road.cc live blog: How to watch the Cyclo-cross Worlds, 12 riders test positive at one race, Should drivers with points on their licence be required to have black box car insurance? + more
All the cycling news from this site and beyond
Fri, Feb 02, 2018 09:00
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.
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.
25 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
captain_slog 13 hours ago
I see quite a few MAAP items out in the Surrey Hills. The new shop has a cafe and they're from Melbourne so the coffee should be good: I'm looking forward to visiting.
jackcycles 16 hours ago
@chrisonabike Mercedes was acceptable, but the second one (old Toyota people carrier/ex-taxi) was a prosecutable offence.
Rendel Harris 18 hours ago
I wasn't saying that nor talking about people who say that. I said it was silly to claim that wearing a helmet indicates acceptance of dangerous driving and poor infrastructure. I choose to wear a helmet; I also regularly report dangerous driving to the police and correspond with councils and road authorities about ways infrastructure could be improved for cyclists. I rather doubt I'm the only helmet wearer who does so.
Steve K 18 hours ago
@JamieT (a pedant writes) she's a London Assembly member, not an MP.
eburtthebike 21 hours ago
@Rendel Harris ".....but the claim that wearing one is somehow to be accepting dangerous driving and poor infrastructure is silly." Not that silly. Demanding that cyclists wear a helmet is seen by many people as 'the answer' to cycling safety, so there's no need to put in infrastructure. The difference between infrastructure and helmets is that infrastructure works. Helmets are a distraction from what really works, and the more time we spend talking about them, the less time we spend on things that do work. Helmets should be consigned to the dustbin of history as a failed experiment, and we should cease even mentioning them.
wtjs 22 hours ago
@Mr Blackbird Hats off to George Hall My hat's not coming off- despite this touch of cycleway-washing, Hall still bears the Mark of Cain, until he repudiates his party altogether
JamieT 22 hours ago
Perhaps an article showing a) what is available in the uk as cargo bikes and) comments from real life scenarios from those already using bikes or cargo bikes as one gentleman has done in the comments. Perhaps road.cc could follow up with this. Even the London Assembly member said not every business should use cargo bikes but suggested a more nuanced approach suitable for certain trades or companies....
25 thoughts on “road.cc live blog: How to watch the Cyclo-cross Worlds, 12 riders test positive at one race, Should drivers with points on their licence be required to have black box car insurance? + more”
I doubt there would be enough
I doubt there would be enough black boxes for all drivers with points, let alone engineers to fit them. Making them mandatory for any driving offence not covered by a fixed penalty notice would appear entirely reasonable though.
Grahamd wrote:
Nothing to fit, no engineers needed. One of the UK’s largest insurers, Aviva, do this through a phone app.
Quote:
Yes.
I think a better idea to the
I think a better idea to the insurance thing would be something that goes on your numberplate outlining the type of offence, eg as symbol to show you’ve been caught speeding, one for texting while driving, one for drink driving. the shame would probably be enough to stop a number of people, especially those with personalised plates, wouldnt want that ruined with something that shows you’ve been caught drinking and speeding, it’d help other motorists and the police identify who to look out for too.
RobD wrote:
You would get some people who’d make that a collectable thing, and want to get the whole set
RobD wrote:
There speaks the voice of someone who has a car for each member of the household.
For the rest of us who have several people using the one vehicle then that would not work
Given that the current system
Given that the current system clearly isn’t working, we need to look at alternatives, and this one seems quite promising. Some drivers might try using the big brother argument and privacy issues, and there is some traction in those, but I think my life and the lives of my loved ones is more important.
Until we have 100% driverless cars, human error by drivers will continue to kill thousands a year, and maim tens of thousands more. If it was any other field of human activity, it would be banned until the problems had been solved, but because we are a car-centric society, our politians are too weak to do this.
I’d suggest that this actually doesn’t go far enough, and all new cars should be fitted with the black box.
burtthebike wrote:
Be careful what you wish for, there’s plenty of reasonably founded speculation that the autonomous vehicle lobby will seek for segregated lanes, stealing valuable and ever-dwindling street space from human powered transport. And unlike us after some decent cycle lanes worth a damn, they’ve got existing funds and the elusive promise of £b for the economy to sway councils’ decisions and get protective legislation in place.
ROOTminus1 wrote:
“… there’s plenty of reasonably founded speculation that the autonomous vehicle lobby will seek for segregated lanes…”
No there isn’t. Driverless vehicles will need less space because they will be following the lane, not weaving around like humans do, so they’ll need less space.
But please feel free to continue your scaremongering.
Telematics is interesting in
Telematics is interesting in how they incentivise good driver behaviour. A mate’s son has just passed his test, he gets extra mileage added to his allowance on a monthly basis if he scores well on speeding. Sounds great but then there’s the clause where they’ll cancel his insurance if he drives 30mph over the speed limit. Not sure if that’s a sliding scale at lower speeds but what sort of message does that send?
kil0ran wrote:
It sends the message not to speed.
rct wrote:
It sends the message not to speed.— kil0ran
It sends the message that driving 29mph over the speed limit is OK because all it means is he’ll lose mileage bonuses that he doesn’t currently need. That’s how my mate’s kid has interpreted it. Now if there was a market where he could sell earned miles that might work…
The only thing these black
The only thing these black boxes do is to control the top speed of drivers in known speed limit areas. If the speed limt has been changed temporarily (roadworks for example) it is not registered.
Also, it does not stop the ever increasing “I’ll ignore that red light because I won’t be caught” attitude!
So I don’t see how it will improve safety other than control the top speed of those who do speed and get caught. All other aspects of bad driving (aggression, middle lane hogging, jumping red lights, driving too close, parking on pavements etc etc) will simply continue to happen and get worse.
The solution is more cameras and / or more police on the roads
Marky Legs wrote:
Don’t they also use an accelerometer to measure heavy acceleration, braking, and cornering?
Perhaps they don’t solve every problem but a partial solution to any problem is usually better than no solution.
portec wrote:
I thought black boxes in cars just measured G forces. The phone apps use GPS tracking as well.
What if one circumvents this
What if one circumvents this blackbox by using a hire car? They can easily say they forgot to take the box with them when switching vehicles.
Hire companies should also up their standards and run checks on drivers
RoubaixCube wrote:
Many do, but also every check involves a charge from the DVLA and the appointed technology providors the DVLA saw fit to work with. If every customer was checked in full, that would require to pass the cost onto the customer, increasing your car rental costs, and right now the industry is being squeezed by price, so not a straight forward thing.
Technology is also going into cars that would enable a company to montior how the car is being driven, where and at what speed. it isn’t being used for those purposes but the potential is there, but you have GDPR, data protection and human rights regulations screaming out at you. It’s a much bigger topic. We can do all of this and more…..and what? End up like China where freedom & rights are a joke.
Be carefull what you wish for
Be carefull what you wish for. Only a hop skip and a jump to boxes being extended to bikes.
I am all for punishment for bad behaviour but I am also a beleaver in right to privacy.
jimt wrote:
When they fit effective black boxes to every car as a legal requirement I’ll be delighted to fit one on the road bike. By all means have privacy, but if you insist on driving a tonne or so of polluting monstrosity maybe you should have to make that sacrifice?
jimt wrote:
What’s a ‘beleaver’? Is it the opposite of a ‘remainer’ ?
Who are you going to get to
Who are you going to get to pay for the black boxes? Currently they are offered for free by insurance companies because insurance companies believe they will reduce claims or at least provide data that allows the insurer to better price insurance (i.e., insurers are willing to pay for them because they benefit the insurer). Can’t see insurers forking out for blanket installation for good of cyclists/other vulnerable road users. Good luck trying to convince the govt to add them to all vehicles (queue outrage from motorists about added cost of motoring in times of austerity). In August last year the FT reported that “[telematics boxes]can cost as little as £50 to buy now, and less than that to install” so maybe the solution will ultimately be that they get so cheap it stops being an issue. The other problem about blanket installation (before you get to privacy concerns) is that it will make some people economically uninsurable. There’s an argument these people shouldn’t be driving anyway. But tey probably will and they probably will continue to do so, just on an uninsured basis, which may not be a great outcome as they are more likely to have collisions.
surly_by_name wrote:
Many, if not most late model cars (post 2012?) have this installed already. Car makers install it as part of the airbag and crash prevention systems, it stores data for the last 2 minutes. The data from these has been used in a number of court cases here down under to establish the behaviour of the driver immediately prior to the accident. The technology is already there.
Arguably making on board
Arguably making on board camera’s a legal requirement. If you know you are on film it will have an impact on a lot of bad driving. it won’t stop the narsacistic idiots and illegal drivers who just don’t care but it could provide a cultural change
the down side is you need resource to review, laws to support, police to action and something to protect all those genuine mistakes and edge cases……and it is very 1984……so it won’t happen…maybe.
Simmo72 wrote:
Personally, I think this is a great idea, and make a non functioning camera an mot fail. In most cases I suspect evidence would be captured on 3rd party vehicles, rather than the offending vehicle, but that’s ok. I have always thought plod had a bias towards catching speeders as opposed to other traffic offences because it is easy, and conclusive, to read a number from a display, compared for example to arguing that somebody jumped the lights. Cameras would give plod the evidence they need. But as you say, there are too many PC people in the UK who would argue infringement of civil liberties. Presumably meaning spouses could check up on where cheating partners had been while supposedly working late!
1) This reinforces the common
1) This reinforces the common misconception that it is always safe to drive at the speed limit, rather than educating drivers to judge what is safe.
2) Speeding is only one form of dangerous driving, and a black box does nothing to stop tailgating, poor discipline at junctions, blind overtaking, and so on.