Man, it’s almost as if we need a third thing. A sort of, road for bicycles (or long, skinny concentration camp, if you prefer) which is suited to bicycling without getting in the way. Get those bloody cyclists off our roads and footpaths, those are for us!
Comment on Team Car!
FollyDolly@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
My issue is if you want to bike in the streetlike a car, then you have to obey car rules. Like stopping at stop lights and stop signs. If you want to ride on the sidewalk then you have to obey pedestrian rules, like crossing at the correct times. Thr number of cyclists I’ve seen blow through stop signs and stop lights is staggering.
Archimedes@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
How would you implement this? Are they going to have bridges over every traffic light?
phar@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Toronto has a pretty sweet setup with bike lanes that have their own bike street lamps. Seems to work very well for a city of millions.
HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
The Netherlands would like a word.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
Granted. But they were originally built with cyclists in mind. I would love their infrastructure!
PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Extensive unlit tunnels five feet tall and two and a half feet wide. Entry and exit is by vertical shaft only.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
I’m so down for this!
Alienz8mypopcorn@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I live in a city in the US that has “bike lights” at the intersections. These give bicyclists the right of way without “letting” cars go as well.
Little longer of a traffic light, but makes biking waaaaay more approachable for newbie bicyclists (like me!)
Unfortunately, this is the only place I’ve ever seen them implemented.
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
Seen some in the UK, usually its timed so that it gives bikes a head start instead of only bikes go.
sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Even when bikes have to ride on the roads, it would be crazy to make them behave exactly like cars, because they’re not.
Cars have to stop at stop signs because a driver’s visibility is quite poor, they have obstacles due to the A-pillar, etc,. and it is unsafe if they don’t stop and look out for other traffic.
Bicyclists have much better visibility, and a slower travel speed, so usually don’t need the extra time to be aware of other bike/car traffic. They are also incentivized to maintain momentum and move past a dangerous intersection in a visible, efficient way.
Which is why the Idaho stop is getting more and more accepted. Crashes at intersections go down 23% when implemented.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Dutch people: “both of those are dumb and dangerous”
UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
A significant portion of accidents involving cyclists is from others not paying enough attention to them - which can be mitigated by proper bike infrastructure.
Unfortunately we cannot mitigate the recklessness of cyclists this way, another big contributor to the accident statistics.
robin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Some places you don’t have to. Here, a stop sign is a yield for bikes, and a red light is a stop sign, legally. It works really well imo.
mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
to be fair, it’s not like fewer cyclists are following the rules than drivers
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
When cycling like a pedestrian here, such as on a shared bike/footpath, you do follow pedestrian rules at crossings. So lights are only advisory and you may cross at any time if you want to.
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 3 weeks ago
You say that, but drivers would lose their minds of bicyclists followed the same rules. Example: Taking the whole lane.
NathanRanch@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I wish bikes just took the whole lane like a car. Half assing it either way is really the problem.
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 3 weeks ago
The reason we don’t is because of the intense road rage it causes in drivers.
NathanRanch@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I’m aware
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
It’s called vehicular cycling and it’s a safer way to cycle.
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 3 weeks ago
I first found John Forester’s book in the library in the 90s, and it felt like a tome of secret, special knowledge. Then, I read more of it, and it did not match my experiences.
Jason Slaughter has now done a very extensive takedown video on his Not Just Bikes channel, which is far more congruent with what I have seen. Taking the lane is effective when there’s no other choice, when it’s too narrow for cars to pass, but drivers will try anyway.
Otherwise, there’s very little that’s safe about it.
Jtotheb@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Video for reference
mbp@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
Thanks for shouting it out! I’ve been putting off watching that video for weeks but I’ll give it a go based on the recommendation here.
glibg10b@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Also often called “taking the primary position”. It’s often done to prevent close passes by forcing drivers who want to overtake to wait for a gap in the next lane
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
That or if you are in a group you cycle next to each other, so you are together taking up a comparable width of a car.
That is the one which angers carbrains the most. Yet it is the safer way to ride.