Paul Barnard

The comment I made was just a general comment based on the recent discussion. I went back and watched the video again. I don't think the sun was the reason the driver in this case couldn't see, I think it was an excuse. Where is the cyclists shadow? Freeze the pic at second 11 and see if you can see a shadow from the truck. Freeze at second 18 and see if it looks like the drivers face is fully illuminated. I think they were dealing with filtered sunlight which is consistent with some of the thin clouds in the video. I can't get the clip to go full screen, so maybe I am not seeing it right.

Unca_Sam

Just before striking the cyclist, the driver is finishing flipping down the visor. Unless the reason for the collision is malice or intoxication, it no longer matters. The best we can do from this situation is try to learn what we can do to make ourselves safer.

Ride on the shoulder! Avoid roads! Take the lane! No one here wants to say ride on the fog line, but I'll ride on the fog line in certain circumstances to invite a pass if there's no oncoming traffic because the shoulder drops an inch into gravel, and traffic is moving close to my speed anyway there. I stay put if they can't pass with enough space anyway.

Edit: add that it's not 4 lanes or above 35mph.

Paul Barnard

Don't take the following too seriously.

It's odd that if someone makes a mistake when they are temporarily alcohol impaired, they go to jail and have their license removed. But if they are just a bad driver, they suffer no ill effects and get to keep on being a bad driver.

I don't ride the fog line on the subject road. That shoulder looks great to me. I will scoot over to the fog line when I am fairly certain the motorist behind me sees me and it's safe for them to pass.

Jim from Boston

I have posted to this thread about lane position, basically my position is...whatever.

Paul Barnard

Nick, you can certainly look at it as victim blaming. I don't. There's really not much of a safety or advocacy conversation to be had if we focus solely on the bad driver. A young woman who works in the building with me was hit by a car a few weeks ago while she was walking across a cross walk. Her light turned green, so she started walking. I talked to her last week. She was quick to point out that she should not have assumed that motor vehicle traffic would stop. I have a hunch if we asked this rider what he's do differently he'd probably quickly identify the very things we have been discussing. In professional mishap analysis circles, those involved in mishaps will always be asked what they'd do differently. Without the benefit of having the victim in our discussion, the only way we can draw lessons from this and grow from this is to discuss what the rider could do differently.

VARider54

Respectfully, I have to agree with Nick, to a degree. Victim blaming is more subtle than saying "The rider is at fault". It's about avoiding our own fear that the world can be a dangerous place and bad things happen randomly to people. If we have done nothing to invite mishaps upon ourselves, it shouldn't be suggested that we should have taken additional actions to have protected ourselves. Your last statement is the essence of victim blaming. What the rider (the victim) could do differently (the blame). As you pointed out, the safety/advocacy conversation is sorely lacking. What can the state do to make roads safer for cyclists? What form of education can have an impact on driver awareness? What technologies can be implemented to make cycling safer? I'm no expert in 'professional mishap analysis', but that sounds like reviewing processes and procedures as well as engineering and manufacturing to determine weakness and failures and making improvements to avoid future mishaps. I'm not sure that really applies to someone freely, and responsibly, enjoying an afternoon ride.

mcours2006

Whenever a cyclist dies from a collision with a vehicle, often when it is reported in the news they will say things like the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet, or that he was wearing dark clothing, or he did not have adequate lighting. This is wholly ridiculous of course, because it implies that had the cyclist been wearing a helmet, or had lights and hi-vis clothing he would have not have died. When news is reported this way it takes the responsibility off of the driver and places it squarely on the cyclists' shoulders, which is ridiculous.

Here's an interesting take on it:
https://www.outsideonline.com/239295...tting-cyclists

VARider54

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. First my condolences to you being struck by an intoxicated driver. I hope you made a complete recovery. I've never been hit so I can't imagine what it felt like.

