Request to be a team road.cc member

@jackcycles You do realise that editing is possible again now? You don't have to comment on your own post.

HSE Risk management 101: Risk = Level of harm x Likelihood of harm from hazard Hierarchy of risk controls: - Eliminate hazard (0 Level) - Reduce hazard (reduced Level) - Isolate; physical/ engineered barriers containing hazard (near 0 Likelihood) - Control; "soft" separation of people away from hazard (reduction of Likelihood) - PPE; mitigate harm of hazard to exposed people (small dent to Likelihood) - Do nothing Excessive vehicle traffic is producing levels of pollution harmful to health - Hazard Given the above, National Highways have straight in with poorly implemented Control measures. "oh, no, please don't cycle or walk here. if you have an asthma attack, don't say we didn't warn you" Closing the road would eliminate the risk at that location, but isn't a practicable solution. They could have very easily reduced the dual carriageway to single lane running in each direction. Slower vehicle movement, sure, but fewer stop-start surges in traffic, halved the number of offending vehicles in the area at any given time, and after a period of time, some people will find driving it unpleasant and seek alternative means of transport. At least the response wasn't to tell people to wear FFP2 masks.

Pardon me! Mr Rahman.

On the blog post about the Tower Hamlets mayor, road.cc write "From a strictly active travel perspective we’ve not been a huge fan ever since he decided he needed a chauffeur-driven Mercedes to drive him around the 7 square miles he represents." I'm pretty sure that the precedent for this goes back to the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan. Lord Khan was exposed as taking a convoy of chauffeur driven limousines for trips to take his dog for a walk, when there was a field a few metres from his house, under the guise of "security". It therefore hardly seems fair to try to impose two-tier security on Mr Luhman to stop him having the same level of amenity. In fact, it sounds like he's traveling economy class compared to the Lord himself.

@PoorInRichfield Except the 1×13 has even thinner sprockets again than the 2×11, which will wear a little quicker. And, despite the thinner sprockets, the 13 will be slightly wider - combined with the single front ring, your chain will be pulled out to greater angles in your higher and lower gears. Again, a bit more friction, a bit more wear.

@PoorInRichfield 1. I never mentioned cross chaining. 2. "a 1×13 with the correct cassette can nearly mirror what I have." Shimano generally do at least 2 or 3 cassette variations. Especially at 105 / Ultegra level. So that probably wont be an issue. And since thay aint cheap, having 1 cassette that can cover everything from potentially 10t to 36t like Sram do but with the added capacity to have a1:1 ratio or very close to it is something that many people would find very appealing

@Clem Fandango I agree. Didn't left wing power grab get in trouble by trying to pass themselves off as female morris dancers? I seem to remember they changed their name to fluffy morris for a while which indirectly led to the now infamous morris dancing wars of the early eighties.

@mattw Good idea on the active speed control system. As I've said on other topics... "We have the technology... We just don't have the political will to make it happen." It could also be tied to the driver's insurance. IE, the more it is used, the lower the premium.

Checks out - where better to meet them than at her next court appearance?

One of the stated reasons for her needing to keep her licence was "So that she could continue to meet with criminals..." 🙄