This forum is just so stale...

mazcp

Man, in terms of interest levels, this forum is right up there with 'watching paint dry'. At least the C+ forum had some character - now we're in this shiny new forum, we're all a bit standoffish. It's like day1 in the Big Brother house.

...yes I'm bored. How about yet another helmet debate to break the ice?! Go on, you know you want to...I've stopped wearing one now for about 2 weeks. It's much better that way, plus stats tell you they're only useful for when you ride <12mph [see 'Cyclecraft' if you don't believe me]. I find that drivers give me extra berth as well, which is another plus point. It's got to be a good thing.

Johnny G

I don't like the decor - it's so...blue!

Never mind, as you say Maz, a few of the old favourite debates and it'll feel more homely.

Chriscommuter

I always find that RLJing past MTB'ers so i can look cool is fun...

Oh yea, London is the ONLY place to cycle...

Will that liven things up or are we tooooo bored even for a row ....?

mazcp

Chriscommuter wrote:

Oh yea, London is the ONLY place to cycle...

You're 'avin a laarf!

Mystery Shopper

Perhaps we could invite Paul Smith to post here, that should liven things up.

Mystery Shopper

"He Whom We Do Not Name" ?!

That's not what I typed.

jimmythecuckoo

Some guy crashed and finished the Tour stage without his helmet today. I think he should be chucked out for not wearing one, how's that for controversial?

el_presidente

Some of the good posters have gone to cyclechat

farrell

it's only a forum...I shouldn't worry about it.

mazcp

So, is everyone OK with the new HC rules 61/63 changes, or don't they go far enough?
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page12275.asp

'not compulsory'...music to my ears...

snorri

mazcp wrote:

So, is everyone OK with the new HC rules 61/63 changes, ..

No, not OK.
I thought the final paragraph where they told us it was necessary to get the rules out quickly as any delay would mean delaying the benefits to the vulnerable road user was a load of poo. If they had spent a bit more time and got it right, then the vulnerable would have had a lot more protection.

dondare

Quite right. The delay is caused by their mistakes, and they should stop trying to encourage cyclists to use cycle lanes altogether.
"Cycle facilities provide no more than an illusion of safety and their use is entirely optional" would be the best choice of words.

Did you actually type "poo"?

mazcp

@snorri...I didn't read that far, but yes, I see what you mean about the last paragraph.

snorri

dondare wrote:

Did you actually type "poo"?

Yes, I did type poo, not a term I use regularly, just an attempt to raise the standards around here.

domtyler

Having listened to the concerns of cyclists regarding certain aspects of rules 61 and 63 of the proposed revisions to the Highway Code, we sought views from key stakeholders on proposals for further changes to these rules.

We have now carefully considered stakeholders views and on 15 June laid before Parliament revised versions of rules 61 and 63, as follows:

61 Cycle Routes and Other Facilities. Use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time it is unsafe to do so. Use of these facilities is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

63 Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway. When using a cycle lane, keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

Provided that there are no objections in Parliament to the proposed revisions we should be able to publish the new edition of the Highway Code by the end of September. Any delay in issuing the Code would mean delaying the benefits of applying all the improved advice for all road users that it contains, including advice to motorists to be more aware of vulnerable road users such as cyclists.

I find the above acceptable and it should be published asap. If they make any more changes they are just as likely to go backwards again as forwards, get it published now.
________
Motorcycle tires

WyS

they just need to structure it properly.

I have installed, maintained and moderated many forums over the years, and this is just a mess.

It should go forums>sub forums>threads

like

MTB >>>>>>>>>>>> freeride/trials/gear >>>>> threads
ROAD >>>>>>>>>> fixies/touring/lycra >>>>> threads
COMMUTING >>>> general/rlj/helmet >>>>>> threads

I have used phpbb many times. Mod me and ill have it streamlined by the end of the day. (You can take the power away from me after i fix it)

ChrisLS

...bike radar is in it's early days, give it time, I'm sure it will come good

BentMikey

I'm already happy, and there are lots of positive changes happening!

hevipedal

Interesting to look at ASL in the HC. It says

154: Advanced stop lines. Some junctions have advanced stop lines or bus advance areas to allow cycles and buses to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached, and should avoid encroaching on the marked area. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 43(2)

So for some one to be done for stopping their car in the ASL the police have to see them cross the first white line on red. Just being stopped there is not an offence.................

