Journalism and cycling

Macy0161 · 14-01-2020 03:22PM

Weepsie wrote: »

Not so much about cycling, but a long read about Strava in the Guardian

Interesting read. I've never set up the Strava Segment stuff to my watch or bike computer. However, what I do use them for is post spin assessment - quite often when my RPE has been high on a spin, the evidence is there (positive or negative) in the times.

I had summit, but cancelled it in protest when they cut Relive from using my data. This year I've set everything as private by default, and then changing activities (like outdoor spins) after the fact. I'm finding I visit the app far less, which is less time staring at my phone, which is a good thing imo.

The Fit File podcast has discussed Strava a few times in recent months, as to how they're going to make any money. If anything, as a recording device, it's going backwards by removing sensor supports. What does it really do, that say Garmin Connect doesn't in terms of analysis?

Seth Brundle · 14-01-2020 06:01PM

Dropbox to Support Dublin Cycling Campaign

On Thursday 23rd January 2020, Dropbox will formally launch its initiative to support everyday cycling in Ireland at an event in its European Headquarters in Hatch Street in Dublin. Dropbox has agreed to support the work of the Dublin Cycling Campaign and to help it develop as a stronger cycling advocacy force.

Dropbox is the first company in Ireland to formally support the work of Dublin Cycling Campaign as Business Members. This follows its pioneering support for other progressive causes over the years such as the Marriage Equality and Pride campaigns.

...

https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/dropbox-support-dublin-cycling-campaign

micar · 14-01-2020 08:14PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Dropbox to Support Dublin Cycling Campaign

https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/dropbox-support-dublin-cycling-campaign

Dropbox just happen to be in the same building I work in.

Wonder if my employer will get involved

Seth Brundle · 15-01-2020 07:15PM

The thick eejit :rolleyes:

Police officer blames cyclist for taxi driver close pass – road safety experts (including another traffic officer) disagree

Breezer · 15-01-2020 10:40PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The thick eejit :rolleyes:

Police officer blames cyclist for taxi driver close pass – road safety experts (including another traffic officer) disagree

And relative to a lot of the stuff posted here and ignored by Gardaí, it wasn’t even that bad a pass.

Any chance PC Mark Hodson would like to come and give a talk to our boys and girls in blue?

Seth Brundle · 16-01-2020 10:05AM

The law is an ass

edit: according to one twitter response, the driver had bull bars fitted (to a feckin Berlingo

) which are illegal but again nothing happens

https://twitter.com/dublincycling/status/1217527671179161602

rubadub · 16-01-2020 10:28AM

^^ very good point in one of the replies

Missed opportunity to check the drivers phone and see if there was activity immediately before he hit the cyclist - should be a routine check for incidents like this

Harrybelafonte · 16-01-2020 12:58PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The law is an ass

edit: according to one twitter response, the driver had bull bars fitted (to a feckin Berlingo ) which are illegal but again nothing happens

https://twitter.com/dublincycling/status/1217527671179161602

Hi, AFAIK, they're not outright illegal but are regulated.

Seth Brundle · 16-01-2020 01:14PM

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Hi, AFAIK, they're not outright illegal but are regulated.

I mnote the following on the RSA site:

Once vehicles are in service they must adhere to the requirements set out in the Road Traffic Construction, Equipment & Use of Vehicles regulations S.I. No. 190 of 1963. Article 32 states that vehicles ‘shall not have any inessential object in a position where it is likely to strike any person involved in a collision with the vehicle, unless injury is not likely to be caused by reason of the projection of the object’.
Article 96 states that ‘every vehicle while used in a public place shall be such, and so maintained and used, that no danger is likely to be caused to any person’.
Owners or drivers of vehicles breaching these regulations may be found guilty of an offence under Section 11 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 as amended.

https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/VS_Information_Notes/Vehicle_Parts/FAQs%20on%20Bull%20Bars%20on%20Vehicles.pdf

