CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
sticky@edinburgh87
Two things:
1) The Daily Mail doesn't seem to know the difference between "break" and "brake";
2) The BMW's registration is clearly visible in the video: LR11 MZY. Not a local registration: Standmore in Middx. Six years old, over 100,000 miles on the clock and worth ~£10-11K according to cazana.com. Hardly a 'prestige' vehicle, it seems to me, but Mr Angry and Arrogant seems to be very proud of it...
While I was waiting in the middle of the road to turn right into the nursery driveway while being undertaken by all the cars in the usual way, a white van going in the opposite direction thought this was the perfect spot to overtake a cyclist at speed. I'm not easily shaken but that was genuinely quite scary. (A good example of how defensive cycling makes *everyone* safer.)
Probably the scariest thing to happen to me in 100,00 miles of cycling. Costorphine Rd westbound at Murrayfield. Car turning right with me in the bus lane. 4 motocross bikes go past me at about 60mph. In the bus lane with me. The first two pulling wheelies. Waiting for the second two to come past. (Both on two wheels fortunately) was a pretty uncomfortable experience. No number plates but judging by the rider's gear not stolen.
@stiltskin, that sounds very bad, will it not be on CCTV.? Even without number plates, might be traceable?
@stiltskin
Was one of them an orange KTM with a very loud exhaust?
I agree with @gembo. One for the police. Hope you're OK.
They went by too fast for me to identify the bikes. Will give 101 a call.
A few days ago and a lot of miles away for me - while descending into Kersey, in Suffolk (where my in-laws live), I was met, on a narrow, overhung, blind-bending, 30mph road by a Jeep doing significantly more than 30mph. Somehow I managed to get out of the way (and into the nettles on the bank) - my roared expletive was heard in my in-laws' garden, about half a kilometre away.
As of yesterday, I now have cameras for my road bike...
@edinburgh87 - yup, me!
@ejstubbs - A couple of friends of friends on Facebook claim to know him / think they know him. I asked them to find out if the police did actually speak to him, or if they just told me that :P
I'm a bit miffed - The Daily Mail contacted me via YouTube DM and asked to use the video. I told them in no uncertain terms where to go. Then Scotland's Worst Drivers contacted me and I said sure, go ahead. Next time I'll be sure to stipulate that the video doesn't go to The Daily Mail...
Two drivers today estimating the safe distance to pass a bicycle with a small child on the back to be roughly 5.7cm.
Big silver Merc: WM13SHJ
New big black thing: YG66VAV
@algo: yikes.
@algo
Police.
Saturday afternoon while Doors Opening around, at the end of Abbeyhill, small truck/van thing decided to pass with barely elbow room whilst I had miniMcR on the back.
Caught up with him 20yrs later, words exchanged, his responses moved as we argued:
1. No I wasn't close, I always give cyclist room.
2. If I waited to give you 1.5m, then I'd never get passed.
3. My fault for taking my kid out on the roads.
It is possible the group of tourists who gathered learnt some new words.
I feel like I am on the verge of giving up cycling, it is relentlessly dispiriting.
1. No I wasn't close, I always give cyclist room.
2. If I waited to give you 1.5m, then I'd never get passed.
Uhh...
@edinburghcycl Agree about the Dailty Heil I've refused them too because of who they are but oddly they are the only ones that actually ask...Johnston press, mirror, sun all have copied and posted without credit As for Scotlands worst drivers ...they've done the same to my videos and when i asked them to take them down or link to the original i was subject to quite a bit of abuse.
The Daily Mail has had their fingers burned with that before: http://www.croydoncyclist.co.uk/video-copyright-and-the-daily-mail-from-50-to-1000/
I know the rules around SatNav are under scrutiny just now with the wee grey area between adjusting the SatNav and adjusting say the radio volume but...
I passed a woman who got round all of that this morning on Parmesan Place (as my kids call it) who instead of anchoring her smart phone to the front window to keep her directions right, was watching a documentary on it!?!?!!
Anchoring your phone to the front window very often results in illegally obscuring the forward view though the windscreen: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/407676/Information_Sheet_View_to_the_front_and_windscreen_obscuration.pdf
Worst example I ever saw of that was someone with a 10" tablet propped up on top of the dash, leaning against the windscreen smack in front of them. I think they were using it to navigate but that's no excuse.
Another oft-ignored regulation concerns dashcams: they're not allowed to display a live view of the road ahead while you're driving. And let's face it, why on earth would you need them to? Most do switch to a screensaver or a simple GPS speed display when recording, but I did end up behind one guy on York Place approaching the Leith Street roundabout who had his dashcam illegally located on the dash directly in front of him (once again contrary to the C&U regs as above) and who seemed to be driving-by-CCTV. (Come to think, it probably doesn't help that they are commonly called dashcams. The one place you really shouldn't put them is on the dash, both for legal reasons and because you end up with a recording mostly of your bonnet.)
In the case of your Parmesan Place barmpot, it's also illegal to have a video display device within the driver's sightline displaying anything other than information about the status of the vehicle. I believe this is understood to include the vehicle's location, hence satnavs are legal. It also seems to mean that reversing cameras and "blind spot" cameras (as fitted to barge-like SUVs which are so bloated that you can't actually see out them properly) are legal.
If you managed to get the barmpot's registration then it would be worth a call to 101.
"dashcams [are] not allowed to display a live view of the road ahead while you're driving"
Really?
