Feed aggregator

Re: Why do we do it?

CTC Forum - On the road - 21 September 2014 - 12:55pm
"There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics"

Re: channel hopping

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 10:56am
Glad to see you had fun and the weather was kind. You're right about the climb out of Folkestone if you took the NCN2 it's certainly more fun coming back from Dover. I understand there's a coast route but that's only accessible during work hours and sometimes you can get stopped by security. Next time you come back through Portsmouth you should pop round for a cup of tea, but not a 7 am as I set off to work in Portsmouth around then, I'm not quite retired yet. Maybe we passed each other on the ferry?
Seems they're about to close the DFDS Portsmouth/Le Havre ferry route so our options for weekends away may be further limited.
Once again, glad to see you enjoyed it.

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 10:28am
al_yrpal wrote:
My phone is an HTC One S. Because its now free of contract I have looked around to see if there is a sensible replacement. The bad news is all decent more modern phones are considerably larger and don't fit in a trouser pocket easily, and, except for the Moto G are all eye wateringly expensive! Its difficult to understand why the latest phones mostly cost more than £500 when they can make a Hudl with 95% of the functionality for £99!!!

Al
Is the answer "because they can"

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 10:21am
Personally not worried about the weight of a tablet vs the weight of a phone. The thing that puts me off carrying a tablet when camping would be:

The difficulty of charging it. I had a dynamo charger on my old tourer but am now committed to the idea of carrying Teknet battery rechargers, these weigh quite a lot and I would need considerably more charging capacity for a tablet.

I can carry the phone in the transparent map window on top of my bar bag and operate it there too. Its protected from the weather and can be fed from a teknet within the bar bag. If necessary I can run Osmand continually to give turn by turn navigation instructions, and/or see exactly where I am on OSM. A tablet wont fit.

However I might consider taking a tablet along if I was cc touring.

My phone is an HTC One S. Because its now free of contract I have looked around to see if there is a sensible replacement. The bad news is all decent more modern phones are considerably larger and don't fit in a trouser pocket easily, and, except for the Moto G are all eye wateringly expensive! Its difficult to understand why the latest phones mostly cost more than £500 when they can make a Hudl with 95% of the functionality for £99!!!

Al

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 10:06am
Sweep wrote:Your comment wasn't apropos of nothing bonefish - I didn't know they had sorted the screen touch issue. Are you quite sure?

I liked the bulk/tough feel of the original - it felt pannier friendly. Am worried that they will lose this travelling advantage on the Hudl 2.
Think so: http://blogs.which.co.uk/technology/tab ... creen-fix/

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 10:04am
I think people have recommended good tablets and alternatives to take touring.

All tablets have the features you don't need, AFAIK, so I suspect you're looking for a product that doesn't exist, or if it did, it's long been superseded.

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 8:58am
All this extra weight adds up! The Hudl is pretty robust but quite thick. I don't need a rear camera, gps, or even bluetooth on a touring tablet.

Re: Red Loon?!

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 7:14am
Thank you for your reply. A bit off topic, but How did you find the Danube? It's been a dream of mine for years to cycle that route so would be fab to hear about it!

I am going to have a look at some ortleib panniers today; I have also been suggested Axiom grand tourer bags - have you ever had any experience with these?

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 6:21am
Bonefishblues wrote:robing wrote:al_yrpal wrote:Got the new Which mag today. The Hudl is recommended as the best cheap tablet. At only £99 its a bargain.

Al

You can get a refurbished one off eBay for £59. At 350g though it's quite hefty.
A Nexus 7 is 60g lighter, so not really here or there if you want that larger screen size than a smartphone can offer.

Apropos of nothing we have a Hudl coming from the Tesco Outlet at the moment. We had issues with a couple of the very early ones that had screen touch blind spots, but I think that's all fixed.

Yes, 60g! Amazing what folk will apply the weight weeny thing to. And where does all that saved/shaved 60g come from - for all I know it's the bleeding battery!

sorry robing, but I find this weight obsession thing plain crazy - I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that there are folk who head down the butchers and are offered £10's worth of their meat of choice and snap up the 500g rather than 750kg pack as the must-have meat accessory. I eat way more than 60g of pasta in a single sitting. And if I announced that I'd lost 60g of weight in my new fitness regime folk would just roll over and laugh.

Your comment wasn't apropos of nothing bonefish - I didn't know they had sorted the screen touch issue. Are you quite sure?

I liked the bulk/tough feel of the original - it felt pannier friendly. Am worried that they will lose this travelling advantage on the Hudl 2.

Re: Show your touring bikes !!!!

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 21 September 2014 - 1:37am
slogfester wrote:Not sure yet. A bit late, but just starting to plan for 6 week trip mid-Dec to end of Jan. Gut feeling says just stick to the South Island at that time of year. We like to get off the beaten track and off-road as long as its not too tough.

You might want to touch base with RonK at the Australian Cycling Forums. His blog can be found at http://wheelswhisper.blogspot.com.au/ I believe he has or has in mind a similar style of tour of the South Island.

Andrew

Re: Lewes Road Brighton- new facility any good?

CTC Forum - On the road - 21 September 2014 - 12:03am
niggle wrote:Pete Owens wrote:That cycle lane is very much thinner than 2m and will result in buses passing very much closer than they would if they were simply sharing the same overal width.

As that is just some sort of digital 'artists impression' I would hope that the lane is actually a genuine 2m as promised.

Well if you look at the detailed scale drawings of the giratory you can see the narrow cycle lane (heading towards Brighton) - much less than the space cyclists need for safety. To see how much worse 1.5m cycle lanes like that make conditions for cyclists take a look at:
http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.u ... -lanes.pdf

It is a shame because the scheme does look to involve genuine roadspace reallocation. They have not just converted one lane of the dual carriageway to a bus and cycle lane but actually increased the width of that lane so that there is sufficient space for buses and cyclists to pass each other. If only they didn't insist on subdividing that space it wouyld be very very good.


Pete Owens wrote:And that plan looks positively lethal. Cyclists are taken off the road to go behind a bus stop then re-emerge onto the carriageway brom behind a stopped bus just at the approach to a junction.

I see what your saying, but the issue will only be with other traffic wanting to enter the left turn lane for Hollingdean Road,

I was thinking more of vehicles turning into the car park imediately after the bus stop. The cycle lane to the right of the left hand filter for Hollingdean Road is much less of an issue.
the cycle lane is continuous and compulsory before

Not according to the drawing. What I see is a narrow advisory on-carrageway cycle lane heading north up Lewes Road and across the mouth of Upper Lewes Road. This is then diverted off the carrageway and behind the bus stop.
and immediately after the bus stop and protected by being raised by 50mm then 25mm before finally continuing as a distinct marked lane- traffic going up the main(?) route straight ahead will not be in conflict with the cycle lane but cyclists wanting to turn right at the 'top' of the 'gyratory' will be needing to take more care and make movements across 'all vehicles' lanes, but hard to see how to avoid that.

It is only hard to see that if you insist on separating streams of traffic by vehicle type rather than direction of travel. Once you segregate by type you are bound to cause conflict at junctions where those streams have to cross each other. This is the explanation why parallel off-carriageway cycle paths have such a poor safety record at junctions.
Another issue will be how pedestrians are enabled to cross the cycle lane to reach the bus stop- opportunity for conflict there.

Indeed so. And here we get to the real purpose of bus stop bypasses. If you start with an off-carriagway cycle path running alongside a bus route then this will inevitably lead to conflict at the bus stops. It is a bad idea to send cyclists through a bus shelter (though this doesn't seem to occur to some designers (see http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.u ... il2013.htm - and others). And to have the cycle path going imedieately adjacent to the bus as people are stepping off is obviously dangerous (though commonly implemented). So to arrange for the cycle path to be routed behind the bus stop is the least bad solution - a way to minimise the unavoidable conflict.

However, these things seem to have become fashionable as a good thing in their own right - so now we are starting to see on-carriagway cycle lanes diverted round the back of bus stops then back on to the carriageway. This is a really bad idea - you are creating conflict where there was none before. To do this on the approach to a junction is plain daft.

Whenever anybody criticises a facility I do think they should back it up with their solution, or to say up front that they are opposed to all facilities...

Well if the problem is the danger caused to cyclists by a proposal to implement a daft cycle path then the simple solution is don't do it. As with medics the first thing is to avoid making the situation worse that it was to start with.

However, the real question is: "How do we improve conditions for cyclists through this cycle-hostile road layout". Unfortunately, rather too many people interpret this question as "Where can we fit in some cycle facilities" with the implicit extension on the part of highway engineers: "without inconveniencing motor traffic in any way whatsoever".

So. This is what I would do:
First I would start by getting to the root cause of the problem - and remove the giratory itself. The entire purpose of giratories is to speed up motor traffic by creating multi-lane roads which require high-speed merging and filtering. Theyare nasty for pedestrians and cyclists and really have no place in any liveable city. This might be politically tricky in some places - but this is Brighton where the Greens are in power - and do show a willingness to take on auto-centric assumptions.

Lewes road would then be a continuous conventional 2-way street similar to the way it is towards the town centre. (though where it becomes a shopping street further to the south I would consider something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... vzDDMzq7d0) There would be a single general traffic lane in each direction and I would maintain a shared bus/cycle lane southbound. I would make the northbound traffic lane as wide as possible and the southbound general traffic lane as narrow as possible.

There would be a traffic light controlled cross-roads (or possibly a contintental geometry roundabout) at the north end (where Hollingdon Rd & Bear Rd Cross) and a traffic light controled T junction (or continental roundabout) at the south end for Upper Lewes Rd. The current Northbound part of the giratory would be blocked to through traffic (possibly with a bus gate) and accessed from the north.

The speed limit would be reduced to 20mph, and enforced by average speed cameras.

Re: Non driving cyclists

CTC Forum - On the road - 20 September 2014 - 11:11pm
Totally agree that DRL's are a nuisance - some are brighter than others, most obscure the (often badly located) indicators, and ALL cause your eyes to register the lights, but not the vehicle- nor vehicles without lights (vehicle in this context includes cars, bikes and cycles. And wheelchairs!)

Why do I mention indicators - how many times have you approached a traffic island, looked for the indicators for a car coming around the island to see if it's going to turn - and simply couldn't see the damn things even if they are being used? Means you have to stop even if sometimes it shouldn't be necessary, not much fun if you've got to pedal uphill to get going again.

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 20 September 2014 - 11:10pm
Pandaz wrote:A second hand Asus 7 is the way to go: 11hr battery life!
Dwarfed by the Yoga

Re: tablet for touring

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 20 September 2014 - 11:02pm
A second hand Asus 7 is the way to go: 11hr battery life!

Re: Jens gets Hour record

CTC Forum - Racing - 20 September 2014 - 10:59pm
Well done Jens, proper hero!

Re: Why do we do it?

CTC Forum - On the road - 20 September 2014 - 10:56pm
bensonboo wrote:I don't question the fact that many motorists jump lights, but it's just not true to say that the majority do it. Just watch any junction, you MAY see jumpers, they WILL be a minority.
Not really, on any given sequence noone behind the first "non jumper" is given the choice, so 1RLJ is 50%, 2 is 66%, 3 is 75%

On every junction I see at least one or two taking the mick...

Re: Why do we do it?

CTC Forum - On the road - 20 September 2014 - 10:46pm
Actually, this year, it seems rare that I arrive at traffic lights and no motorist either drives blatantly through red, or stops well over the line, often so as to obstruct any pedestrian or toucan cruising. I'd probably agree that the only thing stopping most drivers from RLJing seems to be the vehicle in front, rather than their own morals.

Re: FillThatHole - Dying ? Come on CTC

CTC Forum - On the road - 20 September 2014 - 10:06pm
Lance Dopestrong wrote:I've given up reporting them round here. The standard reply, to some quite shocking holes or damage, is "already scheduled for future repair." The fact that someone could be hurt in the mean time just doesn't seem to register with Northamptonshire County Council Highways department.

What is unreasonable about that - so long as it is genuinely scheduled for repair within a reasonable timescale. You don't expect an emergency response tarmac team to set of with blue lights and sirenens the minute you report a pothole. Of course if it isn't genuinely scheduled for repair then that is all the more reason to report it to fillthathole.

If someone gets hurt on an unreported hole and makes a claim from the council then they will get the standard brush off reply that the council regularly inspects its roads and the fault wasn't there last time they looked. That again is entirely reasonable - again you cannot expect them to inspect the entire road network every afternoon incase a pothole shows up in the morning.

If on the other hand someone gets hurt - and the look up the fault on fillthathole - and see that it was reported to the council several months ago then there is clear evidence of negligence. The council cannot simply claim they were unaware of the pothole.

Re: Show your touring bikes !!!!

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 20 September 2014 - 9:20pm
Aushiker wrote:slogfester wrote:Meet Peru (Van Nicholas Pioneer) .... Hasn't been to Peru... yet, but did 4000 km round Europe last year and will soon be off to New Zealand

Nice bike. Where in the Long White Cloud are you planning to ride?

Andrew

Not sure yet. A bit late, but just starting to plan for 6 week trip mid-Dec to end of Jan. Gut feeling says just stick to the South Island at that time of year. We like to get off the beaten track and off-road as long as its not too tough.

Re: FillThatHole - Dying ? Come on CTC

CTC Forum - On the road - 20 September 2014 - 9:20pm
And the FillThatHole web site announces "Thanks to additional funding secured from the Department for Transport, an update to the iPhone app is in progress and will be issued in early 2014." And the latest release dates back to 2011. It does all raise questions about the CTC's abilities to manage such software projects.

Ian
Syndicate content

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