Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I used to blame other cyclists for this, but at some level I understand. After getting buzzed by yet another car while going downhill at 30 mph on a 25 mph road, and then getting pulled out in front of by a car off a side street, who assumed that I was moving slowly. I then got to a stop light that didn't change in my favor due to the sensors not being quite sensitive enough to pick up a bike which forced me to make a decision between running the (traffic-less) red light or fully unclipping, and shuffling my way 20 feet and up a 6 inch curb to the pedestrian button.

While technically I may be a "vehicle" in the eyes of the law, in reality, I'm between a pedestrian and a "real vehicle" without the benefits of either. Add to this strange intersections with traffic, where the cars have a stop sign (side road) and the bike path traffic have the right of way (in theory). Or worse, places where bike paths strangely end leaving a biker unfamiliar with the area unsure as to how to proceed. Adopting seemingly inconsistent and strange behavior is the only way to make cycling feasible in many places. The adoption of standard ways for interaction with traffic and better signage would decrease the cognitive load required to cycle and produce more consistent cyclist/vehicle interactions.

Regardless of my dislike of certain car behavior, such as overtaking without giving space, and misjudging speed, I much prefer riding on speed limited (25mph-35mph) streets to bike paths simply because I know how to act like a car, and people generally expect me to act like a car.



I try to sympathize with reasonable cyclists like you, but I can't help but think of it as swimming with sharks and complaining about it being dangerous. Humans aren't designed to live in the ocean. Roads (the ocean) are filled with cars (sharks). People who swim with sharks do so in cages (cars). Forego the cage at your own risk.

A more reasonable solution, as strange as it might seem, would be to have elevated or underground bike tunnels. Cars and bikes SHOULD be completely separated. Trying to cram them into the same space is asking for trouble.


But you're assuming a car first approach. And on a high-way, I agree with you. It's a car's world, but in a city, or town on a non-major thoroughfare, cars and bikes should be able to co-exist peacefully. To stretch your analogy a bit, low speed roadways would be like swimming in non-shark infested waters. Sure, you are liable to see car but you shouldn't feel like you are in danger when your are passed by the car, and on the other side, drivers shouldn't feel like they are within inches of killing a cyclist when they use a road legally and responsibly. (I add responsibly there because many drivers will complain that they feel they have to pay more attention when the drive near cyclists. I find this a wholly unconvincing argument, if you aren't paying attention while driving you aren't driving responsibly)

I also don't have any desire to use a car frequently. I shouldn't be forced to resort to a car to travel anything less than 15 miles due to fear or lack of infrastructure. And we face a chicken and egg problem. It would be great if we could have elevated bikeways tomorrow, but the truth of the matter is we should be encouraging bike use now not hypothetically in a utopian future. Because without proven use, there's no way major bike infrastructure projects will happen.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: