[mstone]

I always ding the bell going around those corners, in the hope that someone might think twice about passing.

[mstone]

Tornado warnings, yikes.

[mstone]

So, obviously, there’s disagreement over how annoying blinky taillights are. There’s also an assertion that strobes are more attention-getting at cross-streets (and hey, many of our bike trails cross a lot of streets). The point is that there are a lot of factors here, like time of day, ambient lighting, which trail we’re talking about, etc. Everybody needs to make their own decisions about what is the best/safest option for them. Certainly it’s reasonable to raise the concern about strobes so people can consider it, but that’s been done–now it’s just beating a dead horse. Blanket statements like “on the trails it’s bright enough to see without a headlight” are silly, as I guarantee on the dismal stretches of W&OD on a moonless morning/night you’re not going to be seeing without a light unless you’re a mutant. On the urban trails, it’s a different story. I tend to keep the taillight in blinky on the trail for the simple reason that it lasts 5x as long that way, and at 5:30 in the morning in the winter dark east of Hunter Mill on the W&OD the cyclists aren’t exactly packed nose-to-ass. (IOW, remember that light obeys the inverse-square law…)

[mstone]

The anti-strobe meme is getting a bit out of control. Are they optimal? No. Are they the end of the world? Also no.

[mstone]

The CaBi model just doesn’t work well for moving a large number of people to a single spot at a particular time. No matter how many dock slots you add, it will hit capacity fairly quickly. They could dump a ton of money trying to optimize this case, and people would still end up disappointed/pissed off, so the money is fairly certainly better spent elsewhere.

[mstone]

@jnva 30234 wrote:

It used to be (a few months ago maybe) that you would get the walk signal automatically. Now you have to hit the button for the walk signal.

Few things infuriate me more than crosswalk signals where you have to push a button, but still don’t get a dedicated cycle. I’m pretty sure I hit the button, but I’ll keep better track. Or maybe I’ll just give up and start crossing without the stupid walk signal, because sooner or later as a pedestrian you just have to admit the infrastructure is working against you and just do what is safe.

[mstone]

@bobco85 30203 wrote:

While I’m glad there wasn’t an accident, I see that you entered the crosswalk with a flashing red hand showing 10 seconds left as that car was starting its turn. At that point, you shouldn’t begin crossing because you don’t have right-of-way (according to Virginia Code § 46.2-925). I’m not trying to be mean, but I don’t see the law on your side had you collided with the car.

The video shows a need for better balance at that intersection so that drivers get their chance to pass through the intersection and don’t have to resort to aggressive maneuvers. I think a bike signal is necessary here.

Virginia desperately needs to update this section of the code to reflect the changes in crossing signal technology since 1974. There is no legitimate reason for someone to be required by law to stand on a corner when there is plenty of time to cross the street with a signal. Especially since the lights are now supposed to be timed for a walking speed of 3.5 feet per second, and the blinky hand time is coming out of the pedestrian share of the cycle, not the auto share.

The car should not have even been in the intersection, as it passed too closely to the cyclist already in the crosswalk, regardless of the second cyclist.

[mstone]

@dbb 30172 wrote:

Can’t help but wade in. It is a wine ride after all.

Make sure you pair your foods appropriately with the wines you might consume. May need to experiment to determine the ideal pairing of wine and a Clif Bar. I’d likely favor a zin or a syrah

Have fun!

I think “Clif Bar” is tremendously oversimplified. The pairing for, say, a white chocolate macadamia is going to be very different from a panforte. I’d advise staying away from anything with chocolate or a sugar topping unless you’re looking for a challenge.

[mstone]

@dbb 30160 wrote:

There were only a few cyclists out early (I was crossing the 14th St Bridge before 0600) but most were in need of lights. Runners as well!

I don’t know which marketing guy thought that a quarter sized piece of reflective stuff on the back of a technical tee qualified as “enough” but I’d like to invite them for a pre dawn ridealong.

Better than nothing; I’ve noticed that I can see the little tiny reflective strip on the back of the loop on a pair of running shoes from a zillion miles away, running along like disembodied feet. If someone is wearing anything more than black PJs and hemp sandals I them.

[mstone]

@Terpfan 30152 wrote:

(Also, when is Google map’s app going to have the biking directions feature for iphones, grr).

It’s gotta be a hard sell for google to do any new development on the iphone app, since apple’s trying to compete with it, and has a habit of kicking out apps that they don’t like for whatever reason.

[mstone]

Someone seems to be taking this much too seriously.

[mstone]

There’s a point at which it sounds forced. Like the other day my toddler did .01 metric century on his trike–but I wouldn’t put it that way in conversation. The more qualifiers you put on, the more out sounds like you’re trying to make something sound more impressive by association. It’s one thing for an organized ride to say you can plan to bail 1/4 of the way in if you’re not sure you can finish the whole thing, it’s another to say that your leisure ride was 1/16 of a Roman mile or somesuch. You can certainly do it if you want to, but people might wonder why you didn’t simply say the relevant number.

[mstone]

Except that it isn’t free

[mstone]

no.

[mstone]

@Dirt 30002 wrote:

The lane in Clarendon is a great example of why this is done. Clarendon Blvd splits when it gets to Court House and there’s basically a Y in the road. Most of the traffic, including the bike lane, follow the left split of the Y, but many, many cars cross over the bike lane to take the right fork in the road, thus crossing the bike lane. The green paint emphasizes the lane for bikes quite well and reminds people that it is there.

Yes, that’s what the green marking was invented for. The post I was replying to asked whether green paint should be reserved for completely separated infrastructure, and that’s what I don’t think makes any sense.

[Author]

Posts