HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Request for statistics regarding bicycle helmet use in Holland
Date: 22 Nov 92 18:58:43 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In an excellent article <69967@cup.portal.com> JForester@cup.portal.com (John - Forester) writes:

>The first reason suggested for the claim about U.S. cyclists
[being more at risk]
>was that they were sporting cyclists engaging in what was claimed to
>be the inherently dangerous activity of sporting cycling on roads.

>   Now Chris Malcolm makes the claim that many of the falls described
>for U.S. cyclists were caused by discovering, after years of original
>ignorance, the effects of water on the roads.

>Neither the accidents nor the cyclists fit this
>description.

Most of the accidents were due to losing traction in the wet.

>The discovery about slimy wet wood was that the wooden
>bridge decking remained slimy for a considerable time after the road
>had dried off. Considering how rare it is to ride on wood, I think
>that this is not common knowledge anywhere.

Perhaps so, but _walking_ on slimy wooden bridges is certainly
commonplace in the UK. There are actually a few places in the UK where
sections of _wooden_ cobbles comprise the road surface, but I admit
that these are now very rare.

>   Chris Malcolm asked how many of the rear-wheel-slide falls
>occurred when the cyclists were using toe clips and straps that
>prevented them from putting a foot down to stop the fall. All of the
>accidents described except the fall on the complicated streetcar
>tracks (in 1944, approx.) occurred when the cyclist was using toe
>clips and straps.

I would call the use of toe clips and straps as distinguishing
sporting cycling from utility cycling. This supports my contention
that sporting cyclists are more at hazard than utility cyclists, who
can simply put a foot down instrad of falling off. I have seen dozens
of cyclists with strapped-in feet fall off their bikes while trying to
creep very slowly up to red traffic lights. They are reluctant to
disengage a foot, since it takes a little time to re-engage it, but
while travelling as slowly as possible lose balance, and find they
can't pull their foot out in time.  That kind of accident simply
doesn't happen to utility cyclists. I've never seen anyone seriously
hurt by such a fall, but it is clear that lying in the road entangled
with your bike is rather more risky than standing astride it.
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich)
Subject: Re: Request for statistics regarding bicycle helmet use in Holland
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 01:30:46 GMT

In article <28510@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:

>I would call the use of toe clips and straps as distinguishing
>sporting cycling from utility cycling. This supports my contention
>that sporting cyclists are more at hazard than utility cyclists, who
>can simply put a foot down instrad of falling off.

While clipless pedals offer the ability to step right out, they
also prevent another serious problem with open pedals. That is
the possibility to slidding off of the pedal and this causing the
rider to fall sideways. This would happen if a utility rider with
wet soles or not very tractive pedals tries to accelerate hurriedly.
This is a common source of accidents by utility riders that is completely
missing from 'sports' riders using clips and straps or clipless pedals.

>I have seen dozens
>of cyclists with strapped-in feet fall off their bikes while trying to
>creep very slowly up to red traffic lights. They are reluctant to
>disengage a foot, since it takes a little time to re-engage it, but
>while travelling as slowly as possible lose balance, and find they
>can't pull their foot out in time.  That kind of accident simply
>doesn't happen to utility cyclists. I've never seen anyone seriously
>hurt by such a fall, but it is clear that lying in the road entangled
>with your bike is rather more risky than standing astride it.

This accident is far less dangerous than the utility rider who jumps
on the pedals in an effort to get across the street in front of an
on-coming vehicle, only to slip off the pedals and plunk down in front
of that same vehicle. Just because something is used by sports riders
is no reason to suppose it has no other utility.


Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis)
Subject: Re: REAL statistics on bicycle accidents (?)
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:20:40 GMT

dkw@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (David Wittenberg) writes:

>In article <1992Nov17.154934.11385@schbbs.mot.com>, CMSC28@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Mark Hickey) writes:
>|> Believe it or not, I found the following statistics in rec.climbing...
>|> (don't ask why it was there.... it's a long story).  If true (make
>|> your own judgement... I'm just passing it along), it says it all.....
>|> 
>|> >Collision with:        Accidents       Deaths          Injuries
>|> 
>|> >Car                     153829          1897            258732
>|> >Object                   33614          1471             45175
>|> >Pedestrian               17014           956             17493
>|> >No collision             13029           553             17384
>|> >Bicycle                  15187           126             15692
>|> >Parked car                6817           108              8645
>|> >All others*               1712            62              2637
>|> 
>|> >Total                   241202          5173            365758

>The pedestrians oddly lethal.  Compare them to cars or bikes, and
>you find one tenth as many collisions with peds than with cars, but
>half as many fatalities, and less than one tenth as many injuries.
>Compared to bike-bike collisions, there are about as many accidents
>and injuries but twice as many deaths.  

>Why should pedestrian - bicycle accidents be so lethal?  I wouldn't be
>surprised if they were terribly underreported, so we only hear about
>the most serious ones, especially lethal accidents.

These figures must have been mislabeled in the original posting on
rec.climbing.  The usual figure for cyclist fatalities for the whole
U.S. averages around 1000 per year so the 5173 cannot refer the the
number of cycling fatalities in California alone, it must refer to all
vehicular fatalities.  That is, what is being reported is that there
were 1897 fatalities in which a vehicle (all sorts) was in a collision
with a car, most of these would have been other cars, some (no idea how
many) were bicycles; there were 956 accidents in which there was a
pedestrian and there was a fatality, most of the fatalitites would have
been the pedestrian (i.e., pedestrian hit by car), there may have been some 
in which a cyclist or motor-cyclist may have been killed (the pedestrian
may have been killed as well).  Among the other figures:
                          Deaths
  No collision             553  Mostly cyclists and motorcyclists?
  Bicycle                  126  Ditto

If my reading of these statistics if correct, then not much can be said
about bicycling accidents except that there were 126 fatalities in what
ever year this is taken from.

Robert M. Lewis
Department of Sociology
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: davevh@microsoft.com (Dave Van Horn)
Subject: Re: Ticketing illegal cycling
Date: 19 Nov 92 01:24:28 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

>> Ok:  I saw 5 or 6 such campaigns in cities I was living in at the time, one
>> just this year, with no apparent subsequent change in attitudes by bikers, 
>> police, the legislature, drivers or the press.

ed@titipu.resun.com (Edward Reid) responds:

>References to surveys supporting the outcome that you claim?  

The outcome that I claimed is only that,"Cracking down ... has 
been tried many times in many places, but **I KNOW OF NO PLACE** where it has 
caused the hoped-for increase in legislative respect." [emphasis added]. My 
personal observations are quite sufficient to support that statement.  I 
didn't say it can't work, I said I've never seen it work.  Have you?  Has 
anyone else on the net?  I've asked this before, but neither you, nor Robert
Lewis, nor any of the thousands of other people around the world who read 
this group have volunteered any counter examples.

It's funny, when we say we think this won't work we're challenged to
provide statistical proof, but the faith that it will work doesn't seem to
need any such support.

>Human observation of human behavior is highly unreliable, which is
>why we have developed tools to supplement our poor natural capabilities.

So far as I know, no formal studies have ever been done.

>"I saw no apparent change" doesn't cut it, not for you any more than for me.

Glad to hear it.  I will expect your summary of formal studies supporting
your view to arrive by return mail, then.
From: pck@dde.dk (Peter C. R. Kristensen)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Request for Info on Bike Friendly Cities
Date: 19 Nov 92 17:27:13 GMT
Organization: Dansk Data Elektronik A/S

pschimek@athena.mit.edu (Paul M Schimek) writes:

>For an urban transportation class I am doing a bike planning proposal for Boston.
> I would like to include a section on "bicycle friendly" cities.  Specifically,
>cities where public policies have help to promote cycling (increase usage,
>decrease accident rates).  I am open to both US and foreign examples, but would
>prefer cities that are comparable in size to Boston.  I am looking for current
>information, and especially phone numbers (e-mail addresses?) of bicycle planners
>or coordinators, or bike advocates, in these various places.

