Live blog: ONS shopping basket 2018: GoPros in, pork pies out, Kwiatkowski wins Tirreno, Thomas 3rd, Brenton Jones’ rad helmet design + much more
All today’s news from the site and beyond
Tue, Mar 13, 2018 10:20
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
4 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Rendel Harris 2 minutes ago
@Astralstroll The hierarchy of road users does not mean priority of road users except in certain circumstances, e.g. stopping to let pedestrians cross junctions before turning. It doesn't mean that cyclists have priority over motor vehicles at all times any more than the pedestrians have priority over cyclists at all times. It certainly doesn't mean that you have priority in the circumstances you describe; personally, unless the driver is being a complete dick, on a narrow country lane I accept that it is easier for me to turn around and go back to the nearest passing place, which is never that far if you're on a bike, than for a tractor or other large vehicle to reverse back down the road for my benefit.
Backladder 4 minutes ago
If you were spending that much money on the device the obvious thing to do is to book a couple of hours in a velodrome for testing in a stable environment, I can't understand why Road.cc tried to do it outdoors.
wtjs 25 minutes ago
@Astralstroll The Hierarchy of Road Users, announced with great fanfares in 2022, has been rendered into complete fiction by the attitude of the police: there is this hierarchy/ priority list but we don't take it seriously and if drivers ignore it we don't care! The same applies to the ludicrous notice of close-passing - No KSI'd cyclist = No Offence ttps://upride.cc/incident/lwa190_minicooper_hierarchy/
chrisonabike 47 minutes ago
Hope Barcelona keep the transport improvements (they've been making for a while) coming! Better streets, more infra to help active travel where necessary. And while it's a major investment (though can be lower operating cost than busses) maybe more trams where they can. That may be more effective in making places active travel friendly and replacing taxis than mass public bike hire. They've a good start with 6 lines already.
chrisonabike 54 minutes ago
I think this is a positive story. They're not getting rid of public hire bikes - they're expanding their in-house one. They're merely kicking out cowboys who've shown they've a lack of interest in the game they claim to be playing. It seems logical that companies whose business model is to extract (venture capital) money by invading public space are even less likely to make the efforts to keep things in order than a local "in house" scheme. (After all the "bikes and riding" part of these schemes always *costs* money, they don't generate it.) So not surprising their experience shows those firms are not particularly motivated to follow the rules - especially when scrapping for "market share". It's nice the European Cyclists’ Federation is thinking about tourists also (i hesitate to say "follow the money...") - as they note, where it's safe to cycle locals will largely get their own bikes. Tourists aren't going to stop coming because lack of public bike share - I think this is mostly a "nice to have" ("hey - why don't we go on one of those bikes there? ").
chrisonabike 1 hour ago
Harm minimization - at least they're not driving...
Gm_Crop 10 hours ago
I'll counter that by saying the Bryton 750se I have drives me nuts at times. Inconsistantly picks up on routes created on Komoot and the app re-syncs every few seconds when trying to set up the device and sends me back to the home screen. The most infuriating one is that I turned live track on. Once. It now won't turn off and repeatedly flags up the live track is starting, and then disconnecting every few seconds whilst riding. I haven't timed it but it wouldn't suprise me if 10-20% of the time the the screen is covered with an error message. That's been about 6 weeks now. Other than that it's great :/
IanGlasgow 10 hours ago
RE: Police launch road safety operation... by clamping down on cyclists using footbridge Meanwhile in Glasgow, Police Scotland are riding their motorbikes over the pedestrian and cyclists only bridge. https://x.com/FietserGlasgow/status/2065106152917012523?s=20
Rendel Harris 11 hours ago
@Paul J Van Schip certainly seems a bit of a dick, but he's a European and multiple World Champion on the track, pretty sure you don't get there without having some talent in your legs.
4 thoughts on “Live blog: ONS shopping basket 2018: GoPros in, pork pies out, Kwiatkowski wins Tirreno, Thomas 3rd, Brenton Jones’ rad helmet design + much more”
“Road Safety Minister Jesse
“Road Safety Minister Jesse Norman commented: “The penalties for holding and using a mobile phone while driving have proven to be a strong deterrent, and more and more people are aware of just how dangerous this is.”
Total BS. If the penalties are such a strong deterrent, why do I see dozens of people a day doing it. Yet more spin and newspeak from the person responsible for government cycling and walking policy. We’re as safe in his hands as the NHS.
Agreed! What’s the point of
Agreed! What’s the point of having fairly draconian mobile phone laws now that the great unwashed have worked out there’s basically no such thing as road policing any more due to police funding shortages and austerity?! 10 years ago you’d have a few days every autumn where the nights were drawing in where you’d see cars with defective lights before people got them fixed. Nowadays it’s a joke, I’ve seen loads of cars with no working rear lights at all except the high level brake light and the idiots don’t care. They know the chance of getting stopped by an actual police car is just about zero.
StraelGuy wrote:
Actually I think a lot of the time drivers have their lights on for daytime running only, which means the front sidelights are on but not the tail lights, for a lot of cars. I see this regularly as well.
But with regard to mobile phone use by drivers, I don’t think the penalties are in line with the risk. Using the penalty for DUI of a 12 month ban as a base line, surely the penalty for using a cellphone at the wheel should at least be the same. Given that using a cellphone to send a text while driving increases the risk of a crash by a factor of 23 (according to research by the TRL – it is on the website), then surely the penalty should be higher still, say 24 month ban and a compulsory retest.
Unless the penalty matches the offence, people simply won’t take it seriously. And yes, the minimal traffic policing doesn’t help either. We can than Theresa May for the big cuts to police budgets remember.
26,000 people seam like a
26,000 people seam like a large number given that there is little inforcement. these people must the permanently glued to their phones give how unlikely you are to see a road traffic policemen.
This number is clearly only the tip of the iceberg.