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

421–430 of 612 posts

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

#421

Post by qb45 »

lucb1e wrote: post #389
wobbleblob wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that strange? Are you confident you'll stay completely composed and in control with a live bug in your eye? I lost control while trying to get the source of pain in my eye to stop.

I'm not sure... I mean, I've had bugs fly in before but nothing big and bad. Thinking about it now (in a logical state of mind) I would say I'd just press my eyes tightly closed instinctively and press both brakes as hard as I can. If it takes more than a second or two to stop, I think I'd realize I can open one eye to see traffic (if I'm in traffic). But in a panic, there is no way to tell whether I'd do that. It ju…

> I would say I'd just press my eyes tightly closed instinctively and press both brakes as hard as I can.

You probably don't have much experience if you write things like that :)

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

#422

Post by wtbob »

Tharkun wrote: post #144
wtbob wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of cars turn right without checking for bikes. What's up with that? Why are you to the right of the turning lane? If you are a vehicle, act like a (slow-moving, natch) vehicle: get in the right-most through lane, and hold it.

That obviously depends on the infrastructure. If the bike lane is an actual bike lane, then cars turning right should wait until cyclist are done crossing the road. Please don't assume your system is universal: it's broken and it's not.

I think a system which relies on drivers to check blindspots for small, light vehicles while turning (when their attention is focussed on the large, heavy vehicles on the other side which can kill them) is broken.

Bikes are vehicles: they belong on the road, just like cars. They are slow vehicles, so they should take the rightmost lane. Cars should pass them on the left (switch the sides if you're in a certain countries), just as they would pass tractors or slow cars.

Putting cyclists where drivers are liable to miss them and doors are liable to strike them is madness.

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

#423

Post by stephenr »

agumonkey wrote: post #369
thwd wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't know about the American thing but what I do know is that while in Europe they teach us to turn our heads and bodies when driving, the modern world caught up with blindspotless mirrors and teach you to use them. It's much safer as people tended to turn their hands together with their bodies, effectively steering a car to the left when looking out the left window.

I don't lean left when looking back, but I just can't look back confidently because I lose track of what's happening in front of us. My first and only accident occured because I was so anxious to check the blindspot I didn't see the traffic stopping and I rear-ended someone. Blindspotless mirrors are a no brainer (they should be mandatory tbh). There are even inner car blindspot checking mirror, so you avoid the conf…

Honest question:

In what situation were you travelling forward close enough to rear-end another car that you also needed to check your blind spot?

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

#424

Post by ghaff »

mattmcknight wrote: post #397
Symbiote wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People cycling as fast as they can wear helmets, this is usually seen at the weekends when a few people swap their city bike for a racing bike and ride round the countryside. Motorists who enjoy racing also wear helmets when speeding round the race track, but don't wear them on the commute. No doubt deaths around be prevented if car occupants wore helmets, but it's not considered risky, just like routing cycling.

I have often wondered why we don't wear helmets while in a car. It seems like it would be a positive to safety.

Because in general we tend to be OK with wearing helmets for sports when doing so seems a reasonable tradeoff but not for day to day activities. Clearly helmets would be beneficial for certain types of injuries but it's hard to imagine many people willing to make the tradeoff. (I would also wonder if they'd actually be a net benefit given potential reductions in visibility, etc.)

Cycling (in the US) sort of falls between those two categories but, at least for adults, many who use bicycles as transportation also use them as a sport.

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

#425

Post by ptaipale »

sambe wrote: post #278
ptaipale wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Helmets prevent brain injury, but generally you'd have to be going pretty fast, or get hit by a car really fast to land on your head to require one (and then you probably have other injuries to contend with). This is wrong. There's some research done on that over here (Finland). First of all, about two thirds of severe bicycle injuries happen without any third parties involved, cars or not. Head injuries are the wo…

I've seen research in the past that suggested wearing helmets on average was neutral or negative (something to do with adding weight to the head?) but can never find it when this topic comes up. Do you have a reference for the Finnish research? Around the time I read about this research I also read that Switzerland and UK had been reluctant to regulate it in part due to conflicting research. Are you sure it's as clea…

Nothing in English that I could find now without spending more time.