I'll hazard a guess that they are not essential on a Citroen Berlingo

CramCycle · 16-01-2020 01:24PM

They are illegal on new vehicles in the EU since mid last year AFAIK but before that, so long as they were in the manufacturers specs, they were not illegal. Cost you a pretty penny on your insurance if people are to be believed as they would cause more damage in an accident but my daughters boyfriend has them on his Dacia Duster and he said his insurance was not more than expected. Not a fan of them myself

RobbieMD · 16-01-2020 01:49PM

rubadub wrote: »

^^ very good point in one of the replies

I imagine that would be a nightmare to try to legislate for. It would have to grant powers to the Gardai to demand pin codes or require the person to unlock it, and powers to search the vehicle and person. But then could they read your personal texts etc. If someone was using a phone they could deny ownership of it. There is no requirement to keep a register of phones, would the Gardai have to prove you owned a phone? Or if other people were in the car then perhaps the phone was used by someone else. To try examine if emails were read or videos watched or apps being used, I imagine the phone would have to be seized, and even then I’m not sure if that information would be available. Also the Garda computer crime unit is running on a 4yr backlog. Most driving offences would be statute barred at that stage. It seems massively cumbersome to legislate for, when better alternatives exist.

Driving on the phone should be an immediate 3 month disqualification with the penalty doubling for subsequent offences. At the minute the penalty is so low that people will gladly risk it. Or do what New South Wales did and introduce mobile phone detection cameras. But we prefer to do things on the cheap and not invest in smart technology. It’s infuriating the amount of drivers not just talking on their phones but the ones with their heads buried on Facebook or whatever.

AndrewJRenko · 16-01-2020 01:59PM

RobbieMD wrote: »

I imagine that would be a nightmare to try to legislate for. It would have to grant powers to the Gardai to demand pin codes or require the person to unlock it, and powers to search the vehicle and person. But then could they read your personal texts etc. If someone was using a phone they could deny ownership of it. There is no requirement to keep a register of phones, would the Gardai have to prove you owned a phone? Or if other people were in the car then perhaps the phone was used by someone else. To try examine if emails were read or videos watched or apps being used, I imagine the phone would have to be seized, and even then I’m not sure if that information would be available. Also the Garda computer crime unit is running on a 4yr backlog. Most driving offences would be statute barred at that stage. It seems massively cumbersome to legislate for, when better alternatives exist.

Driving on the phone should be an immediate 3 month disqualification with the penalty doubling for subsequent offences. At the minute the penalty is so low that people will gladly risk it. Or do what New South Wales did and introduce mobile phone detection cameras. But we prefer to do things on the cheap and not invest in smart technology. It’s infuriating the amount of drivers not just talking on their phones but the ones with their heads buried on Facebook or whatever.

There have been quite a few cases in the UK where phone use was detected immediately before fatal crashes, including the preacher who was downloading a sermon on his phone, and the truck driver who killed a mum and three kids while changing his music choices;

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-34540151

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/lorry-driver-who-killed-family-while-using-phone-gets-10-years-1.2849455

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/wrongway-driver-who-killed-safety-patrol-cyclist-while-on-phone-jailed-a4252011.html

https://www.irishnews.com/news/2019/06/27/news/driver-who-knocked-down-and-killed-man-while-using-mobile-phone-escapes-jail-1650793/

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6306195/driver-who-killed-pedestrian-sacked-from-job/

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-49987479

I don't recall any such clear-cut cases over here, though it's not unreasonable to suggest that phone use is very likely to have been a factor in serious collisions.

We need to find a way of proving this.

magicbastarder · 16-01-2020 02:13PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

phone use was detected immediately before fatal crashes, including the preacher who was downloading a sermon on his phone

not quite 'immediately before'

The court heard Noble later told a colleague he had been reaching across his cab to play a sermon on his mobile phone just before hitting the cyclist

magicbastarder · 16-01-2020 02:21PM

aha - i read your post as the *detection* of the phone use was immediately before the crash, rather than the phone use itself was immediately before the crash.

CramCycle · 16-01-2020 02:31PM

RobbieMD wrote: »

Driving on the phone should be an immediate 3 month disqualification with the penalty doubling for subsequent offences. At the minute the penalty is so low that people will gladly risk it. Or do what New South Wales did and introduce mobile phone detection cameras. But we prefer to do things on the cheap and not invest in smart technology. It’s infuriating the amount of drivers not just talking on their phones but the ones with their heads buried on Facebook or whatever.

100% agree, make it like the untaxed Diesel fine, that its unlikely you will be caught but if you are, you will feel it. In fact, hand over fines directly to Revenue, I guarantee you they would find a way to enforce payment very quickly. Seize and crush the car plus the 3 months.
I went the long way home the other day and the Drummartin link road was actually worse than the N11 for phone use. I let a roar at one who was merging over and they genuinely looked confused and went back to their phone. A friend of my daughters failed their test (and rightly so) because they thought it was alright to answer their phone mid test because the car was not moving. Some people, I just despair. Same driver then broke a red, right beside a Garda car who had his blue lights flashing to pull someone else in, lights went red and she actually started moving, went through the red and overtook the Garda car who was pulling in the other car. It is insanity that someone like that is let out of the house alone, let alone drive a car.

Harrybelafonte · 16-01-2020 02:35PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I mnote the following on the RSA site:

https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/VS_Information_Notes/Vehicle_Parts/FAQs%20on%20Bull%20Bars%20on%20Vehicles.pdf

I'll hazard a guess that they are not essential on a Citroen Berlingo

Maybe, maybe not, depends on what the van is used for and whether it passed the CRVT with them on. But as I said, they're not outright illegal, but are regulated. I was simply clarifying that. I do not believe myself they are essential for almost any road vehicle in Ireland unless dedicated to off-road use and have never had them on 4x4s or vans I have owned.

AndrewJRenko · 16-01-2020 02:44PM

CramCycle wrote: »

. A friend of my daughters failed their test (and rightly so) because they thought it was alright to answer their phone mid test because the car was not moving. Some people, I just despair.

Same driver then broke a red, right beside a Garda car who had his blue lights flashing to pull someone else in, lights went red and she actually started moving, went through the red and overtook the Garda car who was pulling in the other car. It is insanity that someone like that is let out of the house alone, let alone drive a car.

You couldn't make it up.

Stark · 16-01-2020 02:46PM

Was the second incident also during the test? :eek:

There's no way I would have had my phone switched on, let alone actually answer it when I was doing my driving test.

CramCycle · 16-01-2020 02:57PM

Stark wrote: »

Was the second incident also during the test? :eek:

There's no way I would have had my phone switched on, let alone actually answer it when I was doing my driving test.

Apologies, badly written, the driver who was on their phone earlier in the paragraph, they then broke a red while beside a cop car, with the Blues and Twos going. I just inserted the phone and test story in the middle for some reason.

Harrybelafonte · 16-01-2020 03:29PM

Is the normalisation of mobile phone use part of this (or is that obvious). Using the mobile used to be an extension to the land line, now it's all we have and what stems from that.

Know someone on the M50 last week. Check rear view mirror and could see car behind advancing quicker than their own 100km/h speed with head down looking at phone. Braced in time for the impact.

CramCycle · 16-01-2020 04:38PM

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Is the normalisation of mobile phone use part of this (or is that obvious). Using the mobile used to be an extension to the land line, now it's all we have and what stems from that.

Know someone on the M50 last week. Check rear view mirror and could see car behind advancing quicker than their own 100km/h speed with head down looking at phone. Braced in time for the impact.

