4 ms·
as a cyclist in the US there's a very common scenario here, too - turning right, looking left, not looking into the turn and bam, cyclist at high risk. TO CLAR
by jnazario 13y ago
as a cyclist in the US there's a very common scenario here, too - turning right, looking left, not looking into the turn and bam, cyclist at high risk.
TO CLARIFY - the situation i am most referring to is a cross street, where the car is perpendicular to your path and would be coming from your left as a cyclist.
- snarkyturtle 13y agoIsn't that pretty much why you always cycle with the direction of traffic? As a runner, I've been told to run against the flow for safety but almost always run into these types of situations (which is why I mostly go out of my way to run behind the cars stopped at intersections.)
- fredgrott 13y agono, other way around cycle against traffic to avoid right turn hit as you will be on the left side and see the trucks left turn ahead of time
- jeorgun 13y agoI think the situation being described is more like: ___ ↱↑____ | | TB| | | | | | (where T is the truck, and B the bike, natch).
- dopamean 13y agoA+
- acchow 13y agoIt's generally a bad idea to "pass on the right", not just for cyclists (tho they are disproportionately harmed).
- claudius 13y agoNon-optional bicycle lanes make this unavoidable and motorists still lobby for cyclists to be kept of ‘their’ road.
- bluekeybox 13y agoI think you wouldn't be downvoted if you just wrote, "Non-optional bicycle lanes make this unavoidable".
- afterburner 13y agoHe might not have been downvoted if he hadn't said it, but it's not like it's a farfetched idea. In Toronto Mayor Ford practically made it a campaign promise to screw over cyclists, going out of his way (and incurring great cost) in order to rip out recently installed bicycle lanes. So it's definitely a political issue, and while there might not be actual bona fide lobbyists there are definitely voters who are anti-road-cycling.
- acchow 13y agoI'm confused - having a dedicated lane somehow forces you to pass?
- jzwinck 13y agoImagine the bike lane is on the right. Now if cars are moving slowly you as a cyclist will be passing them on their right ("undertaking"). This is unsafe near the places where cars turn right (across the bike lane).
- kevinpet 13y agoIn California: 1. A bicyclist does not need to stay to the right of the road when approaching a place where right turns are allowed (i.e. can leave the bike lane). 2. Vehicles are required to merge into the bike lane before making a right turn, otherwise it's consider making a turn without being in the rightmost lane. Not to say I've ever seen a single car in the bay area correctly merge to the bike lane before turning. Any case where a bicyclist is hit by a car making a right turn should be considered "failure to complete a passing maneuver."
- bri3d 13y agoAt least in California, the car is supposed to take the bike lane rather than turning over the top of it. In this way the bike only ever passes the car on the left, and motorists (provided they look when taking the lane) are less likely to hit a cyclist if they fail to check their right-hand mirror again. http://www.sfbike.org/?bikelane_right_turns http://www.sfbike.org/?bikelane_right_turns
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- mrweasel 13y agoA bad idea perhaps, but legally required, at least in Denmark. Bikes are suppose to stay as fare right on the road as possible at all time. This means that traffic aren't mixed, which is generally a good idea.