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

451–460 of 612 posts

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

#451

Post by hx87 »

stephenr wrote: post #227
gfodor wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eh, depending on the car, often times a blind spot is just due to someone failing to adjust their mirrors properly. if you actually do it right, you should not have a blind spot. if you can see your own car in your side view mirrors, you've adjusted them wrong. if they are adjusted correctly, cars approaching on either side of your vehicle will pass from the rear view, to the side mirror, into your peripheral vision…

I've read about this supposed "solution" and the greatest thing I took away was that it trades side-of-car blind spots (which I can resolve by turning my head) for rear-of-car blind spots, which I can do nothing about, as my head doesn't rotate 180º.

> for rear-of-car blind spots

How so? The only possible issue I can see about that solution is that you can't see your own car in the side mirrors and thus judging relative position is slightly more difficult.

Of course, the best solution is aspherical mirrors, but for some reason they're not allowed in the USA.

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

#452

Post by hx87 »

thwd wrote: post #316
alkonaut wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> blindspotless mirrors There are cars with 3 mirrors that don't have blind spots, without having some other tradeoff instead? That makes the blind spot radar/lidar/camera systems on new high-tech cars seem pretty dumb!

Yes, there are. Difference is radar/lidar both emit the radiation they use to see themselves. It's hard to illuminate a car's outside completely from within the car.

There is also the issue of massive C-pillars mandated by rollover standards and current fashion, which mirrors can't solve by themselves.

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

#453

Post by baddox »

auxym wrote: post #350
kristofferR wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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.

Here are two credible reviews / meta-analyses stating the contrary, that is, that bicycle helmet use or legislation does, statistically, reduce head injuries. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457500... http://www.cochrane.org/CD005401/INJ_bicycle-helmet-legislat... That said, despite personally wearing a helmet on my daily commute, I don't support legislation. I unfortunately don't have sources o…

Use or legislation of helmets while driving a car and walking would also almost certainly reduce head injuries. It's far from a sufficient argument for legislation.

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

#454

Post by walshemj »

hx87 wrote: post #439
ralfn wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This focus on helmets is ridiculous, because you only have to types of bikes: 1. Death traps 2. Dutch bikes You want less people to die in traffic while riding a bike? Don't make a helmet mandatory. Make the dutch bike mandatory. Your bike needs to be heavy. You need to sit up straight. And if you stretch your legs you have to stand. Whenever i see the images of americans on rice bikes and mountain bikes in NYC, i to…

The drivetrain matters too--I suspect many American bicyclists blow through red lights and generally don't respect road rules because with fixed/single speed bikes, it takes enormous effort to get started from a standstill, and with derailleurs it's impossible to downshift from a standstill (i.e. when you make a quick stop). If hub gears were standard, bicyclists wouldn't have as much reason to ignore signals.

No its not you can down shift with index shifters on the MTB very easily as you stop and you can always lift the back when and quickly shift that way

Agree that fixies should be banned outside of a race track.

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

#455

Post by jstanley »

stephenr wrote: post #227
gfodor wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eh, depending on the car, often times a blind spot is just due to someone failing to adjust their mirrors properly. if you actually do it right, you should not have a blind spot. if you can see your own car in your side view mirrors, you've adjusted them wrong. if they are adjusted correctly, cars approaching on either side of your vehicle will pass from the rear view, to the side mirror, into your peripheral vision…

I've read about this supposed "solution" and the greatest thing I took away was that it trades side-of-car blind spots (which I can resolve by turning my head) for rear-of-car blind spots, which I can do nothing about, as my head doesn't rotate 180º.

You can't see behind your car using your wing mirrors, you need to use the rear-view mirror. Even if you have the wing mirrors pointing behind your car, the sides of the car obscure your view.

I like to adjust the wing mirrors so that a tiny sliver of the car is visible in the mirror, that way I can be sure I'm not missing anything.

