Segway Use and Transportation Costs [Archive]

Karamozov

12-09-2002, 03:30 PM

We'll be moving into metropolitan Kansas City this summer. I plan on getting ride of two cars and purchasing a Segway. PT describes his costs savings by using the Segway. The affordability of a house is greatly increased when household costs are shifted from transporation to housing. The link below demonstates this point. Hopefully, the personal finance savings coupled with the "Wow Factor" that helped legislation breeze through can influence people's choices concerning proximity of home and work.

I used to be a 30 minute walk from all of my families daily needs (work, shopping, school, entertainment, parks, etc...). Now I'm an hour from work on-way. Every 12 working days I lose 1 day of my life. Fortunately, we will end the madness by moving in and purchasing a segway in the summer.

I plan on studying the affordability of housing once the change is made. Are others planning on doing the same? I'm a city planner, so I hope to tie what I find into information local governments can use, not that they will.

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/business/horizon/1202/09commute.html

bicycledriver

12-09-2002, 04:38 PM

Urban areas where higher density allows access to more destinations and quality goods and services over shorter distances tend to have higher property values. This increases the cost of housing unless one is willing and able to own a smaller piece of property to compensate. Sacrificing ownership of one vehicle can make up for some this price differential. However, smaller urban stores tend to have higher prices than big-box retailers located farther away from customers in lower-density settings. This increases the cost of living somewhat in downtown areas. Yet many people consider the quality of life afforded by easy pedestrian access to destinations to be worth the increased costs of goods and services, which of course is one of the factors that drives up the property values.

Giving up one of two or more cars is less painful than giving up all of the cars in a household. Occasional access to distant destinations, transportation of large or heavy cargo, and travel with protection from the elements is compelling to most people who are able to afford at least one car. Those who have low incomes and can save time by traveling by bicycle or bus rather than working longer hours at low wages to pay the total cost of automobile ownership will often avoid owning a car and instead live closer to their destinations. Easy bicycle and pedestrian access also reduces dependency on expensive ride services such as taxis.

See
http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/cyclinguse.htm
for a discussion of the economics of light vehicle use.

Regards,
Steve Goodridge
Member,
Cary, NC Planning and Zoning Board

Karamozov

12-09-2002, 05:11 PM

All these factors do play a role. Another aspect most don't consider is the efficiency of infrastructure and governmental services. Widespread Segway and other short distance non-automobile modes of transportation have far less ware and tear on roads and fewer police hours are spent dealing with fender benders and major accidents. Existing oversupply of surface parking could be exacerbated making development of former parking lots more likely. The trade off for the smaller yard is reduced mowing and smaller well designed neighborhood parks.

Unfortunately, people don't use other modes of transportation in part because of culture and a sprawling suburban development pattern with no pedestrian amenities. What would widespread Segway use do to development patterns.

It doesn't surprise me that you are from Cary. Your City has an excellent reputation for forward thinking and many jurisdictions look to you for different approaches. Has the Segway been a topic of discussion in Cary?

axiotek

12-09-2002, 06:19 PM

Zip-car automobile sharing service has become quite popular and extremely useful here in MA allowing people to live car-free and still occasionally use one for distance or load transport. If they are not in KC yet, send them an e-mail and assist them in finding some permanent parking. They are expand rapidly, I believe.

CyclistBuddy

12-09-2002, 06:46 PM

Karamozov, you asked what would widespread segway use do to development patterns. unfortunately not enough. If that widespread use could get a significant chunk of the 99% of people who still want to drive out of their cars that may help some. But thats not the end all.

Try reading the book "How Cities Work". Its all about how transportation infrastructure coupled with economics and political decisions create development patterns. Basically, development comes about because of transportation infrastructure, and that infrastructure is created by political will. As long as most people in the world want highways, thats what we are all going to get. And from those highways, thats where development occurs. The large supermarkets, malls, warehouse stores all are built around highways. People will always go where they need no matter how far it may be and take the most convenient mode of travel to get there.

As for costs (here is my bike spiel), imagine a bike costing 10% of what a segway costs now, and almost no maintenance costs (What would you do if your Segway stopped working, how much will it cost to fix?). By riding a bike, you can also give up membership to a health club since bike riding is such great exercise. Thats even more of a savings. Granted a segway will still be much cheaper than a car in the long run anyway, you are doing right in ending a complete dependance on cars.

Karamozov

12-09-2002, 07:36 PM

Cyclistbuddy:

I agree with you completely about the cost savings of bicycling exceeding that of the Segway, but bicycles have been around for hundreds of years and have not managed to curb the tide. I fully understand the range of interaction between politics, economics and land use patterns. Unfortunately the public unknowingly subsidizes the entire action through a representative republic (not a democracy) that they are apathetic to get involved in. Our gluttonous highway budgets should be slashed and funding provided to improving other forms of transportation.

Even a modest 10% shift in local trips would have a positive impact. Will the "wow factor" provide the widespread push or will the novelty wear off.

Your a local official. How can San Francisco ban something that has not presented a legitimate threat? What is San Fran's factual basis to ban Segway use?

12-09-2002, 07:48 PM

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddyAs for costs (here is my bike spiel), imagine a bike costing 10% of what a segway costs now, and almost no maintenance costs (What would you do if your Segway stopped working, how much will it cost to fix?). By riding a bike, you can also give up membership to a health club since bike riding is such great exercise. Thats even more of a savings. Granted a segway will still be much cheaper than a car in the long run anyway, you are doing right in ending a complete dependance on cars.

a bike for some (like me) isn't a solution (see my site) that's why i got a segway ht. until now my choices were car, car or car. now it's car or segway.

that said, my travel needs are different than most folks, a bike might be better than most folks, but the segway ht isn't for most folks, it might be for people with similar travel needs like me, and although that number is small it can have an impact. success doesn't need to be 100% ubiquity of large scale marketshare, just a small percentage is all that's required, and over time that could certainly grow and no matter what it'll change things in minor to big ways for some people.

big ole' broad statements can't apply, i don't think everyone should assume "if a segway isn't right for me, it's not right for anyone else" just like i'd never suggest bikes are not for everyone since they don't meet my travel needs.

at the end of the day, i think everyone agrees, less dependence on cars is better no matter what :-]

cheers,
pt

http://www.bookofseg.com

Karamozov

12-09-2002, 07:56 PM

http://www.postwritersgroup.com/archives/peir1202.htm

Here's how the people get "What they want".

axiotek

12-09-2002, 08:38 PM

quote:Originally posted by pt
at the end of the day, i think everyone agrees, less dependence on cars is better no matter what :-]

quote:Originally posted by karamozov
Our gluttonous highway budgets should be slashed and funding provided to improving other forms of transportation.

absolutely!!

CyclistBuddy

12-09-2002, 08:40 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov
.. but bicycles have been around for hundreds of years and have not managed to curb the tide. .. Unfortunately the public unknowingly subsidizes the entire action through a representative republic (not a democracy) that they are apathetic to get involved in.

Your a local official. How can San Francisco ban something that has not presented a legitimate threat? What is San Fran's factual basis to ban Segway use?

1. Cars have not been around as long as bikes, obviously, so the use of bikes could not turn the tide since there are probably fewer cyclists today than there were before the use of the car. Bicycles became the outdated transportation in favor of cars. You know the rest of the history..
2. I'm not sure which state you live in or their laws, but here in CA all transportation measures are on public ballot. Thats why we have so many highways, people voted for them :(.
3. I'm not an official, but its all about the lack of facts on both sides. There was no safety report done to see how the Segway will interact with seniors and the disabled, people who mostly can't drive cars to get around, the people who depend on public transportation or walking or wheelchairs. WalkSF, a local pedestrian group are most concerned that the sidewalks won't be a safe place anymore since the Segway can go as fast as bicycles. We aren't allowed on sidewalks for just that reason, its not safe for us to be with pedestrians on the sidewalk going 4-5 times faster than pedestrians even though we can go that slow when we want(operating characteristics aside, its not the good ones which dictate policy its the bad ones). Its all about having a liveable community thats walkable. If Segway use rises, sidewalks may become for Segway use only and not people since it would be too dangerous to walk (like what happened to streets when cars became more popular). I know if I started to see Segways rushing around the sidewalks I would be scared sh_tless to walk on the sidewalks.

Before the lobbyist could even get registered to lobby in CA, they managed to get the Segway passed at the state level. This guy even contributed to a campaign of a bike/pedestrian unfriendly city supervisor to help shoot down the segway ban on sidewalks. Some are wondering about the ethics of moving so fast and why they moved so fast. If Segway LLC didn't move so fast, they probably wouldn't have gotten the SF welcome they did. BicycleDriver also has wonderful arguments against segways on sidewalks. I would rather see them on the streets so as to avoid obstacles such as people and all the street furniture (meters, light poles, garbage cans, etc.) Some don't even have ramps you have to step onto them. Some sidewalks around here are almost impassable except by foot (and the segway is wider than a person) and not as flexible.

10% of ridership looks like a good and optimisic chunk. If Segways can manage that, that would be great!

And just to be clear, I'm not anti-segway, I want to see fewer car trips all around and more livable streets. I think the segway has a part in that future if people can see the advantage of not driving. The "wow" factor in the past has never lasted that long. I think they will only become popular if people see them as safe, fun and a better way to get around than cars. If people see them as sidewalk nuicances and toys for the rich, they won't go too far. The cyclists around here think a healthy person who wants to stop driving should try bikes first. The weather here is great year-round and its a great recreational vehicle. We have great road rides and mountain rides within 10 miles of the city. (Long live California!!!)

Of course my opinion is just that, an opinion. If my facts are incorrect please tell me.

CyclistBuddy

12-09-2002, 08:56 PM

quote:Originally posted by axiotek

quote:Originally posted by pt
at the end of the day, i think everyone agrees, less dependence on cars is better no matter what :-]

quote:Originally posted by karamozov
Our gluttonous highway budgets should be slashed and funding provided to improving other forms of transportation.

absolutely!!

no argument here..

Ironic though, the article you mentioned talked about obese americans driving cars. They won't get any more exercise on a segway...
I only say bikes are great exercise because I lost 40lbs and 7 inches riding my bike :) I may be a bit biased..

CyclistBuddy

12-09-2002, 09:09 PM

quote:Originally posted by pt

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddyAs for costs (here is my bike spiel), imagine a bike costing 10% of what a segway costs now, and almost no maintenance costs (What would you do if your Segway stopped working, how much will it cost to fix?). By riding a bike, you can also give up membership to a health club since bike riding is such great exercise. Thats even more of a savings. Granted a segway will still be much cheaper than a car in the long run anyway, you are doing right in ending a complete dependance on cars.

a bike for some (like me) isn't a solution (see my site) that's why i got a segway ht. until now my choices were car, car or car. now it's car or segway.

that said, my travel needs are different than most folks, a bike might be better than most folks, but the segway ht isn't for most folks, it might be for people with similar travel needs like me, and although that number is small it can have an impact. success doesn't need to be 100% ubiquity of large scale marketshare, just a small percentage is all that's required, and over time that could certainly grow and no matter what it'll change things in minor to big ways for some people.

big ole' broad statements can't apply, i don't think everyone should assume "if a segway isn't right for me, it's not right for anyone else" just like i'd never suggest bikes are not for everyone since they don't meet my travel needs.

at the end of the day, i think everyone agrees, less dependence on cars is better no matter what :-]

cheers,
pt

http://www.bookofseg.com

Right tool for right job. agreed.
What would you say is the split? I would say bikes for anyone for less than a 10 mile commute each way or who needs multiple legs on a commute. A segway for up to an hour urban area for those who don't want to show up sweaty..

Personally, my choices are Bike/Train/Bus/Car in that order. I have a car but loathe driving it. I even recently decided that when it rains, I'll take the bus rather than driving even though driving is more convenient. I only drive to take my wife places and to get bags and bags of groceries.

If I haven't mentioned. This is a great chat group. people are actually civilized and listen.

12-09-2002, 09:57 PM

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddy
Right tool for right job. agreed. What would you say is the split? I would say bikes for anyone for less than a 10 mile commute each way or who needs multiple legs on a commute. A segway for up to an hour urban area for those who don't want to show up sweaty..

here are some thoughts for the segway peeps':

-some people may benefit from a ht if they can't bike due to a medical condition, age, etc...

-some people may benefit from a ht if they have a route that seems appropriate and their state and local laws are in line with their needs and route.

-some people who would bike but the terrain is too rigorous may benefit from a ht (seattle is like that in some areas, in mine it is).

-some people who need to carry loads that are hard to manage on a bike (yah, i know saddle bags, but i couldn't get up the hills here with or without those).

-some people who don't have a desire to bike may benefit from a ht, there's nothing wrong with not wanting to bike -or- wanting to bike and really enjoying cycling, it's okay either way, really , there's room for all of us.

-people who have been saving all year for a segway, selling their car, working 20 hours a day because it's not very often you can experience something truly new like this and benefit from not having a second car and of course, meet many new people and have something interesting to talk about.

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddy
If I haven't mentioned. This is a great chat group. people are actually civilized and listen.

i think so too, this is a great crew, with great conversations. i think together we can all make a little dent in not having as many cars around. bikes, ht's, carpooling, public transit as long as we're unified and don't get divided on which one is best and eat other, we'll be a very interesting voice in the world ;-]

cheers,
pt

http://www.bookofseg.com

CyclistBuddy

12-09-2002, 10:11 PM

quote:Originally posted by pt
-some people who would bike but the terrain is too rigorous may benefit from a ht (seattle is like that in some areas, in mine it is).

you mentioned the Queen Anne hill in Seattle. What grade is it at (more than 15%)? I enjoy tough grades and that hill sounds WONDERFULL!!

quote:Originally posted by pt
i think so too, this is a great crew, with great conversations. i think together we can all make a little dent in not having as many cars around. bikes, ht's, carpooling, public transit as long as we're unified and don't get divided on which one is best and eat other, we'll be a very interesting voice in the world ;-]

If it sounds like I am eating at which is best, I apologize. All forms of transportation which can get people out of cars are worth their weight in gold.

12-09-2002, 10:32 PM

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddyyou mentioned the Queen Anne hill in Seattle. What grade is it at (more than 15%)? I enjoy tough grades and that hill sounds WONDERFULL!!

it's more than 15%, i'll take a picture, it's a frickin' mountain. from a quick google search, it's 18-20% and greater in some of the areas.

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddyIf it sounds like I am eating at which is best, I apologize. All forms of transportation which can get people out of cars are worth their weight in gold.

no way, you're one of the good ones. together we stand, or ride, or pedal :-]

cheers,
pt

http://www.bookofseg.com

BruceWright

12-09-2002, 11:00 PM

As one who has seen that hill first hand....

I wouldn't want to walk it, let alone bike it. Think Lombard St. without the switchbacks!

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 03:50 AM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

Unfortunately, people don't use other modes of transportation in part because of culture and a sprawling suburban development pattern with no pedestrian amenities. What would widespread Segway use do to development patterns.

It doesn't surprise me that you are from Cary. Your City has an excellent reputation for forward thinking and many jurisdictions look to you for different approaches. Has the Segway been a topic of discussion in Cary?

Nobody is talking about the Segway here. Typical trip distances are too long in the Triangle area and free, convenient parking is plentiful. There is significant attention being paid now to improving the roads for bicycle transportation, which is growing in popularity, but that is a different market. There are two main groups of cyclists - older, high-income cyclists who ride for exercise, including commuting by bike, and younger, low-income cyclists who don't have access to cars. The high income cyclists don't want to give up the exercise benefits of cycling by switching to Segway use, and the low-income cyclists can't afford Segways (although some will switch to inexpensive mopeds or motor scooters.) The rest of the population uses automobiles for trips over 1/4 mile (for good climate control) and walks for distances under 1/4 mile.

The main cycling-related improvement to roads in Cary is providing wider outside through lanes (14' wide lanes) on arterials for easier passing of cyclists. The collector roads mostly are two-lane with 16' lanes. New and improved streets are also getting sidewalks, but the target here is pedestrians and future transit riders, not Segway users.

Some residents are using golf cars to travel around golf court communities, and sometimes on public roads. I could seriously see these folks switching to Segways if the Segway can carry a bag of clubs. Some golf cars are getting used on sidewalks, and there is popular demand to use them for utilitarian travel outside the golf course vicinity. This is causing stress for the police, who cannot condone sidewalk use but aren't supposed to allow the cars on the roadway either. Everybody realizes that it's absurd to prohibit golf cars on roads that are legal for bicycles, tractors, horsedrawn carriages, etc. So the police are mostly just looking the other way and the golf car drivers sneak around wherever they want.

Steve Goodridge

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 04:04 AM

I forgot to add that Cary, like many suburbs, has a minimum off-street parking ordinance. Any site development must meet or exceed a standard number of off-street parking spaces based on its floor space and type to ensure that there is always adequate supply at peak times. This results in huge parking lots, which are mostly empty except for the weekend before Christmas, and pushes destinations farther apart. (Many shoppers will walk from one store entrance to their car, drive across the lot to the entrance for the adjacent store, and walk into that entrance.) It also eliminates the advantage of using easy-to-park vehicles like the bicycle or Segway. This is why the only car owners who ride bicycles here do so for exercise, not convenience.

Steve Goodridge

Karamozov

12-11-2002, 02:20 PM

Steve:

I thought you were from Cary, North Carolina. Oops!!!

hodgepoj

12-11-2002, 02:32 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

Our gluttonous highway budgets should be slashed and funding provided to improving other forms of transportation.

Especially trains. Why shouldn't the USA enjoy 21st century train service the way Europe and Japan do?

We're about to lose Amtrak because it slashes its fiscal wrists on every route. But it's simple to store your HT downstairs on their double-decker sleeper and coach cars.

Dr. Paul O. Johnson
Senior Exhibit Developer
The Science Place
Dallas, Texas 75210

Karamozov

12-11-2002, 02:46 PM

Dispite pedestrian fears of Segways on the sidewalk, which may prove to be unfounded fears since Segways are stable when not moving and can operate at any speed, integrating Segways into pedestrian environments may benefit both. I think the handling of the Segway makes obstacles (trash cans, benches, lights, planters, etc...) a non-factor. When Segwayers want to pick up speed, they will only do so when it is comfortable, meaning that they will not speed up unless it is safe for them to do so. It's a natural self preservation instinct and managable at a 12 mph maximum speed.

As for benefits to pedestrians, Segway users will ask for many of the same amenities pedestrians and wheelchair users demand. ADA compliant curb cuts, wider sidewalks and traffic calming. Non-automobile travelers own the Right-of-Way too and as these people increase in number our public spaces will change to accommodate (at least that's my hope).

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 03:19 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

Steve:

I thought you were from Cary, North Carolina. Oops!!!

I am indeed living in Cary, NC, in the Research Triangle of North Carolina.

I have previously lived in Raleigh, NC, Durham, NH, Dover, NH, Londonderry, NH, and Suffield, Conneticut.

Cary's city government does spend an enormous amount of energy on town planning. Some of it ends up being useful. I am curious how other planners view Cary. I can give you the inside scoop to dispel the myths.

Regards,
Steven G. Goodridge, Ph.D.
Citizen Member, Cary Planning and Zoning Board

JohnM

12-11-2002, 03:25 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

When Segwayers want to pick up speed, they will only do so when it is comfortable, meaning that they will not speed up unless it is safe for them to do so. It's a natural self preservation instinct and managable at a 12 mph maximum speed.

How would you explain the lack of the 'natural self preservation instinct' in the users of other wheeled devices who have made themselves unwelcome on sidewalks? Is this instinct a unique genetic trait to be found only in Segway owners? Since an instict is, by definition, an inborn pattern of behavior that is characteristic of an entire species, are Segway users a distinct subspecies of Homo Sapiens? (Homo Kamenus?) Will potential Segway owners be subjected to genetic testing to insure the presence of this instinct? ;)

Runnin' with the Big Dogs

Karamozov

12-11-2002, 03:36 PM

If you are on a bicycle and you try to flee a hazardous situation, sometimes you loose control of the vehicle. Can this happen on a Segway? I'm not a physicist (I'm not sure I can even spell physicist), but everything I've read suggests that your center of gravity and maintaining balance is what drives the Segway. All of the other vehicles, involve inertia to maintain balance which can be upset by the desire to move.

I'm my teen years I used to be a BMX freestylist and injured myself dozens of times, but at no time did I try to crash into someone or run someone over. And when I did crash, I instinctly tried to stay balanced or break my fall (depending on how far through the crashing process I was).

I don't mind being wrong, if I am?

CyclistBuddy

12-11-2002, 03:51 PM

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 03:52 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

Dispite pedestrian fears of Segways on the sidewalk, which may prove to be unfounded fears since Segways are stable when not moving and can operate at any speed, integrating Segways into pedestrian environments may benefit both. I think the handling of the Segway makes obstacles (trash cans, benches, lights, planters, etc...) a non-factor. When Segwayers want to pick up speed, they will only do so when it is comfortable, meaning that they will not speed up unless it is safe for them to do so. It's a natural self preservation instinct and managable at a 12 mph maximum speed.

It may be possible to enforce Segway operators to behave themselves enough to be safe on some sidewalks. However, there will be some situations where the reduced speed (and thus greater travel time) will be frustrating to Segway operators. The Segway operators will be tempted to either take greater risks (endangering themselves and others) or switch to an alternative route (roadway instead of sidewalk) or alternative mode (bike, Vespa, or car instead of Segway).

You may be familiar with the concept of Level Of Service (LOS) as used by the traffic engineering profession and defined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). LOS ratings A through F are based on a user's perception of delay due to traffic, traffic control devices, or other factors. LOS metrics typically used to rate the performance of a road or intersection in order to determine the relative warrants for engineering improvements. Traffic engineers frequently claim that reduced LOS tends to encourage greater risk taking by road users and that higher LOS improves safety.

For years, the concept of user LOS was applied only to motorists. But pedestrians, cyclists, and Segway drivers also experience frustration with travel delays. In the year 2000 edition, the HCM included LOS metrics for pedestrians and cyclists. The HCM2000 points out that pedestrians and cyclists whose LOS declines due to delays from traffic and traffic control devices are likely to engage in increased risk taking. I therefore conclude that we should be careful about creating laws for Segway operators that will make them experience delay-oriented frustration while their paths are in potential conflict with other vulnerable road users. This is why I think it is important to protect the right to operate Segways on streets where Segway travel can be done with much greater convenience.

See http://www.humantransport.org/universalaccess/library/uaandlos/index.htm
for more information about LOS for light traffic. Note that because I believe that Segways are vehicles, I also believe that the LOS metrics for free-flow bicycle traffic are a better match for Segway use than are the LOS metrics for free-flow pedestrians.

quote:
As for benefits to pedestrians, Segway users will ask for many of the same amenities pedestrians and wheelchair users demand. ADA compliant curb cuts, wider sidewalks and traffic calming. Non-automobile travelers own the Right-of-Way too and as these people increase in number our public spaces will change to accommodate (at least that's my hope).

I promote the concept of universal access, which protects the travel rights of all citizens to access all destinations that are within reach of the travel modes and time available to them. Appropriate design for a road depends on the intended performance of the road, but *all* non-controlled-access roads should be designed and regulated with the assumption of use by pedestrians, cyclists, and other light traffic. Adding width to a roadway does not create a "bicycle facility"; the bicycle facility is already there. Adding width creates an improved passing facility. This is the only engineering approach that agrees with the traffic law and constitutional law.

See my web site at http://www.humantransport.org/universalaccess/ for more information about universal access.

As for Segwayists, there will probably be far too few of them to generate significant increase in demand for good roadway engineering. Pedestrian advocates and cyclists advocates are having an increased effect on road design, but these groups will probably continue to outnumber Segwayists by two or more orders of magnitude for many years. Roadway designs that accommodate cyclists well on roadways will serve faster Segwayists reasonably well; Sidewalk designs that accommodate wheelchairs well will serve low-speed Segwayists reasonably well.

Regards,
Steve Goodridge
Cary, NC P&Z Board

Karamozov

12-11-2002, 04:04 PM

Buddy:

If traffic laws were truly designed for everyones safety, we wouldn't have cars. 40,000 people a year are killed in the U.S. by automobile accidents. Millions are injured. Speed kills. A loose cannon on a 17 mph Segway is not likely to kill very may people, not to say that it can't happen, but it would be as rare as deaths due to bicylcles or skateboards.

If any mode of transporation should give up space, it should be cars. Do Segways give more clout to the "bike lane" argument? A bicycle/Segway lane coupled with speed limits on sidewalks could work nicely. Enforcement is a whole different issues.

Karamozov

12-11-2002, 04:11 PM

Driver:

Here's an excellent document on Gainsville's LOS standards for bicycles and pedestrian facilities.

http://www.enhancements.org/trb%5C1538-001.pdf

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 04:20 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

If you are on a bicycle and you try to flee a hazardous situation, sometimes you loose control of the vehicle. Can this happen on a Segway? I'm not a physicist (I'm not sure I can even spell physicist), but everything I've read suggests that your center of gravity and maintaining balance is what drives the Segway. All of the other vehicles, involve inertia to maintain balance which can be upset by the desire to move.

Analysis of the causes of injuries to cyclists, and in particular the causes of the most common types of crashes and falls, provides important insight into the dangers faced by operators of light vehicles. This leands me to believe there will be great similarity between Segway accidents and bicycle accidents.

Falls are the most common cause of injuries to adult cyclists. These falls are typically caused by surface irregularities that interfere with the operator's ability to maintain balance or control. Potholes, sand, gravel, railroad tracks, wet epoxy/thermoplastic/metal surfaces, seams, curbs, ice, snow, wet leaves, slotted drain grates, debris, etc. are common causes of this loss of balance/control. It will be interesting to find out how the Segway responds to similar surface hazards at similar speeds. The next most common cause of cyclist injury involves collision or near collision with other moving non-motorized hazards, such as other cyclists, dogs, pedestrians, and opening car doors. Here the appearance of a threat occurs too late for the bicyclist to respond sufficiently given the limited maneuverability of the bicycle. The ability of the Segway operator to respond any better will depend on the relative maneuverability of the Segway, which I personally don't believe is any better than a bicycle's at travel speeds that are high enough to make its use very attractive to able-bodied citizens.

quote:
I'm my teen years I used to be a BMX freestylist and injured myself dozens of times, but at no time did I try to crash into someone or run someone over. And when I did crash, I instinctly tried to stay balanced or break my fall (depending on how far through the crashing process I was).

I rode BMX and dabbled in freestyling as well. I did fall a lot, but never got more than a minor scrape. Stunt cycling was an interesting form of social bonding for young males - the low-seat BMX bike provided entertainment, competition, a means of intra-neighborhood mobility, and the chair from which to conduct conversation in an otherwise unstructured public space. However, when I wanted to travel outside my immediate neighborhood I usually switched to my Varsity 10-speed, which was much more better for fast utilitarian trips.

Steve "totally rad" Goodridge

CyclistBuddy

12-11-2002, 04:32 PM

Karamozov, haha, good one.. We do have cars, and people want them (many people want SUVs which are FAR more dangerous, but thats another topic). The reason people are killed and injured is usually when people don't follow those laws. a bicycle isn't allowed on sidewalks, thats so we won't injury anybody. But if a segway is allowed, they are more likely to hurt someone since they are in pedestrian space, where cyclists aren't. A safe, courteous segwayist will be safe, where an unsafe segwayist won't. Skateboarders can only go a few miles an hour and have no added weight, its like someone runs into you (roughly same speeds). A segway goes 17 which is fast enough for a car to injure someone. Its lighter, but the extra 70 pounds makes a huge difference. It would be like a professional football linebacker running at full speed into someone without pads (a little more weight, a little less speed) F=MV. It would be the same impact as a cyclists going maybe 35( given a bike weighing about half that of a segway;35 pounds, some are much less, has to go twice that speed to make the same impact) OUCH!! I know some may want to double check my guesstimates.

I agree cars should give up space, and that any allies cyclists can get for more bike/segway lanes on the street is most welcome.

12-11-2002, 04:37 PM

i would say that the segway with it's weight, tires, and design will fare well over these surfaces. speaking only from my segway ht daily ride, i go over many places that i would be nervous to go over with narrow tires.

the other thing, standing up and being able to simply step off as opposed to dismount makes me feel a bit safer as well. falling over doesn't seem as likely.

lastly, the design of the segway responds to normal human reactions, for example the natural reaction to lean back when a hazzard pops out causes the segway to stop with other forms of locomotion the rider needs to brake or turn.

just some thoughts.

cheers,
pt

quote:Originally posted by bicycledriverFalls are the most common cause of injuries to adult cyclists. These falls are typically caused by surface irregularities that interfere with the operator's ability to maintain balance or control. Potholes, sand, gravel, railroad tracks, wet epoxy/thermoplastic/metal surfaces, seams, curbs, ice, snow, wet leaves, slotted drain grates, debris, etc. are common causes of this loss of balance/control. It will be interesting to find out how the Segway responds to similar surface hazards at similar speeds.

http://www.bookofseg.com

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 04:40 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

Driver:

Here's an excellent document on Gainsville's LOS standards for bicycles and pedestrian facilities.

http://www.enhancements.org/trb%5C1538-001.pdf

This document, like a few other papers I have seen, discusses comfort metrics for pedestrians and cyclists. Comfort metrics are certainly useful, but do not address delay/convenience, which is what the HCM's LOS numbers are designed to address. I prefer to use the term "LOS" to describe performance in terms of user convenience, according to the HCM's terminology, since many users will choose to take a less comfortable or even less safe route if it saves them a significant amount of time. I prefer to use other descriptors for comfort, e.g. noise decibels, and for safety, i.e. collisions per million miles or per intersection crossing. Subjective cultural causes of stress, such as feeling guilty about delaying motorists on a narrow road, are difficult to use because some users never learn to feel guilty, or can un-learn the feeling of guilt. It is more scientific to measure the effect of the bicycle traffic on the automobile traffic, in terms of LOS as described in the HCM, and then recommend appropriate road improvement to provide the desired LOS. For instance, a low-volume road may not need wide outside lanes because it is rare for cyclists to delay motorists, but a high-volume narrow two-lane road would greatly benefit from improved passing facilities. Likewise, a very low-volume low-speed road rarely needs sidewalks, because pedestrians and drivers using the pavement will rarely delay each others' progress signifcantly, and it is easy for them to make minor adjustments for one another when the occasion arises. Similarly, an analysis of the actual causes of collisions is the best way to address the safety issue.

Regards,
Steve Goodridge
Member, Tau Beta Pi engineering honor society

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 04:48 PM

quote:Originally posted by CyclistBuddy

I agree cars should give up space, and that any allies cyclists can get for more bike/segway lanes on the street is most welcome.

Some of us cyclists don't like bike lane stripes. We merely advocate increased lane width in those places where society wants to make passing of cyclists easier. Special bike lanes that segregate drivers by vehicle tend to confuse road users about the vehicular rules of the road, which can lead to unsafe actions by cyclists at intersections and harassment by police and motorists when cyclists operate in normal travel lanes. Segregated bike lanes also tend to accumulate debris. Bike lane stripes have never been demonstrated to improve safety for cyclists, but the extra pavement width may increase both comfort and safety. That's why I advocate wide outside lanes on important roads, not bike lanes. And Segway drivers should be allowed to use the same travel lanes that cyclists use, regardless of the width of those lanes.

Steve Goodridge
http://humantransport.org/bicycledriving/

Casey

12-11-2002, 05:03 PM

quote:How would you explain the lack of the 'natural self preservation instinct' in the users of other wheeled devices who have made themselves unwelcome on sidewalks?

It isn't the lack of self preservation. It is that no other vehicle reacts instantly to the rider/driver reflex. It is natural to duck etc. A natural instinct to stop or go is automatically carried out by a Segway, but no other vehicle.

In fact that natural instinct to duck or dodge could and does cause auto and bicycle wrecks.

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 06:12 PM

quote:Originally posted by Casey
It isn't the lack of self preservation. It is that no other vehicle reacts instantly to the rider/driver reflex. It is natural to duck etc. A natural instinct to stop or go is automatically carried out by a Segway, but no other vehicle.

In fact that natural instinct to duck or dodge could and does cause auto and bicycle wrecks.

Let's say the time it takes between detection of a hazard and beginning the braking force is one half as long for a Segway as it is for, say, a cyclist. But the actuation time for a cyclist is a small fraction of the total perception, reaction, and braking time for a cyclist traveling at 12-15 mph. The Segway driver will be just as likely as the cyclist to be looking in the wrong direction when a hazard emerges, and does not have a shorter braking time than the cyclist because he cannot decelerate appreciably faster. It seems unlikely that this reduced actuation time will have a significant effect on collision avoidance, and it can have no effect on falls caused by unexpected surface hazards.

Also note the experience with ABS systems in cars - at least one study found that drivers with ABS tended to drive more aggressively due to greater confidence, negating the safety benefit of ABS but increasing the drivers' convenience. Similar risk compensation effects have been found for improved cornering ability of cars. If the reaction speed is slightly faster for a Segway, it is quite possible that the Segway drivers will compensate for such, and negate any safety benefit for other innocent facility users.

I do not dispute the Segway's maneuverability in order to support banning it from Sidewalks, but instead to point out that drivers who wish to increase their mobility beyond what is safe for sidewalks should be encouraged and allowed to operate them on roadways.

Steve Goodridge

JohnM

12-11-2002, 06:21 PM

quote:Originally posted by Casey

quote:How would you explain the lack of the 'natural self preservation instinct' in the users of other wheeled devices who have made themselves unwelcome on sidewalks?

It isn't the lack of self preservation. It is that no other vehicle reacts instantly to the rider/driver reflex. It is natural to duck etc. A natural instinct to stop or go is automatically carried out by a Segway, but no other vehicle.

You pulled that line out of context. The 'instinct' refered to was "that they (Segwayists) will not speed up unless it is safe for them to do so." As if somehow the Segway itself has a way of imparting good judgement into its user. Sadly, there is no 'safe speed' instinct. If such an instinct for self preservation were present in our species we would have no need for speed limits on our highways. Like any other device, the Segway is only as safe as its operator. Eventually some dolt will get his hands on a Segway and act irresponsibly. Its inevetable, but not the fault of the device.

Runnin' with the Big Dogs

Casey

12-11-2002, 06:29 PM

quote:Originally posted by JohnM

quote:Originally posted by Casey

quote:How would you explain the lack of the 'natural self preservation instinct' in the users of other wheeled devices who have made themselves unwelcome on sidewalks?

