Riding a bike in London is risky business
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
riding a bike in London. But things are relative and not black and
white, and probably riding a bike in Miami or NYC is far more
dangerous.
London though is launching 6,000 bikes and it may see some peace after
the initial mayhem. Is it really that bad? Here they kill you for
giving the finger. What it would be like to ride a bike in
Afghanistan? Or will it be more deadly to ride an SUV?
LONDON – Feel like living dangerously?
Riding a bike in London will soon be more convenient, though it's
unlikely to be any less scary. Riders already dodge the city's famed
black cabs and double-decker buses — to say nothing of other cyclists.
A bike rental program launched Friday by London's Mayor Boris Johnson
will add an additional 6,000 bikes to the capital's congested streets.
Under the initiative, cyclists will be able to rent bikes from 400
docking stations around town.
Johnson called it "a new dawn for the bicycle in the capital" — but
veterans of the London cycling scene are bracing for a new era of
transit mayhem.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_re_eu/eu_biking_in_london
------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
"The jungle is a very dangerous place to be for the unwise"
http://webspawner.com/users/BIKEFORPEACE
(the revolution starts with the turning of a wheel and the bipedal
monkey)
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> On 30 July, 23:37, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > My sources in London (Yahoo News) tell me that such is the nature of
> > riding a bike in London. But things are relative and not black and
> > white, and probably riding a bike in Miami or NYC is far more
> > dangerous.
>
> London and New York would be pretty similar in terms of risk; I
> wouldn't want to ride a bike in either of them, and there's not much
> that scares me. It's not only the danger, the roads are also dirty
> and fume-filled. If there was a dedicated bike route, not just a
> narrow lane at the side of a normal road, the whole way from home to
> work, then I'd probably buy a bike, and use it. Of course, there's
> still the problem of arriving at work soaking wet in bad weather. As
> it is, I'll keep going by bus.
>
> Of course, different parts of London, or New York, are totally
> different to each other. Overall, I'd say much of London is pretty
> terrible, I hated driving in it during the few years that I had a car,
> but that was almost 28 years ago, and it's certainly got worse since.
London vs. NYC vs. Miami?
Miami bus system is in shambles so getting around by bus is not an
option (unless you are retired). And riding a bike is something you do
short of Euthanasia...
Now, America shares some common dangers not seen in the civilized
world: PEOPLE DRIVE CUSTOMARILY PHONE IN HAND. I don't know about NYC,
but here is the norm. We also have the lion's share of Supersized
Unnecessary Vehicles that add extra aggressiveness and size to the
road (they really ROAR). Road rage is daily life in the city, and I've
been attacked and spit upon for giving a finger to a driver minding my
business.
I guess we are down there with Kabul.
>
>
>
> > London though is launching 6,000 bikes and it may see some peace after
> > the initial mayhem. Is it really that bad? Here they kill you for
> > giving the finger. What it would be like to ride a bike in
> > Afghanistan? Or will it be more deadly to ride an SUV?
>
> > LONDON – Feel like living dangerously?
>
> > Riding a bike in London will soon be more convenient, though it's
> > unlikely to be any less scary. Riders already dodge the city's famed
> > black cabs and double-decker buses — to say nothing of other cyclists.
>
> > A bike rental program launched Friday by London's Mayor Boris Johnson
> > will add an additional 6,000 bikes to the capital's congested streets.
> > Under the initiative, cyclists will be able to rent bikes from 400
> > docking stations around town.
>
> > Johnson called it "a new dawn for the bicycle in the capital" — but
> > veterans of the London cycling scene are bracing for a new era of
> > transit mayhem.
>
> I've seen these bike rental things when I was up in London last
> weekend, though they were not in use then. How do they cope with the
> fact that a bicycle is supposed to be adjusted to fit each rider; do
> you carry a set of spanners with you to make such adjustments?
There must be a way. The Velib is already in place after all. The
Parisian model is interesting. I think they ride mostly on the road
and people are fine. THERE'S SAFETY IN NUMBERS.
>
> Another Boris gimmick I think; if somebody wants to ride a bike, why
> not buy their own? There are a lot of these rental station things in
> the central area, so you would not need to walk far to find one. they
> look like high-tech bike racks, with what I think are contactless
> smart card readers attached to them. I'm not sure how the scheme
> works, where it's pre-pay and you top up the card, or you're billed
> for the use you make, and whether it's charged by the hour, day, mile
> or what.
