• CPS drops case against cyclist who ‘jumped’ red light for his own safety1 year 8 weeks agoUnfortunate - it would have

    Unfortunate - it would have set a useful precedent (when he would have been acquitted, that is).

  • Fibre Flare Single Tail rear light1 year 8 weeks agohave used these in the past

    have used these in the past to good effect, but they don't really like the wet in the long-term... the electric contacts corrode and eventually give up.

  • The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association film 53% of RLJ-ing Cyclists at 2 junctions1 year 8 weeks agoThis is just the LTDA looking

    This is just the LTDA looking for a fight. Forget about it.

  • High vis clothing doesn't make cars pass you more safely, says new study1 year 8 weeks agoflobble wrote:colinth

    flobble wrote:
    colinth wrote:

    What ? You're a "moaner and whiner" if you disagree with the usefulness and validity of the study ? I conduct my own "study" every time I ride, if some mug would like to give me some funding I'll base a phd around my riding experiences and publish y own study, which I'll be happy to take comment and criticism on.

    I'm not sure which part of the world you're from but here in the UK if someone puts up an opinion you're entitled to comment on it and get this, even challenge it

    My personal philosophy: I respect people who actually *do* things in an attempt to make the world a better place (even if they get it wrong). I have little time for those who criticise (even if they're right), but fail to act to improve things. My concern is not the commenting or challenging (i.e. the easy part), it's the difficult bit thereafter that's missing.

    Time now to stop wittering on the internet, and go and do something productive...

    So you respect people who "do" things even if they're wrong, have no time for critics, even if they're right, and make assumptions that those who criticise are doing nothing positive other than post on this forum. Nice to see you've thought things through clearly.

    I'm off to conduct a study to prove that people driving badly is the result of latent tension created by the summer hose pipe ban in the home counties, which was a result of immigrants using "our" water. It'll be published in the Daily Mail soon. I look forward to your full support

  • CPS drops case against cyclist who ‘jumped’ red light for his own safety1 year 8 weeks agoThe cyclist trapped in the

    The cyclist trapped in the left of an ASB always has a third option: stay where he is and signal right waiting for a motorist to let him move across, or wait for the light to turn red again and reposition himself in the ASB. Sure it's a pain in the ass and costs him 45 seconds, but he does get through the junction with his safety and his finances both intact.

  • Metric Century chat1 year 8 weeks agoIt will.

    It will. but:

    NEWSFLASH:

    Metric Century 2014 will be starting on 1 Jan 2014 and running for the calendar year. this is because:

    a) that makes more sense
    b) we've had a lot of stuff on our plate and didn't get round to sorting it out. although i am now

    cheers!

  • Metropolitan Police officers told to fine 10 cyclists a month1 year 8 weeks agostumps wrote:cyclingDMlondon

    stumps wrote:
    cyclingDMlondon - sect 5 public order act - using foul and abusive language in a public place and i dont do this job to be sworn at.

    s. 5 is amended by s. 57 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. The High Court has also ruled that swearing at police is not an offence - see Harvey v. DPP [2011] EWHC 3992.

    Frankly, if you want to arrest someone for swearing at you, I suggest you get another job better suited to your obviously very thin skin.

    stumps wrote:
    Also if you think telling a Police officer to F off is being cheeky god help this country

    Why? Because I don't think that the police are lords to whom we should doff our caps?

  • Brailsford threatened to fine Wiggins if he didn't support Froome in Tour de France1 year 8 weeks agoSo Froome who came 2nd

    So Froome who came 2nd received more money than Brad for winning... No wonder he didnt pay him, the cheek and disrespect of Froome and his greedy bint.

  • The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association film 53% of RLJ-ing Cyclists at 2 junctions1 year 8 weeks agoGkam84 wrote:I went and had a

    Gkam84 wrote:
    I went and had a look at the unedited version's. Just a quick scan through, because I was only looking for one issues that is to do with cyclists.

    Motor's filling the ASL....Here is a prime example of what people thing is legal, but in my eye's, what this van driver does in illegal because the lights were already changing.

    http://youtu.be/5aeYVju0Vzk?t=20m15s

    The first three vehilce's turning right were ok, The white van, the blue car and then silver 4x4, but watch the next van. He had time to stop short of the ASL but went right over it.

