Motorist crushes bike and speeds off with cyclist on bonnet during road rage confrontation; Cycle lane bollard; Rapha jersey listed on Ebay for £105k; Canadian rider outsprints grizzly bear; Highway Code quiz; Aero gains + more on the live blog

sensei wrote:

but Australia looks like it's on a whole new level with even less protections towards cyclists.

In Australia, drivers (and some cyclists) self report viewing cyclists as less than human!

https://phys.org/news/2019-03-offcyclists-human-drivers.html

Small sample size, but worrying for Oz cyclists non the less.

Bishop0151 wrote:

sensei wrote:

but Australia looks like it's on a whole new level with even less protections towards cyclists.

In Australia, drivers (and some cyclists) self report viewing cyclists as less than human!

https://phys.org/news/2019-03-offcyclists-human-drivers.html

Small sample size, but worrying for Oz cyclists non the less.

I saw this and various motorists have said this in the U.K. From the videos, threads, etc I've seen Australia is one of very few countries in the world that have a more toxic anti-cycling culture.

The majority of the anti-cyclist keyboard warriors here wouldn't dare put their words into practice in real life as they're little bitch-like cowards looking for any easy way to raise their pitiful levels of self esteem, cyclists are one of the few remaining groups that are still fair game to many. However, in Australia you see frequent video clips of motorists fully intending to use their vehicle as a weapon against a cyclist, rather than here often by incompetence, ignorance or negligence.

N=1 but having lived in the Northern Beaches of Sydney and commuted in to the city most days I found riding felt much safer than the UK.
The roads are wider straighter having rideable shoulders and there are traffic police (I was random breath tests 5 times in 2 years Vs none in 15 years of driving in the UK).

lostshrimp wrote:

N=1 but having lived in the Northern Beaches of Sydney and commuted in to the city most days I found riding felt much safer than the UK. The roads are wider straighter having rideable shoulders and there are traffic police (I was random breath tests 5 times in 2 years Vs none in 15 years of driving in the UK).

I will concede to your experience as I have not lived in Aus, though the video clips you frequently see regarding Aus road rage attacks on cyclists seems more severe, but the design of the roads will inevitably play a part. Space is a premium in the U.K. and I think this only serves to frustrate motorists here.

"After the initial aggression from the cyclists..."

Yeah, we travel in packs initiating aggression with cars, by using the road, and not just the sliver at the edge they want us to. A group of riders all come up with the lie that the motorist was swerving into them. That point was punctuated by driving over one of them.

Absurd level of prejudice.

7 news did a follow up piece interviewing one of the cyclists. His account was the driver close passed the riders, who were in the cycle lane,    and when challenged at the next lights drove into one of the cyclists. If that is true then the incident in the clip here may have been a second hit-run given the car is in a parking space, not the road lane.

But I don't have a lot of sympathy for these cyclists. Escalating aggression with an aggressive motorist isn't going to end well, and as happened here it's easy to paint them as the at-fault party. It feeds the online frenzy of hatred that spills over to all cyclists, Lycra wearers or not. Better to hold your tongue, ride with cameras and take the footage to police.

TBH, they probably will. All the witnesses interviewed seemed to be on his side.

Yep, I failed video 1 for identifying too many potential hazards - when I re-read the rubric, there's only one intentional hazard per video! I also only scored 4 in the others because I was trying to click where the hazard was actually located in the video, when in fact you can click anywhere.

quiff wrote:

Yep, I failed video 1 for identifying too many potential hazards - when I re-read the rubric, there's only one intentional hazard per video! I also only scored 4 in the others because I was trying to click where the hazard was actually located in the video, when in fact you can click anywhere.

I might have scored 48 out of 50 in the mock theory, but I wish I'd read the fecking instructions on the hazard perception ..

But since when has flowing water over a road, plus narrow hump-backed bridges NOT been a hazard?

I think you get pinged for too many close together. Presumably you lift off the accelerator for some of the signs ?
I'd love to know the answers for that one.

quiff wrote:

Yep, I failed video 1 for identifying too many potential hazards - when I re-read the rubric, there's only one intentional hazard per video! I also only scored 4 in the others because I was trying to click where the hazard was actually located in the video, when in fact you can click anywhere.

Only one hazard per video? Bizarre. I saw about three per video! I only passed video 2,  but I couldn't work out why i'd passed or failed or what hazards I had failed to notice. Some explanation would have been good. OTOH I got 49 out of 50 on the theory test, but that's just rules (as well as being something I've done in real life).

If you read the rubric properly (which I didn't!) they're looking for one "developing hazard" in each video. They were, respectively: (1) the tractor (2) the milk float and (3) the van joining from a layby. When you get your results, you can review the clips. The red flags along the bottom show every hazard I clicked. The 5,4,3,2,1 shows you where the developing hazard was visible in the video, with 5 points for spotting it early, 1 if you saw it at the last minute.   

Although you could see the tractor then the tractor sign well before the tractor pulled out round the bend !

Then there is the narrow road under the bridge at the end. I guess 'test your brakes' is also very optional !

No wonder there are close passes and accidents if this is the standard for new drivers.

Yeah, I think one of my red flags before the 5 point mark starts is when the tractor first became visible through the hedge. 

no need for the outdoorswoman to wear bells. ?

In other news, 12 new KOMs set at Buller Pond, Alberta ....

It might be an issue with the quality of the service? That bear should learn it costs nothing to greet the paying customer with a smile, however it's feeling inside.

I can't stand being upsold and overcharged - just sell me the bear product already. I'm not made of money

the bear didn't accept contactless

47 here too, but didn't feel confident of some of them. Don't feel too bad about failing the one that started with the bare faced lie "you wish to a tow a trailer".  

46.  It's true that cyclists make the best drivers. 

My only disappointment was that there was no question about what to do if you aren't sure your vision is up to driving; as we all know, the answer is to go for a 50 mile test drive.

eburtthebike wrote:

46.  It's true that cyclists make the best drivers. 

My only disappointment was that there was no question about what to do if you aren't sure your vision is up to driving; as we all know, the answer is to go for a 50 mile test drive.

I had a question about what to do if you're not sure what impact cough mixture has had on you. Going for a short drive was an option