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

Zyzz

Went for a quick spin tonight and went up merrion square on my way home. The majority of the railings and everything had been removed but the white finishing strip was still on the ground and hadn't been moved..felt oddly cool rolling over it :pac:

manwithaplan

Beasty wrote: »

You think that warrants a gif

I've got 7 on the line ....:pac:

Can you post the "uh oh" messages if you got any? I'd keep the e-mails for posterity.

Edit: Just realised there's a whole other thread about the strava stuff - ignore this!

doozerie

This is someone who takes his 4yr-old’s bike seriously. Respect!: Review: Islabikes CNOC delivers aggressive, durable ride for kids

doozerie

Promising initiative, I'd hope that councils here will take note: Edinburgh council puts lorry drivers on bikes to learn cyclists' perspective

OldBean

cdaly_ wrote: »

Does the crankset include a longer bottom bracket. The difference is only a couple of mm but it may matter.

You'll likely need a medium cage RD as the short cage that came with the double may not cope with the triple.

Ah. Spot on. I'd thought I had pre-planned with a BB that could potentially do both, but on a check over my original order, I got a 118.

I should probably just get another bike and save all this faffing about.

eeeee

doozerie wrote: »

Promising initiative, I'd hope that councils here will take note: Edinburgh council puts lorry drivers on bikes to learn cyclists' perspective

Hmmmm, whilst this is an excellent initiative, I feel doing it the other way round is as much if not More valuable. The amount of cyclists who are not safe around HGV's is ridiculous. Having grown up in and around lorries, I NEVER, ever, go up the inside, sit out beside them at a junction etc. but the sheer amount of other cyclists going up the inside or parking beside them at the lights (and even giving me the 'jesus that was close what a prick' when they have to hop up onto the footpath out of the vehicles way, is shocking, I always put them right :cool:

I have never in 10 years of cycling around Dublin had a close one with a HGV. Ever. Buses, taxi's and cars yes, HGV's no. I have never seen a HGV drive dangerously in relation to a cyclist yet *touches wood*. They move so slowly, take ages to take off, (and stop. This is something people also don't seem to grasp. They hear an air brake and assume stopping will happen in no time. Or hear the air brake and head up the inside to get a ahead at lights. Which is suicidal, WTF???!!) People have literally no idea how little visibility you have in a cab. I have seen bikes disappear in and around the cab when inside, and it's terrifying, even with blind spot mirrors. Rigid's are the only HGV's I am a bit wary of, because it's the handiest HGV license to get and lads start in rigids before they're old and/or experienced enough to get an arctic or lorry and drag license.

That there needs to be education on both sides is evident, but based on my purely anecdotal experience from both sides of the vehicular point of view the behaviour of some cyclists is pure clean dangerous, and more from a lack of understanding than anything else. (I hope :eek:)

Harrybelafonte

Is there any conclusive proof out there that riding a smaller frame is more efficient for racing? The Internetz is packed with countless arguments among mostly American triathletes for some reason, but there's not much evidence I can find bar the fact so many pros do it while a many people call it a trend?

Harrybelafonte

gadetra wrote: »

Hmmmm, whilst this is an excellent initiative, I feel doing it the other way round is as much if not More valuable. The amount of cyclists who are not safe around HGV's is ridiculous. Having grown up in and around lorries, I NEVER, ever, go up the inside, sit out beside them at a junction etc. but the sheer amount of other cyclists going up the inside or parking beside them at the lights (and even giving me the 'jesus that was close what a prick' when they have to hop up onto the footpath out of the vehicles way, is shocking, I always put them right :cool:

I have never in 10 years of cycling around Dublin had a close one with a HGV. Ever. Buses, taxi's and cars yes, HGV's no. I have never seen a HGV drive dangerously in relation to a cyclist yet *touches wood*. They move so slowly, take ages to take off, (and stop. This is something people also don't seem to grasp. They hear an air brake and assume stopping will happen in no time. Or hear the air brake and head up the inside to get a ahead at lights. Which is suicidal, WTF???!!) People have literally no idea how little visibility you have in a cab. I have seen bikes disappear in and around the cab when inside, and it's terrifying, even with blind spot mirrors. Rigid's are the only HGV's I am a bit wary of, because it's the handiest HGV license to get and lads start in rigids before they're old and/or experienced enough to get an arctic or lorry and drag license.

