Same but different

This ISN'T the Last Working Vehicle...

Over the years, I've noticed that transport vehicles tend to be neglected by myself as long as there are more than one option. In other words, broken cars get left behind until the very last one is at stake. Similarly, so it is with bikes. The difference is that it sure is usually a LOT quicker and easier to get that last injured bike back on the road. Now, it is time to zip off on the NEXT TO LAST bike for some coffee...

Mirrored Reflections on Safety



Wasn't ONE Enough?

My recent post discussed the ways in which mirrors are used and how they might help reduce bad things within the safety pyramid. On my birthday, I received not one, but TWO new mirrors (don’t ask me to explain this), and I’ll start using one of them shortly. I also purchased a new headlight. All of this, in combination, prompted me to ponder two different safety elements; namely that of primary safety and secondary safety, and how they play against notions that might just reflect imagined safety aspects.

PRIMARY SAFETY
Primary safety consists of the things that are really IMPORTANT in keeping you safe. These include things like riding in the same direction as traffic, using a legal headlight and a tail light or reflector at night, not violating the right of way of other people, riding where you can be seen and so on. These primary safety actions are the main riding emphasis in Bike Ed, whether we’re talking about the Bike League curricula, CAN Bike, or Cycling Savvy. Many people violate these principles daily and over long periods of time without ever getting hurt. All that proves is cycling IS fun and safe. Such people are, however, disproportionally represented in the small fraction of people on bikes that DO get seriously hurt or killed. The new headlight I got was a primary safety item. It replaces my backup for “the flamethrower.”

SECONDARY SAFETY
Secondary safety consists of things that many swear by, and others swear at, but they represent a lesser increment of safety over doing the “primary” things right. In the secondary safety category fall things like high visibility clothing, helmets, and MIRRORS. Those that ride against traffic, in the dark, shoot stop signs without looking while wearing a high visibility vests and helmets with mirrors are, IMO, cousins to those asking for a diet drinks with a “supersized” fast food meals. Some know I’m not a cheerleader for secondary safety items. Yes, I wear a helmet on my daily commute. Yes, I wear high visibility clothing if it is what I pull off the shelf – and if everything else is equal, I’ll pick new items with better visibility when I make purchasing choices.

I’ll use this mirror, at least for a while, because it has the potential to provide supplemental situational awareness to me. I DON’T believe that it enables me to ride somewhere in the lane I couldn’t ride without one. I DON’T believe a mirror will enable me to predictably influence the behavior of any road users behind me, nor that it would give me warning if I were about to be run down. My dear departed mirror used flat glass and gave a pretty good view of things. My new mirror is different, and I’m not sure that’s a good or a bad thing. The new mirror has a convex surface and is made of plastic. We shall see. How much secondary safety is enough? I think that is up to the individual and I am reluctant to criticize anybody who chooses to step back from the “I can do more so I MUST do more” mindset – or someone who WANTS that little extra edge. I guess I rate primary safety a lot more importantly than secondary safety, but as long as one isn’t confused for the other, I think both are just fine and probably good.                              

CONFUSING THE TWO
One commenter noted the defense attorney in a trial implied that a mirror is a bike safety item. As you can see from the above, I agree that it CAN BE a safety item. I also agree that wearing a Snell rated helmet is a safety item for a motorist, turning the radio off is a safety item for a motorist, and refraining from texting while driving is a safety item. In truth, few motorists would disagree the items I’ve ticked off CAN add to their safety. However, most would consider such as requirements to be UNREASONABLE. And, by and large, I’d agree with them. Where I get a burr under my saddle is that these same motorists (like that defense lawyer) are sometimes perfectly happy imagining that secondary safety items ought to be necessary for cyclists, or that their omission should represent negligence more than failure of a motorist to wear a Snell 2000 helmet (a requirement in Jaguar Club autocross). These things often get confused in the “safety advice for cyclists” you read in newspapers and pamphlets. Sometimes REASONABLE depends on your perspective.

Their Finest Hour

I've seen a number of posts recently that suggest that 9/11 has been a bit overblown. Perhaps it has been, but I guess I'm a little sentimental. You see, on 9/11, I was in the factory that built the two planes that flew into the World Trade Center. Through the day, we watched our products kill our own people via the Internet as we tried to keep to the tasks we'd planned beforehand. As a Boeing manager said to us at the end of the day: "We were attacked with the products of our own industry." All too true.

However, the very next morning; by coincidence my birthday, before I had to leave to go to work in that same factory, I saw something that I'll never forget. It's shown below, and it let me know that, whatever happens, we are NOT alone! IMO, it was their finest hour. No focus groups or committee recommendations to Parliament were involved. Unlike the Battle of Britain, El Alamein, or even Waterloo, it wasn't YOUR fight. Instead, it simply showed your humanity. Thanks.