Buying your own is always an option, but I guess it sends a signal
that the city is not about cars only. They promised such here in Miami
Beach. I wonder what became of it?
Maybe if I do a Google search?
'While the "City of Lights" is the poster child for what's right and
wrong about bike-sharing, it's only one of scores of programs
springing up all around the world, including here in North America.
Bike share programs are up and running in Washington, D.C.,
Philadelphia (see the short documentary below), and Miami Beach.'
http://evworld.com/currents.cfm?jid=124
Wow, it says they are out there! What have I been missing by being in
the cage! Still around here you see monkeys riding Walmart bikes on
sidewalks. They are true survivors, but it's really more dangerous
than the road.
I'll check into Velib Miami.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
http://www.decobike.com/index.php
I hope they go together with the place to ride them. I don't ask for
special facilities. I would love people TAKING THE LANE with them and
riding as far as Haulover Beach (the nudist beach to be exact) OVER
THE BRIDGE at Bal Harbour (not on the sidewalk) and over the causeways
to Biscayne Blvd. The 96th st causeway needs to be friendly to
bicycles, not telling people to "walk bicycle" over the bridge, on a
sidewalk where barely a man can walk. That's where the "vigilante"
attacked me for not complying with that stupid rule.
Now we should bring that system to Kabul to pacify them.
NOTE: Luckily I haven't sold my beautiful bikes yet.
Chris
equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass the
passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does not
help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down one
way streets the wrong way.
--
Chris
Tony Raven
>
> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass the
> passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does not
> help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down one
> way streets the wrong way.
>
Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
It may feel scary riding in parts of London but risky it is not by any
sensible meaning of the word.
--
Tony
" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell
Colin McKenzie
wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>>
>> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
>> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass
>> the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does
>> not help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down
>> one way streets the wrong way.
>
> Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
> million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
Quite. And as rather fewer than 10 a year, on average, are killed by other
vehicles, you can halve your already minuscule risk of death simply by
being very careful around lorries:
- don't pass (on either side) unless it can't possibly move in the time it
takes to get past.
- if in front, be where the driver can see you, and make eye contact to
make sure he HAS seen you.
- if to the side with priority, ride in a prominent position but be ready
to stop until you know the driver's seen you.
If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
Colin McKenzie
> It may feel scary riding in parts of London but risky it is not by any
> sensible meaning of the word.
--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
Jobst Brandt
> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning
> left, equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to
> undertake, pass the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a
> lot of cyclists does not help though as a lot run red lights, ride
> on pavements and go down one way streets the wrong way.
I spent a few miles riding in central London where two lane streets
were converted to three lanes, tow for cars and one for buses and
taxis and bicycles. This new lane was paved with red asphalt. I and
my brother, who lives there, rode close to the curb on the left and
were passed by huge transit busses with few inches to spare. This was
standard procedure for adult bicyclists, who use these streets for
transportation.
Although we found riding with care safe, I commented to my brother
that many wreck.bike riders would die here, knowing their propensity
to "take the lane", it being their legal right. Don't try it!
Jobst Brandt
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> Chris wrote:
>
> > In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
> > equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass the
> > passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does not
> > help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down one
> > way streets the wrong way.
>
> Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
> million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
>
> It may feel scary riding in parts of London but risky it is not by any
> sensible meaning of the word.
The word I hate the most is STRESSFUL. Rides that become so around
here (90% of them) I avoid and I simply drive a car.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:11:20 +0100, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > Chris wrote:
>
> >> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
> >> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass
> >> the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does
> >> not help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down
> >> one way streets the wrong way.
>
> > Not a lot actually. Ten or less a year are hit by trucks which, for 180
> > million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> > by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
>
> Quite. And as rather fewer than 10 a year, on average, are killed by other
> vehicles, you can halve your already minuscule risk of death simply by
> being very careful around lorries:
> - don't pass (on either side) unless it can't possibly move in the time it
> takes to get past.
> - if in front, be where the driver can see you, and make eye contact to
> make sure he HAS seen you.
> - if to the side with priority, ride in a prominent position but be ready
> to stop until you know the driver's seen you.
>
> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
bit. No clothing, no rights.
Tony Raven
>
> I spent a few miles riding in central London where two lane streets
> were converted to three lanes, tow for cars and one for buses and
> taxis and bicycles. This new lane was paved with red asphalt. I and
> my brother, who lives there, rode close to the curb on the left and
> were passed by huge transit busses with few inches to spare. This was
> standard procedure for adult bicyclists, who use these streets for
> transportation.
>
> Although we found riding with care safe, I commented to my brother
> that many wreck.bike riders would die here, knowing their propensity
> to "take the lane", it being their legal right. Don't try it!
>
Your trouble was not taking the lane. I ride in London all the time and
your riding style will always create problems of buses and taxis trying
to squeeze past whereas I have very few because they have to overtake
me. Its a pity you saw fit to comment on how to do it with so little
experience.
Tony Raven
Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
>>
>> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
>
> My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> bit. No clothing, no rights.
I bet you'd get noticed even more without clothing and you can bet most
motorists would give you a much wider berth ;-)
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> >> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
> >> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
>
> > My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> > bit. No clothing, no rights.
>
> I bet you'd get noticed even more without clothing and you can bet most
> motorists would give you a much wider berth ;-)
No wonder some cyclists propose riding naked. A young lady would
surely get the most attention.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> >> If you want to halve your chance of injury, do the same with other
> >> vehicles, and ride a door's width from parked cars.
>
> > My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> > bit. No clothing, no rights.
>
> I bet you'd get noticed even more without clothing and you can bet most
> motorists would give you a much wider berth ;-)
Only a problem if done alone...
Colin McKenzie
Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock <nolionn...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> bit. No clothing, no rights.
No-one has ever proved that hi-viz clothing makes you safer. You may be
visible from further away, but by definition the driver who hits you is
rather close.
The main thing is to be where they're looking, and not to assume you've
been seen until there's evidence that you have.
Colin McKenzie
Colin McKenzie
wrote:
Absolutely. I would add that too many cyclists equate delaying drivers
with endangering themselves. Actually the main point is to be seen and
taken account of, which means taking the lane if it's too narrow to pass
safely.
Being hooted is great. You know the driver's seen you, and you know that
when you let him pass, he'll pass quickly and not dither.
I am still amazed how many cyclists hug the left of a narrow lane and
never look back, and are overtaken with barely a foot of clearance as a
result. That very rarely happens to me. If it did, my hand would be in
agony from all the cars I'd have thumped.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:04:27 +0100, His Highness the TibetanMonkey,
> wrote:
>
> > My proposal to MANDATE VISIBLE CLOTHING/VEST/LYCRA would help quite a
> > bit. No clothing, no rights.
>
> No-one has ever proved that hi-viz clothing makes you safer. You may be
> visible from further away, but by definition the driver who hits you is
> rather close.
>
> The main thing is to be where they're looking, and not to assume you've
> been seen until there's evidence that you have.
City landscape is not very different from the jungle. You can be
camouflaged in plain sight, which in this case works against you.
Drivers are scanning the road for vehicles, not bikes.
You have a stronger case by wearing bright clothing against "I never
saw him!"
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
The authorities create or allow this "no man's land" to exist. The
result is this confusion that works against the cyclist.
Here TAKING THE LANE would be as dangerous as riding to the edge, as
many drivers feel entitled to the road and you... you are just a
monkey on a bike.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
How the Velib works? I don't think Paris is kinder, gentler than
London.
Tony Raven
Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> many drivers feel entitled to the road and you... you are just a
> monkey on a bike.
>
So how much riding have you done in London?
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> > Here TAKING THE LANE would be as dangerous as riding to the edge, as
> > many drivers feel entitled to the road and you... you are just a
> > monkey on a bike.
>
> So how much riding have you done in London?
I'm talking from the vantage point of the wildest place on Earth. Not
London certainly.
Why don't you turn to Oxford for advice? A lot of bicycles there.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
"Recreational, Onroad, MTB, Smooth, Safe, Unsafe, Rural, Scenic"
http://www.bikely.com/listpaths/country/253/region/5392/city/17161
It sounds like a fun but risky proposition.
Clive George
Whenever I ride in London, I don't get passed "with few inches to
spare". That's because I ride in the correct road position, which is
probably what you'd describe as taking the lane.
