Police stop 50 cyclists for riding without lights in “educational event”… and get blasted for “namby pamby approach” and “two-tier policing”; Why don’t cyclists use the bike lane? Because it’s slippery and squelchy with wet leaves + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Why cyclists don’t use the cycle lane? Because it’s covered with slippery wet leaves
That’s the bike lane in Priory Lane, Roehampton for you, in case anyone asks why don’t cyclists use all the cycling infrastructure (to be fair, there’s only so much).
Suzanne Seyghal, sharing the image on Twitter wrote: “When cycle lanes are this neglected & wet leaves left to pile up, it’s definitely safer to stick to the road.”
Is a football-style transfer market system the future for cycling? Maxim van Gils saga with Lotto Dstny rumbles on…
Teams willing to break the bank to get the best players may well have kicked off in football in the 90s, but pro cycling is still, to some degree, averse to the big-money transfer sagas with glitzy, up-and-coming stars and the world’s biggest clubs at the centre of it all.
However, this recent Maxim van Gils story could very well be the start of a new era, with a former Lotto Dstny manager saying there’s nothing wrong with talented riders leaving small teams to join rival teams in search of a better contract and career prospects.
For context, Van Gils, Lotto Dstny’s promising classics star who had a breakthrough spring campaign in the Ardennes — has reportedly tried to rip up his contract in a bid to secure a better deal at another team with the help of his agent Alex Carera, and officials at the Belgian team are fighting tooth and nail to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Now, former Lotto Dstny manager Paul De Geyter has come out to defend the 24-year-old Belgian rider, who has already seen his fair share of controversy in his young career when he hit another rider during a sprint and was fined by the UCI for “dangerous behaviour”.
In an interview with Sporza, De Geyter said: “If someone from a smaller football team can make a transfer to a larger football team, everyone thinks that is a logical step in a footballer’s career. But when a rider from Lotto Dstny can go to a team with better support, that rider is portrayed as a money-grabber. I think that is totally wrong.”
De Geyter also called more open transfer market and buyout fees, governed by clear regulations that respect contract laws. Yannick Prévost, Wout van Aert’s agent, responded to these calls saying: “That’s not possible at the moment. Because to set up a transfer system, you need to have teams with a lot of capital.”
“There are some rich teams, but there are also a number of teams like Lotto-Dstny that have to make sure every year that they don’t end up in the red. A system of transfer fees is currently premature for cycling.”
Carera, who has previously orchestrated Cian Uijtdebroeks, another promising Belgian rider, break his contract with Bora-Hansgrohe and join one of the most dominant teams in the men’s sport, Visma-Lease a Bike last year, has said that talks with Lotto Dstny are ongoing, but “likely” to end with Van Gils leaving the team. For which team instead? That’s not clear yet.
Of course, this would only happen if the transfer is sanctioned by both Lotto Dstny and the UCI, but it would be fair to say the rider’s relationship with his current team might be all but over — Dmitri Payet for West Ham and Carlos Tevez for Manchester City come to mind, if anyone’s looking for footy analogies.
Meanwhile, Lotto Dstny officials have been left fuming and scrambling to figure a way to stop this from happening. An unnamed team manager told Belgian television RTBF: “The trust between riders and team leaders is disappearing. Soon, a contract will no longer mean anything and it will be impossible to work in the long term since there is this uncertainty.
“Let’s look at this problem the other way around. Could we imagine a team telling its rider, in mid-November when the transfer market is closed: listen, we don’t need you anymore, we’re going to terminate your contract? No.
“This Van Gils affair is shocking because it is November! This behaviour is not acceptable. It is a lack of respect and recognition for the entire structure of the Lotto Dstny team that trained him and brought him to this level. I think that the rider is tarnishing his image.”
What fresh devilry is this???
There, the folks at Ali Express are at it again. This time, I don’t even know how to explain what I’m looking at. Is it a titanium fork? Is it a titanium drop handlebar? Is it both? If yes, why? How am I supposed to reach the drops? And when will I ever need to be positioned so low, crouched like a chicken? So many questions, so few answers…
The product description reads “Titanium race bicycle fork titanium drop handle bar Titanium track bike forks”. I’m sorry if that raises more questions than answers.
If any of y’all have a spare £1262 lying around (£478 for the fork/bars — plus an additional £784 for shipping, and no you can’t get a free month of Ali Express Prime), feel free to go ahead and order it. And please, please, let us know what in the holy hell is this thing…
Perils of mountain biking...
As vezes da uma raladinha mesmo pic.twitter.com/2KM3slfVMq
— O País Do Ciclismo (@opaisdociclismo) November 22, 2024
“Overcrowding highlights the need for more designated parking locations”: Lime responds to news of residents using angle grinders to chop up its abandoned share e-bikes
Lime Bikes has now responded to road.cc’s request for comment after last evening’s news about “pissed off” residents taking to angle grinders to chop up its shared e-bikes which were abandoned by “thoughtless” cyclists in a building’s car park next to the Norbiton train station.
A spokesperson for the US-based company said: “We are disappointed to learn about the criminal damage to our bikes. Poor parking in London is an issue we take very seriously, particularly as demand for our service increases.”
Rockin’ around the cycle lane Christmas tree: Backlash as city’s massive tree plonked in middle of contraflow bike lane, forcing cyclists into oncoming traffic
After cyclists criticised the “baffling” decision to block the bike lane for the second year in a row, Limerick Council has since moved the tree, allowing cyclists to pass while narrowing the footpath.
New points system could be on the table as UCI considers counting points earned in track, cyclocross, MTB, BMX and gravel for WorldTour rankings
A major pro cycling overhaul could be on the cards as the UCI has revealed that it’s considering to count points earned by teams in multiple disciplines of the sport other than road racing for determining teams’ WorldTour rankings.
Currently, the UCI WorldTour is the premier men’s elite road cycling tour with 18 teams, sitting above the UCI ProSeries and various regional UCI Continental Circuits. Points won by the teams from road racing competitions are tallied at the end of three years to determine which teams get relegated and which teams get the promotion.
Speaking to Sporza, UCI sports director Peter Van den Abeele said pro cycling’s governing body believes the revamp could offer an incentive for teams investing in multi-discipline stars like Filippo Ganna, Mathieu van der Poel, or Wout van Aert.
“What we will strive for is that points from other disciplines will be included in the team classification that determines the WorldTour licenses,” Van den Abeele told Sporza.
“A team like Ineos has a top rider in Filippo Ganna who takes part in major track events,” he said. “That’s great, but Ineos doesn’t get any WorldTour points in return. We want to discuss and change that.”
Van den Abeele said the UCI plans to discuss the idea with stakeholders, but any changes would not take effect until the new WorldTour cycle beginning in 2026.
“In this way, we can offer added value to the team by stating that we fully support them if they let riders ride in other disciplines,” he added.
Former Tour de France winner Pedro Delgado says “Tadej Pogačar’s reign will be a dictatorship”
The greatest cyclist in the world has found himself in the headlines even in the off-season, first beginning with the bumper contract extension with UAE Team Emirates, leading to accusations of sportswashing coming along the Slovenian’s way, and then as details about his €8 million a year contract emerged, chatter around a introducing budget cap was also heard.
Now, 1988 Tour de France winner Pedro Delgado has talked up Pogačar’s attributes and success, while also passing foreboding comments about his impact on the competitiveness of the sport.
Speaking to Spanish newspaper El Diario de Valladolid, Delgado said: “The reign of Pogačar will be a dictatorship… He has no rival. In the Pogačar dictatorship, it’s impossible [for rivals] to shine. In comparison, Remco Evenepoel, for all he’s really good, seems like he’s still learning.”
He added: “Pogačar is a real prodigy. I don’t know how long his era will last, not because of his physical qualities, but because he’s made winning a habit. Things could fall apart, but I think he’ll dominate the sport for the next five years.”
Cyclists injured or killed on streets where bike lanes were removed banned from suing Ontario government, as opposition politicians call the ban “heartbreaking”
In a troubling development from Canada, cyclists who have been injured or worse in one of the cycle lanes ripped up in Toronto won’t be able to file a lawsuit against the Ontario province’s government, with opposition politicians called the amendment to safeguard the government’s impunity heartbreaking.
Last month, Doug Ford, the premier of Ontario, shocked residents of Canada’s largest city when he pledged to rip out three of the city’s bike lanes “that are just absolutely insanity right now”, resulting in a dramatic backlash from cyclists, campaigners, opposition politicians and Toronto city council.
Now Ford, a businessman and leader of Canada’s Progressive Conservative Party has passed a controversial cycle lane bill on Thursday that would would create legal protections for the province if cyclists are hurt or killed after lanes are removed.
The legislation also gives the province the power to remove the entirety of three major bike lanes in Toronto on Bloor Street, Yonge Street and University Avenue, restoring them to vehicle traffic, while also dictating that Ontario municipalities to ask the province for permission to install bike lanes when they would remove a lane of vehicle traffic.