You're forgiven for burning Washington DC and trying to take Baltimore - 200 years ago this week. Please forgive us for having burned York...

Thanks for Playing a Tune, from your Wayward Children...

Stepping Down the Pyramid with Mirrors

My Own Dear Departed Mirror

In the last couple of weeks, I was prompted by a couple of events to think again about mirrors when using a bike. Namely, how might mirrors help a cyclist reduce unsafe ("at risk") behaviors; which are the base of the safety pyramid. Some of those behaviors belong to us cyclists. Other unsafe behaviorsbelong to our motoring companions. It isn't always easy to separate the former from the latter. To REALLY be safe, we need to find ways to reduce both.

The Safety Pyramid - You Want to Move DOWN IT!

FIRST EVENT
The first event was a long, drawn out discussion amongst Bike League cycling instructors about mirrors. One point that stuck with me was the inquiry by Khal of Los Alamos Bikes, namely:

"Question to those who strongly advocate mirrors. How often do you check mirrors in traffic, and does this give you adequate warning of a suddenly developing situation?"

It seemed to me that most of the ensuing discussion focused on feelings and faith rather than "what do we need to do."

SECOND EVENT
The second event was the rare "drama behind me." In it, seeing a motorist proceeding in the middle lane of three choices, and me planning to cross those three lanes prior to making a left, I initiated a right turn into the right lane (right turn on red). Normally, the motorist would have swept by and then I'd be up to speed and move over to make the left. I COULD have simply waited, but it seemed to be pretty simple. This time, however, the motorist swerved from the middle lane into the right lane - MY lane. What? Suddenly I was in a lane at about 10mph with a motorist directly behind, doing 50 and closing fast. I considered my options, not knowing exactly WHY this lady had swerved from a "clean and simpl pass" position into a "hit from behind" position; things didn't seem clear. As a result, I fell back on experience and hung a left turn signal while keeping close watch. If the lady was going to make a right, she'd see it and we'd be good. If she was wondering about my intent, she'd see it. Either way, I was definitely going to watch this motorist's wheels to see what would happen next. While my stress level edged up. At this point, anything other than "stay the course andO signal my intent" seemed to be a poor bet.

Well, as it turned out, the motorist then swerved left, back into her original lane, passed me with plenty of clearance (remember, I was signaling an intent to go INTO that lane she swung back into), and proceeded apace. After she passed, I exhaled, completed my leftward shifts and made my left turn; thinking about the safety pyramid and pondering how any mirror might have helped. Lest you think I'm simply being "dramatic," one of my engineers saw the event and said he was wondering if he needed to be calling 911. Lest you think I narrowly escaped death, the lady's closest approach was probably ten feet as she swept by in her original lane. I have no idea what the lady had in mind, other than she imagined I'd cross all the way across the street in front of her instead of following traffic protocol, and decided her best chance to miss the "idiot" was to swerve right. Assuming she was paying attention (she was NOT chatting on any mobile device), despite my concern, I was in absolutely no danger whatsoever UNLESS I'd done some ill-advised evasive maneuver at the last moment - mirror help or hurt? I guess my "proper" behavior simply fooled her. Who really knows. Regardless, as PM Summer once said: "no harm no foul."



Second Event - View from Google Maps - Arrows from Yours Truly

I'm neither a big fan nor opponent of mirrors. The one time I used one, it proved a useful added means to help in overall situation awareness. I think, however, that mirrors are a bit oversold, as are other safety things such as "high vis" and helmets. In the final analysis, our FIRST line of defense as road users (or on other public travel routes) is that our fellow road users know what we plan to do and what they in turn need to do to avoid disaster. That is the basis of traffic law.

Let us consider the actual USE of mirrors. Any mirror has three uses; the first is to see what is directly behind, the second is to see what might be developing in the lane to one's left when you might be considering such a shift, and the third is a similar function for a rightward shift. We'll consider them in order.

BEHIND
If you are looking to see what is going on behind you in a mirror, you are motivated by concerns about the general situation or you think you may want to send some message to following traffic. In the case of the "second event," what message would a mirror enable me to send? In reality, in such a situation, clear consistent operation seems to be the best principle when encountering another road user that seems to be doing illogical things. Even a wave or a "slow down" signal might confuse things for a distracted driver. What's more, for looking behind, we on bikes have no need for the "behind" mirror to keep from backing over people or stuff in the driveway. As you might see from the photo below. The rearview mirror is imperfect in that regard even in the MIGHTY LAND ROVER.



Mirror to Look Directly Behind. Mostly Useful for Backing Up

OTOH, a mirror is quite useful to look behind when one is wondering what happened to that motorist behind that should be ready to pass now. In the one day I had a mirror, it repeatedly answered such questions. No safety issue, but I, for one, dislike even short-term mysteries when riding. Score a point for mirrors.

SIDE (left or right)

LH Mirror - Aim it at the Lane to Your Vehicle's Left According to SAE

A mirror has definite uses when considering a left or right lane move in traffic. That is one reason that driver side mirrors have been required for cars starting in 1968 (prior to 1968, no side mirrors were required). They also became ubiquitous on the far (right) side of cars by the early 90's. In the case of a side mirror, it is "aimed" at the next lane over so you can see what will crunch you if you shift over. Such a mirror is clearly aimed differently than the "behind" mirror. Go HERE for a discussion on mirror aiming. Cyclists have an advantage in this regard over motorists because their head movements that effectively change mirror aiming are less than for their motoring brethren. Still, a mirror is either optimized to see behind or to one or the other sides. And THAT is a point mostly missed in the LAB discussions: if aimed behind, what action can you suddenly take that does not make you LESS predictable? If aimed to a side, how often does it really make a difference? While we are talking about SIDE mirrors, the reason RH mirrors came along much later is that they are a lot less likely to be really useful. Think about it. If you are on a bike (or in a car) and making a right turn, motorists on your right are a rare event. If you are making a lane shift to the left; much more likely. As for pedestrians, we on bikes really don't need mirrors to see them.


RH Side Mirror. Look HERE to Check Before a RH Lane Change. Objects are Closer Than They Appear!

OTHER FACTORS
If you are in a car, the side view mirror is much closer to the lane divider than it would typically be if you are on a bike - UNLESS you are riding a bit left of the LH tire track. This is simply due to the much wider width of a car. In my own experience, I get reduced passing clearance if I ride "close" to the LH lane edge. Things are much more congenial if I ride somewhere within the range of tire tracks. Personally, I like the "left center line of sweetness," but as with a lot in life, "it depends."

BOTTOM LINE
Very little of the mirror discussions I've seen address how mirrors are used for different purposes, nor exactly HOW you can reliably use a mirror for any safety purpose when considering traffic approaching from behind. For a movement you plan to the side - yes. From behind, not so much unless you are planning to jump on the brakes without warning.

MY VIEW (no pun intended)
A mirror can help in overall situation awareness. I'm going to get another mirror partly for this reason. What's more, it'll be a bar end mirror and NOT the one I already have that mounts on my helmet. A mirror makes a useful part of the "eyes moving" sequence of seeing what is all around (if that is any different than overall situation awareness) as long as it doesn't become an "end" in itself. A mirror can also help you prejudge a lane move. In this case, however, I'd never make a lane move without the "trust but verify" Ronald Reagan full head check. My kids were taught the same principle when motoring. NEVER change lanes without actually SEEING things are clear. In that regard, mirrors mainly help you know what to expect when the REAL look occurs.



 

"Trust, But Verify" Applies to Nuclear Weapons - AND Traffic (photo from Wikipedia)

ONE OTHER THING
All the above presumes you have normal vision or are farsighted. For those that are NEARSIGHTED, the mirror also helps them see what is happening back there and off to the side in conjunction with their eyeglasses. Otherwise, they are looking beyond the edges of their glasses.

JAGUAR CONSIDERATION
If you were wondering, NO, I have NO side mirror on my 1967 Jaguar. I have no plans to add one either - unless I find some of those that'll clip onto one's window but can be removed when one drives on to the show field. Just sayin'



No Side Mirror on THIS Vehicle!

What's a Warning to Do?



CURRENT WARNING - Older Adults Should Limit Outdoor Activity - and How Old are "Older" Adults?

THURSDAY UPDATE
One of the above came out at 4:46PM this afternoon, precisely as I was halfway home on my bike. After the fact warnings are not too useful!

Sometimes government, at least at the local level, is phenomenally responsive. One might wonder about this sometimes. I'll give you an example. NCTCOG sends me email alerts when pollution levels get high. Things are, in theory, pretty bad when there is an Orange Pollution Warning. We're told to limit outdoor activity.

The alerts that have been issued SINCE "Bike to Work Day" look like the picture above. I asked the NCTCOG lady about those warnings, and particularly their mention of bikes as shown in the "before" warnings that are pictured below.

No, I didn't suggest they actually eradicate cycling from their suggestions, merely that they might want to consider what they are advising. Mostly, I get these after I have left for work and am checking my email at Starbucks on the way home. Yup, simply based on a semi-serious inquiry at BTW Day, NCTCOG has changed their email broadcasts. I was surprised, particularly after the response I got from Fort Worth when I made input to their bike plan.

Government response aside, has anyone in otherwise reasonable health ever suffered some sort of damage due to failure to limit outdoor activity during such episodes? For example, would the Cowboys or Rangers cancel a game due to a pollution warning?



Before BTW Day, We Older Types Were Supposed to Limit Outdoor Activity but Were Also
Supposed Bike or Walk Instead of Driving