My colleague has one which does exactly that. However I don't think it is in the driver's line of sight - it is mounted to the left of (and behind) the rear view mirror (looking forward) and I suspect the mirror obscures the cam from the driver.
I can't remember if he fitted it himself or had it fitted. The latter wouldn't surprise me.
Following on from my post last week about the fellow who was pulled over for driving along Princes Street, I am saddened to to report two instances on Saturday which, as is unfortunately more usually the case, went entirely unpunished.
First was a black Merc which very sedately but quite illegally turned left from the bottom of the Mound. This meant ignoring both a no left turn sign on the traffic light, and a no entry sign on Princes Street itself. Two offences in one go. Or do those signs not apply to people rich clearly privileged enough to buy get a Merc on PCP?
Second was a red BMW happily tootling along westbound approaching the Mound/Hanover Street junction, surrounded by buses and a tram. Again, must have ignored at least one no entry sign, and possibly a no right turn sign at the bottom of South St David Street. (Or is that buses only now? It's so long since I've driven or ridden that way.)
I wonder whether these people ever stop to wonder why they are the only private car on a stretch of road otherwise occupied entirely by public transport vehicles?
This meant ignoring both a no left turn sign on the traffic light, and a no entry sign on Princes Street itself. Two offences in one go.
Pedestrians crossing Princes Street would have had a green man too?
@fimm
OK, my post was a bit confused. If the dashcam is not visible from the driving position then it's OK (per what I said about the barmpot watching TV - same rules). But it still seems pretty pointless. (Usually they revert to "viewfinder" mode when the USB power is disconnected and they're running on the small internal battery. This means that you can use them to take still photos if required after an incident.)
AFAIK pretty much all of the reputable ones sold as dashcams (such as the NextBase range, for example) do turn off the live video display when the vehicle is under way. Some of the cheap Chinese/Russian ones may not do. And some people use a mobile, or a GoPro or some other camera not specifically designed for automotive use as a dashcam, which also won't necessarily turn off the display automatically.
I can't locate the relevant regulations online just now. I may have a more thorough look later.
EDIT: It's in the Construction & Use Regulations 1986:
109.—(1) No person shall drive, or cause or permit to be driven, a motor vehicle on a road, if the driver is in such a position as to be able to see, whether directly or by reflection, a television receiving apparatus or other cinematographic apparatus used to display anything other than information—
(a) about the state of the vehicle or its equipment;
(b) about the location of the vehicle and the road on which it is located;
(c) to assist the driver to see the road adjacent to the vehicle; or
(d) to assist the driver to reach his destination.
(2) In this regulation “television receiving apparatus” means any cathode ray tube carried on a vehicle and on which there can be displayed an image derived from a television broadcast, a recording or a camera or computer.
Note that "other cinematographic apparatus" means that it doesn't just apply to CRT screens, despite what some people seem to want to argue based on paragraph (2).
There's also a school of thought that argues that a live dashcam picture is displaying information "about the location of the vehicle and the road on which it is located". Same as the view out of the windscreen, then... And AFAICS the only way that a single unit dashcam could usefully do that would be by being located in contravention of the rules about obscuring the windscreen. I'm not aware of it having been tested in court, but the informed advice seems to be to avoid it unless you really like funding lawyers' lifestyles.
I didn't realise dashcams routinely had displays at all? What's the point?
Had a comical one yesterday. Was waiting to turn right out of Scotstoun Avenue in S Queensferry while a SUV piloted by an elderly lady was approaching the junction very slowly, decelerating and indicating to turn left.
I assumed that it was OK and committed to turn right, but she continued on looking out the window I assume trying to read the road name. I just about made it across in time. When I looked back she was trying to turn left having already passed the centre line on the target road with cars and another bike waiting. We made eye contact but she didn't apply the brakes at any time.
I', guessing it was a map-reading/GPS issue. Even though it all happened at about 5mph, she really wasn't in control of her vehicle.
I didn't realise dashcams routinely had displays at all? What's the point?
Allows you to check it's mounted in the best position, and pointed in the right direction. Also lets you review footage without attaching to a computer.
@jonty
See above: primarily so that you can use them in viewfinder mode to manually record video/take photos in the event of an incident. It's also useful for setting up the device configuration: video resolution, vehicle ID & timestamp overlay on the video, audio recording or not etc etc (it would be perfectly possible to arrange for that sort of thing to be done by plugging it in to a PC, but if you have a screen anyway, for the first reason given, then it makes sense to use the built-in screen for settings as well).
EDIT: And what Frenchy said!
Neil Williams Haulage (their reputation precedes them for many) tipper coming out of the works compound at the Murrayfield Icerink onto Riverside Crescent. Rushed to pull out infront of me only to find itself wedged between the bridge wall and a car parked on the other side.
Situation resolved when owner of car appeared and reversed it out the way.
Tipper then proceeded along Riverside at about 5mph. Which is nice except when it has come out of a muddy building site and was spraying mud and gravel off its tyres behind it.
The cycle-route through Roseburn Park and much of the way up to Balgreen is covered in large stones, which are obviously falling off works lorries and not being cleared up. Nearly came off after hitting one this morning - I'll be using my 3000-lumen monster light to illuminate the road ahead when going that way tomorrow. The stones were pretty much invisible under the streetlights and with my Ay-Ups on this morning.
Fair enough, I guess it's a bit like any other camera in that respect
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts