Paul Barnard

I have ridden this road before. It's not ideal. It's a narrow 35 MPH road with moderate traffic. When I rode it, I rode it further out in the county where there was less traffic. The rear strike is the most difficult collision to avoid and the one so many of us fear most. About our only defense on this kind of road is lane positioning to try to enhance visibility. Unfortunately that's probably the point of greatest consternation with motorists.

https://www.wlox.com/2019/01/14/long...-TVyUtEFUXDNMs

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4128...7i13312!8i6656

Leisesturm

How well did that 'defense' work for that woman? I would be ON the fog stripe on a road like that, and I have had to ride roads like that. I really would look for an alternative. Unless I way miss my guess she wasn't ON the fog stripe when she was struck from behind. She was literally between a rock and a hard place, didn't really want traffic crawling up her six, but didn't want them passing her a foot and a half to the left either. Maybe she stayed a beat too long in front of someone with anger management issues. Been there. So I don't stay in front of them, unless we have an understanding.

Paul Barnard

I don't have the details. She may well have been hugging the fog line. Unfortunately in bicycle crash reports like this, there is very little useful information provided. From a legal standpoint, it probably doesn't matter to the killer. The killer will get off scott free. We had a fatality about a year ago where a car crossed over into the bike lane and killed a rider. ZERO consequences for the driver.

Maelochs

I think the real reason so many cyclists fear getting hit from behind is that there is no defense. You can ride the fog line, the center line, the left or right tire track, dead center in the lane ... it doesn't matter.

I have seen cars rear-end each other in traffic. I have had it happen to me. That is one reason I sometimes won't take my place in line at some stop lights/stop signs---- drivers don't pay attention, and might well crush me against the car ahead.

As I an others have posted here, some drivers will try to pass even if it means crossing the double-yellow and dodging oncoming traffic. Some will pass at full speed, leaving a foot or so, and simply misjudge.

Every other sort of collision a cyclist might at least have some warning and be ready to take evasive action. When a car plows you from behind, it happens before you know it is happening.

I bet cars do 45-55 mph down that road, regardless of traffic conditions. I used to ride a road like that to work where drivers wouldn't even slow much in heavy traffic and hard rain. The worst is that drivers never look at the edge of the road ahead---so when a cyclist sees sand washed across the road, or a branch, or a huge hole, the cyclist has to chose between cutting into traffic or crash and falling into traffic. And when cars pass with a foot to spare anyway, a pothole can be deadly.

I am not above pointing out where cyclists could have helped themselves in an accident, but in a rear strike ... that is pretty much on the driver most of the time.

Jim from Boston

A Fatality Close to Home

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Barnard

I have ridden this road before. It's not ideal. It's a narrow 35 MPH road with moderate traffic. When I rode it, I rode it further out in the county where there was less traffic. The rear strike is the most difficult collision to avoid and the one so many of us fear most.

About our only defense on this kind of road is lane positioning to try to enhance visibility. Unfortunately that's probably the point of greatest consternation with motorists.

https://www.wlox.com/2019/01/14/long...-TVyUtEFUXDNMs

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4128...7i13312!8i6656

Thanks for posting, especially with the Google view; is this in the vicinity of the crash? I particularly noted the extensively long sight lines that would lend to viewing with a rearview mirror, and the edges that would be practicable to “ditching.”

I have described roads as pictured, except for the lack of shade (and with light traffic) as “initimate.” Here in Metro Boston though we rarely see such long, straight stretches.I’m not second-guessing the situation, and indeed, I was struck from behind on a seemingly peaceful suburban road, even with a rearview mirror.

Hoopdriver

I recall riding Canal a few times when I lived in Long Beach in the mid 1980s, but it was not one of my routine routes. I don't recall much drama, though. Perhaps traffic was lighter back then but I think the most important factor was that there were fewer distractions to entice drivers.

BobbyG

When I am on a shoulderless road like that (which is a s seldom as possible) I rely on my glasses-mounted mirror. When there is traffic coming up behind me, and traffic coming towards me I pull off the road and stop for a few seconds until things are clear.

If it is just traffic behind me I will wave them around me.

