Using a whistle

[PamNY]

This applies mostly to crowded urban areas: what do you think of using a whistle to let people know you are about to pass? In my experience, the whistle is associated with bikers who are aggressive jerks. But -- it works.

Obviously, being viewed as obnoxious is better than hitting a pedestrian, but one part of me hesitates. Opinions?

[SadieKate]

Do you have an objection to the time-honored bell? Whistles are for coaches, referees, policeman, dog trainers, etc. You notice they all have in common an element of official authority to which (most of us) have agreed ahead of time?

[OakLeaf]

I think there's too much involved in getting a whistle to your mouth, at precisely the time you need to be covering your brakes and being on high alert for someone to jump out in front of you.

I have a rather loud squeeze horn on my commuter, but I'm seriously considering one of these (http://www.amazon.com/Delta-Airzound-Bike-Horn/dp/B000ACAMJC). I don't have any compunction about being loud when people are oblivious. I would give them the benefit of the doubt and holler, or use a bell, though, before blasting them with an air horn.

SK, I so rarely get a response to my bell even on our quiet, generally non-congested MUP, that I hardly bother with it. At least there's a chance they'll hear me holler.



- Oak, really seeing the east/west divide in a few recent posts :cool:

[MommyBird]

I have been looking at state bicycle laws and whistles are against the law in some states.

[MartianDestiny]

I have NEVER heard a cyclist with a whistle and I would NEVER associate such a noise with one.

Use a bell or your voice. Both are the only things likely to be conditioned into another trail user as a polite cyclist wishing to pass. NEITHER is universally understood by all trail users, but better than nothing I suppose.

It is still always on you, the cyclist, to pass safely without hitting another trail user regardless of how oblivious they are being.

[shootingstar]

I have NEVER heard a cyclist with a whistle and I would NEVER associate such a noise with one.

Use a bell or your voice. Both are the only things likely to be conditioned into another trail user as a polite cyclist wishing to pass. NEITHER is universally understood by all trail users, but better than nothing I suppose.

It is still always on you, the cyclist, to pass safely without hitting another trail user regardless of how oblivious they are being.

Yes, many people wouldn't associate a whistle with cyclist.
My bell is not working completely. Anyway....

When I see a child ahead potentially in my way, I call out, pleasantly: "Excuse me!" Then when I get closer to child, (slowing down) especially if they are young and on their own little bike, I say loud enough or yell cheerfully: " Beep-beep. Beep-beep 'Excuse me." Rather than ring my bell, I actually say to young children: "Beep-beep, beep-beep".

Most young children have responded well to this. And it doesn't startle them and you haven't been inappropriate to the child in front of the parent nearby.

It comes from playing with young children, right? :) It works for me.

For anyone older, I do use my voice and yell/say loudly on your left or 'excuse me'/similar. I try to thank them when I pass them.

Sometimes you do have to be rude/loud..especially if one suspects they might not understand English. At least you got their attention.

Be realistic. You do have to slow down a tad when approaching people on a tight path from behind them.

[withm]

I've always associated a whistle as a call for help - scuba diving, kayaking, wilderness hiking - etc. It means that someone is in danger and needs immediate assistance. I would never want an emergency signal like that to be morphed into a "bicycle coming at you - get out of my way" not to mention the utter confusion with traffic cops blowing their whistles.

[pardes]

It's like breastfeeding. Why use a bottle when you have a breast? Or two.

I have a mouth that is always with me. A polite, "bicycle on your left" makes people smile and they usually say, "Thank you." or "You go girl!!"

[Eden]

This may have been posted here before - but a funny YouTube video about the how people in Japan are quite conditioned to bike bells....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_MphtzCOEc

I wouldn't use a whistle...... like others said, a bike isn't what people are expecting when they hear one, so though it may be loud their reaction may be quite inappropriate - like being startled into your path...

