1988Unpublished venueRequires access

INCREASING THE VISIBILITY OF CYCLISTS; HOW, WHY, HOW NOT, WHY NOT? ---PROCEEDINGS VELO CITY 87 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS. PLANNING FOR THE URBAN CYCLIST, MARTINIHAL CENTRE GRONINGEN, NETHERLANDS, 22-26 SEPTEMBER, 1987.

T Godefrooij

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The Dutch cyclists' union enfb has in principle supported the idea of retroreflecting wheel circles, when these make a bicycle recognizable as a bicycle. But strictly speaking the enfb finds that the solution for the problem of the lack of safety of the bicyclists lies in the hands of the motorized traffic. This, however, does not imply that the enfb has embraced the idea of side reflection without criticism. The loose retroreflecting provisions are technically very poor and should be forbidden. Tyres with retroreflection should be obligatory. Specifications for bicycles are desirable. The enfb thinks that the cost of bicycle provisions (at least partly) should be paid by motorists. For the covering abstract of the conference see IRRD 816307.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The Dutch cyclists' union enfb has in principle supported the idea of retroreflecting wheel circles, when these make a bicycle recognizable as a bicycle. But strictly speaking the enfb finds that the solution for the problem of the lack of safety of the bicyclists lies in the hands of the motorized traffic. This, however, does not imply that the enfb has embraced the idea of side reflection without criticism. The loose retroreflecting provisions are technically very poor and should be forbidden. Tyres with retroreflection should be obligatory. Specifications for bicycles are desirable. The enfb thinks that the cost of bicycle provisions (at least partly) should be paid by motorists. For the covering abstract of the conference see IRRD 816307.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The Dutch cyclists' union enfb has in principle supported the idea of retroreflecting wheel circles, when these make a bicycle recognizable as a bicycle. But strictly speaking the enfb finds that the solution for the problem of the lack of safety of the bicyclists lies in the hands of the motorized traffic. This, however, does not imply that the enfb has embraced the idea of side reflection without criticism. The loose retroreflecting provisions are technically very poor and should be forbidden. Tyres with retroreflection should be obligatory. Specifications for bicycles are desirable. The enfb thinks that the cost of bicycle provisions (at least partly) should be paid by motorists. For the covering abstract of the conference see IRRD 816307.

Key concepts: Visibility, Retroreflector, Transport engineering, Criticism, Engineering, Political science, Geography, Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
INCREASING THE VISIBILITY OF CYCLISTS; HOW, WHY, HOW NOT, WHY NOT? ---PROCEEDINGS VELO CITY 87 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS. PLANNING FOR THE URBAN CYCLIST, MARTINIHAL CENTRE GRONINGEN, NETHERLANDS, 22-26 SEPTEMBER, 1987. — Research Paper | ScholarLens