But just waving won't help with a driver who isn't paying attention or has malicious intent.

We may not know what preceded this fatality, or if it was even preventable.

The only certainty is that it was tragic.

My heart goes out to the family of the deceased.

Paul Barnard

Right on. The maximum speed limit on all of the rural county roads in Harrison County is 35. MS has a a state law that prohibits Sheriff's Departments from using speed detection devices. Few counties have found a legal way around it and the will to do it. This crash took place outside of the city limits of Long Beach. These narrow rural roadways are used like rural highways. In many cases they "feel" like 55 MPH rural highways. I am not a speeder, but I find myself going well above the posted speed on these roads most of the time. This particular stretch of road is pretty busy. It's one of few feeder routes off of I-10 to the south and the population has grown appreciable over the years.

As a cyclist, that stretch of Canal Road would rate an "avoid" for daytime riding with me. This happened nearly 25 minutes after sunset. Even with lights, at that hour, the road rates a "no way" with me.

Leisesturm

I need to ask the o.p. what kind of 'lane positioning' options are possible on a road like that? IMO this whole thread is setup to pit our various approaches to VC against each other. If it were not, details of what went wrong (something did) would be supplied. In the absence of such, I for one wouldn't bother to post it because there is no point. People get killed like this nearly every day somewhere in the country. More like two, sometimes three, most days, by the annual statistics. Indeed I would also avoid that road, period. But if there were no alternative I would ride it. Threads like this IMO attempt to bias opinion against drivers and I agree that drivers do plenty to earn our mistrust but ... I don't know ... this particular incident does not look like a cut and dried example of cager incompetence or malice.

Paul Barnard

No it is not. My standard practice when I read of any bicycle fatality is to ask myself, and others, if anything could have been done differently to have avoided the crash. If a story is to have safety value, and I like to think that's part of what this forum is all about, the that's what we have to do. Sure, we can express the sorrow or rage that I suspect most of us feel, but there's not much value to it relative to safety or advocacy. Given that this took place 20+ minutes after sunset and the fact that we don't know if the bike was equipped with lights makes it really hard to put the blame on the motorist. Lane position is our primary defense mechanism for a rear strike. In this case it means little if the bike wasn't outfitted with lights. The lane position options on that road are generally middle of the lane, a foot or two feet off the fog line and riding the line. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. My risk assessment of that road at that time is that I would not ride it period. If I were to ride it I have would have no idea how to strategically position myself. I may ride an MTB on the grass beside the road. You certainly tried to read a lot into this very simple statement.

"The rear strike is the most difficult collision to avoid and the one so many of us fear most. About our only defense on this kind of road is lane positioning to try to enhance visibility. Unfortunately that's probably the point of greatest consternation with motorists."

rumrunn6

very sad for this loss of life. & I know how it feels to have someone die riding exactly where I have ridden. I can personally think of two immediately. don't know if I would not ride that road. I do rides roads w/o paved shoulders all the time. they aren't as straight as the OP's & we have speed enforcement, so no one is going 55 on these 35mph rds. also it's not remote or "rural". but I still don't like it. I always hope that if I'm hit, I'll fly off to the side & survive

mr_bill

shoota 

After looking at the Google Map it would be a "no way" for me too. Looks really busy, fast, and narrow.

Maelochs

Put the pipe Down.

Fact: a car hit a cyclist from behind.

Fact--unless the cyclist darted in front of the driver at the last possible moment, the driver is at fault.

Fact--if the driver was overtaking the cyclist with a three-foot buffer (as is the law) then the cyclist would have been able to serve roadside obstruction without being hit.

Fact: it is the responsibility of the vehicle overtaking another to overtake in a safe cautions manner (hence "failure to use car and caution while passing " tickets.)

Fact---Under NO circumstances is a driver Allowed to hit a cyclist, no matter where that cyclist is on the road.

This is not some conspiracy against drivers. This is a situation were a cyclist got run over. And in case you hadn't noticed, hitting things with your car is a Crime.

I have no reason to suspect malice ... but No Matter What, a car should never be close enough to a cyclist for the tow to collide unless the cyclist deliberately crosses the path of the car. Unless this rider deliberately made a left turn into the path of a car passing with three feet of space---in other words, unless this rider pretty much tried to get hit---then the fault lies with the driver.