You're riding dangerously - don't try and persuade others to repeat your
mistakes.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
So TAKING THE LANE is the solution... But one thing is to take it and
another to HOLD THE LANE, come what may.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
Bicycles applicable in London, Miami or Kabul. It's not yet legally
binding, but it may some day:
ROUGH DRAFT
1- A bicycle is entitled to TAKE THE LANE on multilane roads. You the
driver must exit the lane 20' before and after.
2- A car and bicycle may share the lane on single lane road, provided
the vehicle slows down to 20mph.
3- The cyclist is responsible for being VISIBLE, and ignoring this
rule may result in dismissing liability of the driver.
4- The cyclist may occasionally take the other lanes to turn.
5- Those who ignore these rules, bullying cyclists, committing hit-and-
run, better join the Taliban because they will be hunted down. ;)
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
I've said before 30'... 20' doesn't give you time to react and jump
out of the way, right? Maybe 50' (15m) is better.
Tony Raven
Tantra-Hammock wrote:
> On Jul 31, 6:56 pm, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote:
>> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>>
>> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>>
>>> Here TAKING THE LANE would be as dangerous as riding to the edge, as
>>> many drivers feel entitled to the road and you... you are just a
>>> monkey on a bike.
>> So how much riding have you done in London?
>
> I'm talking from the vantage point of the wildest place on Earth. Not
> London certainly.
>
> Why don't you turn to Oxford for advice? A lot of bicycles there.
>
Have you cycled in the UK at all? The thread is about London in case
you didn't notice but its no different in Oxford or in Cambridge. In
fact its much easier because there are many more cyclists around in the
latter two.
But the advice is the same whether you are in the UK (Cyclecraft) or USA
(Effective Cycling, Vehicular Cycling). And hogging the gutter is not
the advice for safe cycling.
Tony Raven
Tantra-Hammock wrote:
That's a car route not a cycle route. The hint is it takes the Oxford
Bypass followed by the M40 into London rather than Headingley Hill and
the A40.
Tony Raven
Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> another to HOLD THE LANE, come what may.
>
Not if you're cycling in London (the topic of this thread) but it seems
you are posting on the basis of zero knowledge of that topic. But
that's Usenet I guess.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
> > On Jul 31, 6:56 pm, Tony Raven <tra...@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote:
> >> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
> >> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> >>> Here TAKING THE LANE would be as dangerous as riding to the edge, as
> >>> many drivers feel entitled to the road and you... you are just a
> >>> monkey on a bike.
> >> So how much riding have you done in London?
>
> > I'm talking from the vantage point of the wildest place on Earth. Not
> > London certainly.
>
> > Why don't you turn to Oxford for advice? A lot of bicycles there.
>
> Have you cycled in the UK at all? The thread is about London in case
> you didn't notice but its no different in Oxford or in Cambridge. In
> fact its much easier because there are many more cyclists around in the
> latter two.
>
> But the advice is the same whether you are in the UK (Cyclecraft) or USA
> (Effective Cycling, Vehicular Cycling). And hogging the gutter is not
> the advice for safe cycling.
>
I can tell you what Oxford and Cambridge are doing right from far
away: THERE'S SAFETY IN NUMBERS.
I've said both the London (6,000 bikes) and Miami Beach programs
(1,000) are very positive outcomes for that reason. Now, why don't we
define what is the proper way to ride a bike, ie. TAKE THE LANE.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of
>
> Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> > So TAKING THE LANE is the solution... But one thing is to take it and
> > another to HOLD THE LANE, come what may.
>
> Not if you're cycling in London (the topic of this thread) but it seems
> you are posting on the basis of zero knowledge of that topic. But
> that's Usenet I guess.
Listen, we are trying to fix Iraq and Afghanistan and we don't have a
clue about what's going on there. ;)
But we have much to gain by comparing notes, strategies... The whole
world is watching with envy, right?
(not least Kabul)
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
On Aug 1, 5:02 pm, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> well mister highness of thisthatandeverythingelse, you are the one
> promoting cult leadership ... not i ... so it is not very wise [as you
> continuously claim to be] to state such things ... btw, are there a
> lot of baby monkeys that look like you running around in your self
> imposed dungeon?
A hammock under a mango tree is hardly a dungeon, but the hunter-
gatherer inside me is asking for action. And it's coming soon!
1,000 bikes will stampede into the streets in a new rental program,
and that may be time for the Wise Tibetan Monkey to come out of home
exile.
Are you denying my title of King of the Apes?
Chris
> Chris wrote:
>>
>> In London a lot of cyclists have been run down by trucks turning left,
>> equivalent to right turn in the US, as a lot tend to undertake, pass
>> the passenger side of vehicles. The attitude of a lot of cyclists does
>> not help though as a lot run red lights, ride on pavements and go down
>> one way streets the wrong way.
>>
>
> million cycle journeys a year means its pretty rare. And easily avoided
> by giving the big trucks a bit more room and respect.
>
> sensible meaning of the word.
>
>
it didn't feel that dangerous. But you always hear about the horror
stories not the day to day experience.
--
Chris
Chris
cycling proficiency test still exist?
--
Chris
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
I don't know, but I know that...
It takes two to tango. I think it can work quite well with mandating
the cars to exit the lane whenever possible and mandating the cyclists
to wear something bright to have full protection.
Notice I'm NOT for mandating helmets or obeying every traffic signal
out there.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
happening with the full support of the government, not in spite of it.
Education and enforcement are part of daily life.
On Aug 2, 1:13 pm, Wayne Pein <wp...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/10 2:09 PM, His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
>
>
>
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock wrote:
>
> > "THERE'S SAFETY IN NUMBERS," says the old adage. ;)
>
> > But some rules and regulations may help...
>
> > *WORLDWIDE CAMPAIGN TO TAKE THE LANE*
>
> > OK, let's write the CCBTB or Code of Civilized Behavior Toward
> > Bicycles applicable in London, Miami or Kabul. It's not yet legally
> > binding, but it may some day:
>
> > ROUGH DRAFT
>
> > 1- A bicycle is entitled to TAKE THE LANE on multilane roads. You the
> > driver must exit the lane 50' before and after.
>
> "Use the Full Lane" sounds less like stealing.
> Never on 2 lane roads??
> The 50' rule seems superfluous.
Sorry, it's standard jargon in the trade. But not to worry, WE'LL GIVE
IT BACK.
Two or more lanes can accommodate car and bicycle on different lanes.
50' before and after amounts to 100' or 1/3 of a block which would
allow smooth flow of traffic and peace of mind for the cyclists. You
may even have time to jump when you see a vehicle 10' behind you. ;)
>
> > 2- A car and bicycle may share the lane on single lane road, provided
> > the vehicle slows down to 20mph.
>
> What if I as a bicycle vehicle driver don't want to share my lane?
Standard Big Fish vs. Little Fish situation. The role of civilization
is to accommodate the cyclist first. Notice though that in this
reversed food chain, the pedestrian is #1.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
what I've found:
"To travel about Paris on a bicycle for business or pleasure, you will
use a network of bike lanes, often shared with taxis and buses, and
occasionally ride in the streets with traffic. New bike lanes are
being added every year. The lanes in Paris are usually on the right
side of the street by the sidewalk, occasionally divided off from
traffic by low bumps, or by foot-high barriers. Pedestrians may step
out; cars may park illegally; taxis or buses may stop; alertness is
required at all times. Watch out especially for motor scooters, which
weave between lanes and often ignore traffic rules.
When no bike lane exists, which is often, bikers ride with traffic."
http://www.mayq.com/Cycling_out_of_paris/Text_from_paris.htm
Chris
the road does as well as obeying traffic signals, fancy being run down
by cyclist at pedestrian crossing. Its the same argument about level
crossings, drivers still drive around barriers when they are down and
are often crushed by the train despite flashing lights, bells and a half
barrier to warn them. So do you think bright clothing will make the
cyclist cycle better or the driver drive better you just make a better
target ;)
--
Chris
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
It's not only my opinion but that of the article at the heading. I
think the most often heard excuse for an accident with a bike is "I
didn't see him." You can even argue better in court, which is
important if you survive.
It also shows that you are more serious about it. It's the opposite of
a jungle where you want to be camouflaged from the predators. But
often poisonous snakes are bright to advertise the danger too.
Chris
clothing to improve safety.
--
Chris
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock
You gotta do your best and hope it's good enough. Sometimes a cyclist
could become camouflaged in plain sight, like coming from a side
street. Whenever I buy something small I don't want to misplace, I go
bright. Even tools for the bike can "disappear" in your bag when black.