I’d not heard of the ‘Dutch Reach’ (using the hand furthest from the car door to force turning to check before opening a door) but it seems like a good idea. Obviously I know to check before opening the car door - but not the Dutch Reach as a habit or requirement to prevent injury to cyclists.
Thoughts on this becoming a thing in Australian jurisdictions?
Incidentally, there are taxes that more accurately reflect the amount of wear and tear on the road you use - fuel tax is the main one. So if your bicycle uses less fuel than your car does, that's the "discount" on your taxes for making the switch.
And insurance
You must be fun at parties. Do you not believe in coronavirus also?
Negged to oblivion… Bwahahaha
Won't this result in more back injuries due to the twisting motion?
Seems like having proper cycle lanes, safe spaces to cycle or making it mandatory for cars to have door collision sensors is a better option.
Wouldn’t have thought so for most people given it’s not loaded twisting, the door isn’t very far away and you’re not actually turning much as you’re using the length of your arm to reach and head to turn as well. It’s also not repetitive for most (perhaps for delivery drivers) Maybe an issue for some with an existing injury.
Definitely the other things are helpful as well.
Won't this result in more back injuries due to the twisting motion?
Good for back health stretching I would have thought.
Good for back health stretching I would have thought.
you obviously don't have çhronic back pain.
You probably have chronic back pain from not stretching before the incident that caused your back pain.
Open the door on a cyclist and they go over the handle bars, crack their head and probably will have spin injury that causes pain too. Then they complain they can't twist.
People aren't born with chronic back pain. It comes from something that the person did.
People aren't born with chronic back pain. It comes from something that the person did.
Unless they are born with spina bifida, scoliosis or various other things. But yes, generally speaking you’re right.
People aren't born with chronic back pain. It comes from something that the person did.
Don't think so. I had a tumour growing on my spine and I couldn't even stand straight because of the pain.
I needed major surgery to remove it. What did I do to cause that?
@netjock: @netjock lol are you implying that they did something to get that tumour? wow. rethink what you said.
People aren't born with chronic back pain. It comes from something that the person did.
Right……… I guess people who have cancer did something to get it as well, or poor people are poor because of choice.
@[Deactivated]: Ask rich people with chronic back pain how much they willing to pay to be pain free.
I have seen lots of cyclists ride on the road when there is a perfectly good cycling path metres away from them. Having good cycling paths doesn't seem to encourage them off the road
In those cases you generally find that they are not "good cycling paths" at all. Actually full of pedestrians, scattered all over the path, totally oblivious to anyone else because of their earphones. And typically not connecting to anything else.
Not many people prefer to play in the car traffic if there is a reasonable choice otherwise.
There's nothing wrong with the one I am thinking of. There is a separate section for pedestrians vs cyclists with a kerb in between. The only thing wrong with it is having to cross side streets. They'd rather battle with parked cars and moving cars than have to slow down to look both ways at the side streets.
And not to mention part of it is uphill so they slow down to 15km/hr or so, with a string of cars banking up behind them. They're a special breed.
My favourite cycling paths are the ones that go through parking spots. Worse than useless.
Just as a bit of context, as there are some shared/bike paths I purposely choose not to ride on near the city: When I ride, I average 30kph for the entire ride, and am generally cruise along at around 40kph on the flats. There are some shared/bike paths near very popular parks near the river were me doing 40kph through crowds of pedestrians is far more unsafe than me doing 40kph on the road where it is only a 50kph speed limit.
I am not saying your example is like this - it sounds like those cyclists are just being annoying - but there are circumstances where the safer option for everyone, including the cars, is to ride on the road.
Any Sunday morning on Captain Cook drive you'll see packs of cyclists not using the bike path. There are actually 2 bike tracks there towards Cronulla, one for fast cyclists and another shared path. But no - they will use the road
agreed - I have read that a common surprising spinal injury for a driver getting out of a car is reaching over to pick up a bag of shopping from the passenger side floor, then twisting the spine to step out while holding the bag of shopping
I think I've read better to perhaps place the bag on your lap first, then swivel the whole body on the seat before stepping out so you're not loading a twisted spine towards injury.
in other news I spent 18 months in rehabilition exercise after 4 weeks of driving a rental car around Germany 3 years ago using my non-dominant arm to open and close the left-hand side drivers door - resulting in bursitis/capsulitis in my left shoulder - I still do these shoulder exercises daily now - basically max-lifting my shoulders up, back, down for 10 secs each.
so yeah - be careful with car doors - surprising injuries can result.