That there needs to be education on both sides is evident, but based on my purely anecdotal experience from both sides of the vehicular point of view the behaviour of some cyclists is pure clean dangerous, and more from a lack of understanding than anything else. (I hope :eek:)

In fairness awareness has improved over the years after a number of high-profile deaths involving trucks. It's difficult to highlight those particular incidents without insensitively blaming the deceased.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Can anyone recommend a decent track pump that'll fit presta valves. I bought one from amazon but its muck, won't form a secure connection with the valve at all. I am wary to trust the amazon reviews now as they said that the pump would work with presta valves. I'd like a recommendation straight from the horses mouth if anyone would be so kind?

OldBean

This...

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/ie/en/park-tool-home-mechanic-floor-pump-pfp5/rp-prod50273

Reviews on CRC are surprisingly poor, but I've mine 2 years and never had an issue.

Edit: Actually, that appears to be a newer model than what I have, the base doesn't look as stable.

Qualitymark

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27333310

Gino Bartali: The cyclist who saved Jews in wartime Italy

Extracts:

Gino Bartali, one of the leading cyclists of his era - a three-time winner of the Giro d'Italia, who also notched up two Tour de France victories, 10 years apart, before and after the war.

==

His role in the network [saving Jewish families] was uniquely suited to his talents - he became a courier. On the face of it he was undertaking the long training rides for which he was renowned, but in reality he was carrying photographs and counterfeit identity documents to and from a secret printing press.

All were hidden in the frame and handlebars of his bicycle.

"We've seen documentation that he travelled thousands of kilometres across Italy, travelling the roads between cities as far apart as Florence, Lucca, Genoa, Assisi, and the Vatican in Rome," says Jacoby.
==
"When I asked my father why I couldn't tell anyone, he said, 'You must do good, but you must not talk about it. If you talk about it you're taking advantage of others misfortunes' for your own gain.'"

AstraMonti

Nice one hehe

doozerie

gadetra wrote: »

Hmmmm, whilst this is an excellent initiative, I feel doing it the other way round is as much if not More valuable. The amount of cyclists who are not safe around HGV's is ridiculous.

I agree. It is easy to assume that any danger emanates entirely from the big heavy vehicle, but the reality is that far too many cyclists casually put themselves in the way of harm seemingly without a second thought.

So while this initiative is a step in the right direction it is certainly not a complete solution in itself, and I agree that education is needed for cyclists too. I've read of events where members of the public were allowed to sit in the cab of a lorry to see for themselves exactly how impaired the visibility is, but I've always heard of these after they've been held, it would be good to see more of these events organised and advertised well in advance. Another initiative for the councils to consider, perhaps.

cdaly_

AstraMonti wrote: »

Nice one hehe

That's silly. You wouldn't fit a frame (never mind a bike) in that drum! Dunno would it even take a wheel...

Lumen

doozerie wrote: »

I agree that education is needed for cyclists too. I've read of events where members of the public were allowed to sit in the cab of a lorry to see for themselves exactly how impaired the visibility is, but I've always heard of these after they've been held, it would be good to see more of these events organised and advertised well in advance. Another initiative for the councils to consider, perhaps.

How much would that cost per cyclist educated?

The information about how to cycle safely ought to be available to anyone who can bothered to type "how to cycle safely" in to Google.

From the first result...

http://www.rsa.ie/en/rsa/pedestrians-and-cyclists/cycling-safety/

"Steer well clear of left-turning trucks: let them turn before you move ahead"

Except that's the 9th and last item on a list.

Number 2 on the list is "Always wear luminous clothing such as hi-vis vests, fluorscent armbands and reflective belts so that other road users can see you".

The RSA are a bunch of morons.

More pragmatically, how about big signs on the back on HGVs illustrating the geometry of a left-turning truck?. We spend enough time staring at the back of these vehicles, they may as well be put to some use.

Something like this, but better...

eeeee

Lumen wrote: »

How much would that cost per cyclist educated?

The cost of renting a tractor unit from a haulier. One of Toner's trucks was used on O Connell Street, the Guards invited passing cyclists were invited to sit up into it. Much cheaper than hospital!

Even though there is lots of safety things out there, people still chance their arms as they can't even begin to understand what it is like actually IN a cab, and how little you really can see. All the safety campaigns in the world can't replicate that. People use buses, drive cars, so those dangers are relatable. But few have actually been in a working lorry, lesser still have driven them. When it was on O Connell street, people were getting their friends to walk around it and were amazed that they couldn't see each other.

