Talk:2009-01-31 48 12

WOW!!

Really awesome video! Loved every hair-raising second of the ride. Perfect audio track too. Thanks for sharing that with us. NCBears 0259 01 02 2009 UTC

A++, would watch again :P (would you mind sharing the resources you used to create that video? What equipment (other than the EeePC) was used, things like that?) -Ephphatha 15:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) I didn't buy the camera, but received it "naked" without any casing from a local geocacher who works at the company making them - it seems to be the camera module built into this security camera. Its ultra-wide dynamic range feature is really impressive - no other camera I know can show both a sunny sky and shadowy regions on the ground without over- or underexposing. Other than that, I used a Pinnacle USB DVB-T/TV/video capture "stick", an old, weak 11.1V (3S) LiPoly battery to power the camera, a few velcro straps to attach the camera module to my backpack, and VirtualDub for both capturing (at 5 frames per second) and post-processing... nothing fancy, really ;-) --dawidi 19:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

The hashpoint turned out to be within 3 meters of the unfenced part, so given an accuracy of 5 meters, I can presumably claim success without trespassing. Definitely.

I enjoyed the video. It shows so many differences between Europe and here. Questions about your ride. Do you have bike lanes that are in between the parked cars and the sidewalk, or are you sometimes riding on the sidewalk? You are on a lot of multi-use paths with pedestrians. Do they have low speed limits, or can you go as fast as you like? I notice the snow. Are your cities good at clearing snow from bike routes? The streets and various bike paths seem to be quite a maze. How do you know which way to go? I'm just interested in the bicycle infrastructure in different places. -Robyn 17:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

May I drop in? :) - There are different types of bike lanes in /de. They may be both on the road and on the sidewalk (or anywhere else). They are (in theory) mandatory if posted with one of the blue lollipops: a) blue circle, white bicycle = bike lane or path b) wirth vertical white line and pedestrian on the other half = separated bike path and sidewalk c) horizontal line, both symbols = shared path. However, there are lots and lots of so-called "other bike lanes", which may be used facultatively, and are often difficult to identify. There is no legal prescription how to mark these. Some have bike symbols painted, for example. Finally, there are walkways with a sign "free for bicycles", which may be used at low speed.

On multi-used paths (no separation), you are not allowed to endanger pedestrians - on "free" walkways, "walking speed" is mandatory.

You may disregard mandatory bike lanes if they are obstructed, unusable, or not accompanying the street (i.e. there is no street the bike path immediately belongs to - this has rather strict and widely unknown limits: i.e. the bike path must have the same regulations at intersections - you cannot have a "yield" sign for bicyclists where motorists don't).

There is no general speed limit (and almost never any posted limit) on bike lanes, but different courts have ruled that biyclists may not go faster than you would expect them to (i.e. you won't get a ticket, but may be liable in the case of accidents etc.).

In the place where I live, bike lanes are never cleared of snow. Often, the machines wouldn't even be able to pass. People switch to the road (bike lane unusable), or they don't. Navigation on designated bike routes is still a mess, but getting better, imho. I prefer to stick to roads at all times, as the risk of having an accident is multiplied on a bike path or bike lane. -- relet 18:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds a lot like the situation here in Cambridge, too. Sometimes there are good cycle lanes on major city roads, and where space allows there is often a dedicated cycle path -- roads out of the city often have nice new spacious paths. In the city, though, space is often at a premium and lanes often have cars parked in, so it's a bit of a free-for-all. Cyclists tend to (illegally) ignore traffic lights, too, which I find irritating (I stop at them). Have you seen the Warrington (in NW England) Cycle Campaign's cycle facility of the month website, btw?  :-) -- Benjw 19:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, big fan of the latter. -- relet 19:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Yep, relet's account of the various kinds of cycleways seems exhaustive. From my experience, snow on separate cycle routes is never removed; on frequently used cycle lanes, it usually takes until the afternoon, while the roads are permanently kept clear and the sidewalks are usually cleared in time for the morning rush hour. I tend to use the road instead too. As for the "knowing which way to go" - the first 80% of that expedition were a known route for me (the first 40% being one option on my regular way to work, the rest the shortest route to IKEA), and as you can see I did stop at one point after that, unsure if I should take that track across the field. Other than that... yeah - I have a mapping GPS and I'm not afraid to use it ;) --dawidi 19:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Does the mapping GPS include off-road cycle routes? And the faility of the month website is sidesplitting. -Robyn 19:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

uh... the Garmin maps don't include them specifically, but they do include field and forest tracks, and some footpaths. The categorization is rather rough, however - tracks of the types "a farmer drove his tractor along here 20 years ago" and "narrow, but essential paved road between smaller settlements, part of a major cycle route" are drawn in the same style... OSM maps are better in that regard, but of course still incomplete in many regions. - And, faility is an awesome typo relating to that website indeed; that site is a "FailBlog for cyclists" ;) --dawidi 20:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)