A Warning to People Who Bike: Self-Driving Ubers and Right Hook Turns

Once an issue like this is found out, acknowledged as a problem, and a fix created, from then on it won't happen again (assuming no regressions). Gradually, the self-driving vehicles should become safer and safer; after several iterations, they should become safer than most human drivers.

That is how commercial aviation became one of the safest means of transport. Every significant incident was reviewed, direct and indirect contributing factors were determined, and new procedures and/or systems developed to reduce the chances of it happening again.

Unfortunately, it will take some time to get there. The initial implementations of self-driving vehicles are going to be less safe than the average human driver, and will remain so until enough experience is gathered. Not every accident is going to be of the "slow speed read-ended while waiting for the light" sort. Google has been getting away with it so far by putting a human on each vehicle, ready to take over on a hair trigger, while still trying to collect enough data to get over the safety cliff. I don't know how far they are, but by having the human assume so early, they are avoiding precisely the sort of difficult situations which could become important learning experiences.

I biked away with nothing but a large, painful bruise (and the car was dented), but this is definitely one of the more likely causes of collisions between bikes and vehicles.

And if the cars are breaking the law, of course they should get a ticket like everyone else. But making a law that says self driving cars aren't allowed to break the law doesn't really make much sense. They're already not allowed to break the law. That's why it's called the law.

Perhaps it is the primary cause of collision between bikes and cars being driven by humans. Perhaps the primary cause of collision would be different for self driving cars.

Personally, beyond convention, I don't see why one of these turns would be inherently safer than the other. Either way, you still need to look behind you, in the lane to your right, in order to safely turn.

A self driving car has the advantage of being able to see in all directions at the same time (to the extent that it's sensor array allows). I don't think it's entirely clear that the safest way for a human to drive will always be the safest way for a machine to drive.

What I do have a problem with is companies like Uber, Comma.ai, and to a certain extent Tesla who seem to not understand/appreciate how much work has to go into proving these things are safe before shipping them.

C) Sometimes method "A" is best, because there's too much car traffic or too unsafe car traffic for the cyclist to take the lane (method "B"). In this case, it works wonderfully if the car yields to the cyclist (and any pedestrians). When cars don't yield to the cyclist/pedestrians going straight, and they should ALWAYS yield, you have problems.

D) Method "B" is ideal, except when the intersection sucks and doesn't detect the cyclist. There is an intersection I pass through everyday that is like this. If it's empty and I take the lane, it doesn't detect me. If it's completely empty (no cars in sight from any direction), I usually ride through even on a red. If there's cars, I ride to the curb, dismount, hit the crosswalk button, re-mount, and wait for green. The problem arises when after I do this, cars show up behind me to make a right turn and putting me in situation "A". Normally situation "C" plays out if the driver yields to me, but even so I always make eye contact with the right turners to make sure they're aware of me.

The best situation is B) if a car is already in the lane turning right or going straight as I approach the intersection. I can sit in the lane going straight and the light will go green because it detects the car.

tl;dr I wish intersection lanes detected bicyclists better. So much aged infrastructure.

The author admits there's no current practical problem: "Since yesterday, we have been told that “safety drivers” in these vehicles have been instructed to disengage from self-driving mode when approaching right turns on a street with a bike lane and that engineers are continuing to work on the problem"

Then he calls for a petition to ban the robot cars! I remember back when introducing daylight savings time was feared because farmers thought it would greatly upset their cows (in Alberta, this was.) As it happens I hate daylight savings time now, but not for that reason. Hmm, come to think of it, there is an argument here re unintended consequences - if we've spotted one already, there are probably more. I believe I've argued myself to a standstill. If I weren't so stubborn, I'd switch sides.

the above article lists one mitigation for the right hook: "Ride to the left" and, similiarly "Don't pass on the right".

Would this guidance (for bicyclists) be applicable in light of self-driving cars (in addition to human-driven cars)?

I understand that the "right hook" kills a lot of cyclists, but I assume that's largely because of human driver blind-spots. Does the self-driving car have the same (or any) blind-spots?

This behavior should probably be fixed regardless, but I doubt these Uber cars are all rolling murder machines like the author seems to believe.

It seems like the government is happy to wait for the first serious accident that will no doubt immediately end whatever joke of engineering company finds its technology implicated.

I would not enter a reserved lane, but would by necessity cross over the intersection portion of that lane in order to take a right hand turn.

It sounds like San Francisco needs to modernize roadways they've improperly added 'bike lanes' to to include dedicated right turn lanes on the OUTSIDE of the 'bike lane'.

A better solution would be to isolate different types of traffic to dedicated pathways that are not directly adjacent.