Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Frank Krygowsk » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:13:10



Quote:

> Even when taking the entire lane, cars may not see you due to visual
> clutter.

For a certain value of "may." If it were likely that a motorist didn't
see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
from behind long before now.

- Frank Krygowski

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Frank Krygowsk » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:20:34


Quote:

> > Even when taking the entire lane, cars may not see you due to visual
> > clutter. Conspicuity does matter, but I would never go so far as to
> > say that a daylight flasher is "necessary'

> "Necessary" is not the appropriate metric. No one would deny that front
> (and rear) strobes makes cyclists far more visible in the daytime.
> Whether or not the increased conspicuity actually has an effect on the
> number and/or severity of bike/car collisions is the question. There is
> unlikely to be a study that directly addresses this directly ...

Yet above, you said: "The strobe is always there as part of the
lighting system and it would be exceedingly foolish to not use it
given all the research that proves the value."

So it's not necessary, but doing without is "extremely foolish."  And
there's no study, but there's "all the research."  Face it: it's your
fringe opinion and nothing more.

What the available data actually shows is that riding a bike is very
safe, even with the average skill and average equipment used in
America.  If you want even more safety, increase your knowledge and
skill (un-American as that seems).  Forget about spending yet more
money on yet more gimmicks.

- Frank Krygowski

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by AMuz » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:59:30


Quote:

>> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:48:54 -0700 (PDT), Jay Beattie


>>> Even more O.T., my son was telling me that the approved hand position
>>> on auto steering wheels is no longer ten-and-two, but somewhere near
>>> nine and three (or even below, depending on the instructor) -- so when
>>> the air bag deploys, your thumbs are not blown off.  Of course, it
>>> takes away your control of the car,

>> Ten and two was for cars built before power steering became common --
>> it made it easier to hand-over-hand the wheel around and around.

>> Nine and three is for greater control -- you have your hands where
>> they have the most leverage, and if you are bumped, the jerk
>> transmitted to the wheel through one hand is opposed by the jerk
>> transmitted to the wheel by the other hand, so you don't have swerving
>> off in an unplanned direction added to your other troubles.

>> If your driving instructor thinks it has anything to do with air bags,
>> get another instructor.   This one is making up stuff to fill in gaps
>> in an explanation he didn't understand.

> Actually, the 9 and 3 advice is the very latest thing, and it is
> apparently based on fear of airbags injuring hands & arms, or worse.
> Here's a link:
> http://www.nbcnews.com/business/get-times-youre-driving-all-wrong-518710

> Of course, I don't see that anyone's tallied the number of such hand
> and arm injuries, to determine how likely they are.  It seems to be
> more of the usual mentality:  "This _could_ happen, so you must
> NEVER..."

> I look at this as another unintended consequence of ever-increasing
> standards for safety devices.  "An explosive device in your steering
> wheel that will propel plastic parts toward you at 200 mph?  Sure!
> What could go wrong?"

> And before the airbag fans jump all over me: Yes, they've certainly
> saved lives.  But they've saved far fewer lives than projected, and
> they may have saved most of those by simply scaring people into
> actually wearing seat belts.  When your car's visor has a warning that
> your airbag can take off your head if you don't wear your seatbelt, it
> tends to make you buckle up.

> - Frank Krygowski

Or merely drive an exempt pre-government-designed 1965 model
with no safety 'features'.

--
Andrew Muzi
  <www.yellowjersey.org/>
  Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Jay Beatti » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 03:03:38


Quote:

> > Even when taking the entire lane, cars may not see you due to visual
> > clutter.

> For a certain value of "may." If it were likely that a motorist didn't
> see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
> from behind long before now.

I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right.  Taking the lane (or
more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
motorists who looks quickly to the left  can miss a drab colored
cyclist.

My commute this morning, however, is proof that conspicuity is no
guaranty of anything.  I had so many conflicts, I thought I was in one
of those old driver's ed simulator movies.  I was wearing a ghastly
green PI jacket and had my eye-popping 700 lumen flasher blazing away,
yet people turned in front of me, pulled out in to me, etc., etc.  I
had to check my body to make sure I hadn't turned invisible.

