Future Vehicle to Bicycle, etc Comm System?

[jt10000]

I think you ignored the first part of my post about people stepping out with out looking up from there phones. That is the most unsafe part of driving in Hoboken.

Yeah, some drivers and most police (who spend most of their time behind the wheel) say this a lot, but it's just anecdotes I've never seen good evidence for it. And if we do want to play the anecdote game, there is plenty of "I had to jam on my brakes" but much less "Dead - hit while on the phone." Oh, and plenty of anecdotes of causes of death that are also backed up by broader to evidence: speeding and cars turning and violating pedestrian right of way. Also increasing vehicle size make accidents more deadly.

I'm not aware of any pedestrian death in NYC where I live, for example, where the pedestrian being on the phone was a root cause. Maybe I missed that, but it's not a thing as far as I can tell. People are killed here every two or three days on average, most recently yesterday. The person killed (a seven-year old) was not on the phone. The driver turned and ran them over. Drivers turning and running over pedestrians is the common crash mode. Maybe Hoboken is different. Maybe.

Oh, and one other thing. If a pedestrian has right of way they should be able to cross the street with their eyes closed and their ears plugged. Yeah, may not safest, but you don't kill someone by hitting them when walking. Drivers have responsibility to not hit people, not pedestrians to stay out of their way.

Here's a drivers-view perspective in a tweet. The pedestrian is not harming or endangering anyone, but a professional drivers organization tries to call her out. She is crossing with the light, and they're complaining she's looking at her phone.

PS - of course a pedestrian jumping out into traffic without looking w/o the right of way is not good.

 

[jt10000]

Stop asking to be saved. Without individual responsibility the problem will never go away.
Thinking the 'government' is capable of solving any problem with more laws and new technology is absurd. The buck starts with each of us.
No nanny state crap in our vehicles, no privacy invasions. (of course most of you gave that up long ago with your smart phones)

Street safety is literally the government's responsibility.

Through you are right about this tech. The tech that will work with no privacy implications is changed road/street design. Currently our roads and streets are designed to move drivers fast. That's the core goal. Not safety, particularly safety of people not in cars.

And that's not random - that's government policy since at least the 1950s due, in large part, to lobbying by the auto and petroleum industries. That's an explicit goal of government. So no "nanny state" but actually a "don't-care-if-drivers-kill state as long as drivers are privileged." It's not random or natural. It's intentional.

That has to change. There is no way individuals can make our streets safer in a meaningful way except through collective action that changes public policy. Those changes are slowly happening in some places.

I'd urge yall to watch this video - it touches on death from drivers and deaths in workplaces and drug overdoses. (Or read the book - I haven't yet but it's supposed to be brilliant)

 

[Uncle-A]

Stop asking to be saved. Without individual responsibility the problem will never go away.
Thinking the 'government' is capable of solving any problem with more laws and new technology is absurd. The buck starts with each of us.
No nanny state crap in our vehicles, no privacy invasions. (of course most of you gave that up long ago with your smart phones)

You mean you don't have a smart phone?

 

[scott43]

Here's a drivers-view perspective in a tweet. The pedestrian is not harming or endangering anyone, but a professional drivers organization tries to call her out. She is crossing with the light, and they're complaining she's looking at her phone.

PS - of course a pedestrian jumping out into traffic without looking w/o the right of way is not good.

View attachment 214169

I'll call bs on this pic. Once you make eye contact you can carry on. I don't eyeball the driver non stop as I cross the road. I get their point but that pic is in isolation.

 

[scott43]

I see little changing on the road. I suppose self driving cars will help the general distraction level. Currently it’s Russian Roulette being on the side of the road, even in a car.

This was my direction. Self driving gets a lot better when the algorithm is aware of other vehicles and their vector from something in addition to their sensors.

 

[Uncle-A]

Yeah, some drivers and most police (who spend most of their time behind the wheel) say this a lot, but it's just anecdotes I've never seen good evidence for it. And if we do want to play the anecdote game, there is plenty of "I had to jam on my brakes" but much less "Dead - hit while on the phone." Oh, and plenty of anecdotes of causes of death that are also backed up by broader to evidence: speeding and cars turning and violating pedestrian right of way. Also increasing vehicle size make accidents more deadly.

I'm not aware of any pedestrian death in NYC where I live, for example, where the pedestrian being on the phone was a root cause. Maybe I missed that, but it's not a thing as far as I can tell. People are killed here every two or three days on average, most recently yesterday. The person killed (a seven-year old) was not on the phone. The driver turned and ran them over. Drivers turning and running over pedestrians is the common crash mode. Maybe Hoboken is different. Maybe.

Oh, and one other thing. If a pedestrian has right of way they should be able to cross the street with their eyes closed and their ears plugged. Yeah, may not safest, but you don't kill someone by hitting them when walking. Drivers have responsibility to not hit people, not pedestrians to stay out of their way.

Here's a drivers-view perspective in a tweet. The pedestrian is not harming or endangering anyone, but a professional drivers organization tries to call her out. She is crossing with the light, and they're complaining she's looking at her phone.

PS - of course a pedestrian jumping out into traffic without looking w/o the right of way is not good.

View attachment 214169

Having spent the past several months driving in Manhattan I think you have a misconception of the pedestrians that cross the streets in the city. They cross against the light, step out when the walk signs say don't walk and barely look up from their phones and I have seen it first hand it is not anecdotal.

 

[jt10000]

Having spent the past several months driving in Manhattan I think you have a misconception of the pedestrians that cross the streets in the city. They cross against the light, step out when the walk signs say don't walk and barely look up from their phones and I have seen it first hand it is not anecdotal.

I'm not saying they don't do it. I'm saying it's not the root cause of injuries and fatalities. I drive in NYC several times a week and walk around a lot. It's not the "most dangerous thing."

Deaths and some serious injuries are heavily reported and it doesn't show up in any meaningful way that I've seen.

 

[KingGrump]

Yeah, some drivers and most police (who spend most of their time behind the wheel) say this a lot, but it's just anecdotes I've never seen good evidence for it. And if we do want to play the anecdote game, there is plenty of "I had to jam on my brakes" but much less "Dead - hit while on the phone." Oh, and plenty of anecdotes of causes of death that are also backed up by broader to evidence: speeding and cars turning and violating pedestrian right of way. Also increasing vehicle size make accidents more deadly.

Distracted pedestrians appears to be an issue of enough significance for many European cities to implement embed signage IN the sidewalk.

Oh, and one other thing. If a pedestrian has right of way they should be able to cross the street with their eyes closed and their ears plugged. Yeah, may not safest, but you don't kill someone by hitting them when walking. Drivers have responsibility to not hit people, not pedestrians to stay out of their way.

"I have the right of way". That is the same argument I used when going up an eighteen wheeler on the interstate. They are gonna put that on my head stone.

Walking around NYC totally zoned out is simply hazardous to your health. You (generic) are totally dependent on the competence of strangers. You have a much chance coming out ahead depending on the kindness of strangers.

I grew up in NYC. It ain't that difficult to cross the street so long one pays a modicum of attention to one's surroundings. I certainly do not need a walk/don't walk sign to tell me whether it's safe to cross the street.

 

[Paul Lutes]

I grew up in NYC. It ain't that difficult to cross the street so long one pays a modicum of attention to one's surroundings. I certainly do not need a walk/don't walk sign to tell me whether it's safe to cross the street.

Lemme guess: growing up you were young and nimble, able to process multiple variables simultaneously. Are you still able to do that in your 40s? 50s? 60s? I sure as heck can't. I find it overwhelming to be driving in large cities, let alone walking. Conversely, I have to wonder how challenging dodging gridlocked traffic really can be

 

[James]

^Hard to tell how long she was staring at that phone while crossing, but she’s oblivious, and that’s par for the course. Sure, she has right of way and the bus has to wait anyway, so they really have nothing to complain about. (Like the police union, the finer points are overlooked) But trusting cars, buses, trucks, is dumb or naive. Plus cop cars, bicycles, skateboarders, and god knows what electric thing frequently go the wrong way. No look, no see.

Bicycle lanes are a new hazard in nyc for pedestrians. Though as far as fatalities, it’s less than 1% to motorized vehicles.

 

[KingGrump]

Lemme guess: growing up you were young and nimble, able to process multiple variables simultaneously. Are you still able to do that in your 40s? 50s? 60s? I sure as heck can't. I find it overwhelming to be driving in large cities, let alone walking. Conversely, I have to wonder how challenging dodging gridlocked traffic really can be

No issues what so ever. Even in my advanced years. I still drive everyday. In fact I drove to Jersey yesterday. That's what we call two traffic zone. Once into Manhattan and out again to NJ.

My son thinks he is the better driver on open road but still cede NYC driving to dad. He called driving in NYC as close quarter combat. It's all about experience.

As a long time New Yorker, I know almost instinctively where and when traffic usually happens. I just do a work around. Seldom use the GPS/Google map except for the last mile. I usually know how to get into a particular area of the city faster than the GPS/Google Map.

BTW, gridlock usually only happens in midtown Manhattan. WE avoid midtown like the plague. Subway is the best way to get around there. The fact is those stuck in gridlock for a bit of time are the ones to watch out for. They are usually pissed off and angry. Makes them unpredictable. Not good.

 

[jt10000]

But trusting cars, buses, trucks, is dumb or naive.

Sure. Absolutely.

But it's not the *cause* of the danger from a public policy or ethical point of view. Which is what I object to people saying. I tell my child to look carefully before crossing the street, but find it offensive when people use stories of pedestrians not being attentive as something dangerous out there. It's the drivers in a world set up for cars.

If we're talking about fixing things, let's get to root causes.

I don't have a smartphone and even if I did I wouldn't always carry it. My child, who travels independently from me outside sometimes, does not have a smartphone. And if the tech described at the start of this article becomes commonplace then it is certain that people will jump up and say "Too many people walking around haven't activated their beacon app and it's dangerous."

 

[jt10000]

I've said a few times in this thread that pedestrians being on phones/distracted is not a *cause* of danger in NYC or Hoboken (and by extensions other places). I'd never heard of it except anecdotally. But I decided to look for evidence.

It's hard to find evidence of a negative, but came across an interesting paper based on careful review of fatal accidents which does mention some deaths in NYC in which pedestrians being distracted by phones was a cause of a few deaths:

an in-depth review of the written crash narratives in New York City fatality reports from 2014 through 2017 suggests little evidence of pedestrian device involvement in citywide pedestrian fatalities. Records show two cases (0.2%) in which there was electronic device involvement, of 856 with available narratives. One pedestrian fatality in 2015 involved a pedestrian who was texting, and one fatality in 2014 involved a person reaching for a dropped mobile device. This lack of reported pedestrian device involvement is notable, as the crash reports rely largely on drivers’ accounts. In comparison, from 2014-2017, there were 112 pedestrian fatalities where vehicles failed to yield to pedestrians with the right of way (13%).

The paper talks about educating pedestrians to be more careful, which is not bad advice, but still, thems the facts.

And here's the policy mix which we know from places around the world will actually work:

the best way to address distracted walking, and all forms of distraction, is by creating a road environment focused on speed management – where vehicles are traveling at a safe speed so that crashes can be avoided, and when crashes do occur they are not fatal or severe. People will inevitably be distracted when they walk with mobile devices, or may be distracted in other ways. But, in line with New York City’s Vision Zero policy, this common human error should not result in death. Speed management has been shown to be one of the most vital tools for protection of vulnerable road users in New York City8 and DOT will continue to explore strategies for expanding and enhancing its current related initiatives, including the use of speed cameras.

 

[cantunamunch]

I don't have a smartphone and even if I did I wouldn't always carry it. My child, who travels independently from me outside sometimes, does not have a smartphone. And if the tech described at the start of this article becomes commonplace then it is certain that people will jump up and say "Too many people walking around haven't activated their beacon app and it's dangerous."

And vehicles already have a beacon app.

 

[James]

Ironically, I don’t think these collision avoidance systems are meant for crowded cities. So, while we’ve gotten side tracked by crossing the street in Manhattan, we’re back to riding a bike a few feet from cars doing perhaps 60mph. You’re not going to change a 50mph road to 30. Just not happening.

 

[cantunamunch]

Ironically, I don’t think these collision avoidance systems are meant for crowded cities.

Oh I'm fully aware these things seem ideal for road/trail intersections especially where sight lines are blocked by greenery, especially rural, and especially off-angle.

Perkiomen trail:

Indian Head (both the trucks and the TT bikes haul a$$ through here):

York, PA (Torrey Brown trail extension - and, if that looks harmless, there's a bus on the road to the left and a delivery truck on the right)

But I have more pics of situations where they'd be just useless and intentionally turned off.

For example, on-grade fenced off bridge crossings:

Side-paths, both unfenced and fenced:

Can you even imagine the panic of getting a transponder alert from a bike that is on the I-66 bike trail? Especially westbound when the sun is in their eyes?

Or from directly on top of the highway?

 

[Uncle-A]

Ironically, I don’t think these collision avoidance systems are meant for crowded cities. So, while we’ve gotten side tracked by crossing the street in Manhattan, we’re back to riding a bike a few feet from cars doing perhaps 60mph. You’re not going to change a 50mph road to 30. Just not happening.

Especially since the 50 MPH road has vehicles doing 65 MPH. After all how many really go the speed limit.