Feed aggregator

Re: A-hole in a van.

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 11:29am
"I'm sorry mrs x, I appreciate we were a long time responding to your 999 call. Unfortunately we encountered a litterer, an illegal number plate and a pavement cyclist without pedal reflectors on the way here"

I'd want police to prioritise more urgent cases over more minor ones

The poster point was that if the officer may not have had time to properly enforce the law with regards to a driver on a mobile phone because of a domestic incident, what happens if that driver then goes on to run over someone because they are not concentrating properly, does that RTA then become more important than the next domestic incident ?

I appreciate it is very difficult for and individual officer, for that very reason they should not be picking and choosing which laws they think have time to enforce. If there is a pecking order - it should be published so we can use it to discuss with police and crime commissioners, this is supposed to be a democratic system after all.

Re: A-hole in a van.

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 11:28am
I'm not saying the present arrangement is ideal and as I've already posted, I've been stuck in motorway queues fuming with everyone else. It's my impression that most of the protests I read - and I'm not a visitor to diving forums - are against the prolonged delays caused by road closures for a detailed forensic examination, rather than pressure for methods of clearing the queues. Sweep the debris aside PDQ to get the traffic going, seems to be the message and that's what tends to happen unless it's a KSI. I've also been in the duty officer's seat in a police control room when a large chunk of the motorway network was controlled from there so I've some experience from the other end of the spyglass. I've still not seen anything on how this could be done. eg even diverting all the traffic off at the preceding exit - something that happens naturally anyway as drivers see the tailback - leads to further queuing as all that motorway traffic tries to squeeze onto local roads. Turning every vehicle in the queue round and sending it back to that junction would only increase that congestion.

I'm no fan of highwaymen, the Highways Agency or the ministry of transport, but I'm prepared to believe that they look at how these things are handled elsewhere. eg I believe that variable speed limits in conjunction with using the hard shouldr as a running lane was copied from The Netherlands (in spite of police opposition, incidentally.)

Re: Wearing earphones

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 11:24am
RichardPH wrote:Vorpal wrote:
Riding at least 1 metre from the edge is considered by many to be essential for safety, and it is the recommended practice of DfT through Bikeability and Cyclecraft. IMO, riding at least 1 metre from the edge (with a few exceptions) is more essential for safety than not wearing earphones. However, neither wearing earphones nor gutter riding should get a cyclist killed or blamed for an acc
ident.
I would argue with the assertion that riding a metre out is the position adopted by many, that implies a majority, try doing a survey of all the cyclists you see in traffic and make an honest appraisal.
'Many' doesn't mean a majority. It means a considerable number. If you mean a majority then the word is 'most'. There is a big difference between the opinions of experts in road and cycle safety and the current practice of most cyclists (or drivers).
RichardPH wrote:Did you see the Panorama programme earlier this week, a worrying watch if you believe that riding in the dominant position will keep you safe from inattentive drivers. If the DfT admitted that most drivers are on autopilot and one day one will get it wrong and mistake you for a motorcycle, piling into you
I didn't see the programme though I will have a look. Such an opinion doesn't seem to be borne out by evidence in that very few cyclists are killed and drivers very rarely claim to have seen a bicycle and thought it was a motorcycle. The common claim is not to have seen the bicycle at all. I don't think a bicycle resembles a motorcycle to anybody (except maybe with powerful lights at night). Wouldn't this be a much bigger problem for mopeds seeing as they do resemble motorcycless? I'm not sure how a driver at any distance who cannot discern a pedal cycle from a motorcycle could see the difference between your out of the gutter but not 1m out position (that's got to be a good couple of feet, right?) and someone 1m from the kerb.

I used to commute in my car early on a Monday morning and would arrive at work a hour later and not remember a thing about the journey, I was making all my decisions based on a model of traffic that my mind has built up over 43 years of driving.
Then I don't think you are in a position to be giving advice to others.

the slowest should keep to the nearside [not the gutter of course] where drivers expect them to be,
There's this bizarre motorists' fantasy about a duty of cyclists to keep as far left as physically possible. For the avoidance of doubt let me make it clear that where there is a single lane there is no obligation on slower vehicles to keep further left, there is merely a requirement for all vehicles to keep left. This does not mean anything different for different classes of road user. When you say "the slowest" you really mean cycles because none of the other slow vehicles/animals are expected in law or practice to ride further left than a car would be. Can't you see the inherent problem of a single vehicle lane being occupied by two vehicles side by side ?

Re: ITV TdeF coverage; any good?

