About the laser bike lane…

Lasers projecting the image of a bike lane from a bicycle onto the street? https://web.archive.org/web/20120112012925/http://www.lightlanebike.com/ This is archived. The original site has been replaced by a hack. Do not go there! Laser — high tech — must be a great idea then? Not really.

Light shining directly from the vehicle toward the viewer is many times more efficient than lighting the road to indicate the position of the vehicle.

A bike lane that moves with the bicycle conflicts with the road markings on the road.

The page: https://web.archive.org/web/20120117013221/http://www.lightlanebike.com/about.html (with the red lines) is a Photoshop job. The beam from the light would have to pass through the rider to illuminate everywhere shown, and there is no pavement texture visible in the lines on the pavement.

The green lines at either side on the page https://web.archive.org/web/20120112012925/http://www.lightlanebike.com/ appear to have been generated by a device on the bicycle, but the bicyclist symbol in the middle of the lane looks like a Photoshop job.

The video embedded above appears indeed to show lines on the roadway projected from a device on the bicycle’s seat post, but not from the device shown on https://web.archive.org/web/20120127010057/http://www.lightlanebike.com/design.html, as the green spots which the light comes from are too far from the centerline of the bicycle. Also, I just gotta love this masterwork of obfuscation:

“Preliminary contextual research shows its performance in real world situations is best when lighting conditions are at their worst, improving safety in the most critical situations.”

That is to say that light output is weak.

Lasers are hugely inefficient, but because they produce a pencil-thin beam, can send all of it into the pupil of an eye and cause retinal burns if bright enough to light the road — especially, green lasers, whose light is absorbed by the red chorion tissue behind the retina. One reflection from a puddle into the pupil of your eye, of a laser above 10 milliwatts in output power, for as little as a few microseconds — boom — retinal burn, if a mechanical scanning device is used to generate a pattern, as is usual, or if the device stops. A hologram might also be used, but it would reduce efficiency. The lines shown do not extend forward of the bicyclist where most conflicts occur. Notice in the picture that the reflective spots on the cyclist’s shoes show brighter than the taillight included in the laser device, when the cyclist is in the car’s headlight beams. To the credit of the promoters, the cyclist is shown using a headlight.

There is only an e-mail address on the Web site for contact information but, judging by the uniquely nonstandard curve-into-curb edge stripes on the roadway, I think this video was shot here in Massachusetts.

And, the bicyclist in the video rides in the door zone and makes a left turn from the right curb on a red light. The car following him also turns left on red. I’m glad I wasn’t sharing the road with these people!

Now, looking at this photo, https://web.archive.org/web/20150416220216/http://www.lightlanebike.com/prototpye_pics_008.html , I can confirm Massachusetts — the famous Citgo sign near Fenway Park (go, Sox!) is visible in the background.

Right here in Massachusetts! Maybe the perpetrators are associated with a certain educational institution on the Charles River, of which I’m an alumnus! What a thought…

Posted in Bicycling, Equipment, lighting | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

End to “dooring” hazard?

Bicyclists are circulating links to this video, as if the roll-under door eliminates the hazard of riding close to parked vehicles. But, let’s take off the rose-colored glasses. Striking a car door isn’t the only hazard here.

Bicyclists can still collide with people getting out of the car, or who walk out from between parked vehicles, or with vehicles entering from driveways and cross streets.

So, don’t ride in the door zone even if the door can’t open into it. That applies with today’s sliding doors too.

Gotta love the Mozart piano concerto, though!

Posted in Bicycling | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Fixie Pixie

The praises of the fixed-gear bicycle have been sung repeatedly on various Web sites, and so I am pleased to report that not long ago I took my First Real Ride on my Friday — uh, sorry, on a Friday I took my First Real Ride on my Fixie in fifteen years, having finally replaced the brake-lever hoods which had disintegrated into sticky brown goo. I live at the top of a substantial hill, so I chose a trip to meet my wife at her workplace to run an errand together, and we would return with the car. The ride succeeded despite several forgetful moments when I tried to adjust my position on the saddle and found myself elevated, etc.

That experience moved me to compose the following lines.

Continue reading

Posted in Bicycling | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

New Urbanist award-winning video — no bicycles!

It’s amazing — there’s no mention whatever of bicycles or for that matter, any road vehicles in this award-winning video! It’s not like road vehicles are going to disappear entirely even in the most New Urbanist communities. Buses will be even more indispensable if there is less use of private motor vehicles. Use of bicycles and light, efficient motor vehicles ought to increase — and they also can play an important role in mitigating the problems with existing sprawl development — please see this Web page .

