Live blog: ‘Makes more sense’ to keep cyclists and driverless cars separate says report; Froome drops another ride on Strava, “We have to be realistic” say police about pavement cycling fines, Degenkolb spotted on 1x TT version of new Sram Red AXS + more
SUMMARY
“We have to be realistic” say police about low number of fines for cycling on the pavement
Yesterday we reported how several local newspapers this week highlighted the low numbers of cyclists being fined for riding on the pavement.
Responding to one of the stories, in the Cambridge News, a police spokesman explained: “Riding on the pavement is potentially dangerous for both the cyclist and pedestrians and police officers will take action where appropriate.
“In Peterborough, responsibility for enforcement has been transferred to the Safer Peterborough Partnership, and as a force we have to be realistic about the offences we can proactively tackle.
“We remain committed to protecting the most vulnerable people and identifying those most at risk of harm when making demand decisions.”
Liverpool’s Daniel Sturridge hasn’t entirely mastered putting on a cycle helmet
Liverpool are currently on a camp in Marbella. Sturridge arrived at training by bike.
We'll just leave this link here...
According to this Times article about a struggling filmmaker, the Instagram-friendly-day-out-with-a-few-climbing-frames-thrown-in-to-justify-the-150-quid-entry-fee-corporation-fest that is Tough Mudder is “one of the world’s most notoriously gruelling endurance and obstacle courses”. We’re triggered…
Spotted: Degenkolb on new Sram 1X version of their new Red AXS 12 speed groupset
This shot of Trek Segafredo ride John Degenkolb shows the German Classics star checking out the course of today’s Tour de la Provence. More interestingly for us, though, is the drivetrain which looks like it’s missing the front mech.
The large chainring definitely looks like it’s part of the 1x TT crankset option for their new 12 speed Red eTap AXS groupset, and that also looks like the AXS fluid damper rear mech. The large cassette looks to be pretty big and wide-ranging, possible Sram’s new 10-33 option.
Removing the front mech is more aero, apparently, but we’ll be keeping an eye out for Trek riders dropping a chain…
Happy Valentine's Day from, er, Deceuninck–Quick-Step...
Happy Valentine’s to all you cycling lovers out there!
Photo: @GettySport pic.twitter.com/dgHo9MImgT— Deceuninck-QuickStep (@deceuninck_qst) February 14, 2019
Luckily they didn’t use THAT photo that landed Iljo Keisse in a spot of bother a couple of weeks ago…
Fleet managers need to take distracted driving more seriously says IAM RoadSmart
With more and more technological in-vehicle distractions, employers need to revisit their driver policies says road safety charity.
The Red Bull Valparaíso Cerro Abajo... strong candidate for the most insane race in the world
In its 17th edition, this urban downhill race takes riders on a terrifying route through the streets of Valparaíso in Chile, and from this footage from the perspective of winner Pedro Ferreira you’d have to be pretty insane even to spectate. Ferreira celebrated his victory shortly after top 4X’er Tomas Slavic had a shocking crash, breaking ligaments and suffering a concussion according to his Instagram post below.
Sadly out of production, but a Valentine's classic nonetheless
“You do not just lose it from one day to the next” – Cav
Mark Cavendish appears to be walking a mental tightrope at the minute, accepting that Epstein Barr Virus may have permanently compromised his ability while simultaneously raging that a sprinter doesn’t just “lose it”.
Froome lays down the gauntlet for Tour de Yorkshire, and some serious speed at Tour Colombia 2.1
You’ve got some competition Yorkshire @letouryorkshire https://t.co/s636ouWIwQ
— Chris Froome (@chrisfroome) February 13, 2019
Some huge crowds at the Tour of Colombia… and Froome also gave us all the juicy details of his Stage 2 ride on Strava. A 28.4mph average over 3 hours and 24 minutes of riding, with a cadence of 91rpm… topical after this article we posted yesterday about optimal pedal cadence attracted plenty of comments and debate. Froome actually rolled in 33rd and currently sits in 11th place overall in the general classification, 3mins and 21secs back from Stage 2 winner Alvaro Hodeg of Deceuninck-QuickStep but safely nestled in with all the other GC contenders. That peloton was seriously shifting.
'Makes more sense' to keep cyclists and driverless cars separate says report
Forbes reports on KPMG’s Autonomous Vehicles Readiness Index – an attempt to gauge the degree to which various countries are prepared for driverless cars.
Among the more eye-catching observations is one from Stijn de Groen, an automotive expert at the firm, who says that when it comes to driverless cars the Netherlands should focus on motorways.
His argument for doing so? “We have a lot of bicycles. In urban, crowded areas it will be very difficult to start autonomous driving.”
Forbes also spoke to Charlie Simpson, co-head of KPMG’s “mobility 2030” project.
Speaking about where we’re up to with driverless technology, he said: “There will have to be some reprogramming. Right now we’re at the stage of a guy with a red flag walking in front of the [19th Century] car. When that guy went, and the cars started to go faster, humans learned not to step in front of them. We are going to have to go through that evolution.”
We’re not quite sure what to make of that comment, but Simpson did also say that KPMG’s driverless technology reports weren’t focusing on cyclists yet. “That’ll be wave two.”
