They don't even pay road tax Joe. **Off topic thread**

eeeee

We need cat pictures.

*pokes Unknown Soldier* Your Overlord clearly loves the limelight, she'll fatten on the adoration

ThisRegard

I thought we were talking about the cat not surviving the trip to the vet when I read that she didn't survive. I really need to read who's posting before the actual post.

cdaly_

OldBean wrote: »

No luck with the CTC bag in any of the Dublin shops. Lots of offers of bike bags that cost 200-500, but I'd have to take my bike apart, including my full mudguards. And I swore plenty getting them on the first time, I've no desire to get kicked out of the airport.

I also wouldn't be able keep the panniers on.

Might swing up to Woodies tonight.

Any ideas which'd be thickest?

http://www.woodiesdiy.com/category/dust-sheets/2.22.5

None of those would do. Have a read of this ebay guide and then shop for http://www.ebay.ie/itm/HEAVY-DUTY-CLEAR-POLYTHENE-4M-WIDE-SHEETING-Various-Lengths-1000-Gauge-Plastic-/300618010324 or http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CLEAR-POLYTHENE-SHEETING-2M-WIDE-Various-Lengths-125Mu-500-Gauge-Plastic-Sheets-/121178493616?.

OTOH, if you are stuck for time, try the mattress cover or maybe a roll of pallet wrap (you'll likely cadge the end of a roll in your local industrial estate.

On the subject of paniers etc, you probably will have to check these in. Airport/airlines usually won't let you leave them on the bike...

The tax man

ThisRegard wrote: »

I thought we were talking about the cat not surviving the trip to the vet when I read that she didn't survive. I really need to read who's posting before the actual post.

I thought the exact same thing.:o

nomdeboardie

Retraces thread for Unknown Soldier's cat story...
Things become clearer (including banishment of previous misapprehension that hs wife was sneaking into the neighbours cars to be nosey , or something :pac:)

Glad your feline is safely re-ensconsed

CramCycle

Alek wrote: »

My hope is with her, but as far as I know open chest resuscitation has 3% survivability rate.... I am shocked to hear this was aired though.

I remember seeing a documentary about the first survivor of it in the UK a couple of years ago. The paramedic was told not to do it as the guy wouldn't survive but the paramedic made the call that the person wasn't surviving regardless. It was fascinating but if they can get you to the hospital first the survival rate jumps humongously.

RobFowl wrote: »

Some interesting research some years ago suggested families appreciated seeing efforts at resuscitation even if they failed. Seeing them helped them cope and seemed to reassure them everything that could have been was done.

Sounds morbid but I think i would appreciate it, knowing that all that could be done was done, would almost absolve me of guilt that I could not have done more, very selfish I realise.

seamus

gadetra wrote: »

I wonder though how much healing is done by having the resuscitation broadcast to strangers is?

There may be merit for safety, prevention etc. but there is also a kind of morbid fascination factor, a spectacle of horror and fetishization of same.

I posted on another thread about how I reckon that people don't really understand the scale of the damage that vehicles are capable of inflicting on vulnerable road users. They reckon that brushing or grazing past someone and they'll "be grand".
I guess broadcasting this kind of footage might even make one person consider how quickly their risky manouver can turn into open thoracic field surgery for the cyclist beside them.

Idleater

gadetra wrote: »

We need cat pictures.

*pokes Unknown Soldier* Your Overlord clearly loves the limelight, she'll fatten on the adoration

Our cat made her own way in the world like Unknown Soldier's, sadly not to return though.

This is my favourite picture of her, sleeping in a jasmine bush.

Weepsie

Don't get too distracted by your GPS, Cyclist collides with parked car

Alek

The male cyclist appears to be riding along the side of the road looking down at his bars, possibly at his bike computer.

Chris Froome?

magicbastarder

ouch. i've been that soldier.
well, in different circumstances, but it still was a very abrupt end to a short cycle.

magicbastarder

this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVxGFOb1KTY

TL;DW - they stick a bike on a big treadmill and angle it up 6% to simulate a decent climb.
but how realistic is this? if you maintain your position on the treadmill, you're not actually changing your potential energy so you don't have to provide that energy yourself. granted, you're also having to expend energy to stop yourself from rolling backwards due to the angle as well as the treadmill running beneath you. but are they equivalent?

Lumen

Power = force x speed relative to the surface against which the force is applied.

So it is realistic, apart from the lack of aero drag.

I think.

magicbastarder

my question was mainly based around the fact that you're not actually climbing - you're not gaining elevation.

lennymc

i would imagine you would still be fighting gravity

next generation turbo trainers should be some awesome mix of treadmills and virtual rides!

awec

It's the same, except for wind resistance and obviously a smoother more uniform surface.

Picture a treadmill as like a hill moving beneath you, instead of you moving along the hill. A constant hill that never ends. Every time you turn the wheel you push the hill beneath you more.

Lumen

magicbastarder wrote: »

my question was mainly based around the fact that you're not actually climbing - you're not gaining elevation.

You cannot argue this with words alone. It needs maths.

magicbastarder

we can defeat maths with words.

petethedrummer

magicbastarder wrote: »

if you maintain your position on the treadmill, you're not actually changing your potential energy so you don't have to provide that energy yourself.

You are changing potential energy. If you tilt the treadmill up and don't pedal you will roll backwards off it. even if it's not running.

magicbastarder

yep, that was my 'get out of the hypothetical jail' clause.

jinkypolly

magicbastarder wrote: »

my question was mainly based around the fact that you're not actually climbing - you're not gaining elevation.

Well if the whole set up was put in a giant lift do you think it would be harder to pedal as the lift ascended?

magicbastarder

yes, if your pedalling was providing the power to raise the lift.

Lumen

jinkypolly wrote: »

Well if the whole set up was put in a giant lift..

Or maybe inside an aeroplane trying to take off from another treadmill going backwards to match the plane's ground speed.

http://www.airplaneonatreadmill.com/2008/01/airplane-on-treadmill.html

Beasty

magicbastarder wrote: »

we can defeat maths with words.

Numberz is > words - endof...

buffalo

magicbastarder wrote: »

my question was mainly based around the fact that you're not actually climbing - you're not gaining elevation.

Sure if you put it that way, when you're cycling on a flat treadmill you're not actually travelling anywhere, and therefore must use zero energy.

Skrynesaver

"Language was invented so that politicians could lie about the figures" - Mick Madeup

magicbastarder

buffalo wrote: »

Sure if you put it that way, when you're cycling on a flat treadmill you're not actually travelling anywhere, and therefore must use zero energy.

subtle difference is that a change in height results in an immediate change in potential energy; moving an object 100m higher changes its encapsulated energy.
moving an object 100m horizontally does not change its energy.

anyway, i was just thinking out loud above.

awec

magicbastarder wrote: »

subtle difference is that a change in height results in an immediate change in potential energy; moving an object 100m higher changes its encapsulated energy.
moving an object 100m horizontally does not change its energy.

anyway, i was just thinking out loud above.

But your elevation for your potential energy doesn't change when climbing a hill. You are always zero metres off the ground. The ground rises with you.

Your elevation may change relative to sea level but I don't think that's anything other than a measure of personal triumph.

magicbastarder

potential energy does not depend on being on or off the ground, though. the higher you rise, the greater your PE.

Fian

The treadmill is expending energy pushing you backwards and because of the tilt, downwards. To remain in the same place you need to expend the energy to counteract the backwards motion and the downwards motion.

So yes, you are expending the same energy as if you were "climbing" - instead of increasing your potential energy relative to the centre of the earth you are expending the energy to counteract the forces being exerted by the treadmill.


In the same way as you are not gaining kinetic energy (by increasing your speed) you are not gaining potential energy (by increasing your height) but you are still spending energy to counteract the treadmill. Basically spending energy to stand still.

magicbastarder

yeah, that's what i'd assumed; kinetic energy equivalent to counteracting the motion of the treadmill which would otherwise throw you backwards, and the potential energy equivalent being the energy to counteract rolling off downwards and backwards due to the tilt of the treadmill.

Kav0777

magicbastarder wrote: »

yeah, that's what i'd assumed; kinetic energy equivalent to counteracting the motion of the treadmill which would otherwise throw you backwards, and the potential energy equivalent being the energy to counteract rolling off downwards and backwards due to the tilt of the treadmill.

So.......... in or out of the saddle?

Lumen

Fian wrote: »

The treadmill is expending energy pushing you backwards and because of the tilt, downwards.

I don't think so. If the treadmill was an internally frictionless loop (and you weren't pedalling) your weight would push it down/back. So with zero groundspeed your weight is helping it move backwards, and if you cycle up the treadmill you're helping it even more. If you cycled down the treadmill it would need to do more work (briefly), although you'd need to be accelerating significantly to offset the assistance provided by your weight.

tomasrojo

A two-way route on the North Quays has emerged as the most popular option after two years of workshops with stakeholders and a public consultation involving 1,200 submissions.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0603/705...blin-cycleway/

arybvtcw0eolkf

tomasrojo wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0603/705...blin-cycleway/

As a northsider who cycles the Quays in both directions it suits me, but I can't see anyone but the dedicated southside cyclist bothering with it.

I'm also a motorist, my working day takes me down the north Quays in both the morning and afternoon, I'd imagine this is going to be a major pain in the arse and would probably push me onto the small streets around Smithfield where I can cross onto the southside at various bridges along the way.

I can't imagine the chaos at the bottleneck which is already Conyingham Road & Parkgate Street in the early mornings (7am-10am)

Qualitymark

Inspecting the Large Hadron Collider (regrettably not wearing hi-viz, though a helmet is deployed)

Beasty

Qualitymark wrote: »

Inspecting the Large Hadron Collider (regrettably not wearing hi-viz, though a helmet is deployed)

... and hopefully a bell to warn those Large Hadrons if it's imminent arrival ...:)

awec

tomasrojo wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0603/705...blin-cycleway/

Anyone know what the alternative proposals were?

seamus

awec wrote: »

Anyone know what the alternative proposals were?

The other options were a two-way North Quays route with a limited boardwalk supported by 16%, a two-way North Quays with buses diverted after the Croppies Acre supported by 16% and one-way cycleways on either side of the Quays running on the building side supported by 17%.

There's a big discussion with maps and all on the Commuting forum IIRC.

I think I favoured option 3, but I can't remember

tomasrojo

http://irishcycle.com/2015/06/04/two-way-liffey-cycle-route-option-gains-public-support/

Infographic summarises the other options, and the support they received. Think irishcycle.com has a lot of detail on the other options on another page, but you'll have to search.

Thargor

Jaysus:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/road-rage-driver-threatens-to-kill-cyclist-in-foulmouthed-outburst-theres-a-witness-otherwise-id-break-your-fing-neck-31271696.html

tomasrojo

seamus wrote: »

I think I favoured option 3, but I can't remember

I favoured option 3. The Commuting and Transport forum I think is very vexed about the potential impact on buses.

RainyDay

And while we're on the subject of traffic around the north inner city, the NTA are reporting that motorists breaking the red lights at the Luas Blackhall Place junction will now get an automatic 3 penalty points

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Press_Release_Red_Light_Camera_System.pdf

Tenzor07

RainyDay wrote: »

And while we're on the subject of traffic around the north inner city, the NTA are reporting that motorists breaking the red lights at the Luas Blackhall Place junction will now get an automatic 3 penalty points

About time they brought in ANPR cameras.!

The only question is why it took so long and how come only at one single Luas junction? The one at O'Connell street and at the back of the Four courts has had it's fair share of collisions?

tomasrojo

I remember the pivotal role of a traffic-light camera in an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm, and I did wonder why we didn't have any here. That was years and years ago.

CramCycle

RainyDay wrote: »

And while we're on the subject of traffic around the north inner city, the NTA are reporting that motorists breaking the red lights at the Luas Blackhall Place junction will now get an automatic 3 penalty points

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Press_Release_Red_Light_Camera_System.pdf

Finally, my plans are coming to fruition. Admittedly they have adapted my system. I wasn't going to tell people so the cost would be covered by the first day or two of the cameras in operation but admittedly, yes, it should no t be about covering the cost, it should be about health and safety, interesting to see how many get fined.

Lumen

Thargor wrote: »

Jaysus:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/road-rage-driver-threatens-to-kill-cyclist-in-foulmouthed-outburst-theres-a-witness-otherwise-id-break-your-fing-neck-31271696.html

awec

Lumen wrote: »

All of the pictures in that article are brilliant:

RobertFoster

awec wrote: »

All of the pictures in that article are brilliant:

http://cdn2.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/article31271558.ece/d62ef/ALTERNATES/w620/angry4.jpg

The karate kid hasn't aged well.

CramCycle

The driver does his best bear impression

The pic descriptions were so serious until this point