Please note that our live blog can sometimes be slow to load – if it’s taking a particularly long time, try refreshing your browser.
Live blog: Jenny Graham smashes round-the-world record, protest organised against lack of police action over spate of bike muggings in Manchester, new 3T Exploro + more
All today’s news from the site and beyond
Thu, Oct 18, 2018 14:34
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 £2.49. 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.
17 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Blackthorne83 38 minutes ago
Of all the things to morally police on the internet this is a bit ambitious.
chrisonabike 48 minutes ago
@Blackthorne83 Come on. He's already on a fact-free transport diet...
chrisonabike 50 minutes ago
@mdavidford Good spot - it was my zero - one - many thinking there. And were things to get imaginary we could have drivers rotating around the complex plane...
Mr Blackbird 53 minutes ago
Jason Perry is a high functioning, dynamic achiever. And he is only 23. In addition to tackling such a high volume of active transport projects, he recently completed an Airfix B29 Superfortress kit - admittedly he did glue one of the wings on upside down with the engines facing backwards.
quiff 1 hour ago
Nick, brake to a stop. Now take your foot off the brake. No, don't put it on the accelerator. Now what speed are you doing? If it's more than 20, drive to a garage.
mdavidford 2 hours ago
@chrisonabike I think we probably do need a finer grained approach than power-of-ten speed limits, unless you're going to allow for fractional powers, which is going to put an excessive cognitive load on the poor old drivers...
mdavidford 3 hours ago
Were you always missing the first period?
chrisonabike 3 hours ago
@Rendel Harris indeed, but giving this a sympathetic reading it *is* a bit harder to see cyclists especially in low light conditions. I think this usually means "I was a bit startled when I noticed cyclists where not expecting them / so late that if I had needed to I wouldn't have had time for evasive action". That might be when unlit non-reflective cyclists appear from a side road - or where people are salmoning against traffic flow / on and off the footway. We all have tons of experience looking for motor vehicles and are familiar with where they'll be and how they will move. Cyclists are significantly smaller, have more complicated shapes and may not be exactly "where we expect the motor vehicles". They may be moving at unexpected velocities. Plus even if cars don't have their lights on they tend to reflect. I put this one in the "follow the opposite philosophy to 'shared space' for better safety" category. That is: safety between road users is enhanced when a) people can clearly see other road users b) and have as much time as possible to deal with them c) and know exactly where to expect them / what to expect from those other road users. Most humans perform very poorly when faced with the unfamiliar and worse when startled...
chrisonabike 3 hours ago
@ajuk.uk@gmail.com "There does seem to be evidence that 20 mph limits work on roads that already lend themselves to such low speeds, and I do think the lack of a 25 mph limit option is an issue for some roads." Again - not disagreeing that numbers alone are not the best way. But I ask: were people already doing 20mph or near that when those roads that "lend themselves" to that speed had a 30mph sign? I would expect in most cases the answer was "no, people saw thirty and that primed them for the 'expected' speed". Or perhaps "they hadn't noticed the signs at all but it seemed like e.g. a residential area and they recalled from all those years back 30mph probably made sense"? Since we've previously gone through the evidence * that merely changing a number on a sign *does* in fact change behaviour and lower average speeds, and AFAICS nobody has proposed a "a set amount" they hope it will constrain people to ... ... is it fair you're disputing the evidence because it doesn't fit with how you feel it *should* work / your local experience? Or do you believe that eventually everyone will revert back to the old speed or higher because 'freedom' or because nobody's actually getting nicked for ignoring the limit? (And if the latter - what's the point of proposing that the speed limits should help with policing, if there aren't the police?) While I can believe that the truly reckless and *some* less circumspect wrong'uns are more likely also to wildly speed, I think this assertion needs more scrutiny **. As for "forcing the police to target them" I think it's been amply illustrated on this site that many of the police don't feel forced into doing much if any enforcement on the roads (see wtjs etc.). Even where they are more active the level of enforcement isn't such to make many drivers worry about "what happens if I break the law *and* get caught?" I don't feel we need 25 or 32 or other intermediate speed limits. In practice where there's enforcement at all there *may* be the discretionary 10% + a few mph in play - so you might even be fine and not fined doing 35mph in a 30mph limit. But you're far more likely simply not to experience any enforcement. And even if you are detected it's still first chance, then maybe any number of 2nd, 3rd etc. with a reasonable lawyer / sympathetic magistrate. Although if you feel the most important thing is to identify indifferent drivers (and assuming we've got enough police / cameras / "spy in the car" black boxes from somewhere) then having lots of non-power-of-ten speed limit signs might be a way to spot who's paying attention or not. Or ... if we changed to km/h (imagine!) you get a finer-grained 10 / 20 / 30 etc. * The last time this topic came up, or the time before! ** I don't know if anyone has studied this, but I'm not sure of the relative amounts of harm caused by a) a small minority of reckless joyriders and "sod getting a licence" types (who *are* very likely to cause serious harm) and b) vastly more "average reasonable drivers" - who are human and thus cut corners and sometimes make unfathomable errors - who cause damage (up to killing people and destroying buildings) at a small but definitely non-zero rate overall. It wouldn't surprise me if the overall determinant of harm turned out to be simply proportional to the number of drivers times time driven for times some measure of speed. (Since speed reduces both time to do something about a situation and increases the harm, absent a lot of engineering to mitigate it - e.g. evidence shows motorways are statistically safe environments).