Continue reading

Posted in Bicycling | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Categorizing vehicle types

The following categorization of land vehicle and pedestrian types may be helpful in understanding infrastructure issues. I am leaving out snow modes — travel on snowshoes, cross-country skis, or in sleds, sleighs, snowmobiles. They exist in a world unto themselves, serving mostly when and where snow makes other travel modes impractical.

Otherwise, the two fundamental categories are pedestrians and vehicles. Pedestrians generally travel at a walking pace and have the ability to turn in place, or to sidestep. Vehicles can only turn by steering, and travel at a speed which poses a hazard to pedestrians.

Categories generally considered pedestrians:

  • walkers
  • people in wheelchairs
  • people in electric wheelchairs
  • small children on tricycles and sidewalk bicycles
  • slow novice cyclists on bicycles, following pedestrian rules
  • skaters
  • people on push scooters
  • people on roller skis
  • skateboarders
  • Segways — they can turn in place, though their 18 mph speed potential and limited cornering ability make their definition as pedestrians controversial.

Vehicles generally considered bicycles:

  • unicycles
  • bicycles ridden by teen and adult cyclists
  • cargo tricycles
  • bakfiets (long bicycles and tricycles with a front compartment for cargo)
  • electrically-assisted bicycles
  • adult tricycles and quadracycles, both upright and recumbent
  • pedicabs
  • bicycles with baggage trailers and child trailers
  • especially-long bicycle rigs such as tandems, tandem bicycles with trailers

Animal-powered, foot-powered vehicles (“the First Vehicles” — thanks to Mighk Wilson of the Orlando, Florida metropolitan planning organization for that observation):

  • riders on horseback or on other animals (donkeys, oxen…)
  • animal-drawn vehicles
  • rickshaws
  • pushcarts

Narrow, motorized vehicles:

  • mopeds; electric and gasoline-powered motor scooters
  • motorcycles

Wider motorized vehicles or quasi-vehicles:

  • Tricycle motorcycles
  • Motorcycles with sidecars
  • Motorcycles pulling trailers
  • “Golf cars”, “neighborhood electric vehicles”
  • Microcars
  • Cars
  • Trucks
  • Buses
  • Tractors, farm vehicles
  • Construction equipment
  • Trackless trolleys
  • Streetcars

Now, the point of this discussion: Many bicycling advocates favor separate paths, or parts of the width of streets set aside for bicyclists and separated by barriers from travel lanes for motor vehicles. But this rigid approach to use of space makes an awkward fit to the diversity of vehicle types and their overlapping operating characteristics. A few examples:

  • As has often been stated: any so-called bike path also will be used by pedestrians, slowing the bicyclists and leading to conflicts and danger.
  • Inline skaters don’t fall neatly into the category of pedestrians, but still use paths. Also, bike lanes often are designated for the use of skaters. With flailing arms and legs, inline skaters are more difficult than other pedestrians for bicyclists to overtake.
  • Pedicabs fit into the category of bicycles in terms of their speed and how they are powered, but pedicabs are banned from separate bikeways in New York City because they are wide. Result: they slow motorists in the roadway, which already provides less room for other vehicles to overtake because it has been narrowed to construct the bikeway.
  • The vestigial pedals of mopeds are generally used to conform them to the legal definition of bicycles, as footrests, and to start the motor. Still, mopeds are generally prohibited from shared-use paths because they are faster than most bicyclists and because of smoke and noise. Electrically-assisted bicycles, on the other hand, are more often permitted on paths.
  • Long bicycles and bicycles with trailers can not pass through the bicycle mazes intended to prevent motor vehicles from entering some paths. Single-track motorized vehicles (mopeds, motor scooters and motorcycles) can.
  • Golf cars can have all of the equipment required of other motor vehicles to be street legal (lights, horn, seat belts, etc.) and they are non-polluting too, but are prohibited from many roads because they are not capable of high speed. Construction equipment, which has the same speed disadvantage and often a smoke-belching diesel engine, and usually is larger, is permitted on most roadways.

All of these examples point to the conclusion that the distinction between pedestrian and vehicle operator is important, but otherwise, infrastructure can generally best accommodate the different categories of users if roadway width is not split up by vehicle type. Once that is attempted, inconsistencies begin to multiply.

Also, and probably even of more importance, a fundamental issue in road design is to not prevent the application of standard, simple rules of the road. The rules become more complicated and confusing when accommodating different categories of vehicles in separate lanes or barrier-separated parts of the same roadway.

Separation is most commonly suggested for bicyclists, but my observation applies to motorists as well. For example, prohibiting trucks from the leftmost lane on limited-access highways increases truckers’ incentive to tailgate other motorists in the lanes to its right.