And last gripe, some ass clown in a Mini about ran me down last
night.  This is more confirmation that Mini drivers are the absolute
worst -- notwithstanding the Bohemian cred of the car.  I think the
drivers believe they are so small that they can pass bicyclists under
any circumstances -- like a bicyclist passing a bicyclist.  Anytime I
see one, I now take ALL the lanes -- my SMS approved side flags drop
in to place, ten flashers activate and my Planet Bike MP3 calliope
starts blaring "I Love a Parade."

-- Jay Beattie.

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Duan » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 04:14:19


Quote:


>>> Even when taking the entire lane, cars may not see you due to visual
>>> clutter.

>> For a certain value of "may." If it were likely that a motorist didn't
>> see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
>> from behind long before now.

> I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right.  Taking the lane (or
> more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
> lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
> motorists who looks quickly to the left  can miss a drab colored
> cyclist.

> My commute this morning, however, is proof that conspicuity is no
> guaranty of anything.  I had so many conflicts, I thought I was in one
> of those old driver's ed simulator movies.  I was wearing a ghastly
> green PI jacket and had my eye-popping 700 lumen flasher blazing away,
> yet people turned in front of me, pulled out in to me, etc., etc.  I
> had to check my body to make sure I hadn't turned invisible.

> And last gripe, some ass clown in a Mini about ran me down last
> night.  This is more confirmation that Mini drivers are the absolute
> worst -- notwithstanding the Bohemian cred of the car.  I think the
> drivers believe they are so small that they can pass bicyclists under
> any circumstances -- like a bicyclist passing a bicyclist.  Anytime I
> see one, I now take ALL the lanes -- my SMS approved side flags drop
> in to place, ten flashers activate and my Planet Bike MP3 calliope
> starts blaring "I Love a Parade."

What"  No Ben Hur axels?

You know, cars turn in front of cars every day.  Sometime they hit each
other. They call them accidents. I find it amazing that someone thinks
that riding a bike prevents that from happening.

Not that I'm a flag waver (6 ft nor shorter) or anything but when
commuting, I started switching on the lights in the morning.  No high
power search lights or anything, just the Blackburn LEDs but they seem
to help.

Fortunately, the day that you describe is not the typical one.

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by sms » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 04:37:29


Quote:



>>>> Even when taking the entire lane, cars may not see you due to visual
>>>> clutter.

>>> For a certain value of "may." If it were likely that a motorist didn't
>>> see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
>>> from behind long before now.

>> I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right.  Taking the lane (or
>> more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
>> lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
>> motorists who looks quickly to the left  can miss a drab colored
>> cyclist.

>> My commute this morning, however, is proof that conspicuity is no
>> guaranty of anything.  I had so many conflicts, I thought I was in one
>> of those old driver's ed simulator movies.  I was wearing a ghastly
>> green PI jacket and had my eye-popping 700 lumen flasher blazing away,
>> yet people turned in front of me, pulled out in to me, etc., etc.  I
>> had to check my body to make sure I hadn't turned invisible.

>> And last gripe, some ass clown in a Mini about ran me down last
>> night.  This is more confirmation that Mini drivers are the absolute
>> worst -- notwithstanding the Bohemian cred of the car.  I think the
>> drivers believe they are so small that they can pass bicyclists under
>> any circumstances -- like a bicyclist passing a bicyclist.  Anytime I
>> see one, I now take ALL the lanes -- my SMS approved side flags drop
>> in to place, ten flashers activate and my Planet Bike MP3 calliope
>> starts blaring "I Love a Parade."

> What"  No Ben Hur axels?

> You know, cars turn in front of cars every day.  Sometime they hit each
> other. They call them accidents. I find it amazing that someone thinks
> that riding a bike prevents that from happening.

> Not that I'm a flag waver (6 ft nor shorter) or anything but when
> commuting, I started switching on the lights in the morning.  No high
> power search lights or anything, just the Blackburn LEDs but they seem
> to help.

The side flag is not for cars turning in front of a bicycle. The
effectiveness of the flag is in vehicles (and other bicycles) giving the
bicyclist more room when they pass. Itt also increases the cyclists
visibility from the rear, and it's reflective, but the rear strobe light
on the bicycle also serves this purpose (day and night).

A front flasher is very effective and reducing the number of vehicles
that fail to yield the right of way.

I don't think anyone has claimed that these measures will prevent all
"accidents" (I don't like calling these accidents because often if one
or both parties were obeying the law the collision would not occur).
Still, it would be pretty foolish to not turn on the front flasher in
the daytime if you have one.

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Duan » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 04:47:36


Quote:




>>>>> Even when taking the entire lane, cars may not see you due to visual
>>>>> clutter.

>>>> For a certain value of "may." If it were likely that a motorist didn't
>>>> see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
>>>> from behind long before now.

>>> I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right. Taking the lane (or
>>> more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
>>> lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
>>> motorists who looks quickly to the left can miss a drab colored
>>> cyclist.

>>> My commute this morning, however, is proof that conspicuity is no
>>> guaranty of anything. I had so many conflicts, I thought I was in one
>>> of those old driver's ed simulator movies. I was wearing a ghastly
>>> green PI jacket and had my eye-popping 700 lumen flasher blazing away,
>>> yet people turned in front of me, pulled out in to me, etc., etc. I
>>> had to check my body to make sure I hadn't turned invisible.

>>> And last gripe, some ass clown in a Mini about ran me down last
>>> night. This is more confirmation that Mini drivers are the absolute
>>> worst -- notwithstanding the Bohemian cred of the car. I think the
>>> drivers believe they are so small that they can pass bicyclists under
>>> any circumstances -- like a bicyclist passing a bicyclist. Anytime I
>>> see one, I now take ALL the lanes -- my SMS approved side flags drop
>>> in to place, ten flashers activate and my Planet Bike MP3 calliope
>>> starts blaring "I Love a Parade."

>> What" No Ben Hur axels?

>> You know, cars turn in front of cars every day. Sometime they hit each
>> other. They call them accidents. I find it amazing that someone thinks
>> that riding a bike prevents that from happening.

>> Not that I'm a flag waver (6 ft nor shorter) or anything but when
>> commuting, I started switching on the lights in the morning. No high
>> power search lights or anything, just the Blackburn LEDs but they seem
>> to help.

> The side flag is not for cars turning in front of a bicycle. The
> effectiveness of the flag is in vehicles (and other bicycles) giving the
> bicyclist more room when they pass. Itt also increases the cyclists
> visibility from the rear, and it's reflective, but the rear strobe light
> on the bicycle also serves this purpose (day and night).

> A front flasher is very effective and reducing the number of vehicles
> that fail to yield the right of way.

> I don't think anyone has claimed that these measures will prevent all
> "accidents" (I don't like calling these accidents because often if one
> or both parties were obeying the law the collision would not occur).
> Still, it would be pretty foolish to not turn on the front flasher in
> the daytime if you have one.

I wasn't referring to you when I mentioned thinking that bikes wouldn't
be subject to the same stupid driving that causes accidents with cars.

But generally, I don't use flashers in broad daylight.  As I said, I
just started using them for the morning commute.  But I don't insist
that they aren't useful. I mean cars here are required to have daytime
running headlights.  You should do what you think serves you well.

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Frank Krygowsk » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 05:19:58


Quote:

> > ... If it were likely that a motorist didn't
> > see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
> > from behind long before now.

> I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right. ?Taking the lane (or
> more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
> lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
> motorists who looks quickly to the left ?can miss a drab colored
> cyclist.

That's not been a problem for me when on my bicycle.  I actually can't
remember a single such incident - which doesn't prove that it never
happened or can't happen; just that it doesn't amount to much.

One reason it might not amount to much could be the typically lower
speed of a bicycle.  The motorist making a right turn would be tending
to move away from you, so closing speed would be lower.  Besides, a
bike doesn't need a whole lot of lane to avoid contact.

I _do_ worry about that when on my motorcycle, and to a certain extent
when in my car.  I worry less on a bicycle, although I generally shift
to the left part of the lane (on either two wheeler) if someone is in
a position to pull out like that.

Quote:

> My commute this morning, however, is proof that conspicuity is no
> guaranty of anything. ?I had so many conflicts, I thought I was in one
> of those old driver's ed simulator movies. ?I was wearing a ghastly
> green PI jacket and had my eye-popping 700 lumen flasher blazing away,
> yet people turned in front of me, pulled out in to me, etc., etc. ?I
> had to check my body to make sure I hadn't turned invisible.

What was your lane position like?  Or were you in a bike lane?

Quote:
> And last gripe, some ass clown in a Mini about ran me down last
> night. ?This is more confirmation that Mini drivers are the absolute
> worst -- notwithstanding the Bohemian cred of the car. ?I think the
> drivers believe they are so small that they can pass bicyclists under
> any circumstances -- like a bicyclist passing a bicyclist. ?Anytime I
> see one, I now take ALL the lanes -- my SMS approved side flags drop
> in to place, ten flashers activate and my Planet Bike MP3 calliope
> starts blaring "I Love a Parade."

Too bad sirens are illegal, no?

- Frank Krygowski

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Frank Krygowsk » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 05:23:40


Quote:

> You know, cars turn in front of cars every day. ?Sometime they hit each
> other. They call them accidents. I find it amazing that someone thinks
> that riding a bike prevents that from happening.

I don't know anyone who thinks riding a bike really prevents such
things from happening.  But I think the problem is much less than,
say, when riding a motorcycle.  A cyclist moves slower, has better
visibility than when in a car, and _should_ be paying attention.  Lane
position helps, and yelling and brakes also work.

I could look it up, but I don't believe cars turning right from a stop
sign is a major source of car-bike crashes.

- Frank Krygowski

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Frank Krygowsk » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 05:30:28


Quote:

> The side flag is not for cars turning in front of a bicycle. The
> effectiveness of the flag is in vehicles (and other bicycles) giving the
> bicyclist more room when they pass.

... although there's no data confirming that guess, of course.

Quote:
> Itt also increases the cyclists visibility from the rear...

But wouldn't a tall flag, visible even over other cars, increase that
visibility even more?  Why _not_ use a tall flag, if you're a fan of
flippy flags?

Quote:
> and it's reflective, but the rear strobe light
> on the bicycle also serves this purpose (day and night).

> A front flasher is very effective and reducing the number of vehicles
> that fail to yield the right of way.

To quote a certain SMS: "Some people go overboard without any evidence
to support their position..."

I'd at least like to know how many crashes you had per year due to
failure to yield before, then after, you started using front strobes.
I know I could not reduce my version of that crash number, since it's
been zero in 41+ years of riding.

- Frank Krygowski

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by sms » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 05:52:35


Quote:
> But generally, I don't use flashers in broad daylight.  As I said, I
> just started using them for the morning commute.  But I don't insist
> that they aren't useful. I mean cars here are required to have daytime
> running headlights.  You should do what you think serves you well.

No. You should do what actually serves you and others well, not what you
_think_ serves you well.

The reason there are so many laws requiring various visibility enhancing
measures for vehicles is that we can't simply allow people do what they
think serves themselves well because a) they don't know enough to employ
these measures and b) their actions have a direct impact on others.

Reduced visibility at dawn, dusk, and in fog or rain requires vehicles
to use headlights but the reality is that many don't. Additionally,
poorly implemented DRL systems on many vehicles make the problem even worse.

Bicycles tend to get a pass on legally requirements for visibility
enhancing measures because there's a sense, in the U.S., that increasing
the cost of bicycles to include these measures would be unacceptable.
Thus the bicycle owner is tasked with taking matters into their own
hands. I'm not in favor of the attitude  of "let's pass more laws to
make everything safe for everyone" but it's often annoying that clueless
cyclists are not making themselves more visible. Who's at fault in the
event of a collision isn't the issue. There is no way that we're going
to fix the problem of distracted, clueless, and/or inexperienced drivers.

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Duane Héber » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 06:39:00


Quote:

>> But generally, I don't use flashers in broad daylight.  As I said, I
>> just started using them for the morning commute.  But I don't insist
>> that they aren't useful. I mean cars here are required to have daytime
>> running headlights.  You should do what you think serves you well.

> No. You should do what actually serves you and others well, not what
> you _think_ serves you well.

Ok, then you should do what you think actually serves you well. Though
since you have no idea of where I ride or how, I'm not sure how you can
know what serves me well.

  I've not seen any conclusive proof that there's some sweet point of
luminosity that will work as opposed to one that won't.  Or that lights
work better than bright clothing or flags or whatever.  Sure, you need
to be visible.  But there are different ways of accomplishing this in
the daylight.  We're talking about daylight. Riding at night without
lights is just stupid.  And also illegal here, BTW.