Mainly, but then look at new car designs, huge displays the size of small televisions which all have apple or google operating systems to connect to your phone, play music, videos etc. how they are legal is beyond me but here they are and it just slowly normalises the idea that paying full attention is not necessary, it is insane.

Grassey · 16-01-2020 04:40PM

In car entertainment systems.... for when you are stuck on your couch on the M50... why go to the movies, we'll bring them to you as you struggle to find a parking space....

AndrewJRenko · 16-01-2020 06:00PM

CramCycle wrote: »

Mainly, but then look at new car designs, huge displays the size of small televisions which all have apple or google operating systems to connect to your phone, play music, videos etc. how they are legal is beyond me but here they are and it just slowly normalises the idea that paying full attention is not necessary, it is insane.

I'm frequently amazed by the number of drivers with their phones mounted on the windscreen in positions that clearly block visibility of what's happening on the road. Even when used for satnav or whatever, this has got to reduce visibility of pedestrians, cyclists and others.

Seth Brundle · 16-01-2020 06:31PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm frequently amazed by the number of drivers with their phones mounted on the windscreen in positions that clearly block visibility of what's happening on the road. Even when used for satnav or whatever, this has got to reduce visibility of pedestrians, cyclists and others.

...if that practice is good enough for professional drivers such as taxi drivers (who can have two or three in use) then surely it's good enough for an ordinary Joe?

p15574 · 17-01-2020 10:02AM

RobbieMD wrote: »

I imagine that would be a nightmare to try to legislate for. It would have to grant powers to the Gardai to demand pin codes or require the person to unlock it, and powers to search the vehicle and person. But then could they read your personal texts etc. If someone was using a phone they could deny ownership of it.

I suppose there could be two levels of it:
1) A standard request to the telecoms company with the number and a time frame that they are legally obliged to fulfil, where they state whether there were any calls or outgoing texts during that time. Not sure if it'd be possible to determine data stuff - maybe something like if there was outgoing WhatsApp traffic, or incoming YouTube traffic. This wouldn't risk the privacy of text or message contents etc
2) A full examination of the phone, as you've suggested above

Seth Brundle · 17-01-2020 10:26AM

Something interesting for the nerds like myself...
TfL Press Release - TfL using artificial intelligence to help fuel London’s cycling boom

Seth Brundle · 17-01-2020 11:11AM

Calls for ‘dedicated’ cycle network in Limerick

LIMERICK cyclists have expressed their concern at what they say is a lack of concrete detail in the Transport Strategy Advance Consultation Report.

Stakeholder groups in the Limerick area, including Limerick Cycling Campaign and the Limerick Cycle Bus, received the advance consultation report by the NTA and Jacobs/Systra shortly before Christmas.

This initial report outlines engagement with stakeholders in the early stages of the process.

Both Limerick Cycling Campaign and the Limerick Cycle Bus made submissions into this part of the Transport Strategy process.

Limerick Cycling Campaign Chair, Conor Buckley, has outlined the need for the Transport Strategy to make cycling an integral part of Limerick’s transport network by developing a connected, coherent and safe utility cycling network.

...

Seth Brundle · 17-01-2020 11:17AM

https://twitter.com/denverpost/status/1217922065245843467

AndrewJRenko · 17-01-2020 11:21AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

...if that practice is good enough for professional drivers such as taxi drivers (who can have two or three in use) then surely it's good enough for an ordinary Joe?

Does anyone know if there is a specific offence about putting things on the windscreen that block the driver's view?

JMcL · 17-01-2020 12:29PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Does anyone know if there is a specific offence about putting things on the windscreen that block the driver's view?

Not sure if there's anything specific here - I'd imagine it'd fall under some other catch-all, but there was a truck driver jailed in the UK before Christmas for having a shelf tray installed on his dash which led to the death of a cyclist (https://road.cc/content/news/269329-lorry-driver-whose-view-was-blocked-dashboard-tray-table-jailed-killing-cyclist)

Journalism and cycling

Comments