[hawkinspeter]

I think it should be standard

I think it should be standard procedure for drivers to face a re-test and eye test if they hit anything.

[hawkinspeter]

Awesome!

Awesome!

I bet you don’t bother hiding new bike purchases from her with that kind of crime fighting pedigree.

[hawkinspeter]

brooksby wrote:

TBH Peter the Portbury Hundred is a scary road full stop. I would never ride on there, not even if you paid me!  The way people drive on there… <shakes head>

I’ve been along it a couple of times during the day and I know what you mean. It’s far too busy for its size, but then it’s not as though people can use the train instead.

[hawkinspeter]

Sriracha wrote:

Sriracha wrote:

In the first six months of 2021 of such work, the force received 1,484 camera uploads with evidence of road related offences. This resulted in 1,667 warning and prosecution letters being issued.

So by my maths that means at least 183 letters went to those submitting the video.

Yeah, I wondered about that. I interpreted it as them sending multiple letters for single uploads as I’ve never had any warning letters from them after uploading. I’ve had them reply and informally warn me about making a forbidden left turn and one instance where they questioned my road positioning (it was intended and received as friendly advice but I replied with my reasons for taking that particular line and they appreciated my thoughts on that).

[hawkinspeter]

Tom_77 wrote:

They’re Chilli bullet cameras according to this – https://www.portisheadcycling.com/cameras

Thanks, I hadn’t heard of them before but they look pretty good for the price.

Presumably they use them for both front and rear?

[hawkinspeter]

Thanks.

Thanks.

The Sheepway looks like a good alternative. There’s a cycle path that leads to the M5 bridge (by Pill) and then along the Portway, but I might be tempted to go along Martcombe Rd and use the Suspension Bridge.

[hawkinspeter]

I think that’s quite a common

I think that’s quite a common reaction as most people aren’t used to interacting with the police and dodgy people.

I’ve never heard of anyone being targetted by a driver that they’ve reported so I reckon the chances of it happening are very small. If it did happen, then I’d guess you could inform the police of your suspicions and I’d imagine they’d take a very dim view of witness intimidation. Another way to think about it is that the driver is less likely to attack you at a later date as they’d be worried about getting caught on camera (again).

I now usually do as Rendel suggests – don’t bother confronting the driver when the incident happens and just let the video/police do the talking for you though that’s more because it’s usually futile trying to get your point across with an idiot and it just gets you angry/upset for little gain.

[hawkinspeter]

brooksby wrote:

Let’s face it – I suspect that if you stopped a random group of drivers in Bristol, far more of them would fail a drugs test than an alcohol/breath test…

I daresay that you’re right, though that’s to be expected as drugs can stay in your system for a lot longer than alcohol.

[hawkinspeter]

I just had a quick look at

I just had a quick look at the Compensation Experts article: https://the-compensation-experts.co.uk/revealed-the-top-10-uk-cities-for-dangerous-driving/

Shockingly, 17% of Cardiff drivers have admitted to getting behind the wheel whilst drinking over the limit, with Norwich and Bristol drivers in second and third place. In contrast, Edinburgh was the only city in the country where no one admitted to drink driving – and in fact, no one from Edinburgh said they drove under the influence of drugs, or applied makeup whilst driving.

19% of Brits say they don’t know the rules for driving after having a drink, but most shockingly, is that 22% of people surveyed thought that having a drink POSITIVELY impacted their abilities as a driver.

[hawkinspeter]

I’m getting a bit conflicted

I’m getting a bit conflicted over the Bristol numbers.

As this is a self-reported poll, it means that 92.5% of Bristolian responders were being honest about phone use etc., but it also mentions that only 13% admitted to going over the speed limit which means that they’re not being that honest after all.

[hawkinspeter]

Can we have a side shot

Can we have a side shot please?

[hawkinspeter]

When are these bridges going

When are these entitled bridges going to learn to share the road? If there’s a tall lorry coming along, then they need to pull to one side to let it pass. It’s just common sense innit?

[hawkinspeter]

One answer would be to buy a

One answer would be to buy a second-hand bike – that’s surely got to be far more sustainable and gets around the issues with new bike supply chains.

However, I suspect that isn’t the answer you want.

[hawkinspeter]

Excellent!

Excellent!

I’ve just been reading a bit of this analysis: https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1119936_tesla-fatal-crash-rate-with-autopilot-still-no-better-than-with-human-drivers

It dives a bit more into how they’re getting their figures as Tesla are obviously cherry picking statistics to make themselves look better.

While these updated numbers for Autopilot are encouraging, it’s clear that Tesla’s claims of its vastly superior safety—at least in terms of fatal accidents—are still vapor. It’s way too soon to come to any firm conclusions about Autopilot safety.

Musk has compared Autopilot’s fatality rate to government figures for the overall U.S. traffic fatality rate. Surely someone as smart as Musk realizes that comparing Tesla’s Autopilot numbers to the NHTSA figure is not just apples-to-oranges. It’s apples-to-aardvarks.

NHTSA’s Fatality Rate per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled, the figure repeatedly cited by Musk as the Autopilot benchmark for comparison, includes bicycles, pedestrians, motorcycles, and buses. Musk is essentially equating a Tesla Autopilot crash to a pedestrian getting run over by a bus.

[hawkinspeter]

Do the Teslas have a better

Do the Teslas have a better crash record than other vehicles? I haven’t seen a comparison, but their tendency to crash into stationary vehicles doesn’t sound great as usually human drivers avoid those kinds of crashes (I’m ignoring all the examples on the Car Crashing into Buildings thread on here).

Edit: I’ve just had a brief search for comparisons and as there’s little data yet it seems inconclusive. I believe Tesla published a comparison of Tesla autonomous vehicles vs all other vehicles and it came out safer, but a more targetted comparison of autonomous Tesla vehicles vs other passenger cars would reach the opposite conclusion.

[Author]

Replies