[Melalvai]

I've got a jingle bell on my handlebar. On very smooth pavement (like a sidewalk) I am silent but otherwise I jingle merrily along. Like Santa. It's ok that it's silent on a sidewalk, because the way I ride on sidewalks is to stay behind the pedestrians. I don't ride on sidewalks except for the last little bit to reach the bike racks.

[PamNY]

I Oak, really seeing the east/west divide in a few recent posts

Heh. Is really that quiet in the west? Thanks for the air horn link; much as I don't want to hang another doodad on my bike, I probably should get one.

I should have been more clear in my original post. -- my bike path parallels an six-lane highway. At times neither the human voice nor a bicycle bell would reliably rise above the ambient noise level. If emergency vehicles with sirens are stuck in slow traffic, or a large group of motorcycles is around, special measures are needed IMO. Very few cyclists take extra steps, but I think as responsible cyclists we have an obligation to at least consider the matter.

I do want to caution those of you who are not used to biking in very crowded conditions: slowing down, by itself, will not prevent a collision. If someone steps directly in front of you, you are going to hit either them or the person in the lane you swerve into. You aren't going to hit as hard, but you are going to hit. Slowing is good, but it is by no means the whole story.

[OakLeaf]

slowing down, by itself, will not prevent a collision. If someone steps directly in front of you, you are going to hit either them or the person in the lane you swerve into. You aren't going to hit as hard, but you are going to hit. Slowing is good, but it is by no means the whole story.

Slowing down is preparatory to coming to a complete stop if necessary. No, you aren't going to hit anyone if you're paying attention, and riding at a safe speed for the conditions and your skills. Yes, it's a PITA having to ride at 10 mph for most of the path and 2 mph when you're approaching pedestrians who don't acknowledge you. It must be a HUGE PITA when a long stretch of path is your only way to get out of town and onto roads that you can actually ride. (BTDT and glad I don't have to now. But the short stretch of path I do sometimes ride, I think of as an interval workout. You can accelerate pretty hard from 2 mph back up to 10-15. :cool:)

Even though the rider who hit that woman in the other thread wasn't cited, it was still their fault. The rider/driver/even runner overtaking always has the responsibility to avoid whatever is in front of them. Would you want the rule to be any different if you were the one being rear-ended?

Remember that while many collisions are not the "fault" of the bicyclist, there are few that the bicyclist couldn't have avoided or prevented. (Rear-end collisions aren't completely excepted, either, since lane positioning, visibility, and appropriate choice of road can eliminate many of these.) As soon as you start thinking that collisions are inevitable, you stop trying to prevent them.


(And no, I don't believe it's that quiet in the west, but people's responses seem to indicate that drivers and pedestrians mostly behave appropriately w/r/t bicyclists... and I did say mostly, being fully aware of some recent road rage incidents)

[MartianDestiny]

Slowing down is preparatory to coming to a complete stop if necessary. No, you aren't going to hit anyone if you're paying attention, and riding at a safe speed for the conditions and your skills. Yes, it's a PITA having to ride at 10 mph for most of the path and 2 mph when you're approaching pedestrians who don't acknowledge you. It must be a HUGE PITA when a long stretch of path is your only way to get out of town and onto roads that you can actually ride. (BTDT and glad I don't have to now. But the short stretch of path I do sometimes ride, I think of as an interval workout. You can accelerate pretty hard from 2 mph back up to 10-15. :cool:)

Even though the rider who hit that woman in the other thread wasn't cited, it was still their fault. The rider/driver/even runner overtaking always has the responsibility to avoid whatever is in front of them. Would you want the rule to be any different if you were the one being rear-ended?

Remember that while many collisions are not the "fault" of the bicyclist, there are few that the bicyclist couldn't have avoided or prevented. (Rear-end collisions aren't completely excepted, either, since lane positioning, visibility, and appropriate choice of road can eliminate many of these.) As soon as you start thinking that collisions are inevitable, you stop trying to prevent them.


(And no, I don't believe it's that quiet in the west, but people's responses seem to indicate that drivers and pedestrians mostly behave appropriately w/r/t bicyclists... and I did say mostly, being fully aware of some recent road rage incidents)

This.