There needs to be way more of that. Signs on the back of HGV's are a bit nannyish in my opinion. They certainly don't hurt but if you are going to dive up the inside of a lorry will a little sign on the back stop you? There are already signs on the back of taught liners, dry boxes and fridges and I have seen them have absolutely no effect on cyclists (or drivers!) heading up their inside. Plus that is extra regulation on the highest regulated vehicles on the road. Plus where do you put the sign on a low loader for example, where it can seen?

If people seen it from the inside I think it would make a huge difference. Understanding is needed on both sides, but it would appear to be lacking more from a pedestrian/cyclist level anecdotally more than the other way round.

buffalo

gadetra wrote: »

Even though there is lots of safety things out there, people still chance their arms as they can't even begin to understand what it is like actually IN a cab, and how little you really can see.

Part of me is amazed that such dangerous vehicles are allowed on the roads if they don't have a good field of vision. How many people have to die needlessly before extra mirrors are mandatory on trucks?

ford2600

buffalo wrote: »

Part of me is amazed that such dangerous vehicles are allowed on the roads if they don't have a good field of vision. How many people have to die needlessly before extra mirrors are mandatory on trucks?

Extra mirrors don't cover all areas depending on orientation of tractor relative to trailer.

I've tested it a a few vehicles.

What gets me is the absence of relatively cheap proximity sensors/infra red or whatever on very large vehicles.

buffalo

ford2600 wrote: »

Extra mirrors don't cover all areas depending on orientation of tractor relative to trailer.

I've tested it a a few vehicles.

What gets me is the absence of relatively cheap proximity sensors/infra red or whatever on very large vehicles.

Extra mirrors, cameras, proximity sensors, warning alarms, etc. Obviously every motor vehicle is capable of killing someone given enough speed or lack of care, but when a driver can do everything in his/her power to drive safely, and still crush someone, there's something not right.

Granted, there'll always be someone who ignores all the warnings and squeezes down the inside of a truck with the left indicator on and a warning klaxon sounding. Maybe let Darwin sort us out.

eeeee

buffalo wrote: »

Part of me is amazed that such dangerous vehicles are allowed on the roads if they don't have a good field of vision. How many people have to die needlessly before extra mirrors are mandatory on trucks?

Extra mirrors are mandatory. They are not intrinsically dangerous vehicles. What makes them dangerous is how people interact with them. This is the largest pard of the problem in an urban situation.

If HGV's were not allowed on the road, the price of everything you buy and see in shops will rise hugely. And also postage. Paying 3 drives, diesel, tax and insurance etc. in vans to bring what an arctic would bring WILL raise the cost of goods and food. There is no need for this. People just need to understand how to safely move around them. HGV drivers go throughout extensive testing to get their license, they are on the road all day every day. If you actually spend time in them you will see that the drives looks all around all mirrors every time they take off, or turn. It is not the drivers fault people dive in where they can't see. See through steel hasn't been invented yet!

eeeee

buffalo wrote: »

Extra mirrors, cameras, proximity sensors, warning alarms, etc. Obviously every motor vehicle is capable of killing someone given enough speed or lack of care, but when a driver can do everything in his/her power to drive safely, and still crush someone, there's something not right.
.

Are you going to pay for them? Drivers take Every Care they possibly can, in an urban environment proximity sensors would go off constantly! In traffic, lights, everywhere. Also bing loaded and unloaded.

The worst spot I have observed for it is by the GPO arcade on O connell st. Arnotts stuff is delivered there, and they turn in that little narrow way, drop trailers and turn the tractor unit around and go out again. The sheer, vast quantity of pedestrians who walk in and around the lorries turning in and around is shocking. Also cyclists. There are a load of bike racks there and a Dublin Bikes stop and I am amazed how many 'just nip in' by the lorries when they're moving. It actually boils my blood. They have no idea what kind of danger they are putting themselves in. All the proximity sensors in the world can't mitigate that.

It is entirely possible for all road users to exercise understanding in relation to one another. This is by far and away the biggest part of the problem. Not signs, cameras, proximity sensors etc. Same goes for HGV's as cyclists and cars and buses for each other. Can't we all just all get along?!!!

Peterx

I couldn't into the Cycling Show in Merrion Square yesterday after the Giro because.............I was on a bike. The man guarding the gate was very definite.

Sadly that's a true story.

buffalo

gadetra wrote: »

Are you going to pay for them? Drivers take Every Care they possibly can, in an urban environment proximity sensors would go off constantly! In traffic, lights, everywhere.

What? I didn't pay for the truck in the first place, why would I pay for the mirrors? If you mean would I mind if the cost of my groceries went up by a cent each to pay for sensors on a fleet of delivery trucks, then no, I wouldn't.

gadetra wrote: »

The worst spot I have observed for it is by the GPO arcade on O connell st. Arnotts stuff is delivered there, and they turn in that little narrow way, drop trailers and turn the tractor unit around and go out again. The sheer, vast quantity of pedestrians who walk in and around the lorries turning in and around is shocking. Also cyclists. There are a load of bike racks there and a Dublin Bikes stop and I am amazed how many 'just nip in' by the lorries when they're moving. It actually boils my blood. They have no idea what kind of danger they are putting themselves in. All the proximity sensors in the world can't mitigate that.

And this is why there's a ban on HGVs in the city centre during daytime. O'Connell Street must be one of the busiest streets for pedestrians in the city, and yet we have HGVs regularly performing manoeuvres on it.

You can't educate every single human being who enters Dublin city centre on the mechanics of truck drivers' field of vision - that's a few million people. You can try educate many regular users of particular junctions/avenues, and perhaps teach schoolchildren something beyond the Safe Cross Code. But the simplest approach is to train every truck driver and equip every truck with sensors.

gadetra wrote: »

the drives looks all around all mirrors every time they take off, or turn. It is not the drivers fault people dive in where they can't see.

buffalo wrote: »

when a driver can do everything in his/her power to drive safely, and still crush someone, there's something not right..

I'm not blaming the driver, I'm saying they should be given the ability to see where they currently can't see. Failing that, a warning system for when there is an object in the blind spot.

seamus

gadetra wrote: »

It is entirely possible for all road users to exercise understanding in relation to one another. This is by far and away the biggest part of the problem.

The problem is that people aren't automatons. We have evolved a large number of cognitive tricks which alter our pereception. These are awesome when hunting buffalo on the plains, but when wandering down a narrow street with traffic, they can lead us astray.
This is why vehicles need safety systems, and why trucks should be loaded with all the safety equipment they can carry; not because trucks are implicitly evil, or drivers are always wrong, or dangerous, but because everyone is human and will make mistakes.
Vehicles would be/will be many multiple times safer when there is no human at the wheel. Automation or improved visibility isn't shifting the blame, it's just acknowledging the innate fallibility of all road users. Painting pedestrians bright yellow won't stop them walking in front of a truck, but a proximity sensor will warn the driver not to flatten them.

Situational awareness of pedestrians is actually terrifyingly poor. On a bike you tend to see this in effect when they step out in front of you, but you have to go for a run along a busy road to really appreciate how bad it is; weaving left and right aimlessly along the path, looking straight at you but actually not *seeing* you, lashing arms and legs out to point at things (really). This is not correctable. No matter how many safety leaflets you produce, the conduct of pedestrians is difficult to change, because this is humans in their normal mode. We innately do not see the need to be additionally aware (as we would in a vehicle), because walking around the place comes instinctually to us.
So you need to push the safety back to the vehicles.

doozerie

Lumen wrote:

How much would that cost per cyclist educated?

Good question. I’ve no idea of the answer but I think that it would be hard to put a value on it. One previously careless cyclist that left with a real appreciation about the dangers around large vehicles could subsequently pass that understanding on to their kids/partners/family/friends/whatever, which would obviously be worth a lot.

And I don’t think the value would be limited to when those people are on bikes either. I see some appalling antics of people on bikes on a daily basis, the likelihood is that some and perhaps many of those culprits also drive cars and their oblivious attitude will almost certainly shine through while behind the wheel of a car too, making them a source of danger not just to themselves but to others as well. Any initiative that penetrates the apparent cocoon they wrap themselves in while cycling will hopefully make them better/safer drivers too, thereby benefitting everyone else.