>So far, I have considered the following places:

>Madison, WI -- I need Arthur Ross's phone number
>Seattle, WA -- I have nothing on Seattle yet
>Eugene, OR  -- I have "Bikes in Cities" from 1981
>Washington DC
>Montreal (any other Canadian suggestions?)
>Erlagen, Germany
>Munich, Germany
>Delft, Netherlands
>Copenhagen, Denmark

In Denmark you should call our organisation: The Danish Cyclist
Federation
7 Roemersgade
DK-1362 Copenhagen K
Tel: +45 33 32 31 21 
Fax: +45 33 32 76 83

Ask for Thomas Krag, he can give you relevant
phone numbers and information.

>Thanks a lot for helping out.

You're welcome!

Peter Roboz
-- 
Peter Roboz Kristensen                         Telephone:  Int +45 42 84 50 11
Application Program Development                Fax:        Int +45 42 84 52 20
Dansk Data Elektronik A/S, Herlev, Denmark     E-mail:     pck@dde.dk
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: trh2m@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Thomas Richard Hubbard)
Subject: Any advice for a cross-USA ride?
Originator: trh2m@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:21:49 GMT

I have developed a strong desire to ride from Virginia to the Pacific Ocean,
but I have never even ridden more than one state away.  If anyone out there
has done this, and has some useful advice I would really appreciate it.  I
am particularily interested in routes.  I fell confident that I can do over
100 miles per day for an indefinite period of time, but I would like to do
it in a little over a month (one way).  What kind of bike and gear is the
best?  I plan to camp most nights, but will probably stay in hotels  
some nights.  Thanks in advance.           
-- 
Tom Hubbard               |     _~o _O    | BIKE |  CONSERVE  |   PURSUE
University of Virginia    |    -\<,-\<,   |  TO  |    AND     |  HAPPINESS
                          |  (*)/===/(*)  | WORK |  PRESERVE  |     
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: nadeau@bcarh1ab.bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Ticketing illegal cycling
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 14:51:49 GMT

In article <casseres-181192235841@kip2-46.apple.com> casseres@apple.com (David Casseres) writes:
>
>Me too, my friend, me too.  When's the last time you heard of a car driver
>getting a ticket for running a stop sign in the way we have been talking
>about, i.e. slow, safe, nobody coming?  Never, right?  Why would any cop
>waste taxpayers' money by hiding where the drivers couldn't see him and
>then ticketing them for running a stop sign slowly and safely with nobody
>coming?  He wouldn't.  Why should that cop waste taxpayers' money doing
>that to cyclists?  He shouldn't.

Because people complain.

I live on a residential street that has the misfortune of being a quick
shortcut between some arterials, so we get lots of people rushing
through at high speed.  The city has responded to the complaints in
various ways, including a stop sign - not to control traffic, but to
slow it down.  Of course, people run this stop so residents complain
some more.  This summer, at least once there was a motorcycle cop there
ticketing offenders; it was my bad luck to be one of the ticketed
offenders, when I ran that stop sign on my bike.  (I wasn't happy about
the fine, but part of me approved of the cop treating me like a "real"
road vehicle.)

The Rhealist - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
From: ed@titipu.resun.com (Edward Reid)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Ticketing illegal cycling
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 08:41:26 EST(-0500)
Organization: Accuracy, Ltd.
Reply-To: ed@titipu.resun.com (Edward Reid)
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v0

davevh@microsoft.com (Dave Van Horn) writes:
> Ok:  I saw 5 or 6 such campaigns in cities I was living in at the time, one
> just this year, with no apparent subsequent change in attitudes by bikers, 
> police, the legislature, drivers or the press.

Umm ... what cities, please?  References to surveys supporting the outcome that
you claim?  Human observation of human behavior is highly unreliable, which is
why we have developed tools to supplement our poor natural capabilities.  "I
saw no apparent change" doesn't cut it, not for you any more than for me.

Edward Reid  (8*}>
  eel:   ed@titipu.resun.com  or  nosc.mil!titipu.resun.com!ed
  snail: PO Box 378/Greensboro FL 32330
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: pschimek@athena.mit.edu (Paul M Schimek)
Subject: Request for Info on Bike Friendly Cities
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 01:36:27 GMT

For an urban transportation class I am doing a bike planning proposal for Boston.
 I would like to include a section on "bicycle friendly" cities.  Specifically,
cities where public policies have help to promote cycling (increase usage,
decrease accident rates).  I am open to both US and foreign examples, but would
prefer cities that are comparable in size to Boston.  I am looking for current
information, and especially phone numbers (e-mail addresses?) of bicycle planners
or coordinators, or bike advocates, in these various places.