    What happens now if a cyclist wishes to turn right? This harks back to the cyclist who was fined for jumping a red light last month (I think) because the ASL was full and he went ahead of the traffic....there was quite some debate on it.

    What are your thoughts?

    I think what the van does is certainly illegal because his front wheels appear to be across the second white line, there is no excuse for this given that the lights are amber when the van crosses the first line. Strictly with respect to ASL rules as set out in the RTA and The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 the van has probably again broken the law. Its velocity appears to be such as it is capable of safely stopping before the first line therefore it falls under TSRGD 36(1)e but cannot use the exemption. To be sure we'd need the video to be shot from a little further back so as judge the velocity of the van (and see its brake lights).
    Law: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regulation/36/made
    Highway Code 178: https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/road-junctions-170-to-183

  • CPS drops case against cyclist who ‘jumped’ red light for his own safety1 year 8 weeks agoMatt eaton wrote: You're not

    Matt eaton wrote:

    You're not wrong but the way ASLs are designed and the rules around them are.

    ASLs typically have a filter lane on the nearside (even if it's a multi-lane set-up) and this is the only legitimate way to enter the ASL. Moving into the correct lane early and then filtering along the white line is also allowed but you must not cross the fist stop line, i.e. you have to stay out of the ASL in the same way that a car would.

    Turns out I am a regular law breaker on my bike then! (and will continue to be so, because I think it is safer to enter the ASL this way.)

  • CPS drops case against cyclist who ‘jumped’ red light for his own safety1 year 8 weeks agoFarky wrote:Gkam84

    Farky wrote:
    Gkam84 wrote:
    Funny. I was just referring to this in a post this morning

    "I went and had a look at the unedited version's. Just a quick scan through, because I was only looking for one issues that is to do with cyclists.

    Motor's filling the ASL....Here is a prime example of what people thing is legal, but in my eye's, what this van driver does in illegal because the lights were already changing.

    http://youtu.be/5aeYVju0Vzk?t=20m15s

    The first three vehilce's turning right were ok, The white van, the blue car and then silver 4x4, but watch the next van. He had time to stop short of the ASL but went right over it.

    What happens now if a cyclist wishes to turn right? This harks back to the cyclist who was fined for jumping a red light last month (I think) because the ASL was full and he went ahead of the traffic....there was quite some debate on it.

    What are your thoughts?"

    Yes - the van is in the wrong, should be ticketed.
    Any cyclist following in the same lane should already have moved out to turn right in the same lane and await behind with other traffic.
    You do not approach a Right turn in the nearside/left gutter, using an advance box to mover over infront of traffic. That is incorrect use of box also. Thats my point above.

    I've got to disagree there. I think that this is exactly how ASLs are designed to be used by right turning cyclists. It's a bad design and not something that I'd recommend doing but it is how ASLs are supposed to work.

  • Almost 9 in 10 people back headphones ban and compulsory helmets for cyclists say survey1 year 8 weeks agoColin Peyresourde wrote:You

    Colin Peyresourde wrote:
    You want a proof negative, which you can't tell.

    No. If the claim is that helmets reduce head injuries then it's a matter of comparing the head injury rate in high-helmet populations versus that in low-injury populations. We can do this, albeit with the proviso that there may be other variables to account for in the two populations, by comparing Australia, N.Z., Canada (N.S., B.C.) versus the USA. It is not possible to show that there is a difference.

    Helmets have not been shown to have a clear protective effect (whether against their actual test scenario or the more fanciful magic capabilities such as deflecting trucks as you mention).

    By all means wear one if you wish. But, please, don't talk ignorant rubbish. It matters because you're helping to convince the other eejits that don't know how to think. End of.

  • CPS drops case against cyclist who ‘jumped’ red light for his own safety1 year 8 weeks agoFarky wrote:Whilst im happy

    Farky wrote:
    Whilst im happy that common sense prevailed for the ticket...

    "In order to avoid having to cross three lanes of moving traffic"

    My mind is struggling to figure this out. Why could he not have joined any traffic filtering into the 3rd lane to turn right and waited like the rest of them?
    You dont 'have' to use the advance box especially if there is a queue leading upto it. Sounds like he went from nearside lane one to this box....shouldve moved out a lot sooner 'taking the road' to do so. Advance boxes arent meant to replace road sense!

    I could be totally wrong and missing something here...please tell me I am.

    You're not wrong but the way ASLs are designed and the rules around them are.

