The Chainlink

Chicago bike sharing will be known as Divvy, be Chicago flag blue

Views: 15507

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Divvy started announcing their station location. One location a day to further build anticipation:

No helmets available at time of rental or around rental locations.

That must mean that the city supports riding without a helmet.

Who is going to carry their helmet around all the time just in case they find the need for a Divvy?

This has always struck me as an issue with bike sharing.  When I raised this in another forum, I got some vehement responses to my question.  I could see keeping one at my office for the "just in case" use. But I certainly won't be carrying one around when I am out and about on weekends, etc.  Tourists won't likely have them.  I can't figure out an easy solution (other than those inflatable helmets?) but I hope someone creative will come up with a great, enterprising solution.  Maybe downtown hotels could offer them to their guests? 

Step 3 in "How it works" at divvy.com:

"Run an errand, grab a bite, commute to work or school. Don't forget your helmet and watch your ride time!"

(Emphasis added.)

Glad they encourage helmets.  But, that doesn't account for spur-of-the-moment trips and tourists, so agree that the program assumes there will be riders without helmets. 

Wasn't there a thread about a foldable helmet not too long ago? I didn't read it but if they fold small enough to keep in your wallet, they'll be perfect for Divvy users.

Me, I'm gonna go low tech and keep a pocketful of balloons handy:

 

I think most users aren't going to wear helmets.  Does anybody know what it is like in the other American cities where this is popular?  I certainly didn't wear a helmet the times I've used a system like this while abroad.

Which means, eventually, someone is going to get seriously hurt while using Divvy.  And as tragic as that inevitability is, I'm already curious about how that will be handled.  When cyclists get injured, because of our not-very-stellar reputation among non-cyclists, people don't really care that much.  But the Divvy martyr will not be a regular cyclist, and they could be an old man, or a pregnant woman, or some other demographic that generally garners more sympathy.  It could be that harsher restrictions for cyclists are introduced, to "protect" us.  I'm hoping that instead there will be a public outcry for safer biking infrastructure. 

Most users won't use helmets. The safety record for bike share users elsewhere is better than riding one's own bike. (I don't feel like hunting for the link to this.) These bikes have fat tires, weigh 40 lbs and most people won't be riding them faster than 12 mph. I believe that riding predictably, following signals, using hand signals to indicate intended movement, and remaining visible (day and night) are much more important and effective ways to reduce the risk of crash and injury. Hopefully Divvy will provide information to new users on all those issues. Bike share systems are only successful where people feel comfortable using the bikes without wearing helmets (whether due to law or culture). Any person or agency that reinforces the "helmets are the most important way to stay safe!" rhetoric is discouraging the use of bike share.

Michelle Stenzel said:

remaining visible (day and night)

+1 for built-in hub-dynamo lights!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/sunday-review/to-encourage-biking...

Bike share and helmets don't really work together.  It may be a devil's bargain, but that's reality, until someone designs a $2 disposable helmet that can be dispensed on site, or a cheap inflatable or folding helmet that can be carried.

I see a new business opportunity for BalloonBiker. Is she still in Chicago?

Thunder Snow said:

Me, I'm gonna go low tech and keep a pocketful of balloons handy:

 

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service