It isn't the lack of self preservation. It is that no other vehicle reacts instantly to the rider/driver reflex. It is natural to duck etc. A natural instinct to stop or go is automatically carried out by a Segway, but no other vehicle.

You pulled that line out of context. The 'instinct' refered to was "that they (Segwayists) will not speed up unless it is safe for them to do so." As if somehow the Segway itself has a way of imparting good judgement into its user. Sadly, there is no 'safe speed' instinct. If such an instinct for self preservation were present in our species we would have no need for speed limits on our highways. Like any other device, the Segway is only as safe as its operator. Eventually some dolt will get his hands on a Segway and act irresponsibly. Its inevetable, but not the fault of the device.

Runnin' with the Big Dogs

OK, here is the entire quote IN CONTEXT. I interpreted the rest of the quote as an attempt to explain the question.

quote: How would you explain the lack of the 'natural self preservation instinct' in the users of other wheeled devices who have made themselves unwelcome on sidewalks? Is this instinct a unique genetic trait to be found only in Segway owners? Since an instict is, by definition, an inborn pattern of behavior that is characteristic of an entire species, are Segway users a distinct subspecies of Homo Sapiens? (Homo Kamenus?) Will potential Segway owners be subjected to genetic testing to insure the presence of this instinct? ;)
I was in no way attempting to change the meaning of your question, but was answering it as I understand Segway's abilities.

hodgepoj

12-11-2002, 07:41 PM

quote:Originally posted by Karamozov

If you are on a bicycle and you try to flee a hazardous situation, sometimes you loose control of the vehicle. Can this happen on a Segway? I'm not a physicist (I'm not sure I can even spell physicist), but everything I've read suggests that your center of gravity and maintaining balance is what drives the Segway.

You don't have to be a physicist to understand the physics of motion. Nature is so complex and involves so many interacting objects that physicists can analyze it only be assuming ideal conditions.

The HT is not driven by the rider's center of gravity or by his maintaining balance. It is driven by an electric motor on each wheel. Balancing on an HT is sort of like balancing on short stilts -- you have to keep the point of support (where the rubber meets the road) directly under the combined CG of rider and machine.

It's easier on an HT for two reasons: First, any unbalance and compensating motion is always in one plane (fore and aft). Second, the HT's electronic gyros sense any unbalance and command the motors to move the wheels in the appropriate direction to correct for that unbalance. This sensing and correcting is very quick, much quicker than your brain and muscles can react.

quote:
All of the other vehicles, involve inertia to maintain balance which can be upset by the desire to move.

Other vehicles that require the rider to balance (bicycles, unicycles, two-wheel scooters, etc) do not depend on inertia to maintain balance. They depend, rather, on (1) the rider's ability to sense and immediately correct for unbalance, and (2) the the conservation of angular momentum in the rotating wheels.

Ob a bicycle, the rider desires to move only in the forward direction. This motion plays no role in his maintaining balance.

quote:
I'm my teen years I used to be a BMX freestylist and injured myself dozens of times, but at no time did I try to crash into someone or run someone over. And when I did crash, I instinctly tried to stay balanced or break my fall (depending on how far through the crashing process I was).
I don't mind being wrong, if I am?

I can't comment on this because I don't know what a BMX freestylist is. But a human's instinctive ability to remain balanced on two legs is one of the great wonders of the human brain, nerves, and muscles.

Dr. Paul O. Johnson
Senior Exhibit Developer
The Science Place
Dallas, Texas 75210

bicycledriver

12-11-2002, 07:50 PM

People do have a built in ability to estimate relative dangers and manage their risk to benefit ratio. However, this process is not perfect.

In structured environments where the dangers are highly predictable, and thus easy to avoid, human beings do a good job of minimizing their risk to benefit ratio. (For this discussion, benefit = mobility.) In unstructured environments where dangers are mostly unpredictable, human beings have difficulty minimizing their risk to benefit ratio. In such an environment, often the only way to reduce risk to an acceptable level is to also reduce the benefit to an unacceptable level.

Roadways are highly structured environments where the actions of drivers are carefully choreographed by the rules for drivers of vehicles. The dangers occur in predictable situations and it is relatively easy to avoid them while traveling in a convenient manner. It is thus easy to minimize the risk to benefit ratio.

Pedestrian spaces are highly disorganized in terms of traffic patterns with minimum choreography of users. Potential hazards are highly unpredictable, but are well matched to the slow speeds and superior maneuverability of pedestrians. In fact, the main reason that pedestrians feel free to do unpredictable things in pedestrian spaces is because of their expectation that other users of the pedestrian space will have little difficulty handling unpredictable events. The placement of street furniture and and other structures is also closely related to the expectations of pedestrian characteristics. Only those users who attempt to travel faster than pedestrian speed (with consequently longer stopping distances and the need for a larger clear operating space and better sight lines) will have difficulty with these hazards.

The only way that drivers of vehicles can increase their mobiity benefit significantly above that experienced by pedestrians without also increasing risk is to move to an environment that is more structured and predictable, i.e. to the roadway.

Steven Goodridge