I agree with the bike lanes… but I think it's the bike that needs the collision sensors. My car has tools to help me not run into things. I don't see sign posts and trees being fitted with collision sensors to avoid me running into them.
I check my mirrors before opening a door, easier and far more comprehensive than turning my head with all the visual obstructions that come from directly looking through the car from the drivers seat (headrest, B and C Pillars).
As such, making the "Dutch Reach" law or even just taught is a terrible idea IMHO!
Using hand furthest to make people turn their bodies therefore their heads to check.
You can enforce use of that hand but you can't force people to use their neck and eyeballs which is the problem.
Usually having having drivers to ride around a day on a bike would teach much better awareness skills. Learning by doing. The same for cyclists to drive for a day and see how bad some cyclists is.
Having cycled to work for years and seeing cyclists riding into cars and doors opened on cyclists there is wrongs done by both. That includes cyclists riding past parked cars without hands on brakes and too fast, also drivers who don't check their side mirrors before opening their doors (enforcing dutch reach on a driver who is too lazy to check their mirrors is just foolishness).
as an ex-motorcyclist who's had their major accident - woke up in hospital in traction with spinal injuries (luckily not in a wheelchair there but for the grace of dog) - caused by an idiot driver of an Oldhen station wagon blocking my entire roadway just over the blind crest of a hill in an 80kph zone - the picture is imprinted in my mind - just before impact at maybe 50-60kph after last second braking from 80kph - the woman's story - 'I just dropped off my husband at the bus stop - like I've done every day for the last 18 months - I didn't know there was anything wrong'
I simply assume every other vehicle on the road is trying to kill me, and my job is to avoid letting them do that.
So when I see cyclists zipping through heavy traffic and narrow gaps and close beside parked cars - because 'it's faster' - 'I feel free' - 'I'm better than car drivers because I'm saving the planet on my no-pollution machine' and 'what could go wrong?' - I just hold my breath and think 'wait and see'
but then again I regard the MAMIL as rats on the road so no sympathy from me if you're riding within 1 metre of a car door. End of.
Dutch overreach! Nah just kidding, should be like a look left then right when crossing the road like initiative
using the hand furthest from the car door to force turning to check before opening a door
But, it really doesn't. People would just reach across their body. Even if it were mandatory, legislated and carried an enormous fine, it still doesn't cause people to turn and look. Even if you do turn, more often than not, it just makes the driver look directly at the B pillar.
I think there should be a rule that if cars have to give cyclists a gap, cyclists should also in turn give cars the same gap. Most car doors are less than 1m. In most states, cars are required to give cyclists a 1m gap. In turn, cyclists should give parked cars a 1m gap, as this would give them sufficient space if a door was opened.
I think there should be a rule that if cars have to give cyclists a gap, cyclists should also in turn give cars the same gap. Most car doors are less than 1m. In most states, cars are required to give cyclists a 1m gap. In turn, cyclists should give parked cars a 1m gap, as this would give them sufficient space if a door was opened.
The problem with this is that would leave no room for cars to pass. Then we'd have even worse behaviours on the road by drivers, as they get frustrated driving behind a cyclist.
The problem is lack of parking, or people to lazy to walk from a car park near-by.
or just have it by law that a person who door-ed a cyclist is required to exchange details (Driver's Licence etc) - ie if you a smash a cyclist with your door its treated like you've hit another car - expected to give details and pay costs if you're at fault. If lycraperson is at fault, he pays the costs to fix your door.
Surely that’s already a law? I think the idea is to prevent it happening in the first place.
probably shrugs. I think my suggestion would achieve the goal of raising awareness that its not ok to be absent minded and injure someone - now that there are definite penalties.
IMO makes more sense than requiring a car driver to always twist around to open the door - seems annoying and overkill. Plus you'll start having people applying for a letter from their GP stating why they can't do it the prescribed way due to some "chronic past injury". Unless cyclist has a camera, how will they prove it the driver did the twist at that particular incident?
People who do lots of start-stop daily drives (couriers) will resist hard - probably causes muscle pain to have to do the dutch twist so many times per day.