I favor instead the designation of different streets, roads and highways for different uses as needed. I think that it makes sense to designate streets, roads and highways to favor different types of use (local, collector, arterial) while, importantly, not denying access to all destinations in any type of vehicles. So, we might designate truck routes for through travel by the larger and more cumbersome vehicles. Bicycle boulevards — (through routes for bicycles on streets only usable for local access by motorists) also can be useful.

Limited-access highways — those with no destinations except other roads — may serve only faster vehicles without violating this principle, as long as there is shoulder access or an alternate route for slower vehicles. Paths, despite their deficiencies, also can be useful to bicyclists as shortcuts and for access to locations (for example, in parklands) not served by roads.

And — skaters, skateboarders, streetcars and perhaps other devices not yet seen, don’t fit comfortably into the category either of vehicle or of pedestrian. These will continue to pose design and legal challenges, no matter how accommodated, or not accommodated!

Posted in Bicycling, Laws | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Repair of Shimano STI brake/shift levers

The performance of one of my Shimano RSX 7-speed drop-bar brake/shift levers slowly deteriorated, requiring multiple clicks for each downshift.

Someone at a bike shop once told me “they never work”. I just lived with the problem until the lever stopped shifting gears at all.

A web search turned up information that Shimano STI levers are difficult to work on — no kidding, have a look at this disassembled one!

Shimano 600 shifter disassembled, photo by Jim McVey

Shimano 600 shifter disassembled, photo by Jim McVey

Apparently, the most common problem is that the factory lubricant gums up. There is advice on the Web to free up the mechanism by soaking the lever in solvent or squirting WD-40 into it. If you’re going to try this, remove the rubber hood first, or it will absorb solvent and expand. Relubricate with lithium spray grease.

But internal parts can wear out quickly if not fully lubricated, according to the expert in repairing these levers. You could spray in the grease from every possible direction and still not be sure it reached everywhere it needs to go. Also, it’s hard to get all the old, gummy grease out without taking the lever apart. Or, the lever might have a different problem. Are you convinced yet that this is a job for the expert? 🙂 ? For a sure and long-lasting repair, here’s his (anti-spam encoded) e-mail address:

reajcorp2 *at* aol.com

Jim McVey will disassemble, clean, lubricate and reassemble a 7- or 8-speed lever for $30 US, or $50 for a pair. He sells levers on EBay, and he buys up levers and takes trade-ins. His EBay user name is eeforme.

Jim does not work on 9-speed levers, or on mountain bike levers or Sora levers. There is, however, information online about rebuilding 9-speed levers. 9-speed levers are, in any case, also available new, while many if not most 7- and 8-speed levers have been dropped from production.

To remove a lever to send it out for repair, first disconnect the cables at the brake and derailleur, so you can pull them out through the lever. There’s no need to remove handlebar tape unless it has been wrapped over the lever’s rubber hood. Unscrew the handlebar clamp bolt to remove the lever from the handlebar. The clamp bolt is recessed into a groove in the outward-facing side of the lever body, under the rubber hood — not inside the lever body as with most brake levers. You will see the groove if you turn down the upper edge of the rubber hood. Once the clamp bolt is loose, you can just lift the lever off. You can leave the brake-cable housing, handlebar clamp and tape in place on the handlebar.

When replacing the lever, first reinsert the brake cable into the lever and thread it into the cable housing. Then position the lever carefully over the handlebar clamp and tighten the clamp bolt. Getting the lever into place is easier if you roll up the bottom of the rubber hood like a trouser cuff. Pulling the brake cable at the other end will help guide the lever into place over the cable housing. Finally, reinstall the shift cable, adjust the brake and derailleur, and arrange the handlebar tape and rubber hood.

Posted in Bicycling, Equipment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Livable Streets proposal lacks credibility

I’m looking at a GOOD magazine/Streetsblog proposal for a “livable street” [As of 2019, the page is available in the Internet Archive, but it requires a Javascript that is not available. This page on Streetsblog NYC appears to show the “after” image from the GOOD page.  The location as it exists at present is in the image below — identified through the Riverside Memorial Chapel marquee.]

This is a prime example of what I call the Photoshop school of traffic engineering. Anyone with computer graphics skills can generate a before-and-after comparison like this. Often, it looks very attractive to the untrained eye — but, whether the proposed changes make sense is another issue entirely.