You're right, no one is directly blaming the rider. Victim blaming is more subtle than that and it stems from our fears that bad things happen randomly to people and that the world can be a dangerous place. When we, including myself, say "he could've been riding on the shoulder " or "she shouldn't have been jogging at night" or "he should not have pushed the other guy", we are engaging in subtle victim blaming. We all mean well, and we should learn from others comments to help make better decisions for ourselves. That being said, a cyclist who chooses to ride erratically in heavy traffic while ignoring traffic signals definitely bears some responsibility should something happen to them. The rider in this video was not one of those guys.

There are numerous articles and published studies by professionals whom explain victim blaming more eloquently and authoritatively than I.

VARider54

I don't know what video you watched, so I can't comment on that. Perhaps we all have a different perspective on "reasonable". I don't think it's reasonable to be forced to ride on a debris strewn shoulder with rumble strips on my left, rough tarmac, and a hard curb and gravel on my right. I don't think it's reasonable to give up my right-of-way because I'm afraid I might be hit. I know the world is a dangerous place, and I respect that. I know people aren't perfect, and I accept that. What I won't accept is allowing fear of the unknown and things uncertain to influence my reasoning, or give up my privileges because fate is uncertain.

But hey, you be you. And don't let anybody tell you you're wrong.

Paul Barnard

The primary safety message in a media report needs to match the incident. When the auto driver is at fault, the message needs to be directed at the driver.

Paul Barnard

Did you see debris or rough tarmac in the video?

VARider54

When viewed on Youtube on a large screen, yes. Odd that you're more interested in the condition of the shoulder than the injuries suffered by Tuan or the months of recovery after behind hit.
I guess we all have different priorities.

Paul Barnard

This is a safety and advocacy forum. I am discussing the safety and advocacy aspect of the accident. Frankly, I am more than a little disappointed I have to explain this to you.

mr_bill

High volume chip seal applied December 2018, crash (not accident) took place in April 2019, Streetview from May 2019.

There were loose chips on the shoulders in May 2019, so I think we can assume that there were loose chips on the shoulders in April 2019.



-mr. bill

Unca_Sam

+1

Life's too short to live on the margins.

I'm anxious on 4 lane roads, but it stands to reason that I should be more concerned about two lane roads with similar or slightly higher speed differentials. When I'm on a 4 lane, I take my lane, and traffic goes around me in the other lane. It's the same to the driver as it would be behind a garbage truck or 80-year-old Olga going home from the potluck. If a driver has no ambiguity about whether they can get around you in the lane, they'll move. I've been trying hard to find a video I watched with a guy experimenting on an arterial in CA ( I want to say LA, but I'm not sure). He kept right, and was buzzed by traffic, including a 26" box truck . He rode the same route again and occupied the lane, and traffic behind him slowed and passed in the next lane with plenty of space.

I was much more concerned about moving over for drivers when a double yellow is present until I learned that passing in a double yellow zone is legal in Ohio while double yellow lines are present if you are overtaking a vehicle traveling at half the speed limit, you don't exceed the speed limit for the pass, and it is safe (no vehicles in oncoming lane, adequate clear distance, etc.). I use this more frequently for oblivious drivers than cyclists .

VARider54

I think we're all a little disappointed that you have such a burning desire to explain this. Also, I really don't see any explanation there. But I'll give it a shot just for fun.
Safety: Debris, hard shoulders and rumble strips can lead to minor flats or catastrophic bike failures, not to mention the distraction of avoiding objects, animals and disrepair. And before you "have to" respond, the shoulder in the video does not appear to be in disrepair. From that point of view, it's much safer to ride on a clean road with little or no distractions. As for the rough tarmac, it just adds a level of fatigue to the ride.
Advocacy: Where do we start? Protected lanes for cyclist. Re-lining roads to include 'bicycle only' lanes. Street cleaning and maintenance that goes beyond the main travel lanes. Rumble strips across the lanes to "wake up" drivers and focus their attention on the road. Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction of transportation projects, oh...wait, Congress has already asked DOT Federal Highway Administration to study this.
Yes to all.

mr_bill

Do people on bicycles ride Highway 95? Yes, people on bicycles ride this road. On the Strava Segment "soma baby climb" where the crash occured, over 250 public riders have been recorded riding through.