In Almost all rear-end collisions, the fault lies with the vehicle following, because that vehicle should Never be close enough to the vehicle ahead, not to have time to react and avoid. That's the law, those are facts. Tail-gating, unsafe overtaking, distracted driving---all on the driver. The trailing driver's legal responsibility is to not be close enough to the vehicle ahead to have a chance to hit it. Sorry there is no conspiracy, just people stating facts. Go look them up if you doubt me.

MikeyMK

A road like that here would have a 50mph/60mph limit, though usually more hilly/twisty.
Drivers have to have their wits about them but it doesn't stop accidents.

There's no taking the lane anywhere here, even the smallest residential streets are 30mph and many drivers are relentless.

In that situation it's clear it's only a matter of time before you get hit ffrom behind. Every pass relies on the driver seeing you. Not daydreaming, texting, changing the stereo, whatever. Every vehicle that passes you.


It is only a matter of time.


Thankfully, my town is different and I don't cycle on roads. I never will. I'll sooner not cycle.

Paul Barnard

I live in the New Orleans area now. I used to live near where the crash happened. Further up into Harrison County (and southern Stone County) there is a massive network of roads just like that. I had a number of great routes that connected them. I could go miles on some of them without encountering a car. Most weren't as straight as Canal. I never had a close call and rarely had a brush pass. I'd estimate most vehicles traveled between 45-50 MPH. My protective strategy was to ride out in the middle of my lane wearing bright clothing. When a car approached, I'd physically turn and look over my shoulder. I'd even do a little in lane weaving as I did this. I turned my head to let them know I knew they were there and I hoped the lateral movement back and forth in my lane made me a bit more conspicuous. As they got closer I'd gravitate to the right tire track. I'd do head checks over my shoulder as the interaction continued. At this point, I typically had some indication they had seen me. Normally in the form of them beginning to move left. Sometimes it was obvious they were slowing. Then as they continued to close I'd move over to the fog line. I never had it happen, but if at any point I felt like they didn't see me, I was prepared to bail off the road to the right.

None of what I did made it any easier on the vehicles. They always had plenty of room to go around if there was no oncoming traffic. The head check told them that I knew they were there and the movement to the right showed the appearance of courtesy. It was a good strategy in my experience. Despite actively managing each encounter it was still possible that a distracted driver could take me out. Using those strategies simply wouldn't work on a road like Canal. It sees a more traffic coming in both directions. Although this was a Saturday and not a work day, I would assume a good bit of traffic. Every lane positioning choice creates a different set of dangers and issues. Now add in that it's getting dark out. Motorist's eyes are adjusting. Depth perception not as good when it's dark out. If the rider had lights, it's even harder to judge the distance of typical bicycle lights. Now add in that drivers have a steady stream or intermittent volley of motorists headlights in your face. My heart goes out to the rider, but even if the rider was trying to do everything right, it was a case of poor risk management. Even if the rider didn't have lights, an alert motorists would have seen her. Even know well ahead that something was going on. Seeing the vehicles ahead shift left to go around, seeing their brake lights perhaps. It wasn't completely dark out. If memory serves me correctly, it was gray and overcast that evening. One final note of importance. Bicycles are rare on that road. I have ridden and driven roads where bicyclists are encountered more often and it tends to have a different dynamic.

Lemond1985

This is also my strategy for surviving on these kind of roads, though I mainly keep right. As long as I monitor the amount of space approaching cars are giving me, and am prepared to bail out onto the shoulder if needed, I feel fairly safe. But when traffic gets too heavy, this strategy begins to fall apart, and I'm no longer able to monitor traffic approaching from the rear as closely and still keep my own line.

I have become a big believer in "It's the second car that kills you" philosophy. 99.999% of approaching cars will see you and take evasive action if they see you and have time to react. But if they are tailgating the car in front of them, and that car executes a close pass (for whatever reason) the second car has almost no time to see and react to the bicyclist. I think those are the people you need to worry about most as a rider on a narrow road. But it's tough because I can't see them until the last second either. Another reason I wish cops would enforce tailgating laws more aggressively.

But I don't feel unduly threatened are narrow roads like the one pictured above, if traffic is light, visibility is good, and I monitor the living %&# out of every car that approaches from behind and am ready to bail out if it's clear they are not giving me enough room to pass safely. After all, what's the point of using mirrors and glances back if you're not gonna act on the information you get from them?

Paul Barnard

You expressed much of what I wanted to better than I did. Thanks for ringing in.

mcours2006

At those speeds and on that road I would not be comfortable riding on it for any length of time/distance. You could be hit from behind on any road at any time but some roads are will have a higher chance of you being hit from behind, and I'd say that this is the kind of road that invites it.

Daniel4

I have been noticing that the victims are identified as people but perpetrators are usually identified as motor vehicles. In this article, no attempt was made to describe the driver at all.

I also notice that the responses in this thread was trying to put the responsibility on the cyclist. The article states that excess speed and alcohol was involved. I'm assuming this was the driver, not the cyclist. In which case, does not riding in the fog line absolve the driver from all responibilities including excess speed and dui?

Why is bad driving acceptable that everybody else has to accommodate them by avoiding the roads they use?

mynewnchome

What ya got and how well does it work? I picked up one for the handlebar, not that great, looking alternatives, I live on a busy road. Thanks!

Leisesturm

I think this is the perfect thread to bring up a statistic I have known about for about a year. As I understand it, 50% of bicycle accidents are where the bike has collided with a fixed object or road hazard. I don't know, I think it kind of puts in perspective all this fear of overtaking motorists. Full disclosure: I have, and use, a very large, highly regarded, helmet mounted rear view mirror. Nevertheless the main focus of my attention is on the road ahead! My ears give me all the information about overtaking vehicles that I need while I am in a bike lane, on the shoulder, or in the door zone. I don't expect to be rear ended in those spaces and there is little that a mirror could do to prevent a rear ending if that is what is about to occur. A mirror is invaluable for assessing how much distance there is between me and an overtaking vehicle. I can make the call whether to roll over the branch in my bike lane or move out in the road and avoid it. Or stop! 2" Bontrager Hardcase clinchers on a tandem weighing ~400lbs. means that more often than not I will just hold my line and roll over whatever is in my way vs moving out into the traffic flow. A lot is made of here about the distraction of drivers. How about our own distraction worrying about non-materialized threats from behind when there is a pedestrian that has just stepped off the sidewalk in front of you! As long as you are in motion (presumably forward) your greater awareness needs to be focused ahead. You can't do anything about what is behind you. You aren't going to dive to safety if someone bent on killing you with their Escalade hits the gas. Where are you going to go? May as well face it. You're done. Tell the truth, and I know its true because I've been there. You pick up a car moving fast in the mirror and you lose it because you are certain he is on a collision path but he goes right past you and you ruined a perfectly good pair of Fruit of the Loom's for nothing. In my case it was just random chance that I was making my usual once in a while scan but some of you are pretty obsessive about rear threats. Let it go. You have more to fear from what you might hit while you are worrying about what might hit you. FWIW.

Paul Barnard

It was an awkwardly worded sentence, but here's the meat of it. Bold is mine.

"excess speed nor alcohol appeared to be a factor in the crash."

Paul Barnard

I agree with that. I wouldn't say that I worry about a rear strike. It is a greater concern to me because it's the most difficult kind of collision to avoid. I have less control or influence over the situation. That and rear strikes are generally very bad news for the cyclist.

BobbyG

I'm on my second Take-a-Look mirror. The first lasted for a dozen years. It was a front-reflector mirror which is slightly better optically, but those mirrors tend to tarnish. The new one is a more conventional reflector-under-glass mirror and can be cleaned without wearing away the reflective surface.

Not everybody likes glasses mounted mirrors, but I found mine a revelation (pun intended). The girls of view is large, while the small mirror doesn't block my forward view. A small swivel and tilt of the head allows one to gain a panoramic view of the road behind. And no matter how rough the road, the mirror is absolutely shake free.

My glasses mounted mirror and my Delta AirZound Airhorn are two of the biggest contributors to my safe biking.