    ASLs typically have a filter lane on the nearside (even if it's a multi-lane set-up) and this is the only legitimate way to enter the ASL. Moving into the correct lane early and then filtering along the white line is also allowed but you must not cross the fist stop line i.e. you have to stay out of the ASL in the same way that a car would. This design effectivly leads cyclists to stick to the nearside, filter into the ASL and move accross to the position appropriote to where they want to go. The designers of these junctions don't want cyclists to move into the correct lane and merge with other traffic for whatever reason. The guy in this case behaved exactly as the road designers envisaged but was caught out because a motorist did not do likewise. The cyclist actually proceeded in exactly the way that the designers of the juction wanted - by moving ahead of the motors waiting at the lights and positioning correctly.

    FWIW I'm pleased that the right decision was made in this case.

  • Goodbye old friend1 year 8 weeks agoFunny you should say that. I

    Funny you should say that. I have a KHS Montana Pro that's 20 years old this year. The frame's a bit rusty and the bits are all knackered but I'm seriously thinking of tarting it up for winter use...I can't go through the trauma of losing another old friend. (Not unless I have a shiny new friend to distract me from my loss...)

  • Metropolitan Police officers told to fine 10 cyclists a month1 year 8 weeks agocyclingDMlondon - sect 5

    cyclingDMlondon - sect 5 public order act - using foul and abusive language in a public place and i dont do this job to be sworn at.

    Also if you think telling a Police officer to F off is being cheeky god help this country.

  • Brailsford threatened to fine Wiggins if he didn't support Froome in Tour de France1 year 8 weeks agoLegin wrote:farrell wrote:

    Legin wrote:
    farrell wrote:
    Everything else around them is just noise!

    No it isn't just noise. It is also a large amount of money. These multi-millionaires only have a few years to earn their large amounts. It could all end in one crash or loss of form. Unlike say Chris Boardman, I don't think either of these two is likely to be able to forge a post-racing career.

  • Almost 9 in 10 people back headphones ban and compulsory helmets for cyclists say survey1 year 8 weeks agoColin Peyresourde wrote:Ush,

    Colin Peyresourde wrote:
    Ush, I know you're upset, but it's an open forum. She has a right to her thoughts.

    I disagree. Someone handing out advice and calling for laws interfering with other people's choices has a responsibility to spend a long time sorting out the basics. Otherwise they deserve to be called on it. Strongly.

    Colin Peyresourde wrote:

    The only stat that I'm aware of that suggests helmets are unhelpful is that they deter cycling

    Then you need to look at the population-level data in high helmet use areas and attempt to discern whether there is a correlation between the treatment and the response. It is highly questionable whether this can be seen. To say the least.

    If helmets were a new drug being tested on the population there would be howls of outrage from the public about a bogus drug being sold. One of the reasons I find this subject so offensive is that the basis for it is pseudo-science resting on folklore and "common sense" for its basis. It's like hearing someone bang-on about how their naturopathy should be compulsory for every one else and anyone that doesn't take powered rhino horn is a fool.

    Colin Peyresourde wrote:
    Helmets provide protection against head trauma,

    As do hats.

    Colin Peyresourde wrote:
    but how often cyclists are subject to this is not exactly apparent.

    RoSPA and other organizations have plenty of data as to the incidence of serious head injuries broken down by activity and age. You'll find the cycling head injuries are in the same ballpark as pedestrian injuries.

    Colin Peyresourde wrote:
    Wearing a helmet is probably a good idea.

    For what exactly? What specific injuries do you expect it to mitigate?

  • CPS drops case against cyclist who ‘jumped’ red light for his own safety1 year 8 weeks agoGkam84 wrote:Funny. I was

    Gkam84 wrote:
    Funny. I was just referring to this in a post this morning

    "I went and had a look at the unedited version's. Just a quick scan through, because I was only looking for one issues that is to do with cyclists.

    Motor's filling the ASL....Here is a prime example of what people thing is legal, but in my eye's, what this van driver does in illegal because the lights were already changing.

    http://youtu.be/5aeYVju0Vzk?t=20m15s

    The first three vehilce's turning right were ok, The white van, the blue car and then silver 4x4, but watch the next van. He had time to stop short of the ASL but went right over it.

    What happens now if a cyclist wishes to turn right? This harks back to the cyclist who was fined for jumping a red light last month (I think) because the ASL was full and he went ahead of the traffic....there was quite some debate on it.