It would be nice if the Streetsblog people who created this graphic had a few more clues about street design. Some of the issues:

Continue reading

Posted in Sidepaths | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Review of J. Harry Wray’s book Pedal Power

Review of
Pedal Power, the Quiet Rise of the Bicycle in American Life
By J. Harry Wray

I purchased this book at the 2008 National Bicycle Summit (conference and congressional lobbying event), where the author spoke. He inscribed my copy:

“John – Pedal on! We skipped over the 20th century to take over the 21st. J. Harry Wray”

OK, that’s a friendly inscription, so I’ll tell you what I like best about the book first. It gets most interesting about one-third of the way through, with vignettes of individuals and organizations involved in bicycling and bicycling advocacy. You could

  • follow several Chicago-area utility bicyclists on their daily commutes and errands;
  • learn what motivates bicycling advocacy honcho Randy Neufeld,
  • visit with a group of counterculture types who ride around Chicago on bicycles and glean most of their material possessions from dumpsters,
  • read pocket biographies of politicians who champion bicycling causes, including members of the U.S. Congress,
  • Read some useful descriptions of the history and workings of various local and national bicyclists’ advocacy organizations.

and more.

But now, backpedaling to the start of the book: Wray’s discussion of car/bike cultural differences wanders far from bicycling and from hard fact. Culturally-mediated perceptions are so important to him that he literally holds Ptolemaic (flat-earth-centered) and Copernican (round-earth, sun-centered) astronomy equally valid (see page 11). Let’s recall that one major goal of scientific and historical research is to refine perception. Wray clearly is not cognizant of bicycling research literature, and he draws some unsupported conclusions e.g., that special bicycle traffic signals increase efficiency and safety. In fact, special signals increase safety only if they are obeyed. They more usually reduce efficiency, and then often are not obeyed. Wray is weak on data which would, for example, quite certainly refute the statement on page 24, “I am absolutely serious about feeling less vulnerable to some violent act on a bicycle than in a car.”

Page 30 begins a chapter discussing bicycling in Amsterdam, where scofflaw bicyclists, as Wray acknowledges, are the norm. They serve the same traffic-calming function that scofflaw pedestrians commonly do in crowded cities. But Wray doesn’t address an important difference, that North American, British and French cyclists more generally expect a climate of equal rights and responsibilities as vehicle operators, making for a huge difference in advocacy goals.

The following chapter covers – take a deep breath – American materialism, individualism, inequality, capital punishment, the lack of guaranteed health care, the weakness of the labor movement, television watched alone, mass consumerism, the Super Bowl as a national religious rite, and the American dream of a house with a fenced backyard with a patio, and car. (I’d turn to James Howard Kunstler for a more compelling discussion of such topics.)

Wray predicts a resulting “culture storm”. Time will tell whether his claim is prophetic. In any case, only the last paragraph of this entire chapter is about bicycling!

Then there’s the useful stuff in the middle of the book, followed at the end by a couple more chapters about global warming, ill effects of motor vehicle use, and societal benefits of bicycling.

Also, Wray and his editors got on my nerves rather quickly by way of sprawling sentences, poor grammar and incorrect word usage. There are some real howlers — here’s one from page 17: “[S]truggling up the mountain, the smell of pine was unmistakeable and exhilarating” — this from a tenured university professor! Wray’s sloppiness with language can lead to confusion, not only eye-rolling. He, for example, frequently uses the word “bike” instead of “bicycle” even when misreporting a proper name, for example “Congressional Bike Caucus” and “San Francisco Bike Coalition.” He calls the Cyclists’ Touring Club (U.K.) the “Bicycle Touring Club”.

And so on.

Enough. I like Jeff Mapes’s book Pedaling Revolution better, and I’ll be reviewing it soon. (Now reviewed)

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Technical and legal issues with the NYC 9th Avenue bikeway

All intersections along the NYC 9th Avenue bikeway are signalized, and it has separate bicycle signal phases at most of them. At the time of the field trip, December 5 and 6, 2008, some of the signals (especially at the north end) had not yet been installed or were not yet working, and so another visit to the site would be useful to view the complete installation.

Manhattan has typically in the past (since Henry Barnes set it up in the 1960s) had signals on the one-way avenues timed in sequence for 30 mph, except at two-way cross streets where that was not possible.

Continue reading

Posted in Sidepaths | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Guest posting: John Ciccarelli on the NYC Broadway bikeway

[John Ciccarelli is a consultant on bicycling, League of American Bicyclists Cycling Instructor and member of the Bicycle Technical Committee of the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. These comments are based on his observations during a field trip to examine bicycle facilities in New York City in December of 2008.]

Broadway bikeway, Manhattan

Broadway bikeway: clogged with pedestrians

For me, the pedestrian conflicts on a new unconventional Manhattan bikeway — on the pedestrian-enhanced blocks of Broadway starting south from Times Square — rendered that bikeway nearly useless — even though those blocks of Broadway are similar to the
9th Avenue layout in several ways:

  • Both streets are multi-lane one-way-southbound
  • Both have a left-curbside one-way bikeway
  • At intersections there is a bike signal and a left-turn pocket and turn-arrow for motor vehicles (where the cross street is two-way or one-way-left) Continue reading
Posted in Sidepaths | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment