Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Apr 24, 2014 04:01

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 585 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 19:56 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 14:26
Posts: 117
The Universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and He manipulates all everyday events in it using His Noodly Appendage.

Big Tone wrote:
[dcb_mode]Have you any evidence of that?[/dcb_mode]

No. Does that mean I'm wrong? :wink:

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 20:51 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 15:34
Posts: 4890
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
MrGrumpyCyclist wrote:
The Universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and He manipulates all everyday events in it using His Noodly Appendage.

Big Tone wrote:
[dcb_mode]Have you any evidence of that?[/dcb_mode]

No. Does that mean I'm wrong? :wink:
You may be right but there's one thing in life you should remember; no-one likes a smart arse. :wink:

Actually, I do if I'm honest. :D And sarcasm, and silly jokes...

When I joined Safe Speed I was sent a lump of Plasticine in the post. I didn't know what to make of it. :D

:coat:

So then, we’re all agreed that using the Primary Position on a bicycle is a personal choice and if you die from using it you won’t be able to post on a forum no more which accounts for the minority ‘for’ vote here? :P

I’m sorry. Sometimes I don’t know when to stop and I feel a bit naughty tonight. :lol:

But I am a cyclist! Going down memory lane for a second

And in a link from that link I said back in Sept 2009..

Big Tone wrote:
weepej wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
EDIT: If anyone has ever been stuck at the side of heavy traffic doing 70+mph it is very frightening I can tell you.


Sorry, slightly OT, but this is not consistant with you saying then that you wouldn't mind people passing you on your pushbike at 70mph... as long as they give you enough room?
From memory I was referring to my journey to work which is a :30: all the way. I think what I said was I would ‘prefer’ or ‘rather have’ someone to go past me at a higher speed and give me room than someone doing the speed limit, or less, and nearly clip me.

And I still stand by that ;)


And I still do...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 23:15 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 09:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
MrGrumpyCyclist wrote:
Steve: Ages ago, you asked me how far the helmet camera would be displaced laterally on the curved entrance to the roundabout in Magnatom's tanker incident. It was when you told me: "Be warned: I can do maths and physics!" (which caused me to be filled with fear and trepidation, I can tell you! :) ) Well, I did the calculation (because I was interested) and, with a radius of curvature of 22m (which is about right - from Maptool), at 15mph (which Magnatom said he was doing), the camera would be displaced laterally by approximately 0.4m. Not making any point, and I know there are lots of assumptions and approximations, but I just thought you might be interested.

You evidently know me :D

Your guesstimate for the radius is a little larger than mine (30m), but it is very difficult to determine with any level of precision.
Assuming your numerical estimates, my maths results with 0.208G lateral. It seems you assumed a camera height of around 1.9m, which is a little on the high side.

(Some subtle perspective: deceleration from 15mph to 0 in 3 seconds is 0.28G...)

However, to close the loop:
The rider went from roughly the middle of the 20ft wide carriageway (including the cycle lane), to about 2ft from the edge. 2.4m is bit bigger than 0.4m; so there was definitely a lot of cutting going on.
Furthermore, at the location where the apex was cut, the rider was on a straight path to the edge of the roundabout island, so there couldn't have been much of a lean, far less than 0.4m anyway.

;)

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 23:21 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 09:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
Steve wrote:
Yeah, usually no more than 1.5ft (wheel to kerb); certainly within 2ft. 1m is totally unnecessary and is a waste of road space.


Do you normally drive your car with the nearside wheels no more 18 inches from the kerb?

Is the failed, specious argument being raised again?

To answer directly: not usually. I like to maintain maximum visibility ahead, as well as leave room to pass cyclists, or let them pass me when I'm queuing. Isn't that good utilisation of road space?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 23:28 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 09:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
Steve wrote:
1.25ft upwards would put you outside of the painted lines (I did say diagram 1018.1), as well as the 99.9% of drains.

:?


weepej wrote:
You're riding over drains grates and covers,

Steve wrote:
And? That's what I do!



weepej wrote:
You're not as steady as your wheels ride around on the lumpy paint.

Quote:
Why can other people manage to do exactly that without any problem at all? I don't even notice it when I'm riding.

There's nothing inconsistent in any of that weepej.
It means I would cycle within 1.25ft of the kerb. When space is tight, I will happily stop pedalling and go within a foot (over the drains if desired).

Anyway, returning to the questions you evaded:

Are you seriously standing by your notion that the camber at that point is "sharp", sharp enough to make one concerned about ride handling?