    What are your thoughts?"

    Yes - the van is in the wrong, should be ticketed.
    Any cyclist following in the same lane should already have moved out to turn right in the same lane and await behind with other traffic.
    You do not approach a Right turn in the nearside/left gutter, using an advance box to mover over infront of traffic. That is incorrect use of box also. Thats my point above.

  • The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association film 53% of RLJ-ing Cyclists at 2 junctions1 year 8 weeks agoDave Atkinson

    Dave Atkinson wrote:
    incidentally the LTDA obviously picked those two junctions because they're filter junctions

    You're absolutely right. I cycle through the fortess junction every weekday on my commute and if I were to pick one junction on my route to skew statistics it would be this one - by far the most RLJing cyclists. That said, I don't dispute that there are too many cyclists who RLJ, just the methodology of this "survey".

  • Brailsford threatened to fine Wiggins if he didn't support Froome in Tour de France1 year 8 weeks agofarrell wrote:So last week it

    farrell wrote:
    So last week it was claimed the GC winnings from the Tour weren't divvied out, but it now appears that those monies were paid direct to the team.

    However, we now have a new claim from Michelle Cound via David Walsh that Brad didn't pay Froome a bonus out of his own personal bonus from his team.

    I wonder just what Michelle Cound, business adviser and fianceé of Chris Froome and David Walsh, future ghostwriter of Chris Froome's biography, would have to gain from painting Wiggins in a bad light?

    I doubt that Wiggins is too worried about what they say; his legacy is sealed any future achievements are a bonus. As for Froome he clearly has the talent and opportunity to establish himself amongst the elite of grand tour winners. Everything else around them is just noise!

  • Video: Graeme Obree movie seeking final edit funding on Kickstarter1 year 8 weeks agoSadly the days of the BBC etc

    Sadly the days of the BBC etc paying £200K per hour for any thing other than Natural History programmes are long gone. We tried very hard to sell it to all the TV stations when we started, they all turned it down because it was either "too niche", "we've just done cycling" "its not noisy enough" or simply it doesn't turn the controller on. Journey Pictures concentrates on telling stories that don't fir the TV schedule. This is an amazing story of genius, please help us to make it happen.

  • Brailsford threatened to fine Wiggins if he didn't support Froome in Tour de France1 year 8 weeks agoProfessional conduct by

    Professional conduct by Wiggo? I think not.

    Super domestique for Froome in 2014 TdF? Hard to imagine.

    Guaranteed place on track squad for Rio 2016? Nope.

    Time for some reflection.

  • Brailsford threatened to fine Wiggins if he didn't support Froome in Tour de France1 year 8 weeks ago“Then I would say, ‘OK, if

    “Then I would say, ‘OK, if you don’t follow team orders we will agree to fine you three or four months’ wages’,” explained Brailsford...

    So, does that mean Froome didn't get his bonus from Wiggins because he didn't like following team orders in the 2012 TdF. Or at least made a point he wasn't happy following team orders? Because to me, if I were in Wiggin's position, I wouldn't be tripping over myself to pay Froome a bonus.

    They're all bloody primo!

  • Fibre Flare Single Tail rear light1 year 8 weeks agoUsed these for years now !

    Used these for years now ! As they do several different colours, my favourite addition is a blue (OK could do green for legality but I did ask a policeman about the blue one and he shrugged his shoulders and said it was OK) one strapped to the top tube ... instantly visible from BOTH left and right as an extra warning to vehicles etc. coming out from side roads or pavements. I hang one from my backpack and many car drivers have noted how visible it is. The movement helps as you get out of the saddle, too.

  • The Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association film 53% of RLJ-ing Cyclists at 2 junctions1 year 8 weeks agoThere's a great quote by W

    There's a great quote by W Edwards Deming: "Your system is perfectly designed to give you the results you're getting."

    So if fallible people are regularly dying under the wheels of lorries, it's because the system's design facilitates that. change the design. let's not forget, also, that the people who regularly die under the wheels of lorries are neither the demographic that are more likely to run the lights, nor is their running of a red light often cited as a factor in their death. the point being that even if everyone stopped at the lights tomorrow, people would still die. because their failure to stop at the lights isn't what's causing them to die in the first place. this is a good read on that subject:

    http://brackenworld.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/it-isnt-about-cyclist-behavio...