test

As always we get half truths. The number of bikes and cameras needed for the current coverage, is that any different to full coverage? I would say no, it’s the same number of cameras just working for longer. They don’t magically change camera bike riders mid stage so I don’t see that as an extra cost. Perhaps the helicopter camera for longer is an additional cost. Commentary - that comes from the broadcaster and not a cost of the organiser. TV broadcast costs - again minimal for the host, but given we’re in the age of streaming if they are offered the rights owner will likely broadcast them. So far the tour has been great but missing the key parts of each stage is pretty poor. The fact it only became normal on the men’s recently is irrelevant - that was the era of broadcast TV not streaming.

We are talking about the Highway Agency here. You know the same ones that think it is perfectly acceptable for a cycle lane to stop just before an exit or entry spur on a carriageway. Or the same ones who thought it was better to infill disused railway bridges and so block local paths, rather than actually spend the money on fixing the issue. Motorised traffic is their only concern. If you use the Dartford Bridge bike service you need to be very sure of your cycling skills and confident of your route to get to the pickup point, it is not for the faint of heart. The service itself is excellent, just a shame you have to risk your life to get to it.

Maybe Shimano will do the same with 13 speed road as on CUES, the largest sprocket is dished inward and hangs slightly in bound of the free hub, so the 11 speed CUES fits on a 10 speed free hub

I wonder what happens when they're not trolling here. Does that mean life's going well and they don't feel the need? I hope so. Or are they doing the same thing in rotation on a cooking / photography / historical re-enactment forum?

Either: Close the road to all vehicles except EVs. This seems an obvious solution to me. Or: if it's a dual carriageway, make all traffic use one side as a bi-directional single lane carriageway, and leave the other side for cyclists and pedestrians. At least then they could ride a bit further away from the fumes (but not much).

Agreed, if you want to kill someone a motor vehicle gives the least punishment. Unless you reverse back over them, that's a bit of a giveaway. I am not even joking, it's happened before

If interested GCN did an interesting video about this (albeit with a heavy focus on one contributor): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dHRfClVJg70&pp=ugUHEgVlbi1HQtIHCQlkAqO1ajebQw%3D%3D

I agree about the nonsense around the two offences *. As others have suggested, while the law should be applied perhaps taking a step back and moving focus from a legal framing towards a "health and safety" perspective would be productive? * I believe these were created in the first place to "drain the drama" / remove the "but they didn't mean to" factor since it was noted people were reluctant to convict killer drivers for eg. murder and manslaughter. Alas "they didn't mean to" has followed, thus we see the "incompetence defense".

The ski jumpers are puting ali kind of stuff in their underwear to increase lift. Here we have something similar 😄

Having once been blown off my bike by a tunneled gust by Centre Point tower, much to the amusement of the black cab driver next to me, this looks fit to hugely enhance black cab driver amusement.