CTC Forum - Racing - 23 July 2014 - 11:19am
When I was over in the States for a few years in the noughties I had to watch TdF on Versus, can't remember what they called it before they changed the channel name. Paul & Phil did the commentary and it was clear they were covering other channels simultaneously. I do find their cliches rather trying, they often miss key moves & were rather too Lance loyal, but no one is perfect [emoji6] I do miss Duffers though for watching live rather than highlights. Ad breaks in the States were however the most annoying, always on during the key parts of a stage, especially the run up to the finish and their duration increased towards the finish as well. One year I recall there was a 'commercial-free' half hour sponsored by P#bar, great except for the constant ticker tape saying that is what it was & it was followed by a prolonged Ad break with all the ads that had been stacked up in the interim. So ITV4 and Eurosport are much better IMHO.

Ned needs to wear his 'hat' properly or not at all (lights blue touch paper & retires) [emoji6]

Re: Shipping the bike by plane

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 23 July 2014 - 11:07am
I've just come back from a flight with my bike to Holland from London Gatwick with Easyjet. Here's what happened at Gatwick when I arrived with bike in a CTC bag.

Easyyjet’s check in assistant at Gatwick stared at out bikes with a look of horror and confusion.
‘We cannot take bikes like this. They must be in a box.’
Calmly, I explained that I had read the policy and it says that the bikes must be in a bike box or bag.
‘This is a CTC Bike Bag. Cycle Touring Club bike bag specifically for flying.’
‘No, that’s not a bag, it’s just a piece of plastic.’
The assistant phoned her manager at the check in row opposite, telling her to lean over the counter to see the plastic bags we were insisting were bike bags.
‘Go around the corner to the luggage shop and get them wrapped in bubble wrap.’

I was hungry. Up since 5am and it was my birthday. I was beginning to feel a bit pissed off. The shrink wrap packing company refused to wrap the bikes saying they weren’t allowed, so we joined the queue where the Easyjet manager was. She was having a bad morning and decided to talk to us from behind her desk while we were still shuffling along in the queue. A young man with tattooed long socks, dressed like Jean Paul Gaultier’s ‘Le Male’ Eau de Toilette joined the queue behind us.
‘Get some bubble wrap from the luggage shop,’ the manager said
‘We tried. They refused to do it.’
‘Why?’
‘They said they are not allowed.’

I think she saw the perfume bottle man behind us and mellowed. Those tiny navy shorts made my mouth curl into a smile.

‘Alright, but you’ll have to sign a disclaimer.’
At last the bikes were accepted and we had enough time to grab a croissant and coffee.

When we showed up in Schipol at the Easyjet counter, there were smiles, bikes weighed and put on the check in belt immediately.
There are pictures and instructions in the link below.

http://www.farawayvisions.com/flying-with-a-bicycle/

Re: Touring bike alternatives?

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 23 July 2014 - 11:07am
bikerwaser wrote:How Far Can You Go On A £10 Touring Bike? (Answer: A Surprisingly Long Way)


http://tomsbiketrip.com/how-far-can-you ... ring-bike/

Or even starting with no bikes, no clothes, and no money. The book of these guys' trip is an enjoyable read.

http://www.georgemahood.com/lejog.htm

Re: Wearing earphones

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 10:55am
RichardPH wrote:I ride appropriately, very occasionally that means moving out and stopping the car behind from passing, under these circumstances I'm going at the speed of the traffic and there is no chance that a half concentrating driver will mistake me for a faster moving powered cycle and pile into my back wheel.
Travel at the speed of the traffic? What 30, possibly even 40+?
I doubt it. Not only that but you're contradicting yourself, why would you need to stop a car from passing if you're travelling at the same speed as the traffic? Anyone who passes is by definition travelling faster!

Just to check here. You believe that the driver can see you but can't tell whether they're closing or not?
That's utter nonsense. If they can see you they can work out how fast you're going. I've never heard of a case where a driver saw a cyclist and then rode into the back of them because they weren't going as fast as they thought.
OTOH I've heard of plenty of cases where a cyclist near the kerb was ignored by motorists because they were dismissed without thought and then came a cropper.

Re: Lesser known hazards for off-road cyclists

CTC Forum - MTB - 23 July 2014 - 10:52am
Over the years:
1 Forestry vehicle coming the other way with a loose snow chain 2m long flailing about - jumped into a ditch to shelter.
2 Rounded a corner and found two walkers both with long staffs tucked in the top of their backpacks...crosswise...and blocking the way
3 12 point Red deer stag standing in the middle of the track staring at me, having been surprised
4 A pair of red patent leather stilletto boots (without owner) by the side of the path...

