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

A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

singletrackworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 522 posts

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#451

Post by cornyNetHandle »

papermule wrote: post #443
cornyNetHandle wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I walk on the road all the time, having grown up in an area with plenty of rural roads without pavements. I would get into a ton of shit should I visit anywhere that had jaywalking laws, though in the places they exist and are enforced, they presumably get by without a dedicated licensing and testing regime.

Dude, you're missing the point. You do not walk on the road the same way a cyclist cycles on the road. You do not walk up to T junctions, indicate with your arms and turn left. You neither come to a set of traffic lights in the same way. Cyclists have to do all these things.

And they are somehow managing to do so currently without licences.

One thing to consider is how much effect licensing has on car safety anyway. Mexico city has no test requirement at all, you just pay for permission to drive rather than sitting any test, while Peru has more road deaths per capita, despite needing a practical test, written test and medical certificate before you get behind the wheel.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#452

Post by chimprich »

dabbledash wrote: post #447
chimprich wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why shouldn’t cyclists need a license to ride on the road? Thought experiment: if you didn't have any motorised vehicles on the road, would you still want cyclists to have a licence? In a general case though, requiring cyclists to have a licence would reduce the number of cyclists, probably significantly. This would correspondingly increase the number of motorists. This dual effect would have a number of negative i…

>Thought experiment: if you didn't have any motorised vehicles on the road, would you still want cyclists to have a licence? No. Why do you think this is relevant? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the rest of your argument.

You are correct in pointing out that it doesn't have much to do with the rest of my argument. I posed it as a question because I think a lot of the opinions around this issue (like many or most issues) stem from emotions. In this case I think this argument comes from a sense of fairness: motorists have to pay tax / have insurance / pass a test; so why shouldn't cyclists? I think if you consider whether we would even be asking that question if there were no motorists, you can get around the "fairness" point of view.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#453

Post by codazoda »

jessriedel wrote: post #439
aidenn0 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least 4-way stops have the same basic rules throughout the US (cars go in order of arrival). 2-way stops do not : Consider the case where the first car to arrive is turning left, but cannot do so due to traffic on the main road. Then a car arrives from the opposite direction going straight. Who is supposed to go first? In some states it's the car that reached the stop sign first, in others it's the car going strai…

> In some states it's the car that reached the stop sign first, in others it's the car going straight. Do you have a cite/link about this? I've heard people say different things, but I've never seen evidence that the left-turning vehicle has legal right-of-way in any state.

This is evidence to the contrary, as you've said...

Utah law only talks about who must yield. I use to believe that a person going strait had the right of way. Some of the confusion may come from the wording from different ways of entering the roadway. In Utah it says the following.

41-6a-903 Yield right-of-way -- Vehicle turning left -- Entering or crossing highway other than from another roadway -- Merging lanes. (1) The operator of a vehicle: (a) intending to turn to the left shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction which is so close to the turning vehicle as to constitute an immediate hazard;

This doesn't actually apply to a stop sign because it says "other than a roadway". It also talks about "opposite direction" and not cross traffic.

The other part of the law that actually seems to apply is the following.

41-6a-902 Right-of-way -- Stop or yield signals -- Yield -- Collisions at intersections or junctions of roadways -- Evidence. (b) After having stopped at a stop sign, the operator of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another roadway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard.

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapter6A/C41-6a-P9_180001...

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#454

Post by uoaei »

papermule wrote: post #410
brewdad wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the actual gain to society from requiring a cyclist license? Today, without licenses, police can and do hand out moving violations to cyclists. Today, drivers who have their license revoked or car impounded still find ways to drive cars, at least in the US. The barrier to picking up a new bike after having yours impounded by police is far lower. If it's forcing a baseline requirement for skills and knowledge,…

> What is the actual gain to society from requiring a cyclist license? Today, without licenses, police can and do hand out moving violations to cyclists. I could, as someone who doesn't have a driving license, or has never learned to drive, go out on the road with my bicycle and more or less ride whenever and wherever I like. I don't know what any of the road signs mean and I have no experience or training in hazard…

Kinetic energy = 1/2 m v^2

In a typical city scenario, a car has KE of 1/2 (2000 kg) (50 kph)^2 ~= 2e5 Joules. A bicyclist has 1/2 (100 kg) (30 kph)^2 ~= 3.5e3 Joules. Almost 100x less capable of inflicting damage on a typical pedestrian. Add onto this that bikes are way more maneuverable, less collision surface area, are totally exposed to the same forces exerted on the pedestrian with which they may collide... your comparison with cars is intellectually dishonest because you are comparing a human on top of a 10-20kg machine with a human inside a 2000kg metal box with an incredible array of safety features for the driver and hardly any for pedestrians outside.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#455

Post by matte_black »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #145
matte_black wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the goal is to maintain speed through the intersection they could have built a bridge to overlap the other road.

This is in the New Forest National Park. You can’t just go constructing massive structures because drivers are too lazy to read signs.

As the body count begins to rise we’ll see how much that really matters.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#456

Post by clarry »

ptaipale wrote: post #389
Xylakant wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, motor vehicle driver was at fault in about 40 % of cyclist deaths. Without any breakdown of who was at fault in the other accidents your stats still indicate that in comparison between bikes and motor vehicles, motor vehicle drivers are still twice as likely to be at fault. Retrain them before you retrain cyclists.

In a large majority of the remaining cases it is the cyclists who is at fault. There are a few cases where a pedestrian causes a cyclist death, but they are rare. The list includes those cyclists who are run over by a train, for instance, but we don't really expect trains to swerve to avoid cyclists, and such a collision is the cyclist's fault. I don't necessarily say that requiring a license from cyclists is what I…

I'm pretty sure elementary schools in Finland have a cycling lesson or two. Mine certainly did.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#457

Post by Xylakant »

papermule wrote: post #368
Xylakant wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, motor vehicle driver was at fault in about 40 % of cyclist deaths. Without any breakdown of who was at fault in the other accidents your stats still indicate that in comparison between bikes and motor vehicles, motor vehicle drivers are still twice as likely to be at fault. Retrain them before you retrain cyclists.

> Retrain them before you retrain cyclists. Why can't we retrain both? Do we have to pick one or the other?

Because it’s an inefficient use of time and money. All that you’ll achieve is less people cycling and that’s exactly the opposite of what you want. Think about the practicality of a cycle license: do you expect a 6 year old to pass a test before cycling? A ten year old to carry along a license when he goes out? You can’t even fine them because the statuary limit in germany is 14. You can’t fine the parents either because parents are not obliged to keep their kids in sight all the time. Adults are already very likely to have a drivers license, should they now need a cycling license on top.

So make better use of the time and money: create safe infrastructure or - as a better investment train those that already have a license requirement and that insist on moving around tons of steel. Maybe increase the number of hours in school that deal with safe conduct in traffic. Or - gasp - fine the people blocking cycle lanes and otherwise endangering cyclist hard.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#458

Post by jakubp »

cup-of-tea wrote: post #381
jakubp wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow... Children can also drive cars, ride motorbikes, fly planes, perform surgery. That doesn't mean it's in society's best interest to let them without some training or examination beforehand. The difficulty in riding a bike in a city doesn't come from having to control the vehicle. Danger doesn't come from the ability to maim someone with a bike. It comes from hugely complex set of rules, dynamic nature of traffic,…

But children do manage to ride bikes safely all over the world every day without any formal training. On the other hand, adults who have had training and are licensed to drive still manage to cause accidents.

Not in city centers on busy multilane inrersections, at least not in my country. We arent talking about riding a bike in a park or in the suburbs. And kids cause a lot of traffic accidents as well, regardless of their mode of transportation... Nothing will eliminate accidents. Training and systems can minimize it though.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#459

Post by cornyNetHandle »

pc86 wrote: post #373
chimprich wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why shouldn’t cyclists need a license to ride on the road? Thought experiment: if you didn't have any motorised vehicles on the road, would you still want cyclists to have a licence? In a general case though, requiring cyclists to have a licence would reduce the number of cyclists, probably significantly. This would correspondingly increase the number of motorists. This dual effect would have a number of negative i…

You're suggesting that requiring bicyclists to be licensed would kill people?

Requiring licensing for cyclists could indirectly result in more deaths depending on the change in other behaviours.

Off the top of my head, walking is more risky per mile for the traveller than cycling while driving is safer per mile, but increases your risk of obesity and DVT and is more dangerous for everyone else in terms of pollution and accidents.

Re: A Type of Road Junction that Kills Cyclists

#460

Post by killjoywashere »

I got hit by a car, as a cyclist, in exactly this kind of intersection. Got a Bankart repair on my left shoulder as a reward, but also got the motivation to go to medical school. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Incidentally, as a sailor, I totally get the constant bearing decreasing range problem. That phrase still sends shivers down my spine. I can't tell you how many times I've thought about what's on the other side the front pillars.
Post reply on HN