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

#456

Post by walshemj »

ralfn wrote: post #402
saiya-jin wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal evidence - i never wore helmet when growing up, nobody did. once had an accident on small bmx bike when I fell head first on tarmac, but didn't land on head and apart from scratches and being shaken all good (if parents only knew...). few years ago decided to buy new cross country (ie all-rounder) one, lightweight and blazing fast for what it is. Decided to go for a helmet for the first time. After 2 weeks,…

This focus on helmets is ridiculous, because you only have to types of bikes: 1. Death traps 2. Dutch bikes You want less people to die in traffic while riding a bike? Don't make a helmet mandatory. Make the dutch bike mandatory. Your bike needs to be heavy. You need to sit up straight. And if you stretch your legs you have to stand. Whenever i see the images of americans on rice bikes and mountain bikes in NYC, i to…

A little less "team Holland Bike Police" attitude please - I find those sit up and beg bikes unstable when riding at slow speed I felt much safer on a proper SWB MTB with proper rakes

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

#457

Post by luca_ing »

rkangel wrote: post #266
Angostura wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The transition on attitude towards skiing helmets (at least in European resorts) has been really interesting to watch. It has gone from being something that only children and the seriously hardcore off piste snowboarders. I never used to wear one, and neither did most of the people I ski with, but over the last 5 years its changed until we now seriously judge people for being reckless if they won't wear a helmet. The…

> The transition on attitude towards skiing helmets (at least in European resorts) has been really interesting to watch.

I agree.

Ten years ago, only racers wore helmets.

Five years ago, some people did.

Now, I suspect it's the majority who wear a helmet.

I bought one too, a few years ago.

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

#458

Post by stephenr »

hx87 wrote: post #451
stephenr wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read about this supposed "solution" and the greatest thing I took away was that it trades side-of-car blind spots (which I can resolve by turning my head) for rear-of-car blind spots, which I can do nothing about, as my head doesn't rotate 180º.

> for rear-of-car blind spots How so? The only possible issue I can see about that solution is that you can't see your own car in the side mirrors and thus judging relative position is slightly more difficult. Of course, the best solution is aspherical mirrors, but for some reason they're not allowed in the USA.

http://www.driveandstayalive.com/setting-exterior-mirrors-ca...

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

#459

Post by mrsuprawsm »

solatic wrote: post #129
Zanni wrote: post #51

The real answer is to get rid of street parking when you have a bike lane. They're incompatible. In fact, just get rid of street parking altogether. As a bicyclist, I've been doored. As a pedestrian, I find it difficult to see around parked cars to know if it's safe to cross the street in some locations. As a driver, I find it difficult to to see around parked cars to know if it's safe to enter the street AND I have…

Getting rid of street parking hurts people with handicapped permits. In Israel, if you are eligible for a handicapped permit then you can get a street parking space in front of your apartment building reserved for your car (with signage saying that if the car parked there doesn't specifically have license plate number X then it will be towed). Telling these people to go a few blocks to an underground parking garage,…

We have the same in NL. Accessibility doesn't need to suffer at the hands of bike lanes

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

#460

Post by nerdponx »

lucb1e wrote: post #392
nerdponx wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In New York City, sometimes the only way to bike safely is to attempt to match the speed of the traffic, which despite road congestion will still be well over 10 MPH. At that speed, if you hit a pothole or get doored, or get hit by a car, you are going to go down very hard. I've crashed exactly 3 times on my bike in New York City, and every time I would've cracked my head open if I didn't have a helmet.

That's 16km/h if I got the conversion rate right. That's a good run but I think most Dutch people bike even faster than that. I'm pretty sure the difference is not the speed but the traffic. It sounds like the odds of crashing in the first place are a lot higher in NYC than in the Netherlands.

Yeah. I was lowballing though. It's actually scarier when cars are flying by at 25-30 MPH, and you're trying to dodge potholes in the road (if there's no bike lane) or various obstacles (if there's a bike lane) like construction equipment, work vans, and police cars.

One time I went wiped out in a bike lane because some trash bag had leaked some kind of garbage sludge all over the sidewalk (garbage day in NYC means 5-foot-tall piles of stinking trash bags on the sidewalk). The street was slightly banked, so when I hit the slick stuff my wheel just slid right out from under me and I had no time to even bail off the bike. My helmet probably saved my life that day.

Post reply on HN