Me planning my next move in life.
Choosing your path through the multiverse
At least you know you’ll be doing it by bicycle 🚲
They need a sign like this which gets the point across:
It’s not that hard to read from here, but definitely hard to read cycling
Sign or not this is pretty much how cyclists are supposed to cross most big intersections and the inconvenience of it is the reason so many of them break the rules. If you make rules that are too complicated, counterintuitive or inconvenient people will break them.
No. There is no Loss here. I refuse. I refuse
My theory is that all traffic planning on Germany is being done by drunk chimpanzees. This confirms it yet again.
Jesus, i saw that picture and thought
well murica and their anti pedestrian street designs
Then read your comment.
Checked the picture.
Zoomed in. there is text.
in disbelief
thats actually a german crossing.
Got angry and dumbfounded at the same time.
What piece of shit is this crossing?!
@WhateverCommunityPlannersOnMeth Fix that planned this shit!
Towards whatever Communityplanners on meth that did this: Fix this shit!
The city planner: „What do you mean? This intersection is just fine. I drive my car through it every day.“
And it complies with all regulations. As long as we comply with regulations, we don’t have to come up with reasonable solutions.
You can easily tell it’s not American because it’s even there in the first place. You don’t get a sign explaining the bike paths and crosswalks in America. You just gotta know or get fucked. Also we wouldn’t have a complicated bike route we just wouldn’t have one, solves that issue…
See, I watch Adam Something videos from the point of view that he’s not really talking about America. He’s talking about European politicians looking at terrible ideas from America and trying to replicate them.
This is a pretty good example. America wouldn’t do this, exactly, but it’s a step towards our terrible bike infrastructure. The other poster had the right of it: in America, the sign wouldn’t be there at all, but the intersection would still be badly designed.
I’ve been staring at it for a moment and am still unsure if I understood everything properly. xd
Is this Loss?
I thought it was a warning… Be careful or your bike will end up in this shape.
This was made by someone who hates bikers and just wants to see them smeared across the pavement
It makes sense, it’s just stupidly presented.
It makes sense if you believe that cars should have absolute priority in traffic and should never never ever be in the slightest inconvenienced in order to make life easier for cyclists.
If I need 5min to read and understand a road sign which you will pass at >15km/h annd have 10sek to read it’s just bad.
Hence the “hmmmm.”
It’s presented the way it is, it’s just shit infrastructure.
Someone designed this intersection and got asked where the bike paths were and they went “oh, the bikepaths, yeah, they exist… here and here and here… it’s just not on this particular slide, or any other slide I’ve brought today. It’ll totally be there on the final thing.”
Oh I get it. The top picture is a bike. 🚲 The bottom picture is the same bike after being hit by a 6ft tall SUV while trying to cross that intersection.
It’s so obvious!
/s
Is it not obvious? You’re not allowed to go straight from the sign is.
You have to make a right if you want to make a right, a left or continue going straight.
They probably have the lanes marked out too.
Looks like a dumb redneck kid trying to draw a swastika
hortler!
Man, I hate the detours you’re supposed to take as a pedestrian or bicyclist, so that car drivers don’t get inconvenienced.
I’m sure there are plenty of car drivers who’d take the challenge to follow those bike routes.
https://www.adfc.de/artikel/den-regeln-der-stvo-folgen
In principle, cyclists may choose whether to turn left directly or indirectly.
When turning directly left, cyclists may also leave cycle paths that are subject to mandatory use in order to turn directly left, but must pay attention to straight ahead traffic, which has the right of way. If you want to turn directly left, get into the middle of the lane in good time and follow the traffic lights of the corresponding lane.
When turning indirectly left, the cyclist first stays to the right and crosses the junction or intersection. They then turn left. The cyclist therefore crosses two lanes straight ahead.
Of course, the question arises as to whether you want to cycle on the road or prefer to stay on the cycle path.
As a cyclist you’re in constant danger around car traffic. Insisting on your Rufus will likely get you killed. We need cycling infrastructure that is separate from car infrastructure and that will create some inconvenience for car drivers.