If you ride a bike south of Yuma, your choices are pretty much roads like Highway 95, clay roads along canals, or stationary bikes.




If you ride your bike IN Yuma, you are pretty much faced with typical superblock developments, multilane stroads with isolated local roads that often only connect to other multilane stroads. There are also a couple of paved mups along canals, and a few separated bike lanes (aka sidewalks) too. You can ride your bike on most sidewalks in Yuma County, but if you do, they remind you to ride in the direction of traffic.



-mr. bill

livedarklions

Yeah, I'm with you on this one--I hate these exercises in hindsight. None of us can tell what that shoulder was like to ride on (there's a stretch of shoulder on NH 111 that would probably photograph much like that, but is ok to ride on if a bit unpleasant), so I don't see how it makes sense for us to second-guess the rider on whether he could actually ride on it safely. He was there, we weren't, and I don't think he'd likely have been on the road where he was if the alternative seemed reasonable to him.

My riding generally doesn't require that I get to a certain place at a particular time, so I have the luxury of avoiding roads like that. It would be completely arrogant of me to assume the same was true of the rider here.

Paul Barnard

These exercises in hindsight and assumptions can be instructive and educational. If we assume every rider who was a victim of a careless motorist was infallible in their decision making, we wouldn't have many of the discussions we have here. Some riders summarily reject riding on the shoulder because there may be debris. Some reject the shoulder because it has debris even though that debris doesn't present a hazard. Some reject the shoulder because it's not a smooth as the primary road surface. Unless there was debris that presented a substantial hazard on that shoulder, I would have been on it. If there was such debris, I would NOT glue myself to the white line, and I would reenter the shoulder lane when the debris no longer presented a hazard, rumble strips be damned.

None of that disallows that the rider may have been completely just in where he was during the video.

Daniel4

Here's the latest example.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...ruck-1.5277522

Usually, you can't comment. But in those rare articles where you can, I ask if it was a self-driving car.

This latest fatality occurred yesterday. I heard on the radio it was Toronto's 41st road fatality and she was the 22nd pedestrian. At this rate Toronto will maintain its 30 to 40 average pedestrian death per year. And of course, the bad drivers will always look for excuses to blame the victim.

The Humboldt bus crash killed 16 people. Annual Toronto experiences two Humboldts each year, one victim at a time.

mcours2006

So much for Vision Zero. It's looking more like Vision 40.

Leisesturm

The shoulder is the proper place to ride on that road for a bicycle. No, it isn't quite as nice as the pavement but that isn't saying much. The pavement ain't all that great either! Typical Red State infrastructure. To the usual traffic stream (pickups, SUV's, RV's) road quality isn't a deal breaker. Even the lycra set all want 32mm and bigger tires. Gravel bikes are a thing. A gravel bike would make short work of that shoulder. But in another thread I read where the cyclist that was hit was posting on Strava again just two months after the crash? Really? Either the actual speed of the car that hit them was way inflated or someone else has ownership of the account. Seriously, with as little follow-up (did the driver stop?!) as there has been to this story a person should be forgiven for wondering if it wasn't some elaborate stunt.

Unca_Sam

Please share?

dougmc

It might have been me, in this thread. Post #54.

That said,

1. the gap is three months and a week, not two months, and
2. all of his activities since the crash seem to be on a trainer rather than on the road.

So ... it looks like he's healing, but I imagine he has a long way to go and may never fully recover.

edit:

Also, I see no evidence whatsoever that this is an "elaborate stunt" -- everything I've seen says the opposite.

Also, "55 mph" is the speed limit on this road -- I don't know that anybody has worked out the actual speed of the car, though it might be possible to do that from the video.

mr_bill

Unforgivable.

Really, between the “safety professional” who gets passed by a couple dozen cars a week telling people where to ride on this road, the thread-jacker, lawnmower man, and you....

The only thing that could “improve” this is the opinions of someone who no longer rides bikes. Oh.

Instructive and educational?

-mr. bill