One thing about bicycle helmets is that they really need to have that shiny surface. Without it, i.e. with just a polystyrene surface, the friction of helmet vs. road surface will be so high as to cause a risk of neck injury when the head stops faster than the rest of the body, even if the helmet protects the head per se.

Without the helmet, the head will just crack, of course.

Mostly the negative impacts of bike helmets involve human stupidity, i.e. that if helmet is required, people will ride less.

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

#426

Post by nbouscal »

jerf wrote: post #405
smartbit wrote: post #55

It is true that getting doored is not part of the Dutch vocabulary as it is not something that happens often. But there are more reasons than grabbing the handle with the opposite hand. A non extensive list: 1) Dutch car drivers all have been bicyclist before they get their driver license, everyday to school more than an hour being nothing being frowned on. 2) Major transit bike routes have separate bike lanes, the t…

When you make a long list like that, the human intuitive norm is to start by assigning a roughly equal responsibility for each of them. However, it is rare to encounter a situation where some effect is obtained by 10 distinct factors all providing an equal contribution. (Think about it from an entropic point of view; that is one very specific configuration of contributions, vs. all the others in which they are not ba…

I upvoted you for the useful perspective, but wanted to point out that smartbit was almost certainly just sharing information that most readers are unlikely to have, rather than implicitly insisting anything. I don't think your tone in the third paragraph is very reasonable or charitable in response to their comment.

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

#427

Post by nbouscal »

kristofferR wrote: post #362
jgraham wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is very unclear. Some studies suggest it isn't, but a recent metastudy reached very different conclusions [1]: > Bicycle helmet use was associated with reduced odds of head injury, serious head injury, facial injury and fatal head injury. The reduction was greater for serious or fatal head injury. Neck injury was rare and not associated with helmet use. [1] http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2016/09/06/…

Sorry, I should have been more clear. That helmets protect the head in a crash pretty obvious, and that metastudy seems to confirm it. What I had in mind was that helmet users tend to risk-compensate, taking more risks in traffic.

In the majority of cases, risk compensation leads to a decrease in expected benefit of legislation, but does not eliminate the benefit. (At least, that's the message I came away with from reading Foolproof.)

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

#428

Post by [deleted] »

stephenr wrote: post #423
agumonkey wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't lean left when looking back, but I just can't look back confidently because I lose track of what's happening in front of us. My first and only accident occured because I was so anxious to check the blindspot I didn't see the traffic stopping and I rear-ended someone. Blindspotless mirrors are a no brainer (they should be mandatory tbh). There are even inner car blindspot checking mirror, so you avoid the conf…

Honest question: In what situation were you travelling forward close enough to rear-end another car that you also needed to check your blind spot?

[deleted]

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

#429

Post by mcv »

aeharding wrote: post #411
mcv wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, do people in the US not use professional driving instructors in modified instruction cars? Doesn't that cause a lot of accidents?

I applied for a permit (purely knowledge/eyesight test), and that allows you to drive any normal vehicle (class-A) as long as there is someone in the passenger seat over 25/at least 5 years possessing a driver's license (or something like that). I went home and took the family car out on public streets with my Dad. 6 months later, I applied for my license. Simple 15 minute public roads driving test in the same family…

That's quite a bit different from the Dutch situation. I've paid thousands of euros for lessons, with a professional instructor, teaching me from working the pedals and the clutch all the way through navigating complex double merges on the motorway, sending me from the motorway straight into a low-speed zone, and through every imaginable traffic situation. Before you get lessons in the car, you first need to get your theory exam (which was easy for me, but can apparently be very hard for less academically inclined people), and I think I failed the practical exam about 5 times (which is excessive; some do manage to pass the first time, though it's not unusual to fail).

I felt fairly well prepared for Amsterdam traffic, but still managed to send my car into a spin on a slippery onramp that I underestimated.

Post reply on HN