So far, I have considered the following places:

Madison, WI -- I need Arthur Ross's phone number
Seattle, WA -- I have nothing on Seattle yet
Eugene, OR  -- I have "Bikes in Cities" from 1981
Washington DC
Montreal (any other Canadian suggestions?)
Erlagen, Germany
Munich, Germany
Delft, Netherlands
Copenhagen, Denmark

Also, has anyone looked at 1990 census journey to work information, i.e.,
percentage of bike commuters?


Thanks a lot for helping out.
From: casseres@apple.com (David Casseres)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Ticketing illegal cycling
Date: 19 Nov 92 06:53:08 GMT
Followup-To: rec.bicycles.soc
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <721661573.AA00000@urchin.fidonet.org>,
Chilero@f88.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Chilero) wrote:
> 
> Boy, what wide variety of opinions on one subject! Well, here's mine!
> Let's face it, the modern system of roads was built with motor vehicles in mind.
> Still, bicyclists have every right to use them, as long as they abide by the
> same laws as the m.v.'s, with the added legal provisions for bikes that at least
> Texas law has. I've found that if I am cognizant of the law, and things going on
> around me, I have had no problems that I don't have while driving my car. The
> key seems to be AWARENESS. You will have drivers doing stupid things around you
> whether you're riding or driving a car; this is inevitable. Just watch out, is
> all.

Boy, you start out so reasonable...

> As to the idea that it's OK to run red lights & stop signs if no one is
> coming, that is exactly the kind of 'stupid thing' I'm talking about!

And then you sail right off the deep end:

> Those of
> you who hold to the idea that it's OK when no one is coming down the road
> probably do the same thing in your cars.

By god, you got me!  Yes, I do the same thing in may car.  And the point
some of us have been trying to make here is that *so do all the other
people in cars.*  It's the norm, it's the standard, it's the way things
are.  It's the way we're all expected and assumed and SUPPOSED to respond
to stop signs.

> I think you should be cited, if caught
> at it, just as if you were driving a car.

Me too, my friend, me too.  When's the last time you heard of a car driver
getting a ticket for running a stop sign in the way we have been talking
about, i.e. slow, safe, nobody coming?  Never, right?  Why would any cop
waste taxpayers' money by hiding where the drivers couldn't see him and
then ticketing them for running a stop sign slowly and safely with nobody
coming?  He wouldn't.  Why should that cop waste taxpayers' money doing
that to cyclists?  He shouldn't.

> The law DOES apply to cyclists!

Did someone claim that it doesn't?

> I
> would suggest that everyone contact state law enforcement agencies in his state,
> and get all the info available on traffic law as pertains to cycling, and it
> wouldn't hurt to brush-up on your motor vehicle laws, either. Please, RIDE
> SAFELY! 

I agree, except that you seem to be saying that obeying the law and being
safe are one and the same thing, and we all know better.

--

David Casseres
Exclaimer: Wow!
From: fj@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Fiona Jamieson)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Bike User Groups in Toronto
Date: 23 Nov 92 12:55:21 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: University of Edinburgh, Scotland

I went to the Scottish CTC open council meeting in Falkland at the
weekend. One of the items was a slide show by a guy just back from the
USA & Canada, about different cities and their attitude to bikes etc.
One of the things that was mentioned was the Bike User Groups in
Toronto.

I'd be interested in any information about them, we might be able to
start something similar in Edinburgh, like campaigning for secure
bike-parking facilities at the university.