I always ride with the expectation that the pedestrian (or other cyclist for that matter) on the MUT is going to jump out in front of me and stop cold. If the path is too crowded for quick dodge maneuvers (and frequently it is) then I'm riding slow enough, with enough of a gap, to come to a complete stop.

Crashes aren't inevitable, but riding such that they are avoidable is frequently boring and annoying and requires full focus and awareness. IMO that's just something one has to deal with, even if that means the only safe way to get through an area of the path is to ride 2mph or get off and walk.

[mariacycle]

does yelling "on your left!" or "left!" not work for you? i think the whistle would scare the bejeeeesus out of me if someone came up from behind me with one... in fact, i'd probably crash.

EDIT: so sorry didn't realize you were by a 6 lane highway! now the whistle makes MUCH more sense... BE SAFE!

[shootingstar]

- Oak, really seeing the east/west divide in a few recent posts :cool:

I behaved the same as a cyclist when I lived in Toronto and was cycling regularily there for over a decade. :) I engaged in the same type of verbal warning as I described earlier in this thread.

What cheeses me off, are OTHER cyclists who make no noise behind me to warn me that they are passing me ie. over a road bridge. It's just stupid.

[PamNY]

Even though the rider who hit that woman in the other thread wasn't cited, it was still their fault. The rider/driver/even runner overtaking always has the responsibility to avoid whatever is in front of them. Would you want the rule to be any different if you were the one being rear-ended?

Of course it's the cyclist's responsibility to avoid hitting who or whatever is in front of them. I didn't say anything to the contrary, I didn't complain that going slowly is a PITA, and I didn't say a word about other path users behaving responsibly. Those are indeed familiar themes in TE discussions, but not one of them was mentioned by me.

I simply pointed out that going slowly, by itself, is not guaranteed to prevent a collision in very crowded situations. I did not say that collisions are inevitable. In extreme cases, cyclists should dismount, and in all cases they should be aware of ambient noise levels.

Cyclists occasionally use whistles in NYC; I had no way of knowing this would be a radical or provocative topic to introduce. I am a slow and careful cyclist; my interest in a signal that can actually be heard should prove that I am particularly concerned with safety.

[PamNY]

Crashes aren't inevitable, but riding such that they are avoidable is frequently boring and annoying and requires full focus and awareness. IMO that's just something one has to deal with, even if that means the only safe way to get through an area of the path is to ride 2mph or get off and walk.

I usually regard having to bike with full focus and awareness as an advantage -- it probably keeps reflexes and skills sharp. Of course, I ride mostly for recreation and am rarely in a hurry -- if I were commuting, it would be different. I do dismount when warranted (and believe me, I'm usually the only walking cyclist).

It's odd that my original question was interpreted as a complaint. In my mind, it was a question about equipment, not very different from inquiring about saddles or brake pads.

[malkin]

Those airzounds air horns are really shockingly loud. Fun as a novelty, but not really something that will build good feelings toward cyclists.

[owlice]

I'd use an air horn in that situation. When I roadbiked in Manhattan, I had one (actually, I had it before I moved to Manhattan). I'd try voice and bell first, but I would NOT hesitate to use an air horn when biking along a highway.

It's tourist season in DC, and my ride on Thursday had several challenging moments, but the most challenging was having a huge pack of teenagers on the path walking toward me and STILL not making room. They SAW me! There was no keeping to the right for them; they took up the entire path. I use a "teacher voice" when I have to: loud and authoritative and demanding. I don't like to do it, but I'd soooo much rather use it than hit one of these kids. One girl actually ran toward me and then in front of me heading right for me, and I don't know which one of us was more scared! Had I had an air horn, I'd have used it.

Generally, tourists are great about giving way; I usually call out, and if I need to, use my bell. The exception are the busloads of teenagers. An air horn *might* work better with them, but an air cannon might be better yet. :D

I always thank people as I pass them, and if they have shown themselves to be particularly quick or attentive, I praise them, too.