I'm not sure how the cyclist could ever be at fault in this situation.
I hit a door in this way luckily mostly stopped by the time and way uninjured, bent the door and they thought it was my fault.
Dutch Reach
Is it something similar to the Dutch Oven?
cyclists like it when someone does a reacharound?
.
they dont wear lycra for nothing
Really surprised Sydney drivers dont do it.
Cyclist aside, modern car doors are huge, easily result in an accident by randomly opening door on oncoming traffic on narrow Sydney streets. As a car owner, I like my doors on my car and not down the road.
Cyclist aside, modern car doors are huge, easily result in an accident by randomly opening door on oncoming traffic on narrow Sydney streets
Front occupants should check side mirrors before opening door.
Front occupants should tell rear occupants of incoming traffic.
Laziness does wonders.
we always made our children get out on footpath side. it amazes me how often I see parents loading/unloading children on road side
.
Every morning at the school, I see so many parents pulling up (mostly illegally in no stopping, bus or the handicapped zones) and their kids getting out on the drivers side. And I’m not talking about parents with a car seat on the left back seat or another kid getting out the left side, these are kids (1 or more) unloading into the line of traffic side.
my parents always made us do the same.
I most definitely still do likewise!
I am a cyclist and motorist.
Unless I am in my own garage or in a parking spot where where it is enclosed, I will look before opening the door. This is especially important where parallel parked on the street not just for bikes, but for other cars too.
Well bully for you. But the point here is not what YOU do but what many other drivers do. Which is fling the door open without looking.
I think teaching the Dutch Reach is a great idea. It's much better to have a safe practice embedded in muscle memory than to depend on people making a conscious decision to look properly every single time. Because the one time they forget …
Won't work here. Too many chronically obese / self obsessed / "do what I want" people in society.
Put that together with people with a legitimate excuse (so many disability permits), an aging population and bad attitudes and what looks like a great idea would be a wholly unenforceable law.
The only time you might see an enforcement fine is when a cyclist has a crash cam clearly showing negligence, but there's already laws for this anyhow.
It's a good idea and should be advocated, but made law? No
What if cars had doors opening from the front? At least the cyclist would hit with a glancing blow. And probably driver would get a sore arm too? Be a reminder to be careful next time.
What if cars had doors opening from the front? At least the cyclist would hit with a glancing blow
So suicide door that if its not closed properly will blow open while driving, and lets not forget the glancing blow to the cyclist deflecting them into active lanes of traffic to get run over good and proper.
What if cars had doors opening from the front?
If we're going to mandate new door openings, why not go the whole hog and force Koenigsegg doors? These open in such a way that it ought to make it near impossible for a cyclist to get doored.
Those of us with limited mobility might struggle to reach, twist and turn to open the door that way.
Cyclists could always ride further away too.
Cyclists could always ride further away too.
+1
lot of problems, incidents and resentment towards cyclists will disappear if their on-road behaviour are modified; and permitted manoeuvres more closely regulated the same way cars are. ie if the direction of travel on a road lane is north, don't travel the opposite way there because pedestrians crossing the street wouldn't expect any traffic coming from that direction.
Where do you want the cyclists to ride exactly?
- There's the cars lined up along the side of the road.
- There's a minimal shoulder where the cyclist is
- There's the lane for the cars
Cyclist don't really want to be in the car lane & risk getting hit by the cars/trucks going past & the cars have to keep 1m distance
anywhere but anywhere near roads
up really steep hills preferably
i remember hearing about it on QI a while back. seems like a sensible practice
Another way is for Driving Examiners to be told to verify that drivers are looking before they exit the car. Doing so means Driver Trainers will implement it in their lessons.
Making it a legal requirement to do a body turn that's not natural every single time is just the wrong way to solve the issue.
Its the same level of strangeness as CDC telling people to hum Happy Birthday as they're washing their hands
"Scrub your hands for at least 20 seconds. Need a timer? Hum the “Happy Birthday” song from beginning to end twice."
I really don't get this - doing a big twist would mean I can't use my wing-mirror - which gives a much greater view of speeding obstacles that wish to flatten me if I step out of the car.
