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?
Better than using the Dutch rudder method in the car I guess?
If drivers are required to keep 1.5m distance from cyclists then perhaps cyclists should be required to also keep 1.5m distance from drivers. This would then likely solve the door opening issue.
So you’d need 3m between parked cars and traffic where there are cyclists?
Reality is that not everywhere is wide enough. It is also recommended that cyclists drive one door width away from park cars but it’s not always possible and then people complain they are too close to traffic. This isn’t only an issue for bikes but also cars, motorcycles. People need to look before opening their door, Dutch Reach is one suggestion to make it a habit.
Nah 1.5m gap between cyclists and cars, not 3m.
if there are parked cars and cars driving on the road and the cyclist is in between eg in a bike lane/shared bike lane, that would be 1.5m on either side. Where I live that would mean the cyclist coming out of the bike lane into the road to stay 1.5m from the parked cars.
Ignorance!
Sounds like you're a fan of separated cycling infrastructure. Remember to consider which parties support expanding the cycling network next time you go to vote.
If you are flinging car doors open, then you are tossing your iPhone, dropping gym weights, infringing the parking spot near you, leaving garage bin out all week, using the leaf blower at 6am, tv blearing day and night, yelling abuse to anyone in the street, and the ist goes on.
Do cyclists yelling to each other at 5am in the morning on the street count?
All you "charge cyclists road tax" and hate upon those who are lessening road congestion, pollution etc, you ARE the most ignorant there are, it reminds me of racism "because I'm not what you are I'm going to hate upon you" it just makes me lament for the human race, we need nature but nature does not need us!
I used to live in the inner west of Sydney, I rode my bicycle to work and sometimes rode and brought home shopping as well as with a small group on routes without cars for recreation and would end the day at a cafe.
While riding to and from work I often had people open doors on me, someone here said "I check my mirrors" most of the problem was back seat passengers, have even had a front seat passenger in a car turning right from the middle lane in a 3 lane situation where 2 lanes turn right at a "T" intersection, while I was turning left with a left turn green arrow get out and walk straight into me.
So cyclists should pay tax for cycling? …. WRONG! cyclists should be considered in the green house gas offset scheme and rewarded for their efforts, STOP hating on anything different and put your efforts into something worthwhile, stop adding to the hate and negativity and start to make a difference, look at ways to do what you do with the idea that this world we live in does not need you and could end you if we keep on the way we are!
Drivers should be responsible for passenger(s) exiting as they are for their safety over all, drivers get fined if a passenger does not wear a seat belt, drivers should be fined if they or a passenger open the door and cause a cyclist to come into contact with the door, injury or no injury, if a cars door is opened and another car comes into contact with that door the stationary car is at fault, it's not just contacting the door that can cause injury … it can also cause a cyclist to veer off and could cause a head on accident between that cyclist and another vehicle.
Before ignoring this think about how you would feel if your ignorance caused injury and death to another, it's the ignorance to danger that makes that danger more relevant.
If you can teach this, then there wouldn't be an issue in the first place.
Cyclists are not common in Australia, only in certain suburbs. There will always be a large population of people travelling into these areas who are not used to sharing the road with Cyclists
OP should stop posting unnecessary polls. What a waste of space. No way to enforce this.
Suppressionist!
Create a situation where people exiting are doing so in such a way so that others around or approaching the vehicle are safe, joggers on a footpath can be injured by people exiting cars, does not even need to be the door but exiting the car quickly and colliding with pedestrians, (have had this happen to me) removing objects from a vehicle without consideration of others, whether cars, motorcyclists, pedestrians, Bicyclists or any other person or animal, regardless of the method they use to exit the vehicle, simply need to exit in such a way that all others around are safe, just like OH&S is to a commercial situation.
Drivers should be responsible for passengers actions and should be given the ability to have people behave in a safe way, blame should be able to be apportioned onto a passenger if a situation occurs where police become involved and the driver has attempted to properly control the passenger in question, We as drivers are responsible for others safety, can be fined if passengers are not restrained or if a driver drives in a way that could injure or drive in a way that could be considered negligent according to the law, if they are responsible and educated I don't care what safe method anyone exiting a vehicle uses or what the vehicle is, so long as they exit, dismount or whatever safely, safe exit from a vehicle should be a law, enforced and encouraged and the driver should be responsible and perhaps cars should have cheap options like locks that are able to be controlled by the driver to force the driver to assure safe exit.
Cyclists should always travel 1.5m from parked cars for safety.
It is important that cyclists remain aware of their surroundings.
Cycling at lower speeds would provide improved ability to stop and prevent accidents.
This would significantly reduce cyclists injuries and deaths on our roads.
Considering the dangers of venturing out onto public roads with seatbelt or other safety equipment the use of lycra should be banned and replaced with motorcycle type leather jackets, pants and gloves. A full face helmet should also be considered
Sounds sweaty!
I'm sure most cyclists would love to travel 1.5m from parked cars, but have you noticed that bike lanes are adjacent to street parking spaces? Unless it's a particularly wide parking space, when you fling the car door open it opens out into the bike lane.
Cyclists should always travel 1.5m from parked cars for safety.
