From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock on
On Aug 12, 1:19 am, Frank Studt <frank.st...(a)gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 12.08.2010 00:25, schrieb TibetanMonkey
>
> > On Aug 11, 11:53 am, Frank Studt<frank.st...(a)gmx.net>  wrote:
> >> Am 11.08.2010 18:36, schrieb TibetanMonkey
>
> >>> It's a hopeful video and also sad.
>
> >> The sadest thing in the video are the bike lanes and the cycle paths and
> >> the damn fools who believe they make cycling saver and better. Its a
> >> lie. A before-after study for the city of Copenhagen shows that the
> >> building of separated bicycle facilities worsened the safety of cyclists.
>
> >>http://www.trafitec.dk/pub/bicycle%20tracks%20and%20lanes.pdf
>
> > I think two parallel systems are desirable. Few sane people would
> > allow their kids through the maze created by the automobile.
>
> Why wouldn't you let your kids drive on the road like every other
> vehicle? I mean you obviously would let kids drive on small cycle lanes
> directly alongside "the maze created by the automobile". BTW these
> segregated cycle facilities are crossing car traffic all the time and
> what kind of person would let his kid drive on the right side of a maybe
> right turning vehicle? Accidents with right turning vehicles are the
> most common car-bicycle-accidents and its proven that for several
> reasons the segregation of cars and bicycles increases them. I gave you
> a link above about an up to date study about cycling safety in
> Copenhagen. Read first than talk.
>
>
>
> > We saw kids there, didn't we?
>
> Enough about the kids, yes its saver for them to drive in mixed traffic.
> They can be better seen for car users and the safety rules on the road
> are much easyer to follow then riding on separated facilities with a
> different right of way.
>
>
>
> > Is there a model anywhere in the world where such relaxed cycling is
> > observed WITHOUT bike facilities?
>
> I dont know how much you are cycling but its definitely not very
> relaxing being on smallish cycle facilities with that many riders. Some
> of them going alongside parking vehicles (doring zone). You might think
> you are safer, but studies have proofen the opposite many times. Before
> the mass motorization took place in many European citys the bicycle was
> the first choice as a means of travel and there where almost no
> separated facilities at all. Facilities where created to get that damn
> cyclists out of the way, so cars can go faster.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Actually there is no kind of scientific evidence that separated bicycle
> >> facilities have a positive impact on the safety of cyclists. The
> >> opposite is true (the study above is not the first that shows the
> >> negative effects of cyling facilities on riders safety). There isnt even
> >> a prove that more people ride bikes if you built bike lanes.
>
> >> If you want to drive save listen to what John Forester is saying:
>
> >>http://www.vehicularcyclist.com/vcvideo.html
>
> >> Or just search for vehicular cycling
>
> >> Frank
>
> > So perhaps we can learn from some other model where a good chunk of
> > the population rides bikes among cars. I'm all ears.
>
> Actually Forester talks about it in his lecture i have linked above. The
> people in DK or NL are not biking cause there are cycle facilities. They
> are doing it cause the city structure favor it as a mode of travel and
> mass motorization took place very late. Here a picture from the 50s.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/16nine/4161144794/#/
>
> No facilities at all!
>
> A 2004 study for NL shows that cycling is decreasing\stagnating, despite
> the efforts an money put in cycling infrastructure.
>
> http://www.ecf.com/misc/filePush.php?mimeType=application/pdf&fullPat....
>
> Another study shows that infrastructure is of no relevance for choice of
> Transport.
>
> http://www.ecf.com/misc/filePush.php?mimeType=application/pdf&fullPat....
>
> So why dont you take some time, read a little bit of science about
> traffic choice, traffic safety, listen to what Forester has to say and
> meditate a bit about. Maybe next time you are lucky and right something
> useful.
>
> Frank

You haven't been listening. I'm encouraging that at least in America
PEOPLE SHOULD TAKE THE LANE. Let the car look for space around you,
not the other way around. If America were to take a project like
Copenhagen, the whole trillion dollars that went into the war go would
down the "black hole" and the resulting product wouldn't work.

What it's totally unsustainable is the STATUS QUO. When some of you
decide we should take the lane under the same flag, you let me know.
The situation here is bound to improve with be Velib program, but the
peripherals roads, I'm afraid, will remain NO MAN'S LAND. I want to
take off and ride around Florida perhaps.

Think of the logo for the flag, but I'm OK with a banana. ;)
From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock on
On Aug 12, 2:07 am, Frank Studt <frank.st...(a)gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 11.08.2010 22:50, schrieb Jim A:
>
> > On 08/11/2010 07:53 PM, Frank Studt wrote:
>
> >>http://www.vehicularcyclist.com/vcvideo.html
>
> >> Or just search for vehicular cycling
>
> > I like the style of those videos, especially the emphasis on being
> > courteous to other road users. We could do with some similar videos on
> > cycling in the UK (if we don't have some already).
>
> I dont know about videos, but there is a book out by John Franklin about
> vehicular cycling in the UK.
>
> http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/index.html
>
> Although i think the general principles of vehicular cycling are not
> really different, you just have to exchange right for left sometimes.
>
> Here some words by Franklin about Segragation, Vehicular Cycling and
> cycling safety.
>
> http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/vehicular.pdf
>
> Frank

Everybody is selling you a book that says "how to survive in the
jungle." I'm telling you "how to tame the jungle." How can we tame the
SUVs? How can we ban phones? How can we reverse the food chain?

The implications are much more profound.
From: Frank Studt on
Am 12.08.2010 15:47, schrieb the TibetanMonkey
>
> Everybody is selling you a book that says "how to survive in the
> jungle." I'm telling you "how to tame the jungle."

Actually you have nothing to tell at all. Bye.


Frank
From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock on
On Aug 12, 9:04 am, Frank Studt <frank.st...(a)gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 12.08.2010 15:47, schrieb the TibetanMonkey
>
>
>
> > Everybody is selling you a book that says "how to survive in the
> > jungle." I'm telling you "how to tame the jungle."
>
> Actually you have nothing to tell at all. Bye.
>
> Frank

Bye, but don't you have a suggestion how to deal with these beasts?

'It's a jungle out there. Well, not really: it's worse than a jungle.
It's a stretch of roadway anywhere in America, and in place of the
ravenous tigers and stampeding rhinos and slithery anacondas...

And the enemy is us. Take a ride with "Anne," a 40-year-old mother of
three who would rather we not use her real name, as she steers her 2
1/2-ton black Chevy Suburban out of her driveway on a leafy street in
residential Washington. The clock on the dashboard reads 2:16. She has
14 minutes to make it to her daughter's game. Within a block of her
house she has hit 37 m.p.h., taking stop signs as suggestions rather
than law. She has a lot on her mind. "I'm not even thinking of other
cars," Anne admits cheerfully as she lays on the horn. An oldster in
an econo-box ahead of her has made the near fatal mistake of slowing
at an intersection with no stop sign or traffic light. Anne swears and
peels off around him.'

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,987643,00.html
From: Frank Studt on
Am 12.08.2010 18:37, schrieb His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of
the Movement of Tantra-Hammock:
> On Aug 12, 9:04 am, Frank Studt<frank.st...(a)gmx.net> wrote:
>> Am 12.08.2010 15:47, schrieb the TibetanMonkey
>>
>>
>>
>>> Everybody is selling you a book that says "how to survive in the
>>> jungle." I'm telling you "how to tame the jungle."
>>
>> Actually you have nothing to tell at all. Bye.
>>
>> Frank
>
> Bye, but don't you have a suggestion how to deal with these beasts?

I already made my point pretty clear, no segregated facilities like bike
lanes or paths. Regarding transport policy, there is a necessity to make
driving cars unattractive. Possible means are taxes (oil), reducing
parking spaces, traffic calming and more speed limits and surveilance of
traffic violations... But I think there have been made big mistakes
especially in the US concerning city structure and town planing. The
distances between home, work, shopping... are often too big for most
people for using bicycles...

Regarding individual behaviour, I suggest avoid cycling facilities, take
the lane use the principles of vehicular cycling and it will be the most
safety you can get.

>
> 'It's a jungle out there. Well, not really: it's worse than a jungle.
> It's a stretch of roadway anywhere in America, and in place of the
> ravenous tigers and stampeding rhinos and slithery anacondas...

I dont like the analogies to the animal kingdom cause we are not
animals. If you increase your visibility in traffic nobody will kill you
on purpose with his SUV even "Anne" wouldnt. Of course there is reckless
driving but driving on separated facilities does not reduce your risk of
getting hit by a car. The opposite is true. Most car-bicycle-accidents
happen on intersections. The best way to reduce this risk is being
visible by driving on the road.

Frank