devices.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#49So, that little slope probably saved my life once. I was trucking up 44 at a fairly moderate pace (I'm not a big speeder) around a curve when there was suddenly a car in my lane, so I jerked the wheel to the right lane ... where there was another car, I twitch back to the other lane and begin, well, hydroplaning or whatever it is when you have just a touch of rain to bring up the oil from the road. Brakes were not ef…
Hydroplaning below 80 km/h ~49 mp/h is rare and the risk of the wheels loosing contact to the ground increases with speed. So not sure if this was really hydroplaning. As a tip for others: If you ever encounter hydroplaning make sure not to keep your steering wheel straight (or at least: know why you are doing what you are doing) and step off the gas pedal. In hydroplaning your wheels don't have contact with the road…
> make sure not to keep your steering wheel straight
remove the "not".
> (or at least: know why you are doing what you are doing)
Remove that too, it's unnecessary.
Re: Basics of Concrete Barriers (2000)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Purely from a safety standpoint, outright prohibiting bicycle traffic on motorized roads would be a massive improvement at the expense of inconveniencing a small minority of people (while improving the convenience for everyone else). I'm kind of surprised more states haven't done it yet. But then you have the self-perpetuating problem of stigmatising cycling and promoting car use. Given the numerous advantages of pro…
It’s not a problem IMO. Bicycles aren’t very useful vehicles compared to cars, which is why a very small share of the US population uses them on the roads in the first place. Unfortunately that tiny minority of people are very outspoken about attempting to socially and physically engineer the world to cater to their preferences.
> Bicycles aren’t very useful vehicles compared to cars, which is why a very small share of the US population uses them on the roads in the first place.
It's because the infrastructure for biking is almost non-existent. Thanks to people who keep saying "just ban bycicles because cars!".
Read and watch this: How the Dutch got their cycling infrastructure https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/how-the-dutch-...