Cyclists should stay out of the middle of the road
^ A basic summary of this entire thread of comments.
Apparently cyclists need to stay 1.5m away from parked cars while simultaneously staying out of the middle of the road and as far to the left of the lane as possible.
OP, if it's anything, the next generation of cars coming out have doors with digital latches with "Safe Exit Assist" (ie. blind spot sensors). It won't let you open the door unless it's clear. Check out the new Lexus NX e-latch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78w3CjyNvwM
To clarify, it’s being added to the Highway Code in the UK, but it’s not the law - the UK Highway Code is a set of recommendations, some drawn directly from the law and others about how to respect the intent of the law, without being a legal requirement per se.
For example, in the section on double lane roundabouts, it essentially says “They’re tricky. Use care”.
This means the Dutch reach isn’t mandatory, but if you open your door onto a cyclist without employing that technique you may be more liable then if you did.
Thanks! I realised just recently that the original article I read it in is a bit skewed in referring to it as ‘law’ I should have fact checked and will update post.
Keep seeing comments such as "Won't work"
As in people won't obey this rule if implemented?
That was said about seat belts in the 70's, I remember the debates!
Does not mean "that" rule (seat belts) or any rule should not be implemented regarding the safe exiting or dismounting of a vehicle or for any safety issue, every person should exit or dismount a vehicle safely for their or for others around safety.
OH&S, safety is everyone's concern, opening a car door and causing any accident is the door openers responsibility and the car owners insurance will be asked to pay damages, I believe the operator of a vehicle should be not only responsible for the safety of those on board and others around the vehicle … but responsible for the actions of passengers and should have guidelines on how to act when a passenger becomes dangerous including how that passenger operates things such as doors or windows or even anything contained in or on the vehicle.
Where those actions may injure others, proper laws on this would better define and hopefully force education on the safety of others in such cases where people exit or dismount vehicles or use any part of a vehicle or anything contained in a vehicle in a dangerous manner, this should be mandated so road users know who's responsible for what, does not matter what method is used to exit a vehicle IMO but safe existing should be a mandated action, exiting or dismounting of a any vehicle should have clear laws setting clear responsibilities and as I said … hopefully education would follow, humans are ignorant, until you've injured or killed someone with a vehicle you don't understand what that action does to you long term, had a boss who ran over a child and mother, killed them both, this was late 80's he was a very sad man till the day he died and it permanently changed him, "and of course the family of deceased" …. the comments here remind me of the difference in thought of those who've been through that and those who have not, the have nots don't care and show that in their comments, very sad! we as a species have destroyed too many other species, burnt too much, exude too much, care too little, nature does not need us yet we need nature, it's the same, care not and the outcomes can be worse than if you were educated or cared.
The Dutch Reach works well in the Netherlands, but I can't see it transferring to Oz as we don't not have as the cycling culture here and sadly some Aussie drivers consider cyclists to be sub-human "cockroaches":
https://www.racv.com.au/royalauto/transport/cycling/driver-a…
Pre-COVID, I used to bike down Tooronga Rd in Melbourne to get to my place of work. Tooronga Rd is a perfectly straight road with a dedicated bike lane on both sides and 4 schools. That ought it be safe road, but it is not. In addition to having 4 schools Tooronga road is a route to the Monash freeway and on weekday mornings it's… busy. Even though it's daylight, I have my headlight on and a tail light both my bike and helmet. But sometimes, I get treated like I'm either invisible or a stationary object. I've had plenty of close calls but the worst experience was when I suffered a cracked rib after being cut off by a woman whose explanation was "I didn't see you". Still, I consider myself lucky. I know of a cyclist who wound up in hospital with a shattered pelvis. 1 in 5 Australians hospitalized for a transport related injury was a cyclist. 38 cyclists a year are killed.
I'm not suggesting that the majority of drivers are bad and all cyclists are innocent. I've seen cyclists do some really stupid things and to be honest, I'm a rubbish driver. However, most cyclists are careful because they will come off worst in an accident.
Cockroaches are both far less dangerous and annoying.
Note to self: don't feed the trolls
Bicyclist should have to play a trumpet or trombone so everyone knows when they're riding past. Harley and roadbikes make a lot of noise for this same reason. Safety.
I don't ride much these days, but I was doored a few years ago riding through town. Truck driver swung his door out and sent me sprawling out into traffic. I ended up mostly uninjured, but with a damaged bike and broken laptop in my bag. I was in shock and didn't even think to get the drivers details.
Cycling reduces pollution and contributes to a healthier population. The government should be doing anything they can to encourage the activity and make it safer for us all.
I was driving along the driveway at work to the car park. A woman about to enter the gym threw open her door and I almost drove into it. It happens to drivers too. I ALWAYS do a head flick when changing lanes and when looking for cyclists. So many times a car has been in my blind spot, I can’t understand people who don’t do a head flick.
I can’t understand people who don’t do a head flick.
They are lazy and stupid. I gave up riding a motorbike on the freeway as I had people just change lanes onto me almost daily. There are lots of people who are blissfully ignorant of their surroundings for some reason.
I was curious, so did some research.
