7 ms·

>There are times when, as a cyclist, I blow through a red light. I’ve got momentum, I don’t feel like stopping, I’m running late. I wish there was a more pract

by Nadya 11y ago

>There are times when, as a cyclist, I blow through a red light. I’ve got momentum, I don’t feel like stopping, I’m running late. I wish there was a more practical way than increased surveillance to prove the pedestrian/cyclist at fault. Cars have momentum too. Physics makes it so they can't come to an instant stop. Then cyclists wonder why they get hit by cars when they run red lights. >“every time a cyclist stops, they lose kinetic energy and have to work harder upon starting off in order to accelerate and restore that kinetic energy" If this is an actual justification cyclists try to use, might I suggest investing in a car? > http://www.citylab.com/commute/2013/05/why-we-should-never-fine-cyclists/5571/ http://www.citylab.com/commute/2013/05/why-we-should-never-f... It's sad that this level of entitlement doesn't seem rare among cyclists (incl. the ones I know/have spoken too). They matter more than everyone else, so they should be allowed to break the law. Then cyclists wonder why most other pedestrians dislike them.

zimpenfish 11y ago
(anecdotes are not evidence but) most of the cyclists I see blowing through red lights seem to have little concept of how gears work - hence stopping and starting is "too much work". Not that it helps, mind - many's the time I've passed and re-passed the same red light jumpers despite stopping at every single one.
- jakejake 11y ago
  At least around here in Chicago gears are totally uncool - fixed gear bike with no brakes is where it's at.
- talaketu 11y ago
  "work" to change velocity is proportional to the square of the change in velocity, proportional to mass, and independent of gearing.
  - falcolas 11y ago
    "work" also involves the total velocity change, which means that the trip to employment results in the same amount of total work, regardless of the number of stops made, and which over the total of a day results in 0 work being completed (assuming a round trip from home to the place of employment). Perhaps the physics definition of "work" isn't quite the right one to use?
    - talaketu 11y ago
      A regenerative braking system might make cyclists happier to stop, it's true.
  - Nadya 11y ago
    The physical "work" of trying to take off uphill in 7th gear is a lot more effort than taking off in 1st gear on a 7 gear bike.
  - zimpenfish 11y ago
    I'd suggest testing that theory by moving off from a standstill in various gears and seeing how much "work" each one takes.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
melling 11y ago
Wouldn't the world be better off if more people biked? Maybe we should come up with a better solution than recommending that people get cars?
- Nadya 11y ago
  If someone is too lazy to bike, my suggestion is to embrace the laziness and get a car. I guess I could suggest they walk or jog - but being reasonable - biking is a lot more practical than walking or jogging when you have a 6 mile commute.
Mithaldu 11y ago
> > There are times when, as a cyclist, I blow through a red light. I’ve got momentum, I don’t feel like stopping, I’m > Cars have momentum too. Physics makes it so they can't come to an instant stop. Then cyclists wonder why they get hit by cars when they run red lights. While the justification does not make any sense whatsoever, the way he explains it also doesn't, since it fails to capture the difference between cars and bicycles: Cars don't fall over when they stop. The thing that makes intersections a little annoying when you have to stop at them is not the effort of stopping and starting, it's the physical AND mental effort required to evaluate all the possible options for stopping and then balancing the bike, then choosing and encating the right one. Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.) That said, there are no justifications for running a red light as a bike, only excuses made by fuckheads.
- dllthomas 11y ago
  "Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.)" Arses can leave the saddle, and - more importantly - bikes can tip (substantially shortening the distance from saddle to ground).
  - Mithaldu 11y ago
    You're pointing out the obvious that i was implying in my post in the hope that it already was obvious. Getting out of the saddle is both a slightly strenuous thing to do, and also moderately dangerous, since you have to balance on a vehicle that is devoid of inherent balance at low speeds. Dangerous since you run a small risk of "tipping" into the car that's half a meter left of you, sometimes less. As for the tipping comment, yes, that is valid, but also highly depends on the anatomy of the rider. At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection. Many intersections have affordances like light poles, rails or just the curb that i can use, but sometimes stopping at an intersection for me means i have to entirely get off the thing.

by Nadya 11y ago

zimpenfish 11y ago

(anecdotes are not evidence but) most of the cyclists I see blowing through red lights seem to have little concept of how gears work - hence stopping and starting is "too much work". Not that it helps, mind - many's the time I've passed and re-passed the same red light jumpers despite stopping at every single one.

jakejake 11y ago
At least around here in Chicago gears are totally uncool - fixed gear bike with no brakes is where it's at.
talaketu 11y ago
"work" to change velocity is proportional to the square of the change in velocity, proportional to mass, and independent of gearing.
- falcolas 11y ago
  "work" also involves the total velocity change, which means that the trip to employment results in the same amount of total work, regardless of the number of stops made, and which over the total of a day results in 0 work being completed (assuming a round trip from home to the place of employment). Perhaps the physics definition of "work" isn't quite the right one to use?
  - talaketu 11y ago
    A regenerative braking system might make cyclists happier to stop, it's true.
- Nadya 11y ago
  The physical "work" of trying to take off uphill in 7th gear is a lot more effort than taking off in 1st gear on a 7 gear bike.
- zimpenfish 11y ago
  I'd suggest testing that theory by moving off from a standstill in various gears and seeing how much "work" each one takes.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

melling 11y ago

Wouldn't the world be better off if more people biked? Maybe we should come up with a better solution than recommending that people get cars?

Nadya 11y ago
If someone is too lazy to bike, my suggestion is to embrace the laziness and get a car. I guess I could suggest they walk or jog - but being reasonable - biking is a lot more practical than walking or jogging when you have a 6 mile commute.

Mithaldu 11y ago

> > There are times when, as a cyclist, I blow through a red light. I’ve got momentum, I don’t feel like stopping, I’m > Cars have momentum too. Physics makes it so they can't come to an instant stop. Then cyclists wonder why they get hit by cars when they run red lights. While the justification does not make any sense whatsoever, the way he explains it also doesn't, since it fails to capture the difference between cars and bicycles: Cars don't fall over when they stop. The thing that makes intersections a little annoying when you have to stop at them is not the effort of stopping and starting, it's the physical AND mental effort required to evaluate all the possible options for stopping and then balancing the bike, then choosing and encating the right one. Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.) That said, there are no justifications for running a red light as a bike, only excuses made by fuckheads.

dllthomas 11y ago
"Do keep in mind that proper bike configuration means the leg is almost at full stretch when the pedal is in down position, which means you can't just keep your arse in the saddle and put a foot on the ground. (Unless you've extraordinarily long legs.)" Arses can leave the saddle, and - more importantly - bikes can tip (substantially shortening the distance from saddle to ground).
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  You're pointing out the obvious that i was implying in my post in the hope that it already was obvious. Getting out of the saddle is both a slightly strenuous thing to do, and also moderately dangerous, since you have to balance on a vehicle that is devoid of inherent balance at low speeds. Dangerous since you run a small risk of "tipping" into the car that's half a meter left of you, sometimes less. As for the tipping comment, yes, that is valid, but also highly depends on the anatomy of the rider. At 5'4" i'm small enough that it is impossible for me to tip my bicycle down far enough to put both feet on the ground in the space afforded me at an intersection. Many intersections have affordances like light poles, rails or just the curb that i can use, but sometimes stopping at an intersection for me means i have to entirely get off the thing.