Quote:
> The reason there are so many laws requiring various visibility
> enhancing measures for vehicles is that we can't simply allow people
> do what they think serves themselves well because a) they don't know
> enough to employ these measures and b) their actions have a direct
> impact on others.

> Reduced visibility at dawn, dusk, and in fog or rain requires vehicles
> to use headlights but the reality is that many don't. Additionally,
> poorly implemented DRL systems on many vehicles make the problem even
> worse.

Daytime running headlights are mandatory here.

Quote:
> Bicycles tend to get a pass on legally requirements for visibility
> enhancing measures because there's a sense, in the U.S., that
> increasing the cost of bicycles to include these measures would be
> unacceptable. Thus the bicycle

Huh?  Given the price of my bike I can't imagine that cost is the
determining factor deciding whether or not riders would install a light.
  Yet bikes like mine are more likely the ones that you won't find with
the large expensive lights.  Maybe there's some other factor involved.

Quote:
> owner is tasked with taking matters into their own hands. I'm not in
> favor of the attitude  of "let's pass more laws to make everything
> safe for everyone" but it's often annoying that clueless cyclists are
> not making

Who said anything about passing laws.

Quote:
> themselves more visible. Who's at fault in the event of a collision
> isn't the issue. There is no way that we're going to fix the problem
> of distracted, clueless, and/or inexperienced drivers.

Well like I said, do what you think works for you.
 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Dan » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:26:48


Quote:


> > > ... If it were likely that a motorist didn't
> > > see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
> > > from behind long before now.

> > I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right.  Taking the lane (or
> > more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
> > lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
> > motorists who looks quickly to the left  can miss a drab colored
> > cyclist.

> That's not been a problem for me when on my bicycle.  I actually can't
> remember a single such incident - which doesn't prove that it never
> happened or can't happen; just that it doesn't amount to much.

Translation:  You "should" work on becoming "comptent" (like Frank).

Quote:
> One reason it might not amount to much could be the typically lower
> speed of a bicycle.  The motorist making a right turn would be tending
> to move away from you, so closing speed would be lower.  Besides, a
> bike doesn't need a whole lot of lane to avoid contact.

"Avoid contact"!?  Christ, man - (I understand the part about you
being slow, but) are you saying it hasn't been a problem for you
because you have had room to dodge?

Quote:
> I _do_ worry about that when on my motorcycle, and to a certain extent
> when in my car.  I worry less on a bicycle, although I generally shift
> to the left part of the lane (on either two wheeler) if someone is in
> a position to pull out like that.

When driving a car, I generally shift to avoid the potholes.  I don't
ride a motorcycle on the road, hence I am still alive today.

Quote:

> > My commute this morning, however, is proof that conspicuity is no
> > guaranty of anything.  I had so many conflicts, I thought I was in one
> > of those old driver's ed simulator movies.  I was wearing a ghastly
> > green PI jacket and had my eye-popping 700 lumen flasher blazing away,
> > yet people turned in front of me, pulled out in to me, etc., etc.  I
> > had to check my body to make sure I hadn't turned invisible.

> What was your lane position like?  Or were you in a bike lane?

I got the impression that he was everywhere (relative to the people
doing the turning in front of, pulling out into, etc., etc.)

Quote:
> > And last gripe, some ass clown in a Mini about ran me down last
> > night.  This is more confirmation that Mini drivers are the absolute
> > worst -- notwithstanding the Bohemian cred of the car.  I think the
> > drivers believe they are so small that they can pass bicyclists under
> > any circumstances -- like a bicyclist passing a bicyclist.  Anytime I
> > see one, I now take ALL the lanes -- my SMS approved side flags drop
> > in to place, ten flashers activate and my Planet Bike MP3 calliope
> > starts blaring "I Love a Parade."

> Too bad sirens are illegal, no?

Whoosh!
 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Frank Krygowsk » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:44:51


Quote:



> > > > ... If it were likely that a motorist didn't
> > > > see me taking the lane due to visual clutter, I'd have been run over
> > > > from behind long before now.

> > > I'm thinking of traffic entering from the right. ?Taking the lane (or
> > > more of the lane) does help, but when you get cloud cover and flat
> > > lighting, objects can get lost in a background, and a right turning
> > > motorists who looks quickly to the left ?can miss a drab colored
> > > cyclist.

> > That's not been a problem for me when on my bicycle. ?I actually can't
> > remember a single such incident - which doesn't prove that it never
> > happened or can't happen; just that it doesn't amount to much.

> Translation: ?You "should" work on becoming "comptent" (like Frank).

Well, Dan, I've been told (by people who should know) that I am very
competent; that they've learned from riding with me.  But whether or
not their judgment was correct, a person _should_ work at becoming
competent.  What are the other choices?  To work at incompetence?  To
bumble along without any thought?  No thanks.

Quote:

> > One reason it might not amount to much could be the typically lower
> > speed of a bicycle. ?The motorist making a right turn would be tending
> > to move away from you, so closing speed would be lower. ?Besides, a
> > bike doesn't need a whole lot of lane to avoid contact.

> "Avoid contact"!? ?Christ, man - (I understand the part about you
> being slow, but) are you saying it hasn't been a problem for you
> because you have had room to dodge?

Re-read.  I did not say that.  I did say it has not been a problem for
me.  I believe one big reason is that I do tend to take a very visible
lane position; furthermore, I've described before (here, I think) my
habit of moving further left in the lane when I see a car approaching
a stop sign from my right.

I recall one event (probably five years ago) when a motorist did start
to pull out in front of me, then stopped and apologized.  It wasn't a
close encounter; I was watching even more carefully than usual,
because I was coming from a direction cars didn't come - a bike-ped
shortcut into our village center, where it dumped out onto an
otherwise dead end.  Only one little-used parking lot could have
produced a car for this guy to yield to, so there's little wonder he
was less than observant.

Quote:

> > I _do_ worry about that when on my motorcycle, and to a certain extent
> > when in my car. ?I worry less on a bicycle, although I generally shift
> > to the left part of the lane (on either two wheeler) if someone is in
> > a position to pull out like that.

> When driving a car, I generally shift to avoid the potholes. ?I don't
> ride a motorcycle on the road, hence I am still alive today.

I do ride a motorcycle on the road, and have since 1969 or so (with a
few years off-time from time to time).  I'm still alive today.
Competence _is_ worth striving for.

- Frank Krygowski

 
 
 

Another spontaneous headlight compliment

Post by Jame » Thu, 18 Apr 2013 08:33:20


Quote:

>> On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:48:54 -0700 (PDT), Jay Beattie


>>> Even more O.T., my son was telling me that the approved hand position
>>> on auto steering wheels is no longer ten-and-two, but somewhere near
>>> nine and three (or even below, depending on the instructor) -- so when
>>> the air bag deploys, your thumbs are not blown off.  Of course, it
>>> takes away your control of the car,

>> Ten and two was for cars built before power steering became common --
>> it made it easier to hand-over-hand the wheel around and around.

>> Nine and three is for greater control -- you have your hands where
>> they have the most leverage, and if you are bumped, the jerk
>> transmitted to the wheel through one hand is opposed by the jerk
>> transmitted to the wheel by the other hand, so you don't have swerving
>> off in an unplanned direction added to your other troubles.

>> If your driving instructor thinks it has anything to do with air bags,
>> get another instructor.   This one is making up stuff to fill in gaps
>> in an explanation he didn't understand.

> Actually, the 9 and 3 advice is the very latest thing, and it is
> apparently based on fear of airbags injuring hands&  arms, or worse.
> Here's a link:
> http://www.nbcnews.com/business/get-times-youre-driving-all-wrong-518710

> Of course, I don't see that anyone's tallied the number of such hand
> and arm injuries, to determine how likely they are.  It seems to be
> more of the usual mentality:  "This _could_ happen, so you must
> NEVER..."

> I look at this as another unintended consequence of ever-increasing
> standards for safety devices.  "An explosive device in your steering
> wheel that will propel plastic parts toward you at 200 mph?  Sure!
> What could go wrong?"

> And before the airbag fans jump all over me: Yes, they've certainly
> saved lives.  But they've saved far fewer lives than projected, and
> they may have saved most of those by simply scaring people into
> actually wearing seat belts.  When your car's visor has a warning that
> your airbag can take off your head if you don't wear your seatbelt, it
> tends to make you buckle up.

I've thought for a while now that those who chose a car because it has
all the safety features must be preparing to crash.

I prefer to prepare to not crash, and drive what ever I feel I can
control well enough to avoid an accident.

--
JS.