Fizik launches “After Ride” clothing
Fizik, best known for its saddles, shorts and shoes, has launched a small range of off-the-bike clothing in its new After Ride Collection.
If you’re a big Fizik fan, you might want to dress in the new t-shirt, sweatshirt and jacket, because we can’t think of any other reason why you’d want to buy it? To be fair, the branding is understated but it’s still got the Italian company’s logo splashed all over it.
“From beautifully cut all-cotton men’s and women’s T-shirts to a full-zip soft sweatshirt and a semi-technical waterproof jacket – not forgetting the snapback cap – ‘After Ride’ is effortlessly sophisticated, all in black, with discreet branding and satisfying design touches for when you’re off the bike.”
Prices range from £20 for the t-shirt through to £170 for the waterproof jacket.
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.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn’t especially like cake.
18 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@kinderje Are you aware that -ise endings are actually the newer form, having supplanted -ize (as used by Shakespeare, the King James Bible and Jane Austen, amongst many others) in the mid 19th century? Etymologically there is a far better argument for -ize endings for words with Greek and Latin roots than the -ise ending which arose from Victorian publishers imitating French verb endings. Both endings are now regarded as acceptable in British English, although the Oxford style guide recommends -ize. It is most certainly not incorrect.
@Backladder Given that the makers are selling it as being useable on any ride on open roads, it doesn't seem unreasonable to try to test it in those conditions.
'Leasting'? That's a whole 4 letters less.
Although usually the easiest thing of all would be for them just to stop for a few moments while you cycle past them (which requires a lot less space to do safely than them passing you), but most people seem allergic to stopping, even for the briefest time.
@Backladder Oh I think I can guess - the nearest indoor velodrome to road.cc HQ looks to be some distance away in Wales, whereas Odd Down Cycle Track (where this test was conducted) is just 2 miles away.
There are a number of causes of "the divide between motorists and cyclists". Only one is to do with the technology (of bicycles and cars) and that's the nature of the car, which is designed to induce the sort of dangerous and careless behaviours that providing humans with a lot of power and glamour fetches out of us. Other causes are much more insidious - A culture of hyper-individualism bordering on solipsism, with violently ultra-selfish and aggressive anti-heroes being promoted in every mass media channel as the ideal. A "news" media that overwhelmingly seeks, creates and offers pariahs and scapegoats to the rabid individualists, which pariahs and scapegoats includes all kinds of those perceived as less powerful and therefore easy victims, including cyclists. The near complete lack of any curb upon the dangerous antics of vast numbers of media-maddened motorists by the forces of law and order, many of whom are actually members themselves of the mass media maddened motorist ilk. ******** No amount of a more rational discourse about active travel or the means of making it safer will change these root causes of the vast numbers of deaths and maiming due to inept, incompetent and deliberately violent antics of vast numbers of motorists allowed their dangerous "weapons of choice". Yet many other highly damaging aspects of modern societies would be solved by a much more effective curbing of mass media mob-building and goading along with a serious attempt to prevent motorists and a whole range of other damagers from behaving as badly as so many do. It'll not happen, of course. Large and powerful elements of the modern world obtain far too much ultra-riches and power from current conditions for them to allow any significant change. And vast numbers of the population have long had their minds, attitudes and behaviours captured and directed by various oligarchical monsters and their mass media propaganda horns. About the only chance of safe active travel becoming extant is for the population at large to become mostly too poor to afford a car, ironically one other likely outcome of the machinations of those same power and money-mad monsters that have created the car-issue in the first place. Their need for zero-sum socio-economic arrangements degrades everything, including the wallet-contents of the masses.
@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.
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.
@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/
18 thoughts on “Live blog: ‘Makes more sense’ to keep cyclists and driverless cars separate says report; Froome drops another ride on Strava, “We have to be realistic” say police about pavement cycling fines, Degenkolb spotted on 1x TT version of new Sram Red AXS + more”
Quote:
You’d think that a police spokesperson would use the correct definitions. IIRC “pavement” includes the bit the cars are on, the bit the pedestrians are on, and (obviously) the bit the bikes are on. Confusion arises when local papers start frothing at the mouth about cyclists on “pavements” without checking the legal status of said pavement, and whether cyclists are actually allowed to ride there.
(Anecdote: “Bloody cyclists on the pavement!” mutters the young lady to her friend as I ride slowly past; I stop, point at the blue roundel on a nearby lamp post, ask if they know what it means… They didn’t).
brooksby wrote:
I have a similar anecdote, of an old dear telling me to get off the pavement when she was stood on the painted bike sign of the shared use path. I asked if she wanted to apologise for swearing at me and my daughter, but she declined.
brooksby wrote:
Odd one, pavement is any paved surface whereas ‘the’ pavement seems to be taken specifically as the raised, paved surface beside the road. A footpath may be paved, in part, but not a pavement (or rather, not ‘the’ pavement) and may be by the side of a ‘road’. The bit house-house / building-building is the highway, that’s the one that includes (side) pavements, footpaths, road surfaces and the like. Or something, i’ll look later maybe.