Re: ITV TdeF coverage; any good?

CTC Forum - Racing - 23 July 2014 - 10:51am
itv4 have shown the Vuelta a couple of times - I think live at weekend and highlights every day. If Chris Froome rides this year, I hope for an itv announcement soon after the Tour. When itv tried to get the Giro to complete the set a few years ago, RCS reportedly wanted more for highlights than ASO got for the Tour live+highlights and their spring classics highlights combined.

Re: Touring bike alternatives?

CTC Forum - Touring & Expedition - 23 July 2014 - 10:36am
I lot of people have gone down the old MTB route, and if you have the inclination they world great as tourers. The only thing, is it can end up a money sink if you need to refurb it (i.e. racks, tyres, maybe back wheel, different bars, mudguards, etc, etc) but if you have the bits laying around or carefully select one that doesn't need too much doing it.

Re: Wearing earphones

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 10:31am
Vorpal wrote:
Riding at least 1 metre from the edge is considered by many to be essential for safety, and it is the recommended practice of DfT through Bikeability and Cyclecraft. IMO, riding at least 1 metre from the edge (with a few exceptions) is more essential for safety than not wearing earphones. However, neither wearing earphones nor gutter riding should get a cyclist killed or blamed for an accident.

I would argue with the assertion that riding a metre out is the position adopted by many, that implies a majority, try doing a survey of all the cyclists you see in traffic and make an honest appraisal.

I ride appropriately, very occasionally that means moving out and stopping the car behind from passing, under these circumstances I'm going at the speed of the traffic and there is no chance that a half concentrating driver will mistake me for a faster moving powered cycle and pile into my back wheel. I do find the '1 metre out' dogma both dangerous and illogical, I'd rather use my experience and ride according to the conditions, frankly DfT guidelines seem to be for people with no common sense and no imagination of the real world and real drivers.

Did you see the Panorama programme earlier this week, a worrying watch if you believe that riding in the dominant position will keep you safe from inattentive drivers. If the DfT admitted that most drivers are on autopilot and one day one will get it wrong and mistake you for a motorcycle, piling into you and killing you instantly, well it wouldn't do much for cycling figures would it? Sadly though it's fact of life, I used to commute in my car early on a Monday morning and would arrive at work a hour later and not remember a thing about the journey, I was making all my decisions based on a model of traffic that my mind has built up over 43 years of driving. Our lives are all patterns, if you don't conform to the pattern life will be hard, it's the same with roads, the slowest should keep to the nearside [not the gutter of course] where drivers expect them to be. Ride too far out and drivers will need to register that you don't conform the pattern and make adjustments, I'd rather not be the person who re-educates everyone who comes up behind me.

Sorry to go on and on off-topic but it's so typical of the nanny-state giving misleading advice.

Re: Wearing earphones

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 9:55am
In all this discussion, no one from the 'headphones bad' side of the argument has given an example of anything they have done differently because of what they have heard, they just assert that they feel safer.

For quite a few years I mostly rode with a pocket radio and ear buds tuned to speech radio. I turned if off in town centres, but used it on suburban and rural roads. I was never at any time surprised by anything that happened around me where hearing might have helped. With the exception of occasional cricket, I now rarely listen to anything while riding, just because I don't want to, not because I feel it is unsafe.

When riding and hearing something coming up behind you, the best action is surely to continue confidently riding the same line. There is no way what you hear can tell you if an overtake is going to be too close, and looking behind may lead to drifting off line, increase the chance of hitting a pothole, and may make the driver think 'he's seen me, so he'll obviously get out of my way, won't he'.

There's one junction I ride through where I rely on hearing - a right turn on to a major road with a poor view to the left. In my car I inch out half way before committing, but I don't like to risk being stuck half way on the bike, so I wait until I can't hear any traffic. (Traffic from the left is coming up a very steep hill, so is always audible.)

Other than that, the only time I can ever remember taking action based on what I've heard was years ago on a twisty Oxfordshire lane. I heard something heavy come up behind me, and when I got to a suitable overtaking stretch, I waved him passed. When he didn't overtake, I turned to see why, and saw it was a tractor plus grain trailer probably only capable of 2 - 3 mph faster than I was going.

Obviously nobody should be listening at a volume where they can't hear emergency sirens, and there's probably an issue for people who get very engrossed when listening to music, but that apart, I can't see any situation where listening to something while riding has any impact on my safety.

Re: Triumph of HiViz over common sense?

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 9:28am
Stop and put it on - every time.

Mind you there has to be quite alot of rain falling for it to be worth putting a waterproof on.

Re: ITV TdeF coverage; any good?

CTC Forum - Racing - 23 July 2014 - 9:27am
I do wish ITV would go further and provide coverage of both the Vuelta and the Giro. I think for most people in the UK it's just like they only ever watch tennis when Wimbledon is on, they only watch cycling when it's the Tour de France.

Re: Triumph of HiViz over common sense?

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 9:13am
On the day in question I thought Thunderstorms were forecast coming up from the south. I know I would want a waterproof coat on in heavy rain.

So if heavy showers are forecast do you put on the waterproof coat and keep it on or do you stop if it starts to rain and put it on?
After all that is why some cyclists jump red lights and punish slower pedestrians that might slow them down.
They need to make reasonable progress (for them) at all times. Sod the rest of us.

Cycling waterproofs only seem to be available from most shops in Hi Vis or black. So what colour do you pick?

School children wearing so sort of bright top are easier so spot in the little darlings try to escape. Some parents are happy to leave their brats in pubs but get upset if they wander off from a school trip even if found a few minutes later because the child decided that the dog/shop/pond was more interesting.

Having been in the situation of trying to control the little things I would want them in bright orange boiler suits. Also all chained together to stop any of them "getting lost".
Now you know why I am not Minister for Education".

Re: ITV TdeF coverage; any good?

CTC Forum - Racing - 23 July 2014 - 8:56am
Ontherivet77 wrote:I think Ned Boulting is good, he seems to have the right balance between being light hearted and serious and can speak several languages, which helps him get interviews. Same for the presenters.
Ned interviews in English and French but the rest are usually left to Matt. Ned's mentioned on the podcast that he's uncomfortable with Nibali answering in Italian because he can't understand much of it.
A previous post referred to multiple commentary streams for american channels which must explain him referring to the World Cup as the World Soccer Cup.

I think ITV should be congratulated for putting cycling on terrestrial tv, it surprises me that the BBC has not got involved considering the current popularity of road racing.
BBC has broadcast the UCI Road World Championships the last few years, on the red button streams. BBC3 may be evening-only but has broadcast some sport, but that doesn't matter as it's up for the axe. This is a good thing, as ITV usually has the sense to use their good TdF presenters on other races. If the BBC did it, they could use Simon Brotherton from their good but spasmodic radio coverage (in other words, when there's no cricket or tennis or competitive snail baiting) on Radio 5 Sports eXtra, but more often they've persevered with Hugh Porter who I don't really enjoy.

Re: Newsbeat article re conviction rates

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 8:55am
There is a discussion of the article going on here.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=88821

Re: Triumph of HiViz over common sense?

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 8:47am
Mark1978 wrote:I think this is two seperate but conflated issues. Why would someone wear a jacket in this weather of whatever colour. As opposed to a short sleeve jersey of whatever colour.

The colour of the garment and the type are independent variables.
Except people have been told that techno-colour dreamcoats will save us all... regardless of whether you need a coat in any particular weather.[/quote]

You don't know why the person in question was wearing their coat. It might have been for hi vis reasons, it might have been they are a bit cold, or they needed the pockets or any number of reasons.

Re: ITV TdeF coverage; any good?

CTC Forum - Racing - 23 July 2014 - 8:45am
Ontherivet77 wrote:I think ITV should be congratulated for putting cycling on terrestrial tv, it surprises me that the BBC has not got involved considering the current popularity of road racing.

Quite so. ITV4 has always had a sports slant since it's inception so ITV has the space to be able to go with these things. The BBC really doesn't as BBC1 and BBC2 are packed with programming and BBC3 and BBC4 only broadcast after 7pm, and they don't do sport from what I've seen.

Plus it's only really been in the past few years we can properly consider ITV4 a terrestrial channel available to all (most) TV's, so there's no need to think about those who might not be able to receive it.

Re: Triumph of HiViz over common sense?

CTC Forum - On the road - 23 July 2014 - 8:44am
mrjemm wrote:And to that I refer you to the rest of my post that you left out...
Which seemed irrelevant to the points I made, claiming that there's never a background the same colouring as your unspecified choice and that hi-vis will somehow get prats who don't look to look.

Mark1978 wrote:I think this is two seperate but conflated issues. Why would someone wear a jacket in this weather of whatever colour. As opposed to a short sleeve jersey of whatever colour.

The colour of the garment and the type are independent variables.
Except people have been told that techno-colour dreamcoats will save us all... regardless of whether you need a coat in any particular weather.
Syndicate content

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Carol McKinley (Acting)
  • 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