When reporters repeatedly asked Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria if the amended bill would, in fact, protect the government from lawsuits — he did not answer the question and instead pivoted to government talking points about traffic congestion each time, saying: “We believe bike lanes should be on secondary roads.”
Premier Doug Ford also refused to answer any direct questions from reporters about legal protections, instead choosing to repeat the same lines, reports CBC.
Meanwhile, social democratic party New Democratic Party’s Member of Provincial Parliament Jessica Bell claimed that the new amendments to Bill 212 would make it so people could no longer sue the government if they are hurt on roadways as a result of bike lanes being taken out.
“What this means is the conservatives want to remove themselves from any responsibility if someone is injured or killed in the future,” Bell said. “It’s heartbreaking, because someone will be injured or killed in the future.”
The never-ending story of Residents vs Binley Cycleway in Coventry has a new chapter
Campaigners attempting to put a stop to the final phase of a cycle lane project in Coventry, which last week saw them take part in a mass tree-hugging event to highlight their opposition to plans to cut down 26 trees to make way for the new active travel infrastructure, have accused the local council of spreading “misinformation” about their motives for opposing the cycleway.
In a formal complaint sent to Coventry City Council this week, Dawn McCann, one of the leaders of the opposition to the planned Clifford Bridge Road cycleway, argued that the local authority was “misleading the public” by “putting out several untrue statements”, denying that the scheme’s original design was rejected by residents due to plans to cut the number of on-street car parking spaces.
However, the head of public realm at Coventry City Council has told road.cc that plans to cut parking spaces had made the scheme “politically unacceptable” to residents, while noting that other areas where the cycleway has been installed have led to a “significant reduction” in collisions, increasing safety for vulnerable road users.
Ronaldo is busy making phone calls as I type…
> Will the ride quality be as silky smooth as his dribbling skills? Lionel Messi reportedly set to launch £10,000 custom bike
Police stop 50 cyclists for riding without lights in “educational event”… and get blasted for “namby pamby approach” and “two-tier policing” by social media users
Wait, I think I’ve heard this story before!
Almost exactly a year ago, Oxfordshire’s Fire and Rescue Service’s Road Safety Team, together with Thames Valley Police & Brookes University staff, came together to stop cyclists riding without hi-vis or lights on their bikes. With the Christmas-y fervour apparently setting in rather early with the teams, they decided to display their generosity and let the cyclists go without handing them with a £30 fine — but not before issuing them with some “lights and hi-vis rucksacks” so they could get home “legally and safely”.
And like clockwork, the same three teams got back with the same ‘Be Bright, Be Seen’ joint initiative as part of Road Safety Week, stopping 50 cyclists for cycling without lights. Oxfordshire Fire and Rescue Service wrote on Facebook: “As the event was aimed at educating cyclists, no penalty notices were issued, but instead cyclists were given advice about the importance of being clearly visible to other road users.
“Their bikes were then fitted with a temporary set of lights to ensure they got home safely.
“The second cyclist in the picture shows how difficult it is for other road users to spot cyclists without lights or bright clothing.”
And lo and behold, just like some things never change, the comments were flooded with people fuming about taxpayer’s money being misused, even accusing the police of “going soft” and trying to be everyone’s friend.
“Why are we, the taxpayer, paying to give irresponsible people lights to get home? Everyone knows they need lights when cycling in the dark.”
“Why the namby pamby approach to cyclists, if it was a car or a motorcycle they would be ticketed and fined. Two tier policing again.”
“Typical of a modern policing policy. Just do your job and fine them… Stop trying to be everyone’s friend… The reality is that they’ll be laughing at you for getting away with it!”
“Why were they not given a fine? It would happen to a motorist if the police pulled them over for not having their headlights on but there again, common sense does does fail some people.”
With winter well and truly here, it would be a good time to bring back Rule 59 and 60 of the Highway Code. While the former says that cyclists should wear “light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light,” while the latter dictates that when cycling at night, cycles “must have white front and red rear lights lit. It must also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85).”
> The Highway Code for cyclists — all the rules you need to know for riding on the road explained
However, hi-vis still continues to be a divisive topic amongst cyclists, some disputing its efficacy and arguing that it only serves to perpetuate the tradition of ‘victim blaming’. Yet, there are some who swear by it. One person on Facebook wrote: “Cycling through the winter I couldn’t imagine leaving without putting all my lights and hi-vis bag cover on… anything to make myself as visible as possible especially when leaving Oxford in areas with no street lights.
“At the end of the day, it’s my health I’m putting at risk if I leave with no lights and a car doesn’t see me… Why on Earth people take that risk I do not know.