@brooksby – had this on the Portway heading North up past the Shirehampton Golf Course – path there is seriously wide but robustly framed gent was on the inside of it, two small terriers skittering, about sniffing the floor and so on between him and the outside – said ‘excuse me’ a couple of times, waited, eventually went around the outside of one of the dogs who then jumped up and barked. Mouthful from the gent, I point at shared use sign, he says what’s wrong with the road. I encounter dozens of dog walkers going through Blaise Castle when commuting, and never get that sort of grief – some people are just like that.
fukawitribe wrote:
Do you mean that section up by the lookout? That’s about thirty feet wide??
And I’ve got to say: “what’s wrong with the road”???
Has he even looked at the Portway?!? Or how people drive on it…
brooksby wrote:
Nearly, juuust before that on the way up – probably only about 25 foot wide there…. 😀
@brooksby – had this on the Portway heading North up past the Shirehampton Golf Course – path there is seriously wide but robustly framed gent was on the inside of it, two small terriers skittering, about sniffing the floor and so on between him and the outside – said ‘excuse me’ a couple of times, waited, eventually went around the outside of one of the dogs who then jumped up and barked. Mouthful from the gent, I point at shared use sign, he says what’s wrong with the road. I encounter dozens of dog walkers going through Blaise Castle when commuting, and never get that sort of grief – some people are just like that.
[/quote]
Just remind them of the guidance in the highway code
Rule 56
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders.
From the same force that
From the same force that decided not to prosecute this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-cambridgeshire-40134629
Pavement as defined in the
Pavement as defined in the Highway Code is the pedestrian footpath and only that. “Pavement” as defined as all paved surfaces is an american definition, so applicable in the USA – not the UK.
In UK highway design the formal designations are footway, carriageway and cycle-route.
danhopgood wrote:
Nope, it’s been descriptive of general paved surfaces in English for a long time *. It may have changed it’s primary interpretation over time but it’s still retained the broader meaning as well.
Cheers for the clarification.
* In particular, since before the English-speaking US was a thing.
danhopgood wrote:
OK, thanks for that
It’s a pity the police
It’s a pity the police spokesperson didn’t point out the actual statistics for Cambridgeshire showing it’s such a minor issue. Here they are for 2007-11. I’m sure they’ve access to up to date figures that would be broadly similar.
From https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cycle_and_motor_vehicle_accident_3
Pedestrian casualties
During the five years 2007-2011 inclusive, six pedestrians were seriously injured in collisions
with pedal cyclists in Cambridgeshire, five of these collisions occurred in Cambridge City.
During the same period 45 pedestrians were slightly injured in collisions with pedal cyclists in
Cambridgeshire, 40 of these 45 slight injuries occurred in Cambridge City.
One of the serious injuries (that happened outside of Cambridge City) occurred when a cyclist
was cycling on a pavement. Seven of the 40 (my emphasis) slight injuries that occurred in Cambridge City
involved a cyclists cycling on the pavement, as did two of the five slight injuries that occurred
elsewhere in Cambridgeshire.
Comparable figures for pedestrians injured in collisions with motor vehicles are also shown
below.
Severity | Total | Cambridge | Elsewhere
——————————————–
Fatal | 34 | 2 | 32
Serious | 185 | 49 | 136
Slight | 570 | 172 | 398
Didn’t we have a Minister
Didn’t we have a Minister telling us that considerate cycling on pavements was ok two or three years ago? Shouldn’t Cambridge Police mention that?
Quote:
Maybe, this will keep autonomous vehicles off the road until they can actually drive around people and cyclists safely… Hmm: Big Auto.
I have a Bad Feeling about this… Think about the history of the automobile – pedestrians just walking around made it difficult for early automobiles, therefore a whole campaign started to make it the pedestrians’ fault (“jaywalking”).
given the number of annual
given the number of annual deaths and serious injuries caused by mobility scooter users (which far exceed that of people on bikes) I think plod should be focusing more on that mode of transport with respect to the danger presented to society.
Of curse they should before they do that sort out all the nobbers in motors who park up and drive onto the ‘pavement’ all the time, no, just cyclists then that are ‘dangerous’ eh!
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
While the number of accidents seems to be going up, I thought the annual deaths involving mobility scooters was around 10 or a dozen, and that they mostly killed the drivers and rarely anyone else. Serious injuries also seem low in number. Do you have a link to the stats you had ? Tah.
fukawitribe wrote:
“The most recent figures from the Department of Transport show there were 260 accidents involving mobility scooters in 2016. Sixty-one of those were classed as “serious” and 14 were fatal.” – https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/mobility-scooter-crash-man-seriously-injured-london-harold-wood-a8413391.html
Only other non news story I could find on google was
https://www.accessandmobilityprofessional.com/mobility-scooter-law-change-needed-says-coroner-yet-deaths/
but this refers more to scooter users killing themselves rather than anyone else…
brooksby wrote:
Yep – that’s looks similar to all the previous years stats (think 2015 was something like 28 serious, 9 fatalities – all of which were the driver – 2013 and 2011 less total, same result)
To my mind the [motor] car is
To my mind the [motor] car is better seen as a monstously over-engineered mobility scooter.