A - W

I've finally remembered my password hench me being on today!

hevipedal

A - W wrote:

I've finally remembered my password hench me being on today!

Hench?????? was it alcohol forgetfulness?????????????????????

A - W

hevipedal wrote:

A - W wrote:

I've finally remembered my password hench me being on today!

Hench?????? was it alcohol forgetfulness?????????????????????

Yes. :oops:

Jeremy Parker

hevipedal wrote:

Interesting to look at ASL in the HC. It says

154: Advanced stop lines. Some junctions have advanced stop lines or bus advance areas to allow cycles and buses to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached, and should avoid encroaching on the marked area. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 43(2)

So for some one to be done for stopping their car in the ASL the police have to see them cross the first white line on red. Just being stopped there is not an offence.................

Actually the idiots who wrote the HC seem to have made the same mistake that the idiots who wrote the law did. They forgot that not all vehicles are motor vehicles. Actually all vehicles, not just motor vehicles, have to stop at the back stop line

I suppose we should be glad that they are not subtle enough to try to hide how prejudiced they are

Jeremy Parker

dondare

Jeremy Parker wrote:

hevipedal wrote:

Interesting to look at ASL in the HC. It says

154: Advanced stop lines. Some junctions have advanced stop lines or bus advance areas to allow cycles and buses to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached, and should avoid encroaching on the marked area. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 43(2)

So for some one to be done for stopping their car in the ASL the police have to see them cross the first white line on red. Just being stopped there is not an offence.................

Actually the idiots who wrote the HC seem to have made the same mistake that the idiots who wrote the law did. They forgot that not all vehicles are motor vehicles. Actually all vehicles, not just motor vehicles, have to stop at the back stop line

I suppose we should be glad that they are not subtle enough to try to hide how prejudiced they are

Jeremy Parker

Unless there's a feeder cycle-lane. (Or should that be a cycle feeder-lane?)

Hairy Jock

mazcp wrote:

So, is everyone OK with the new HC rules 61/63 changes, or don't they go far enough?
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page12275.asp

'not compulsory'...music to my ears...

From the Highway Code

61: Full details about the correct procedure at roundabouts are contained in Rules 160-166. Roundabouts can be hazardous and should be approached with care.

62: You may feel safer either keeping to the left on the roundabout or dismounting and walking your cycle round on the pavement or verge. If you decide to keep to the left you should

* be aware that drivers may not easily see you
* take extra care when cycling across exits and you may need to signal right to show you are not leaving the roundabout
* watch out for vehicles crossing your path to leave or join the roundabout.

63: Give plenty of room to long vehicles on the roundabout as they need more space to manoeuvre. Do not ride in the space they need to get round the roundabout. It may be safer to wait until they have cleared the roundabout.

What so controversial?

mazcp wrote:

Man, in terms of interest levels, this forum is right up there with 'watching paint dry'. At least the C+ forum had some character - now we're in this shiny new forum, we're all a bit standoffish. It's like day1 in the Big Brother house.

...yes I'm bored. How about yet another helmet debate to break the ice?! Go on, you know you want to...I've stopped wearing one now for about 2 weeks. It's much better that way, plus stats tell you they're only useful for when you ride <12mph [see 'Cyclecraft' if you don't believe me]. I find that drivers give me extra berth as well, which is another plus point. It's got to be a good thing.

There is a much better debate running on CC.

Yep BR is crap, duno why I keep coming back...

Kaipaith

I'll be honest, it's just a forum. I don't really give a ****.

I've been a member of many a forum, just like most people here. I'm sure we can agree that when a forum moves a fair few people kick up a stink, but most people just get on with it. At the end of the day, it's just a place to discuss what you have in common... a "forum" if you will.

If people come, it's usually because other people make it what it is, so stick around... It's not like your local fecking bikeshop is moving to Hamgyong.

Keiron Curtis

Well I'm new to the forums,and I have to agree,not alot going on.

As far as helmets go,I'm with you,I've never worn one and don't feel the need,I stay away from traffic as much as possible,and very rarely get above 12 mph.

I'm sure they are a must for the racing boys etc.,but for me I only wear a hat when its raining.

BentMikey

They aren't much use above 12mph anyway, mate.

rdaviesb

I'm waiting for someone to tell me that London is hilly. That'll get them going.

Big Red S

Well, it is, what with all those bridges.

rdaviesb

But still not hilly enough to actually need gears though?!