CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 8 min ago

Re: A ride too far

17 October 2014 - 6:52pm
mercalia wrote:well unexprected rides are the spice of life. just be lucky u didnt have to sleep rough for a night just an extra 15 miles.

I was very glad Mercalia. Have you ended up having to sleep rough?

Re: 2 LeJog deaths: Death by dangerous driving charge

17 October 2014 - 6:26pm
Sentencing in this case on this thread

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=91288

Re: A warm dry winter?

17 October 2014 - 5:00pm
MikeF wrote:GrumpyGit wrote:If I'm going to make it to Brighton next spring I shall have to keep riding through anything the winter can throw at us.

In preparation I've just bought a pair of studded tyres for my mountain bike as it is my "weapon of choice" for filthy conditions. My hybrid remains set up for relatively benign roads.

Working on the principle that it never rains when you're carrying an umbrella I'm expecting a very mild winter this year! I predict there will be fewer hours of daylight, so you might need lights.


Did you scatter some chicken bones, or dangle some seaweed to see into the future

Re: A warm dry winter?

17 October 2014 - 4:34pm
GrumpyGit wrote:If I'm going to make it to Brighton next spring I shall have to keep riding through anything the winter can throw at us.

In preparation I've just bought a pair of studded tyres for my mountain bike as it is my "weapon of choice" for filthy conditions. My hybrid remains set up for relatively benign roads.

Working on the principle that it never rains when you're carrying an umbrella I'm expecting a very mild winter this year! I predict there will be fewer hours of daylight, so you might need lights.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 4:19pm
NUKe wrote:Mick F wrote:Yep.
Ridden there, and Amsterdam, and Antwerp.

Cycling Utopia is a place where there is scenery, hills, sweeping countryside, vales and valleys, quite lanes, mountains and hills, smooth roads, cafes and pubs, castles and farms and draughty barns ........

Not a busy European city.
Mick
I think I may have confused you with my title it was mine not the articles, Cycling Eutopia was my interpreration, It all depends on why you cycle. If you had to cycle into a big city everyday for work, then copenhagen is probably one of the best. But if you ride for Liesure then your right with your version of Eutopia. I am very lucky that most of commute is on quite country lanes.

A utopia for cycling rather than for cyclists. Cambridge certainly isn't perfect, but is full of people who aren't cyclists, they're just people who happen to use bikes to get around (in the same way I wouldn't call myself a pedestrian just because I walk to the shops. It's also incredibly boring to cycle around

Re: Clipping and running

17 October 2014 - 3:52pm
Although I've listened several times it's not clear to me who says what and to whom. It appears the camera is attached to a cycle. Was it in the ride as part one of the participants or just to film? It's speed seems to be erratic. The second cyclist appears to catch up with it quite rapidly as he then freewheels, and slows. Why doesn't he overtake as he's going considerably faster? The camera vehicle then overtakes the first cyclist and is going noticeably faster, but then it appears to slow relative to the first rider, causing the first rider to overtake. The first rider starts to overtake but the camera cycle maybe slows more than he expects - hence he has his hand on the front brake as he is about to overtake. He then makes a sharper turn than he was intending.

Unless we are shown a video with a forward facing camera we cannot conclude anything. I might even conclude that the cyclist with the camera caused the crash. No-one has suggested that yet!

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 3:42pm
djqster wrote:You know how you're not supposed to use a train toilet in the station? Well when you use it away from the station and the train is moving quickly, whatever you flush is blasted into an aerosol by the slipstream where it sits in a nice breathable cloud.

It's a problem for lineside workers and potential lineside cyclists until all trains are fitted with waste tanks.
How many still aren't? The HST slam-doors. What else? Most of what's seen locally are Happy Trains and the various *stars and I think they've all got waste tanks, like most trains built since 1989.

I think the UK government was given a deadline of 2017 to stop this and that's why the Intercity Express Programme trains are scheduled to start service then, so this doesn't seem a big barrier to railside cycleways any more.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

17 October 2014 - 3:19pm
A couple of weeks ago I had to ride at night along the cycle path on Lisbon front. It was dark, about 9pm and the path was packed with cyclists. 90% were on MTBs They were flying along and had powerful headlights attached. I was constantly dazzled and had to keep stopping until they had passed. It was dangerous for me as there were high kerbs where the path met a junction and I could not see them. OK on an MTB, but I was on a 700c tourer. IMO their lights were far too bright. I could not see the rider or the bike just the dazzling light. If I was in a car I would be forced to look away. Not good.

Re: Clipping and running

17 October 2014 - 2:44pm
[XAP]Bob wrote:
EDIT: Just read the description on the video:
"The guy in the silver and blue Pinarello cut-off in front of a rider and took his front wheel out. He saw the accident he caused and sped away." We don't know that from the video. That's just an opinion.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 2:16pm
Bicycler wrote:As for railways, that's a cracking idea. Seeing as so many have had the number of tracks reduced I think there would be space on quite a few for an adjacent cycle path.

Hmm.
You know how you're not supposed to use a train toilet in the station? Well when you use it away from the station and the train is moving quickly, whatever you flush is blasted into an aerosol by the slipstream where it sits in a nice breathable cloud.

It's a problem for lineside workers and potential lineside cyclists until all trains are fitted with waste tanks.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 2:00pm
Yes, I agree.
Like I said, it make it easy to cycle to work and shops etc. "Easy" means safe as well as simple. I reckon pedestrians want the same things too.

If I ruled the world, it would STILL be education education education, plus the police would have a big and constant presence on the streets.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 12:04pm
Mick F wrote:Yep.
Ridden there, and Amsterdam, and Antwerp.

Cycling Utopia is a place where there is scenery, hills, sweeping countryside, vales and valleys, quite lanes, mountains and hills, smooth roads, cafes and pubs, castles and farms and draughty barns ........

Not a busy European city.
Mick
I think I may have confused you with my title it was mine not the articles, Cycling Eutopia was my interpreration, It all depends on why you cycle. If you had to cycle into a big city everyday for work, then copenhagen is probably one of the best. But if you ride for Liesure then your right with your version of Eutopia. I am very lucky that most of commute is on quite country lanes.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

17 October 2014 - 12:01pm
I put it on the left because I find it easier to use the buttons there, they could move and I would get used to it.

Except one of my bikes has a brake top lever fitted just for the front brake, which is on the right side and doesnt leave room for the light.

On the other hand I do have a smaller LED light fitted on the stem of each bike, if only they were BS stamped (and I had pedal reflectors) then I would be legal on the new bike as well as the old ones.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 11:53am
Mick F wrote:We don't need facilities, we need to be respected as valid road-users and given space with no harassment, being an accepted part of the road transport system.
We need both. Yes, a right to ride on the road, but there are places where motorists have proven themselves incapable of being trusted to coexist with all non-motorised users and high-speed motorways are not the only one.

We have motorways, so let's have decent cycleways in key places where they can improve cycling... and I mean decent cycleways. There are some which come close but they need their faults correcting - barriers and unsafe junctions are the most common failings. There are also many many more where the blue plates should probably be removed or replaced with something like the "bikes allowed if you really want" German ones. Also in the mix, let's have more 20mph and no-through-motors zones, green space routes, school routes and cycle-friendly town centres - not every road needs a cycleway.

Meanwhile, let's keep pushing for http://www.RoadJustice.org.uk too.
Education, education, education, not segregation, segregation, segregation.
That's the failed approach of the last 80 or so years, isn't it? Why would it work now when it hasn't yet?

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

17 October 2014 - 11:52am
Just to satisfy my curiosity, if somebody has some form of bar-mounted front lamp, why would they be bothered whether it was just to the right of the stem or the left? I'm thinking here of some sort of clip-on bracket which goes on the fatter bit of the bars near the stem. I can understand why riders might be unaware of the requirement in the regs and so might position it to the nearsie, but I can't think of a reason for saying it's imperative that it should be fitted to there, rather than on the offside.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 11:40am
Yeah, just coz they have more and better facilities, it doesn't mean that it's a good place to cycle. Yes, I agree that it's safe and easy to get to work/shops/etc, but that doesn't mean I'd like that model here.

We don't need facilities, we need to be respected as valid road-users and given space with no harassment, being an accepted part of the road transport system.

Education, education, education, not segregation, segregation, segregation.

Re: Knocked off bicycle. Driver won't give insurance details

17 October 2014 - 10:32am
Psamathe wrote:The Mechanic wrote:gaz wrote:As he is the Director of a Limited Company his home address is a matter of public record.

Go to Companies House website and sign up to WebCHeck. You'll need to ask for a "current appointments report" which is free.


Not quite so. It is common for Directors to give the Company address on their registration. I am a Director if 5 companies and most of my co-Directors use the Company address.
Me too. Not a good idea to make your home address publicly available on the internet. Particularly when there are so many sites that publish the info (in addition to Companies House) e.g. http://companycheck.co.uk (again, all immediately available online to everybody).