Fiona
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: kiisaka@csi.uottawa.ca (Ken Iisaka (the mad pianist))
Subject: Re: Request for Info on Bike Friendly Cities
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 20:35:07 GMT

Ottawa/Hull
-- 
Ken Iisaka               \ NEXT RECITAL  |12:00 pm, Thursday, January 7th, 1993
kiisaka@csi.uottawa.ca     \ Produced by |National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa
AI Lab, University of Ottawa \ CBC Stereo|Berg        Sonata, b minor, op. 1
H: +1 613 237 6642 W: 564 8155 \ 103.3 FM|Mussorgsky  Pictures at an Exhibition
From: frankh@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Frank Hamlin)
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 15:50:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Shoullights be req. Std. Equipment?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc

>
>       On the other hand I disagree with those who say that only very
>    fancy lighting systems are adequate for cycling on normal roads. For
>    example, the person who says that bicycle lamps are hard to see when
>    alongside motor-vehicle headlamps may be correct, but he forgets that
>    under these circumstances it doesn't matter because the cyclist is
>    protected by the presence of the motor vehicle. In any case, I have
>    tested this situation by looking for people for whom I was waiting,
>    and I have seen the standard Union U100 headlamp and generator set
>    when blocks away, even when accompanied by a steady stream of cars.

I agree the cyclists can be seen, but only if the motorists looks.  When
driving down the road with cars 1-2 blocks behind me, the driver of a
car needs to take more than a cursory glance to see a Cat Eye head lamp.
If it is a cold morning, and all the vehicles windows are fogged up, the
problem is even worse.  

I'm not trying to be seen by careful drivers that look out for bikes, I
want to be seen by ALL drivers.  This includes the drivers that are late
for work and only concerned about how fast they can get to their
destinations.  If your light is bright enough, drivers of autos do not
realize you are on a bicycle, and give you more room than bicyclists get
during the day.  Car drivers are so much nicer when they think their
cars might get damaged!

I use a Night Sun with the high beam aimed slightly up.


-------------

Frank Hamlin, Santa Rosa Systems, Hewlett Packard      __@ __@  
1400 Fountaingrove Pkwy, Santa Rosa, Calif           _-\<,-\<, 
frankh@sr.hp.com   (707) 577-2084                   (*)/---/(*) 

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: mike@neopath.wa.com (Mike Rosenlof)
Subject: taillights/reflectors ( was Re: Should lights be req. Std. Equipment? )
Keywords: reflectors taillights lights
Organization: NeoPath
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:51:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.013026.4905@adobe.com> jciccare@adobe.com (John Ciccarelli) writes:
>> As for being seen-it is taillights that concern me the most.  
>> Generator taillights are pathetic.  Cars have 8 watt taillights for 
>> a reason.
>
>You don't need your own 8 watts, just reflect some of the approaching 
>car's 100-200 watts back at them.
>
>Although my bike has a taillight (battery powered) I feel that big
>reflectors are better than taillights for being seen from the rear, at

... other good stuff deleted

Agreed. Now that it's getting good and dark by 4:30 here (with another
month to go before the solstice) there are a lot of people riding in
the dark.  When I'm driving, the most visible bikes I've seen cary
those reflectorized triangles thar Mr. Ciccarelli mentions from REI
for six bucks.  Much more visible than vista blinky lights, moving
reflectors on pedals or legs, etc..

Of course my headlights work, but are 11 year old sealed beams, not
newer brighter halogens. Get a vistalight for the morons who drive
with just their parking lights long after dark, but never realize it
because they can see the dash lights just fine...

mike

-- 
mike rosenlof                   (206)455-5932
mike@neopath.wa.com     NeoPath, Bellevue Washington USA
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
From: ncherry@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (neil j.cherry)
Subject: Re: Ticketing illegal cycling
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 14:39:38 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.023117.29098@adobe.com> byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer) writes:
>Otto-Ville Ronkainen writes
>
>> The last time I stopped at a stop sign was months ago. The last
>> time I ran a stop sign must have been years ago ;-)
>
>So, city councils love stop signs.  Cheap, they can generate revenue,
>and are a very easy and standard response when someone in a
>neighborhood complains about traffic.
>

In 'Jersey where I live, the signs are most useful for determining who is at
fault during an accident. Also we have streets designed in a Y shape (3 streets
come together at an intersection) and no stop signs. I never could figure out
street logic. 

I'm also one of those people who runs stop signs when it easy to see that no
traffic in any direction. Now for the big question: If I come to a stop sign
at a busy intersection and I coast about 20 feet at 1 mph waiting for traffic
to clear. When I continue through (traffic clear) am I running a stop sign?

NJC

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles,rec.bicycles.marketplace