Absolutely agree with Payton. I could go on about the nanny state aspect of it, but the real problem is the futility of thinking someone who can't be assed to look out for cyclists would be altered by using left hand or would even do that or if it would even work.
Double Dutch Reach?
Get your passenger to open the door.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
I think its a good idea but only drivers who look for cyclists anyway are gonna do it.
Bad drivers gonna bad driver regardless.
Agreed, but they're the one's who'll be looking out for cyclists already, so isn't it pointless?
That's my point.
Thing this does not cover is that passengers don't have rear view mirrors to check, many have said here they check via rear view mirrors, in my experience it's been a passenger that has opened their door on me, drivers should be responsible for their passengers exiting as they are if any door on the car is opened and another car comes into contact with that door.
Just as I suspected. Too many anti cyclist posts here.
Yes, they are entitled to be on the roads and must follow the rules like other road users who are all perfect.
No, they shouldn’t pay rego. it’s just dumb.
Yes, there are some douchebag cyclists that don’t treat pedestrians right, but there’s plenty of douchebag motorists and pedestrians too. A cyclist had a vested interest in not crashing, it bloody hurts when you do.
I agree with your general position, but the douche bag cyclist issue is bigger than you say. My grandmother was killed walking out of a shop by a cyclist on the footpath not looking. I've been hit twice while stationary in a driveway (in a car) by cyclists doing the same thing. Lots of cyclists ride aggressively, are hard to see at the best of times and don't ride as car aware as they expect motorists to drive bike aware. A bike licence preceded by some training seems reasonable to me.
I’m sorry that you’ve had such bad experience with cyclists.
Bad drivers cause millions in damage and kill hundreds of people per year. We’d be better to put money into proper driver training to make a dent in those numbers. The vast majority of cyclists already have a drivers licence ‘special’ training is hardly necessary given rod sense is taught in schools as well.
Absolutely ridiculous making a law like this. Presumably police will now be crouching behind rows of parked cars to see what hand drivers open their door with!
By all means, put laws on this sort of thing around the consequence of actions, but putting laws on the action itself is just total overreach.
Well to be fair a lot of road rules are focused on prevention rather than consequence, e.g. speed cameras, headlights, and the like.
ERH MER GHERD!
Police use existing laws to assign blame in accidents, so they may not be crouching somewhere waiting for someone to break a certain law … ANY LAW … but have that law as a guide to assign blame!
How often do you contradict yourself?
Yep making it law seems a little extreme and for sure cops in Australia would use it an excuse to fine someone. I do like the idea of Dutch Reach as a habit though because as much as everyone says they always check, they don’t so if it can prevent potentially catastrophic injuries it’s better than after the fact.
I always look so this seems stupid to me
To be fair though, I almost hit cyclists on two separate occasions, one was at a roundabout, they approached from my right, didn't see them until I started moving then appeared like magic right in front of me, slammed on the brakes, no harm done except gave us both a huge fright.
Similar situation except at a stop sign, saw them last second. Either my car has a shit blindspot caused by the a frame or I'm just a bad driver.
People opening their car door without looking is also dangerous for other drivers, not just cyclists. The number of times I've seen someone just swing the door open the farthest it'll go, in one swift motion - it drives me insane. If it's a narrow road and there's a car going past it, sometimes the other driver gets a shock and swerves a little out of reflex. Even if the door isn't close enough to hit the car, it's super unpleasant to have someone fling the door open so suddenly. Often the care factor is zero and the other party doesn't even realise what's happened.
I also don't understand why the topic of cyclist tax is being dragged into this. Various laws are made to protect everyone, whether they be pedestrians, drivers, cyclists, electric scooter riders, whatever. If enough passengers started flinging the car door open and injuring pedestrians there could be a law against that too.
I am all for people always checking before opening doors but as a cyclist I am also cautious around parked cars and try to avoid getting too close to the doors (If I can help it) and also check to see if i can see anyone in the cars as i am coming up to them.
Am careful also, but have had in one instance where a car come around a corner in front of me, hug the gutter and immediately pull up, had no option but break and attempt to steer around … then the drivers side rear passenger exit straight away trapping me in the door, can't control every situation … so education then?
Yeah, I think its both sides have to just be more careful and learn to co-exist. I think with a lot of things these days, people just expect one side (the other side) to basically do all the work and take all the precautions and sometimes that might be the letter of the law but still it makes sense to have both sides just be more aware. And if there is a mistake, to acknowledge it. I have come across scenarios where i am driving and there is a parent with a kid, the kid has just suddenly decided to run across the road and i had to brake extremely hard as well as swerve onto the other side of the road but luckily it was quiet at the time so no oncoming traffic. The Parent of the kid didnt acknowledge or apologise or even look embarrassed, she just walked across the road, grabbed the kid and took the kid back to the footpath slowly as if nothing had just happened. I was flabbergasted, no wave or sorry or anything.
Depends. What does the data say about prevalence of incidents in Australia?
I always enjoy a good dutch rudder
Related but unrelated, in South Korea they have cool little mirrors on the sides of taxi's so before you get out of the back (as only Aussies sit in the front of Taxis overseas) you can see in the mirror if cyclists\motorcyclists are filtering up the inside between the car and the kerb so you don't fling a door open in to someone.
Not my image but I've got one much like it from visits there.
https://imgur.com/gallery/TgpKbS1
I'm a bit pro cyclist, they make minimal impact on road costs and to the extent they do, it's fine; cycling should be encouraged.
However, as to the costs/contributions issue, the disparity is much worse than posts are saying. Road Tax? What about fuel excise 42.7c/liter or $12.5B/ year in Australia, not including GST and all the other direct and indirect taxes on road transport.
PS My wife is Dutch and trying to work out how they got blamed for this.
PS My wife is Dutch and trying to work out how they got blamed for this.
Maybe ask het to do the dutch reach on you? See if it aligns?
I'm now starting to understand this rule.
I found an online article on it. https://www.bicyclenetwork.com.au/tips-resources/know-how/du…
Named for its origin in one of the world’s most cyclist-friendly nations, the “Dutch Reach” refers to a method of opening your car door using the hand furthest from the door.
I suppose that's what you get for being cyclist friendly???? I think it's lovely though.
I stacked into a door when riding to uni once. Stayed on the bike, bent the door hinges lol! Driver was not happy. I suggested we call the police… conversation was over.
Couldn't care less. More cyclist's are a law unto themselves and literally don't give a toss about anyone else so why should I waste my energy?
How could this even be enforced?
How can anything be enforced!?
Make it law then-
A Police officer sees it happen then issues fine
Police investigator conclude it happened then issues fine and offers evidence in court (only called to investigate major accidents)
Cyclist's camera records what happening and is reviewed by investigating officer proving what happened and driver is fined and possible court proceedings depending on severity of accident.
Ete Etc!
99% people do the right thing under threat of fine
MS paint drawing pls
i'm more of a dutch rudder fan myself
Not a good idea. The important thing is to turn your head and look at the back. I can still do the "Dutch Reach" with my face facing forward.
And it is not just cyclist problem, the door can hit people and cars as well.
That should be though since we are kids as the passenger to form a habit.
How about just using your eyes to look before flinging a door open? Surely this is common sense, not just for cyclists, but also for other cars/trucks? It's not exactly rocket surgery.
It's law, anyone, passenger or driver causes an accident by opening a car's door and the car's owner or insurer is liable
Obviously. Doesn't stop people doing it though, as people are stupid. Having this Dutch thing as a law won't make people any less stupid.
Having this (insert law) won't make people any less stupid
There are speeding laws, mobile phone use laws, drink driving laws, and people still do these all day every day. The idea of having it in law is not to eliminate it, but reduce harm over a large population. Less people, overall, "do the thing" but some still will.
As already mentioned elsewhere, it also makes prosecution for accidents and injuries far more straightforward as there is a law explicitly written that can help in determining liability for an accident or injury.
it also makes prosecution for accidents and injuries far more straightforward as there is a law explicitly written that can help in determining liability for an accident or injury.
It is already the fault of the person opening the door.
How on earth would someone have seen inside the car, to see which hand the driver used to open the door? It's would be an unenforceable law.
We need cyclists off the roads. Go to trails. They slow the traffic down and are a hazard on the road.
That's not how road tax works; you pay the same road tax if you drive 1 cm a year or 1,000,000 kms a year. So it's not about how much you damage/wear-and-tear the road.
It's an annual payment for the right to access a safely maintained piece of infrastructure (complete with lane markings suitable to your vehicle).