Ian

Its a legal obligation for a director to provide Companies House with their residential address. However, under the Companies Act 2006 the director can provide an address for service which can be his accountants, solicitors, the company's own registered office, or his grandma. If the director provides a service address, then the residential address is private and is only available to the security services and the police. There is nothing on Companies House now to acknowledge whether the service address shown is the directors home address or not.

Re: Cycling Eutopia ?

17 October 2014 - 9:49am
I'd like a rule which gave 1 mile of cycle track (on-road or separate) for each new mile of road that is created or re-surfaced. Wouldn't take that long to have an improved transport system.

I agree with you Mick, to be Utopia I would need a lot of variety in the scenery. Cycling in Denmark is fun but it is lacking variety scenery-wise. Cycled there this year and last year. Preferred Holland as at least there were lots of waterways but both countries have much better provision for cyclists than the UK

Re: Clipping and running

17 October 2014 - 9:09am
Sum wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:I've just rewatched the video and can see no evidence of a strong acceleration (as would be needed to maintain road speed). However it is very difficult to see any acceleration anyway. His cadence doesn't seem to increase at all though. The onus is still on the person making the manoeuvre.
Well you wouldn't see any acceleration/deceleration if he was maintaining road speed, would you!? However to me he looks as if he's moving past the camera guy at the time of collision. He certainly doesn't look as if he was pulling back.[/quote[

Sorry - I was unclear. In order to maintain speed along the road, whilst travelling diagonally, he would have to increase his speed over the tarmac. I'm not sure he does this, so his sideways manoeuvre inevitably adds a "backwards" component relative to the riders around him.
It is this component that is exacerbated by the rapidity of the manoeuvre.

A more gentle change of direction would have reduced this component (which is possibly/probably what caused the collision) as well as allowing time for the component to have been observed and accounted for by the other riders.

OT: Had it been me behind then the rider in front might have been in a world of pain - since his rear wheel would have been caught by my feet/pedals which can't "give" sideways, so he'd likely have been down, with me completely unable to stop before running him over.

Poor judgement by both, but only one of the riders actually caused a collision.

Additionally we don't see long enough, but the forward rider certainly stops pedalling, but then starts again, implying that he didn't stop. Note that this is speculation.

EDIT: Just read the description on the video:
"The guy in the silver and blue Pinarello cut-off in front of a rider and took his front wheel out. He saw the accident he caused and sped away."

Re: Clipping and running

17 October 2014 - 8:55am
[XAP]Bob wrote:The point is that the onus is always on the person making a manoeuvre. (We'll return to the verbal signal at the end)
We've already said that the guy in front is partly to blame, and this is yet more repetition on that. I guess what I'm saying is that once the rider behind tells the guy in front to go ahead then his actions resulted in an assumption of duty as well i.e. part of the onus is now on him as well.
[XAP]Bob wrote:I've just rewatched the video and can see no evidence of a strong acceleration (as would be needed to maintain road speed). However it is very difficult to see any acceleration anyway. His cadence doesn't seem to increase at all though. The onus is still on the person making the manoeuvre.
Well you wouldn't see any acceleration/deceleration if he was maintaining road speed, would you!? However to me he looks as if he's moving past the camera guy at the time of collision. He certainly doesn't look as if he was pulling back.
Again part of the onus is on the rider behind once he tells the rider to go ahead.
[XAP]Bob wrote:I know what the words were - I was questioning the meaning behind them. "Go ahead" could mean: I'm letting a gap open up so that you can go ahead in a few seconds, or it could mean: there is already room for you to go ahead, or it could mean something else entirely.
The onus is on the person making the maneuver to ensure that it is safe, and he didn't even look - it's a couple of seconds between looking and swiping. Interestingly his hand also comes over the front of a brake lever - doesn't look like he touched the brakes though.
You can't say that the guy didn't even look. The guy looked twice; as he was indicating and when the rider behind said “go ahead go ahead” just before he pulled out. The brake lever thing is interesting.
The rider behind clearly said something and if "go ahead" didn't mean go ahead then he has to accept responsibility for that. The fact that he said go ahead means that part of the onus is upon him as well. I certainly wouldn't wave someone out if my safety was dependent upon them waiting until the gap got bigger, or having to suddenly go much faster. As it it I suspect the rider behind meant go ahead and he didn't spot the wheel overlap.
[XAP]Bob wrote:The rear rider makes an error of judgement - either in terms of space or in terms of word choice...
Agreed, the rear rider and the front rider as well. Fundamentally we seem to be agreeing (I think!)

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

 

Terms and Conditions