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

481–490 of 612 posts

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

#481

Post by hx87 »

stephenr wrote: post #458
hx87 wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

The diagram in that article underestimates the viewing angle of the various mirrors in the car--my rear view mirror has far more than 90 degrees FOV, and when my side view mirrors are adjusted the "new" way I am just barely unable to see the side of my car.

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

#482

Post by huehehue »

ehnto wrote: post #85
paulddraper wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As a bicyclist...As a pedestrian...As a driver" Uh huh. 100% agree. Street parking is especially dangerous because it is not sufficient to look for the presence of a car; I must look for the presence of a car, and continue looking until I ascertain whether it's one of the dozens of parked vehicles. But...street parking is also very convenient. Streets are very close to where people want to get to; no need to walk fr…

I have never found street parking convenient. It will depend on where you live but I tend to find that it's never available so you wind through the streets and inevitably end up far from where you wanted to be. Thinking specifically of CBD type locations, removing street parking and having more mobility on foot or bicycle works better for me because I can drive straight to a big parking building, then move swiftly to…

"Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."

Street parking is very convenient for the people that get it.

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

#483

Post by mcguire »

et-al wrote: post #161
djsumdog wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of bicycles in The Netherlands is absolutely surreal. Both in major cities and out in the suburbs, bicycles are everywhere. I also find it interesting the Dutch rarely ever wear helmets. Large cities in Germany or the UK or anywhere else I've seen cannot compare to the magnitude of people on bicycles in The Netherlands.

Most people in China don't wear helmets either. 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). Also, we have bike light laws in California, but there are plenty of cyclists that don't use them. Personally, if I had to choose between riding without a helmet,…

"...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."

An uncontrolled fall from a standing height is potentially fatal. The impact tests for motorcycle helmets are typically an ~2 meter drop.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=88107031183058372...

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

#484

Post by rkangel »

luca_ing wrote: post #457
rkangel wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yup. The people who don't stand out - and they're almost universally the older generation of serious skiers (>= retirement age) who are too stuck in their ways.

To quote my Dad (who admittedly hasn't skied in years) "You wear a helmet? Why? I never needed one".

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

#485

Post by pja »

gambiting wrote: post #440
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.

I think those statistics are very very very heavily skewed and should be ignored. If you have a car accident, 99% of the time, it gets recorded. If you have a bike accident, if the police is not involved, where are you going to report it? To whom? Therefore, the only cases that do get reported are collisions with vehicles, or cases severe enough that cyclist gets taken to hospital - and in those cases, the situation…

Split, or crushed? Helmets absorb the energy of an impact by crushing - it’s a destructive process.

It might have protected you from cuts & abrasions, but if it didn’t crush then it didn’t absorb any of the impact.

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

#486

Post by cr1895 »

johanvts wrote: post #415
cr1895 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been to the Netherlands before and seen how effective and safe the cycling infra is even without people wearing helmets?

Yes, I have and it's great. Similar to Denmark where I live, but it's even safer if you wear a helmet. There is a clear benefit to wearing one and not much of cost so it's an easy choice IMO.

I haven't been to Denmark (yet, will be in CPH in Nov!) but I understand ytour cycle infrastructure is comparable to that of the Netherlands. Do you find more people wear helmets there than in NL?

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

#487

Post by ghaff »

rkangel wrote: post #484
luca_ing wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Yup. The people who don't stand out - and they're almost universally the older generation of serious skiers (>= retirement age) who are too stuck in their ways. To quote my Dad (who admittedly hasn't skied in years) "You wear a helmet? Why? I never needed one".

Yeah. For me, it's pretty much: I don't ski much these days. I don't ski particularly aggressively. I've never worn a helmet and I'm not about to start now.

It's not that I think they're stupid or anything. And I do wear helmets for various other sports. I just never have for skiing and don't feel compelled to change.

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

#488

Post by [deleted] »

anarazel wrote: post #128
cortesoft wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using your blinker is a requirement in the driver's license test, too. So is driving with your hands 10-2, coming to a complete stop at all stop signs, and driving the speed limit. I don't think adding something to a driver's test is going to change much.

Coming from Germany to the US, I'm very regularly confused and annoyed how few drivers here use signals in a meaningful way. If used at all, it's halfway through the turn.

[deleted]

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

#489

Post by pja »

ekidd wrote: post #356
Symbiote wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd rather live to see the next day than care about what a helmet looks like. Do you wear one while walking? Or hiking? There's also an increased risk of brain injury from these activities. Most people I know don't wear one, because the combination of the discomfort, hassle, inconvenience and appearance aren't worth the perceived low increased risk of cycling compared to, for example, walking.

I wear a helmet for bicycling, in-line skating, snowboarding and whitewater kayaking. In the case of the first three sports, the helmet has saved me from nasty head hits: - Two over-the-handlebars crashes on my bike at relatively low speed (one when mountain biking). - A low tree limb and several backwards falls when inline skating. - Countless backwards falls when learning to snowboard. For whitewater kayaking, a he…

So, according to your risk profile, it sounds like you should be wearing a helmet when driving a car.

(This is actually something that the safety researchers advocate for if you go read the literature.)

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

#490

Post by 794CD01 »

mcv wrote: post #297
wobbleblob wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've tried driving in the Netherlands, you know why so many people prefer to ride a bike instead. Well maintained, but narrow and extremely busy roads, densely packed with tiny vehicles. Wearing a helmet while cycling in the Dutch bike lanes is a bit like wearing a helmet while walking on the side walk. I used to only wear it while racing. Since I had a bad crash after being hit in the eye by an insect, I wear a…

It's not just how you're treated. Research has shown that cyclists wearing helmets tend to put more trust in their helmet, whereas cyclists without helmet tend to be more careful.

If that means that wearing a helmet allows you to ride faster while keeping the same level of safety, it's still a great benefit.
Post reply on HN