“I stick to having two strong rear red lights. One constantly on, one flashing. Hi-vis bag cover and shoe covers, then on the front I have two lights. One constantly on and one flashes when in street lit areas and then both constantly on when not in street lit areas
“Boggles my mind as a cyclist and driver that people will chose to leave in the winter with no lights.”
One driver said: “Thank you for this initiative. I am a very anxious driver in Oxford at the moment. Cyclist friends please be aware visibility in our car is poor with other cars lights on, glare on our wet windscreens, etc… So we really can’t see you in our mirrors when you pass on the left if you don’t have a decent front light. T-junctions are also a worry as we can’t see you bombing down behind another car at night as we are mostly blinded by their lights…”
There were also a couple of people who questioned the police’s approach towards dangerous drivers. Juan Escobar commented: “Please also do checks on drivers using mobile phones. It’d be a lot more than 50 though,” while Emma Franks said: “Now go for drivers and take more licences away please. Far too many risky drivers about. At least a cyclist is only likely to hurt themselves.”
And finally, there were some who thought that this was indeed a good approach, Garry Templeman keeping it short and sweet: “Good work. Progressive policing.”
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.
69 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
If you're cycling in the UK. But just be careful about picking up discarded perfume bottles, watch who you drink tea with, don't cycle near Russian warships etc.
Vittoria Corsa NeXT are the answer for anyone who actually isn’t pro. Still better than Conti GP5000’s, more durable, better ride feel and better price. …the best way to not pay too much? Buy something else.
I'm am more at threat from dangerous drivers than I am from russian snipers
But again, it's irrelevant to the argument.
The thing that makes cycling more dangerous (among others) is poor skill and situational awareness. Both of which will be exacerbated by this thing full of screens sensors and other distractions which will do nothing to help a novice ride better.
Good to hear that people are keen and they won't be doing the Lambeth Walk if they can help it. Now, can we have a rule that new buildings (that the government wants more of built) have to include decent cycle storage space? Like in NL? (Of course not - that would be insanity as nobody cycles, and anyway Nige and Kemi and anyone else will be shouting "nanny state" and "government overreach". And frankly the planning process is a giant hot mess as it is and we're already worried about being slated for missing housing targets ...)
Those wheels are certainly a major advance in road safety for squirrels trying to cross the road.
@momove maybe they mean "more pure cycling *marketing*"?
It needs to read license plates, look them up, and tell you the registered owner has 26 prior driving offences. Ideally it would remotely hack their car and turn the engine off. Driver: I only get 'undred yards down road and another one of those bloody smart bikes shuts me down. Took me two hours to get t' pub.
Shurely one of those Zwift bikes is safer? As long as you get medical approval before use, always wear a helmet in case you fall off and don't put it near a wall that someone might inadvertently drive a motor vehicle through.
69 thoughts on “Police stop 50 cyclists for riding without lights in “educational event”… and get blasted for “namby pamby approach” and “two-tier policing”; Why don’t cyclists use the bike lane? Because it’s slippery and squelchy with wet leaves + more on the live blog”
I’d be less concerned about
I’d be less concerned about this if I was sure that police were also stopping all those motorists whose cars have a missing headlight or only one working brake light, that sort of thing.
When did hi-viz become a legal requirement? I know that lights are – after dark – but I was under the impression that hi-viz was a “It’d be a good idea, m’kay?”.
I can see them. And I haven’t got headlights on which would be lighting them up rather than silhouetting them…
[/quote]
I can see them. And I haven’t got headlights on which would be lighting them up rather than silhouetting them…
[/quote]
TBF the second rider in that picture is not easy to spot, and headlights on a car face forwards only, so a driver positioned as per the camera (waiting to turn out a juction ?) should be looking there but won’t be lighting them up, so a rider will be silhouetted by any light behind them.
Just to be clear, the rider
Just to be clear, the rider is clearly visible, but only if the driver looks.
We can’t do that for them. Instead we are obliged to enter an arms race, competing with: overly bright car headlights, fog lights, multiple lighting arrays from form-over-function car designers, infotainment systems with large screens distracting both attention and peripheral vision; and drivers thinking it’s OK to mount satnavs and phones within the swept field of view in their windscreens.
It’s just not fair that we expect people to look out for other road users, too. Surely it must be their responsibility for ‘us’ to see ‘them’?!
GMBasix wrote:
Interestingly I have just been reading an article in Commercial Motor during my lunch break (I know, I know, 7th November Issue, I am a bit behind) about human factors in road collisions. It identifies fatigue, stress and distraction as the key (and intertwined) risk factors along with “unconscious bias” from the fact that most mistakes/ poor decisions made by drivers have no consequences so the driver learns that it isn’t a problem to take that action again. The conclusion was to train drivers differently and more frequently to reduce the bias, and for employers to ensure that drivers have the right environment to concentrate.
It struck me that this was all very good, but wouldn’t necessarily tackle the very conscious bias against other road users displayed by some drivers (and no effect at all on non-HGV drivers), not least members of the editorial team at CM with their views on cyclists.
Another justification for CPC
Another justification for CPC training for all licence holders
Agreed but in the HGV sphere
Agreed but in the HGV sphere at the moment as far as I am aware there are no courses that would cover these issues and as the legislation is currently written at 35 hours every 5 years it is not sufficient to effect behavioural change, the article was recommending training interventions every 3-6 months.
There are several cycle
There are several cycle awareness courses around the country. They may not address psychology in detail, but they take drivers out on bikes. They have to choose to take it all on board and apply it, though.
GMBasix wrote:
Even before you get on to the myriad other competing things, headlights are not actually mandatory where there is street lighting. I don’t know if I think it would overall be better or worse if drivers only used sidelights in the city though – less glare for people to see cyclists (and their lights) through; but less light to see us (and our optional reflectives) by?
Rule 113
You MUST
ensure all sidelights and rear registration plate lights are lit between sunset and sunrise
use headlights at night, except on a road which has lit street lighting. These roads are generally restricted to a speed limit of 30 mph (48 km/h), or 20mph (32km/h) in Wales, unless otherwise specified
use headlights when visibility is seriously reduced (see Rule 226).
quiff wrote:
??!!??
I think I must have missed that bit of the HC.
I confess it is relatively
I confess it is relatively new to me. It’s psychologically hard to limit yourself to sidelights when everyone else is using headlights though – the arms race problem.
It’s below the bit that says
It’s below the bit that says you MUST obey the speed limits at all times, unless you are a member of a service with a specific exemption. Or in an emergency. Or on a motorway where everyone else is doing more than 70mph. Or in a 20mph limit as it’s not possible for cars to keep below that speed limit without the motorist being focussed on the speedo to the exclusion of all else.
I’d be less concerned about
I’d be less concerned about this if I was sure that police were also stopping all those motorists whose cars have a missing headlight or only one working brake light, that sort of thing
I can assure you they’re not- in the same way as they’re refusing to take action against drivers passing traffic lights long after they turned red, refusing to take action against drivers with long-expired MOT when informed of the offence with immaculate photos, refusing to take action against drivers using handheld mobiles while driving despite being provided with perfect video etc. etc. ‘because everybody does it we can’t do anything about these offences’
DG67 SJU was first reported on 24th August, a month after the MOT expired, when it was filmed passing outside Garstang Police Station- the driver has enjoyed trouble-free offending since then, with the police cheering him on.
Or the ones whose combo of
Or the ones whose combo of super bright side/driving lights makes them assume they don’t need headlights on at all.
It used to be the case that
It used to be the case that daytime running lights were only at the front – so you’d get stupidly bright front lights (and a lit up dash) while the driver was blissfully unaware they weren’t lit up at the rear. Seems now DRLs are both ends, so you can blind people from the front while not being a danger to yourself behind.
I thought having one working
I thought having one working headlight was the new norm? Is it some form of guerilla marketing activity maybe?
Anyway, as with all road “crime” – *clears throat* ShOUldN’T DeY Be AHt caTcHin’ ReEL KriMiNAlz?!!
New one to me “and amber
New one to me “and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85”
That means any cyclist with clipless pedals cycling in the dark is breaking the law.
When I cycle in the dark, I do so with lights, but I have no refelctors of any colour.
Not all clipless pedals are
Not all clipless pedals are built the same, some come with reflectors built in,and some come with the feature to add clip on reflectors, all precisely to meet that rule.
A few years back I had a
A few years back I had a police officer stop me (they were looking for a recently stolen bike and I had one from the same manufacturer, although not the same model) and after we had established my bike belonged to me he said, “You are supposed to have reflectors on your pedals, you know?” I pointed out the three lights on the front of the bike, three on the back, one each side of my helmet, my fluorescent and reflective jacket and the reflective details on the back of my SPD shoes (it was at night) and he just laughed and said, “I know, stupid law isn’t it?” and that was that!
Pedal reflectors are
Pedal reflectors are brilliant, you can tell its a bike from a long way off, I think the fact that the reflectors are moving up and down when pedalling make them all the more effective for being spotted. Get some clip on ones for your clipless pedals, e.g:
https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/pedals-cleats/shimano-105-spdsl-pd5800-smpd65-reflector-unit-y40r98110/
Front and rear reflectors are part of the “dumby” kit everyone takes off theri bikes for some reason but I wouldn’t ride my commute bike without them. Even if my rear light runs out of battery without me noticing therese a level of passive safety from a rear reflector for example.
Alternatively just wear
Alternatively just wear reflective bands around your ankles or choose shoes with reflective detailing/stick a bit of reflective tape on the heels. I’m totally unconvinced of the necessity for rear/front reflectors, by definition they won’t reflect unless a car’s headlights are shining on them, if the headlights are shining on the rear reflector they will also be shining on the big bloke sitting on the bike wearing a fluorescent jacket with reflective patches…
Even so, something is better
Even so, something is better than nothing. I don’t have seperate plastic reflectors on my winter bike, but I do have a patch of 3M relfective tape on the headtube and red reflective tape on my rear mudguard. As I use clipless I rely on reflective bands and detailing on my shoes. I still have two lights front and rear.
I did see someone who also had mini lights on the sides of the drops in addition to the multitude of lights front and rear.
Matthew Acton-Varian wrote:
I’ve put those on Mrs H’s bike and keep meaning to put them on mine as well, they are really effective because not only can drivers see you clearly from the side when you are pulling out of a side road, they also show from front and rear and create an eye-catching disruptive pattern which I think is desirable. Also because hardly anyone else has them it means I can easily pick her out when I look behind to check she’s still with me!
+1 for motion and the
+1 for reflectives in motion and the particular up / down is quite an unambiguous signal for “cyclist” (for those drivers who know / have engaged “not just looking for the other motor vehicles” mode…) I’ve also added the reflective straws to my spokes.
…but as you say you can get same from reflectives on your feet / legs.
BUT I guess it’s a kind of “fluoride in the water” – if bikes should be sold with these then in theory everyone gets the benefit without needing to know or think. And no effort remembering to put on the reflectives and actually doing so etc. Of course for “cyclists” smaller SPD pedals are quite likely to mostly be invisible under the ball of the foot…
Also – bigger reflectives are generally “better” in one sense BUT – a bit like “more lights” – don’t necessarily signal “cyclist” as opposed to pedestrian, or just “shiny thing”. Or help as much with judging their distance / velocity. Two points with horizontal separation arguably do that better that e.g. a reflective top. Though are a bit less helpful than more widely separated motor vehicle front / rear lights.
Aside from that my problem is that a) I tend to run at least one large pannier on my utility bikes which block view of my leg on that side b) the recumbent mostly lives indoors in winter but generally when on it you can’t see my pedals, feet or even legs from behind.
As you said the pedals will
As you said the pedals will be hidden anyway. My shoes, 3 pairs of them, have reflective strips on the heel and my winter trousers do too on the ankle. I have not seen any difference in the behaviour of nobhead drivers though.
Like you, I wear shoes with
Like you, I wear shoes with reflective details.
Yep reflective bands are 360
Yep reflective bands are 360 and far better than simple reflectors.
I’m disappointed that you have more lights than me !
I look forward to my conversation in court.
“You had 4 rear lights of different patterns, reflective jacket, decals on your shoes and tights, reflective ankle bands but no pedal reflectors. How did you expect my client to see you ?”
Years ago driving down a
Years ago, driving down a country lane in the pitch dark, the only thing that alerted me to the cyclist in front was their pedal reflectors (dark clothing and no lights or other reflectors).
Pedal those squares wrote:
I got some Shimano pedals with relflectors for my gravel bike, one side is flat the other is spd clip in.
Ì had a conversation with a
Ì had a conversation with a PO about the lack of pedal reflectors. He amazingly was on a bike without pedal reflectors. He admitted that he couldn’t remember ever seeing a police bike with them. Perhaps the newer bikes will have them.
This conversation about clipless pedals without reflectors has been going on for a long time now and is way down the list of what is important.
A close pass operation in
A close pass operation in West Yorkshire:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly0w2xzzd4o
Nice to see this as a joint enterprise between local government and the police.
the little onion wrote:
Your link didn’t work for me, so here’s one that does https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly0w2xzzd4o
A close pass operation in
A close pass operation in West Yorkshire
They do things differently in Lancashire, where the police have decreed it’s impossible to pass too closely to a cyclist so they’ve never done a ‘close pass operation’, and the result is that driving schools even train drivers to stay completely within the left lane while overtaking.
Green Pass Training, aka Close Pass Training, claims: All Green Pass assessors have to go through vigorous internal training lasting 6 months, once this is completed our driving assessors are subject to a further half a day training every 6 months conducted by ex-traffic police this gives the directors of Green Pass the confidence that all our assessors will deliver our training to the highest possible standards
Must be Lancashire ‘ex-traffic police’
In Surrey, that doesn’t count
In Surrey, that doesn’t count as a close pass.
No, it’s close but not as bad
No, it’s close but not as bad as the vans and massive Stagecoach double deckers. The point is that it’s a driving school teaching Lancashire learners to do it because they know Lancashire Constabulary condones the offence. And Green Pass also trains HGV drivers.
A bit ‘preaching to the choir
A bit ‘preaching to the choir’, but quite an interesting 10 minute watch:
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/11/22/friday-video-what-if-we-let-bike-haters-on-social-media-plan-our-cities
“The second cyclist in the
“The second cyclist in the picture shows how difficult it is for other road users to spot cyclists without lights or bright clothing.” – di dthey mean the clearly visible second cyclist?
Nope, that’s the third
Nope, that’s the third cyclist. The second one is invisible.
Whilst true for that photo,
Whilst true for that photo, there are situations where no lights means it is very hard to see someone ahead with oncoming traffic with headlights.
You must always have lights at night.
Quote:
Parser error.
Not doing a very good job of it – they’ve been in red for as long as I can remember.
Pedestrians, dog walkers and
Pedestrians, dog walkers and runners!
When using shared cycle lanes, make sure you wear reflective clothing, helmets and lights. Take responsibility for your own safety and make sure that speeding, distracted cyclists don’t hit you.
What fresh devilry is this???
What fresh devilry is this??? – perhaps they had a design for some handlebars, and another design for some forks, and somewhere along the line the two designs/files got merged and nobody questioned it…
Barring any other explanation
Barring any other explanation, I’d say someone definitely forked up.
It’s a FUBAR = Fork Utility
It’s a FUBAR = Fork Utility Bar
Definitely an FU bar
Definitely an FU bar
Maybe it’s actually some sort
Maybe it’s actually some sort of cunningly disguised sanctioned military product (been watching too much of the Jackal).
Probably the result of AI
Probably the result of AI design…
Coming out around the end of
Coming out around the end of the year is that one of those metal puzzles you find in crackers?
Wait – I’ve got it! It’s
Wait – I’ve got it! It’s actually an accessible design – for cyclists without arms. Hey presto, you can be in the drops using only your feet!
Could be for cyclists with
Could be for cyclists with congenitally long arms.
Perils of mountain biking…
Perils of mountain biking… – the worse peril is surely from riding your bike in flip-flops?
I sometimes carry a spare set
I sometimes carry a spare set of lights with me expressly for loaning or giving away, and I’ve given away one set in the last year or so. They look nearly identical to these, but aren’t this exact item on Amazon. They’re good enough to be seen and get you home, with a few hours of run time.
I’ve given away cheap AA powered lights before which were provided by a bike advocacy organisation, but I’m certain that as soon as the batteries died, they stopped being used. I kept checking Amazon until I found a cheap enough USB rechargeable set; in this case I got two sets (two red, two white) for under $18 (about £14.) If I ever spot them at more like $5 / £4 a set, I’ll buy 10 or 20 sets for me and my friends to give away to the local bike ninjas.
These guys are organising to
These guys are organising to do something similar…
https://www.bikelaneuprising.com/product-page/sponsor-a-light-set
At $14 / £11 a set, that’s still a bit much for me to do it solo. I may try to get my local Co-op to sponsor some.
I suppose I could take a
I suppose I could take a chance on aliexpress, though.
https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256806030349283.html
Those are clearly rip-offs of
Those are clearly rip-offs of Lezyne’s IP – I think they are called a Zecto drive? – made for peanuts in some factory in the Shenzhen special industrial zone*.
Products made there turn up on Amazon or Walmart – the weird five letter manufacturer names are the giveaway.
But if you go to Aliexpress there’s nothing except those rip-off products.
*Other special industrial zones are available.
brooksby wrote:
Yes, they look just like the Lezyne Zecto model. My club bought a couple of sets from the LBS for our midweek TTs so if someone turns up without lights or theirs fail they can still ride (I’m surprised at how many people who know they need lights for a TT seem to arrive having forgotten to charge them while their fancy GPS has more than enough battery life).
I wouldn’t mind these ‘roadside education’ attempts if I felt that all road users were treated fairly (meaning that those that can cause the most harm get the most attention). Earlier this week a surprising number of drivers were still speeding or driving too close to the vehicle in front desite the soaking wet roads and near-zero temperatures.
A few years ago, at the start
A few years ago, at the start of winter, Lambeth council would give out 5 pairs of free small front&rear (white&red) lights to cyclists who could hand them out to anyone who didn’t have lights.
No idea how much it cost the council but I can’t imagine it was a huge loss.
Shame they stopped doing it.
“Backlash as city’s massive
“Backlash as city’s massive tree plonked in middle of contraflow bike lane, forcing cyclists into oncoming traffic”
Ok, that’s crap, but forced into oncoming traffic? We have free will people!
cut the tree down instead?
cut the tree down instead?
The real issue, here, is that
The real issue, here, is that the council did not learn from the first time they messed up.
One of my philosophies is that it’s not the mistakes that you make, but the way that you deal with them.
Lights: they should be
Lights: they should be punished. Unlit bikes are a serious threat to pedestrians and other cyclists, especially when riding on pavements that not mixed use. At my age, many friends and relatives have dodgy sight, hearing, mobility.
Pedal reflectors: I use ankle bands as there are no reflectors on my pedals.
Rear red reflector: built into lights but I’ve been thinking of bolting one onto the back of my rack and mudguard.
I have spare lights and, like a few others, have given some away
E6toSE3 wrote:
Riders riding into people should be punished. I would give those riding on pavements they’re not legally allowed to a finger-wagging…
(Noting – as I had not remembered from my driving test you MUST have any sidelights you have lit but in fact even cars are not required to have their headlights on when using a road which has lit street lighting – see HC rule 113). Actually, I’m with you here in that I would strongly recommend lights for all at night, both to see and to help be seen by. (That doesn’t necessarily help that much with people who have dodgy sight though).
The ultimate “fix” for that (insofar as you can) is “clearly defined (in a standard way) separate spaces for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians” – although there are circumstances in which mixing is workable.
Is it too much to hope that none of them are driving?
Agree with all that – you can get different colours of adhesive reflective tape also (some pretty durable); I’ve applied that to mudguards and suitable frame bits. Also those reflective straws that clip onto spokes (not quite as durable but won’t break the bank).
It would be more educational
It would be more educational to give them a fine. They wouldn’t forget that in a hurry.
Sod the layby, I’ll use the
Sod the layby, I’ll use the cycle lane.
Still there over an hour later.
Came across 2 more furhter up, one was blocking both the ped and cycle section.
“It all looks like road to me
“It all looks like road to me!”
Nothing uncommon about this round Edinburgh also. People see a building, no obvious parking immediately in front of it next to the door? Up onto the pavement and/or cycle track *.
But there’s parking round the back? Invisible! Have to walk more than 15 metres to the door? Impossible! Got some things to carry (anything from some ladders and building supplies down to a takeaway bag of chips)? I’m just dropping off / loading, mate.
Part of me thinks we have to cater to this with some kind of “drop off” points everywhere – but as you point out people will ignore those also so they can roll out of the car/van and in through the door. Plus others will block them by parking there for hours.
* Yes – I am somewhere with actual cycle tracks and not shared space or a footpath with a painted line! They don’t go very far though…
My local football practice
My local football practice pitches (all weather, in a fenced off area, are regularly the scene of inconsiderate parking, with vehicles blocking the pedestrian/cycle path and sitting in a yellow box/grid, within plain view of a “please use the main stadium car park”
All of this despite the aforementioned (and free) carpark being just the other side of the quiet stadium access road…
Laziness, mixed with total disdain.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/yeoHFNNXq5J1zCPD6
If motorists cannot see a
If motorists cannot see a cyclist because they are not wearing a hi-vis bib then they cannot see pedestrians on a crossing, also drunk/ drugged drivers find it difficult to notice anything outside their cars.
A man who tried to send 500
A man who tried to send 500 bikes to a charity in Africa had them refused at a Scottish port after they were classed as waste.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2e7yy3z3p8o
Hirsute wrote:
Unfortunately, Africa is heavily exploited both for resource extraction
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx9gwweeeo
and waste disposal
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gvq1rd0geo
Particularly indicative of how far we have to go is “The UN says only around 15% of the world’s e-waste is recycled”.
Finding solutions to US
Finding solutions to US school drop off: Our school has 2 VIP parking spots they auction off at their fundraiser. So, I got one ? – and made it eBike/Cargo Bike drop off for everyone. At least for 1 year. One less car parking spot, and usually 5+ parent bikes in a central, accessible place ?
https://bsky.app/profile/j-raspberry.bsky.social/post/3lblayefad226