Please tell all of us what level of camber you expect there [1.25ft from the kerb] (in degrees), and what limit of camber you can expect to safely ride over (in degrees).

Why can other people manage to do exactly that (ride over the lines) without any problem at all?
How do you cope with yellow box junctions?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 00:30 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 18:08
Posts: 3340
I think the issue here, is that everyone has a different idea of what feels "safe" or "dangerous", to them. Some people feel safest at a foot or so from the kerb, some feel safer at a metre from the kerb. Personally, I would prefer to travel closer to the kerb and when driving a wide vehicle along narrow country lanes, you don't have much choice. DCB's 18inches would again be a luxury (as the actress said to the bishop...lol)...(sorry Tone, pinching your lines again..;-) )

We had a classic case a couple of years ago where one of our major roads was closed for a about a month, due to rock slides and traffic was diverted along a quiet B road (which I used to use daily and found to be a lovely short cut).
The local ladies (mainly school teachers) were up in arms at the increased traffic along "their" road, accusing people of driving dangerously and wanting a 30MPH limit put on "their" previously NSL road.

One poor lady, actually stated that she had been "nearly run off the road", twice in two days by HGV vehicles...something that I have never experienced in about a million miles of motoring.

She was either very unlucky or a very nervous driver.

I think that some people will complain about virtually anything and accuse people of "trying to kill them", while others will just, "get on with it"

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 00:58 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:45
Posts: 4022
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Steve wrote:
Please tell all of us what level of camber you expect there [1.25ft from the kerb] (in degrees), and what limit of camber you can expect to safely ride over (in degrees).


Steve. I think that it would be better to measure the angle in radians.

Quote:
How do you cope with yellow box junctions?

Yellow lines at box junctions don't suffer the same wear as roadside yellow lines.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 01:00 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:45
Posts: 4022
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
graball wrote:
I think that some people will complain about virtually anything

...such as being obstructed by cyclists

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 01:51 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 09:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
Steve wrote:
Please tell all of us what level of camber you expect there [1.25ft from the kerb] (in degrees), and what limit of camber you can expect to safely ride over (in degrees).

Steve. I think that it would be better to measure the angle in radians.

Given the expected level of answer (for the actual values and paranoia respectively), I suspect degrees may be more appropriate, perhaps even minutes of arc.

dcbwhaley wrote:
Quote:
How do you cope with yellow box junctions?

Yellow lines at box junctions don't suffer the same wear as roadside yellow lines.

In what way?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 05:39 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 05:36
Posts: 1
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Whats the use of camera???

_________________
Weimaraner dog tips: weimaraner crate training and how to train a weimaraner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 06:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 21:50
Posts: 3144
graball wrote:
It's just that I have visions of you driving down country roads, dodging every puddle or slowing dramatically at those which would put you in "danger" of swerving round.



Hmm, and here's me thinking your "mmm ... visions" statement was in reference to me losing control of the vehicle...

And why would one "slow dramatically" to avoid going through a puddle? How do you drive down country lanes when it's wet graball? and surely you wouldn't have to "slow dramatically" as you're planning your driving way ahead. What do you do with puddles, hit them at 60mph?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 06:25 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 21:50
Posts: 3144
Steve wrote:
Are you seriously standing by your notion that the camber at that point is "sharp", sharp enough to make one concerned about ride handling?


On some roads, yes.

Steve wrote:
Why can other people manage to do exactly that (ride over the lines) without any problem at all?


Where you can you should absolutely avoid riding over painted lines and drain grates, any motorcyclist will tell you they feature high in the list of things to avoid.

If you have no choice then you need to be very careful, lumpy lines and drain grates can deflect your front wheel, and they're also slippery, even more so when wet and will affect braking performance.

I can "manage" riding over anything, but desire to avoid stuff like this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 07:21 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:45
Posts: 4022
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
I don't think Weep actually means "camber" in the technical senses of a raised crown or of super-elevation.
Rather to the fact that a lot of roads - country roads without pavements - have a very abrupt drop of several inches (often at an angle of pi/2) at the edge of the tarmac. That is caused partly by water erosion and partly by motor vehicles driving partly off the tarmac. Also, on the back streets of many industrial towns where the tarmac is laid over setts there is often a gap between the edge of the tarmac and the kerb giving a similar, though less pronounced effect

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 08:41 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 15:34
Posts: 4890
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
weepej wrote:
Where you can you should absolutely avoid riding over painted lines and drain grates, any motorcyclist will tell you they feature high in the list of things to avoid.
As I’ve said before, not in a straight line they don't unless you are trying to brake at the precise moment you're on one in the wet. Dry metal is actually quite grippy.

weepej wrote:
If you have no choice then you need to be very careful, lumpy lines and drain grates can deflect your front wheel, and they're also slippery, even more so when wet and will affect braking performance.
That's right, and there's some drain covers I've seen which are positively dangerous. They have large gaps in an arc, if that's a good description. If you went in one at an angle I think the tyre would get stuck.

Like you, I avoid these things when I can but that still only puts me ~18" from the side; not a metre or more.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:45 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 14:26
Posts: 117
Big Tone wrote:
Like you, I avoid these things when I can but that still only puts me ~18" from the side; not a metre or more.

Actually, I think more than a metre is a bit excessive for secondary position in the absence of pot-holes and other obstacles (unless the locus of the inside edge of the flow of motor vehicles is more than 2 metres from the kerb).

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:55 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 09:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
I don't think Weep actually means "camber" in the technical senses of a raised crown or of super-elevation.
Rather to the fact that a lot of roads - country roads without pavements

We have been discussing roads with lines painted along the side - which is normal for the areas we have been referring to in our debate.

dcbwhaley wrote:
Quote:
How do you cope with yellow box junctions?

Yellow lines at box junctions don't suffer the same wear as roadside yellow lines.

In what way?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:57 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 09:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
Steve wrote:
Are you seriously standing by your notion that the camber at that point is "sharp", sharp enough to make one concerned about ride handling?

On some roads, yes.

So, to again return to the evaded questions: on these roads, at the stated point (outside of the second yellow line - 1.25ft from the kerb), what is the angle of the gradient?

weepej wrote:
Steve wrote:
Why can other people manage to do exactly that (ride over the lines) without any problem at all?

Where you can you should absolutely avoid riding over painted lines, any motorcyclist will tell you they feature high in the list of things to avoid.

If you have no choice then you need to be very careful, lumpy lines can deflect your front wheel, and they're also slippery, even more so when wet and will affect braking performance.

I can "manage" riding over anything, but desire to avoid stuff like this.

I was talking about the painted lines, so I've undone your mission creep within your quote.

Do you "STRONGLY recommend" avoiding these lines?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 15:09 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 14:26
Posts: 117
All good fun, and I agree (as I already said) that there are approximations and assumptions in there. However, I would take issue with one point:

Steve wrote:
It seems you assumed a camera height of around 1.9m, which is a little on the high side.

I just measured and, assuming a height of six feet for the rider (183cm - though I don't know how tall this rider is), plus the height of the pedal from the ground in the lowest position (15cm on my bike), plus the height of the camera above the head (7cm on my helmet - though I don't know where this rider's camera is mounted), that puts the camera 2.05m above the tyres. Allowing for a slight dip due to the rotation about the fulcrum (Pythagoras) makes that 2.03m.

Note that, when adjusting the seat height, it is normal to have the leg almost straight with the heel on the pedal in its lowest position, so adding the heights is valid, but it will certainly not be over by 13cm. :)

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 09:04 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 01:17
Posts: 7139
Location: Highlands
weepej wrote:
ed_m wrote:
perhaps a little further out than weep's very practical looking shopper.

Have to say, that's a London Cycle Hire Bike (Boris Bike, Go BoJo, or a myriad of other names).
Riding one is like riding an exercise bike from the gym that's been unbolted from the floor.
This is my usual steed:
'Usual' Cambridge Online Dictionary - "usual" adjective - /ˈjuː.ʒu.əl/ adj
Definition: normal; happening, done or used most often
So I took it to mean that you own and rode it - Why not? - it would not be taken, that you hang it on the wall and watch it. :) So to give BTone a hard time, IMO is not terribly fair.
Is that a Cf one ? (not had time to look it up)
weepej wrote:
Speed does kills
Speed might contribute to the severity of an incident sometimes. Speed in itself is not dangerous, it is the misuse of an inappropriate speed, that may help to contribute towards injury or death.

I have never tried the 'Boris bikes' and I thought they were part-electric-powered - are they not ? Why do you choose to 'keep' hiring if I understand what you are implying? Convenience? Is the cost not excessive for a regular hire?
christinecccc wrote:
Whats the use of camera???
:welcome: christinecccc
The aim of this thread is to discuss the use of cameras being used to record errant road users and that value and potential positives and negatives.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Camera ?
PostPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 09:10 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:20
Posts: 258
would a camera have helped here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12604639


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 585 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.364s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]