[just_had_coffee]

I am a cyclist. I am always incredibly wary when I see drivers using their phones. Yes, this happens a lot, and yes I am in the habit of looking very carefully if drivers have seen me or not. Usually they don't and drive as if I don't exist – it's so frequent that I am nearly driven over, that I have become a rather defensive cyclist. But indeed, apart from random aggressive people (e.g., just yesterday on my way home from work, a car shaved past me at rather high speed (about 50-60km/h at 10cm max) with youths shouting at me) on of my biggest gripes is people who text at the wheel. It's insane.

(disclosure: I live in France, and as far as cycling culture/acceptance and infrastructure is concerned, this is a third-world country)

[pkkim]

Funny phrasing. I usually think of third world countries as having drivers who are more aware of cyclists, and more bike-friendly roads in general. ;)

[mzs]

I've had drivers on phones see me at a red light and then almost turn into me. I've decided it's not enough they see me at some point. I've solved this by looking to see it is clear and going when all the directions are red. It's just safest to not be where they will be even though I am breaking the law.

[georgerobinson]

I spend most of the week in London, where cycling is an incredibly popular mode of transport given the slow buses, heaving tubes, and the more widespread push to exercise and be healthy.

A pedestrian myself, I've observed that the largest risk to cyclists appears to be either at the lights or in slow moving traffic.

This could be incorrect, but I think almost all mid-range cars come with parking sensors which alert drivers to objects around them. However, they typically only sense objects in front of or behind the vehicle.

Therefore, I think it would be great to extend parking sensors to provide 360 degree detection. As a driver, your car would be able tell you if there is a cyclist behind you, in your blind spot, stationary or moving - all without having to take your concentration of the road ahead - including pedestrians who choose to jump out right in front of you.

I don't know if this is present in executive cars, such as the Mercedes E/S class, however, it would be an amazing kit to have, and I think it should be a legal requirement on all busses and HGVs - the single largest cause of accidents between cyclists and vehicles.

[mcintyre1994]

I think the whole parking sensor systems moving to the mid-range has probably happened too recently to be widespread at this point, but I imagine that depends enormously on affluence. There's a big difference between people who buy a mid-range/family car, and the people who replace it every few years.

It's a neat idea though, and if it is already on higher end models it'll probably trickle down eventually. Eliminating blind spots seems obvious - I imagine check the blind spot before moving is one of the first behaviours people lose after passing their test. I very rarely see drivers do it.

> I think it should be a legal requirement on all busses and HGVs - the single largest cause of accidents between cyclists and vehicles.

Do you have a link for this? It seems hard to believe given how relatively low the numbers of those vehicles are. Rospa [0] say it's cars or taxis which I'd have expected, although they do point out 20% of fatalities in London involve an HGV - and say one quarter of serious injuries are a bus/HGV (as you'd expect, performing a left turn). So more than I'd have guessed, but I'm not sure about the single largest?

For what it's worth they also say 75% of accidents happen at or near a junction which matches pretty well to your observation of lights/slow moving traffic.

[0] http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts...

[georgerobinson]

> Do you have a link for this? It seems hard to believe given how relatively low the numbers of those vehicles are

In 2013, HGVs were the cause of approx. 65% of all deaths of a cyclist (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25080427).

* 2010: 10 deaths, four involving HGVs

* 2011: 16 deaths, 12 involving HGVs

* 2012: 14 deaths, five involving HGVs

* 2013 so far: 14 deaths, nine involving HGVs

In fact, it looks like every cyclist death this year (up to 9th April) has been from a collision with a HGV (http://www.london24.com/news/cycling/london_cycle_deaths_201...).

I've not read the 2014 report from ROSPA, so I will take a look! Thanks for posting the link!

[matthewmacleod]

Please stop fucking doing that. The number of times I've nearly been hit by other cyclists, who no doubt also "looked to see if it was clear", is terrifying.

[mzs]

If you had asked more politely I would be much more inclined to listen, good day Matthew. edit (in case it gets deleted or editted)

matthewmacleod 28 minutes ago

Please stop fucking doing that. The number of times I've nearly been hit by other cyclists, who no doubt also "looked to see if it was clear", is terrifying.

[mcintyre1994]

As a cyclist, I definitely agree with you - but this applies to other cyclists too. One of the most ridiculously dangerous things I regularly see is someone I'm cycling behind in a narrow cycle lane suddenly slowing to walking pace to answer their phone like an idiot. Most of these cycle lanes don't really have enough room to safely overtake if the road alongside is busy (at least without probably panicking a driver and causing issues there) so it's really annoying and stupid.

That said, yea - anyone in a car not paying attention are lethal, it's not easy to predict what someone is going to do even at 30mph if they act like they have the whole road to themselves.

[zzleeper]

Same here but in the US. I can actually spot them as they drive like faux drunk drivers. Driving at weird speeds, swerving a bit, etc. and then when they get close enough, "yep, just texting!".

I hope in 10 years people using their phones while driving will be seen on the same scale as drunk driving. At least drunk drivers keep their eyes on the road...

[coldtea]

>I am a cyclist. I am always incredibly wary when I see drivers using their phones.

OTOH, I'm always wary when I see cyclists on roads where heavy boxes run with 40-80 miles per hour...

[Frondo]

I know it's hard to accept sometimes, but the world changes. Cycling is becoming more prevelant in auto-dominated America, whether autoists think it should or not.

[bobbyi_settv]

Isn't it as likely that hipster bikers of today will grow into adults with cars like their parents did? "Our generation is different and our trends will last forever" doesn't have a great track record of panning out.

[Frondo]

Maybe, maybe not. My friends and I are all pushing 40, most don't own cars (including some of the people with kids, mind), several of us don't even have licenses.

Like I said, the world changes. We got to this autoist-centric world slowly and through a lot of policy choices, and we'll move away from it the same way.

[djcapelis]

Many generations have changed to adopt newer forms of transit than the previous generations. I'm pretty sure the pony express doesn't run anymore. Did you think we would never change forms of transit again? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/16/t...

[scrollaway]

Where would you want cyclists to go exactly? Sidewalks filled with pedestrians? Not every road has a cycling path.

[hellbanner]

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5656153 "A bicycle superhighway was the future of transit"

[bobbyi_settv]

By foot? By car? By bus? "Cyclist" isn't a race or religion. He's not telling them "to go" anywhere. He's saying that if you choose to use a mode of transport that is a hazard and nuisance to others, you are in a glass house and shouldn't be throwing stones.

[jedrek]

Considering the hundreds of thousands of people drivers kill in Europe and North America every year, they're the hazard.

If you want cyclists off roads, lobby to change the law.

[Frondo]

A cyclist isn't a hazard to an autoist. Maybe to the paint on their two-ton vehicle, but not to them bodily.

[bobbyi_settv]

They are a hazard because drivers need to take actions to avoid them. It turns the road into an obstacle course, except with unpredictable obstacles that rarely follow traffic rules like red lights.

[Frondo]

I spend a lot of time on the road, and I see autoists running red lights far more frequently than cyclists. Cyclists are at a lot greater risk getting out into any intersection, it'd be suicide (literally) to put ourselves into the path of oncoming traffic.

I do see this remark ("you dumb kids on your bikes break all the traffic laws!!") on all the web forums for the local newspaper, whenever any article comes along about bike lanes or whatever. I just don't see people on bikes breaking traffic laws anywhere near as often as people in cars.

As for needing to avoid things, would you call traffic circles or pedestrians a "hazard" as well? Again, you're in a two-ton metal box, none of this stuff is going to do anything more than scratch your paint.

[polymatter]

If your roads are an obstacle course then it sounds like they shouldn't have cars on because they're clearly not wide enough. That's endangering the lives of all traffic, not just cyclists.

[GFK_of_xmaspast]

If you're driving, you should always be wary whether or not there's any cyclists around.

[jedrek]

Cycling on the road is literally the law in most of the west.