Although there are a lot of news articles (seemingly all referencing the same survey about how unaware drivers were about it), I struggled to find an actual rule saying you have to use Dutch Reach.
And it's because as far as I can tell, there isn't one.
That said, it's not completely false; there is a change in the law.
Rule 239 has been amended, and now includes;
you MUST ensure you do not hit anyone when you open your door. Check for cyclists or other traffic
Rule 239 is specifically about on-road parking.
Here the Highway Code link
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/waiting-and-par…
and here is the specific law
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/105…
So yes, if you’re using on-road parking, you must check for cyclists and traffic. However there is nothing specific about how you check or how you open the door
Yes, sorry, my apologies it looks like I was mislead by the original article I posted and didn’t actually check - my bad. Still the concept of Dutch Reach isn’t bad, just not ‘law’
They can look out for me until they pay insurances and rego.
For the professional bike riders.
Ignoramus
Ask Louis Rossmann his feelings on cars vs. bikes…..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7s-9MLbrko&t=7s
A rule of a thumb when making laws, is to only make ones you can enforce. Just like the King in Little Prince would ordinate a sunset for a given time. Otherwise, your rule will seem ineffective, and the people will not mind your laws.
The Dutch Reach (had to look it up) seems to be more of a cultural trick, coded into Dutch society. There is nothing special about it, since it forces you to move your body, not to explicitly look in the side mirror or to turn your head and look behind you. Might just as well teach L platers, that they need to look in the side mirror before they open the door after stopping.
My driver instructor always told me not to only rely on mirrors but to do a quick glance with my head, ie check blind spot as well. Mirrors also don’t help passengers, so the Dutch Reach thing if instilled as habit kind of makes some sense.
Sure, dead angle might account for 5-10% less reliability than turning your head. I normally turn my head when I change lanes as well - been taught that when I first got my licence. Good foundations when first starting to drive result in better driving skills later on in life. Teaching the aspiring L-platers to mind their vehicle's sides and to look around should be a norm. But a law? Not really, since like I mentioned above, it would be almost impossible to enforce.
Many cars have BSM. Car manufacturers could adapt the BSM technology to stationary situations
Was an amazing experience commuting on bike in Amsterdam. Mostly people commuting to local shops and to the nearest public transport. Sydney, different story, mamil using Eastern Distributor/M5 for France de Tour.
No bikes allowed unless the bike can keep up with flow of traffic
So all bikes must travel at 60?
Or do we reduce the speed limit for cars?
Either way should be fine, and my guess is that common sense will prevail. No right mind on earth will impose 40km/hr limit on freeway/highway, nor people expect to drive at 80km/hr in pedestrian dense area. Hence, my comment on the flow of traffic, mixing different type of transportation mode at very different speed is outright dangerous.
I do not enjoy driving on a 80km/hr road, and needing to slowdown to 50-60km/hr because there are cyclist on a free way going for their weekend ride. From time to time, it is out right dangerous (seen it many times). Nor I am keen to doing anything more than 40km/hr in pedestrian dense areas, just imagine if one of the pedestrians being a loved one.
Bike path in Sydney is such a joke partially due to infrastructure is maintained separately by LGA/State. This is one thing that AU need to learn from EU, to discourage (deterrence of some form) by imposing restriction on automobile in dense inner city areas, and those areas should predominately be for pedestrian or cyclists. Bikes should also be prohibited from travelling more than 40km/hr in pedestrian dense areas (it is for commuting purposes).
MAMILs might object to this… but yea… bring high speed cycling else where… Similarly, high speed motorsport is generally prohibited on public roads.
Just noticed today that I do this method without even knowing it was a thing.
I treat opening the door as if there could be a speeding car going past that could kill me.
Everyone should do this.
[So,] consider these words from Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" spoken by a character named Dr. Ferris: "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against – then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. … There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
I am Dutch and I don't think this is even a law in the Netherlands. We do learn this in our driving lessons but not that it's mandatory.
Why don't people just look in the mirror before opening the door? People should be for cars anyway right?
I vote dutch rudder.
This is symptomatic of whats wrong with the UK… they make laws about general behaviour like this… i'd be tempted to not do it the way they want because you know, F' the government.
hell no ahahahahaha.
One, the idea is dumb, use your common sense.
Two, on the serious side, this sort of contextless, overbearing law is what is wrong with most Australian's perceptions on lawmaking. Stay out of other peoples businesses.
No, this is not something that should be legislated. Seriously, what will the offense be called? Use wrong hand to open vehicle door? Ludicrous.
We have too many laws already, whatever happened to good old fashioned common sense? We can't create a law to cover each miniscule point of friction between society at large. It will become just another selectively-enforced law that will be used by police against those who fail arbitrary "attitude tests".
Cyclists when they are driving should start driving close to parked cars, that would stop people not looking
Don't really care if a cyclist gets doored so no.
We should be building dedicated roads for cycling.
Don't really care if a cyclist gets doored so no.
That’s a bit harsh don’t you think?
How can you legislate common sense?
They're encouraging a look around, not a reach around.
El Grande: "I'M STUCK IN TRAFFIC!!"
You are the traffic.
www.imgur.com/gallery/sCvRIEd