belugabob 3 hours ago
Now the wands are gone, I look forward to the cycling lanes being cleaned regularly - and not parked in (thereby leaving plenty of room for the buses and emergency vehicles) (all to delivered before Coventry win the FA cup again)
17 thoughts on “Live blog: Jenny Graham smashes round-the-world record, protest organised against lack of police action over spate of bike muggings in Manchester, new 3T Exploro + more”
I’ve always wanted my bike to
I’ve always wanted my bike to ride itself, leaving me to watch tele and get fat while notching up all those verifiable Strava miles
MarkiMark wrote:
it gives the autonomous cars something to aim at
From the Irish Article…..
From the Irish Article…..
“He told me he saw the cyclist ahead of him. He told me he saw the cyclist turn his head but the cyclist did not alter his position on the road,” Garda Vance said.
Ms Harrington, who was in the front seat, heard a bang and her husband realised the car had collided with the bicycle as they passed.
Mr Carney was not wearing a helmet or high visibility clothing, the court heard.
Forensic Collision Investigator Garda John Culleton said both the car and the bicycle were travelling in the same direction at a similar speed along Butterfield Park when the collision occurred.
“Both parties were travelling alongside and either could have encroached on the other. One moved towards the other and contact was made.
“I cannot say who made the contact between these vehicles. There was contact between both parties but I can’t say who made the manoeuvre that resulted in contact,” Garda Culleton said.
The jury of three women and three men returned a verdict of accidental death and made a recommendation that all cyclists wear helmets.
FFS!
Deeferdonk wrote:
Quite staggering. What else can be said?
Regarding the inquest verdict
Regarding the inquest verdict, despite the driver admitting he saw the cyclist and that the cyclist didn’t alter direction (read – didn’t get out of the way), the cyclist ends up dead despite what’s practically an admission of fault the old victim blaming should wear a helmet nonsense appears again. Not a word about drivers taking more care and overtaking safely.
The three men and three women of the jury should be made watch the effect of a ton+ of metal rolling over a foam hat (I’m not completely sadistic – I wouldn’t insist their heads be in it at the time) to see what utter pointless shite that is as a verdict
JMcL_Ireland wrote:
Clearly the three men and three women of the jury haven’t been told what a bicycle helmet is – and isn’t! – designed to help protect the wearer from…
brooksby wrote:
Spot on there!
77 years old, eh? Probably
77 years old, eh? Probably been driving the thick end of 60 years without any further scrutiny. Eyesight could be shot as well.
vonhelmet wrote:
In a fair and reasonable society, they would obviously have checked his eyesight at around the same time they checked that he wasn’t drunk etc.
Quote:
What is the possible relevance of this given that the motorist and his wife both admitted having seen him?
I saw the cyclist ahead of me
I saw the cyclist ahead of me and decided to run him over anyway.
On what informed basis, having regard to all the benefits and cons of a helmet did they come up with that recommendation?
How about recommending that drivers don’t run cyclists over? That drivers give an appropriate amount of room? That drivers don’t drive right next to a cyclist, maintaining the same speed?
Oh on their lack of facts basis, drivers of that age need to pass a retest and eye test before being allowed to drive.
hirsute wrote:
Ah, but remember: “the cyclist did not alter his position on the road“. Clearly his fault, then…
You wonder how it’s possible
You wonder how it’s possible to have a fatal accident on a residential street like this…
Until you look at google maps and see how it’s a great little rat-run parallel to a main road. Perfect if the rush hour traffic is bad and you’re running late on your way to the train station. Maybe…
Surely the police can tell
Surely the police can tell where the car hit him ? If the damage is at the front he’s just run him down.
If it’s the side it’s more complicated.
RIP fellow cyclist.
We’re not sure if he forced
We’re not sure if he forced his penis inside of her or whether due to his close proximity she fell onto his exposed penis, so accidental ‘relations’, the rape cannot be proven. The victim was wearing a low cut top, short skirt and was walking down a street minding her own business, we recommend long dresses, big baggy tops and chasisty belts for all women.
Fucking cunts.
Hopefully this gets taken to
Hopefully this gets taken to a court of appeal, with expert witnesses for the deceased. That summary of facts sounds like an admission of guilt to me
Professor Mingguo Zhao, who
Professor Mingguo Zhao, who led the team that developed the bike, said:“Our project is about how a bicycle can keep its balance like a human. We chose the most similar method to a human, making use of centrifugal force produced by controlling the handlebar to keep balance,”
Nope. No such thing as centrifugal force. What sort of professor makes that statement?