Such initiatives shouldn’t be necessary, I agree with that too, but anecdotal evidence suggests that such basic understanding really is lacking in lots of people. It’s the usual problem of common sense being scarily uncommon. Worse still, if experiences with kids in our housing estate are anything to go by, many of the next generation are being brought up without even a shred of common sense around roads given the way they casually wander in front of cars (and bikes) and expect them to magically stop on a dime. No surprise really given the shockingly bad standard of driving amongst the adults in the estate.

Better education is needed across the board, I think, not just in relation to big heavy vehicles, but that’s a reasonable place to start.

eeeee

buffalo wrote: »

What? I didn't pay for the truck in the first place, why would I pay for the mirrors? If you mean would I mind if the cost of my groceries went up by a cent each to pay for sensors on a fleet of delivery trucks, then no, I wouldn't.

Yes that's what I mean. Except the cost of such a measure will be borne by the hauler in practice not the supermarket or end user unfortunately. It is a very tight industry that is being constantly squeezed.

buffalo wrote: »

And this is why there's a ban on HGVs in the city centre during daytime. O'Connell Street must be one of the busiest streets for pedestrians in the city, and yet we have HGVs regularly performing manoeuvres on it.

You can't educate every single human being who enters Dublin city centre on the mechanics of truck drivers' field of vision - that's a few million people. You can try educate many regular users of particular junctions/avenues, and perhaps teach schoolchildren something beyond the Safe Cross Code. But the simplest approach is to train every truck driver and equip every truck with sensors.

I'm not blaming the driver, I'm saying they should be given the ability to see where they currently can't see. Failing that, a warning system for when there is an object in the blind spot.

HGV's manoever on it so the shops in that area have things to sell! If they didn't there would be no food/groceries/stock anywhere in the area!
They are a necessary part of the vehicular infrastructure of any city, anywhere. People need to learn how to interact with them. No of course you can't educate everyone, but it should be an intrinsic part of road safety and the safe cross code. Ignorance is no defense.

You can only do do much about visibility before it becomes distracting. There area mirrors EVERYWHERE in a cab. There are 3 in a car, every lorry in the country has 6 minimum, including two for blind spots. But you have only two eyes, and binocular vision. Every vehicle has blind spots, it is not unique to HGV's. However the consequences are more severe in case of contact. So you need to personally mitigate as much of that as possible. If you sat into one you would understand for yourself what it is like, how much ou can actually see, and protect yourself accordingly. HGV's also go really slowly, they are slower to take off and stop and are huge, you can't miss them, it's not like you can't see or hear them coming. They cannot suddenly pull out or stop in front of you. No vehicle is without danger, but a disproportionate amount of people seem to apportion all the blame on HGV's without ever taking the time to ensure their own safety first.

doozerie

buffalo wrote: »

Part of me is amazed that such dangerous vehicles are allowed on the roads if they don't have a good field of vision. How many people have to die needlessly before extra mirrors are mandatory on trucks?

Even the average car has blind spots. This was hammered home to me several years ago when driving along the M50 in the outer lane and planning to move into the left lane after overtaking a car in there. I look around a lot in the car, as I do on the bike, checking my mirrors like a hyperactive paranoid mad fella. I was always sure that I'd spot anything before it ever moved into my "so-called" blind spot. Thankfully I paused just before moving left on that occasion and a motorbiker zoomed past on my left. I hadn't seen him in my mirrors, but I hadn't looked over my shoulder at the very real blind spot, I would have taken him clean off the bike if I'd moved left when I intended, and it would have been entirely my fault.

I also recall an occasion many years ago where I had to yell at my father as he drove out onto a main road as a cyclist approached. The roof pillar on his side obscured his view of the cyclist, from my position in the passenger seat I could see the cyclist clearly. On another occasion I was in a taxi when the driver did the very same thing. Those incidents have left me always conscious of how much the pillars in my car impede my view while driving, unfortunately I probably forget that all too often when I'm on the bike and approaching a car waiting to pull out of a side road.

So there is a risk of being complacent about the poor field of vision in cars when we focus on trucks. More and more technology is being installed in heavy vehicles to address the blind spots they have (I posted a link some weeks/months back about sensors being fitted to buses somewhere in the UK, which generate an audible "Cyclist on left!" or similar warning to the driver, so there is some progress being made in this area), but there is clearly an onus on all of us too to not put ourselves knowingly in the blind spots. And emphasising the importance of that should hopefully have a beneficial knock-on effect on peoples' behaviour around cars too, with their lesser/smaller, but also very dangerous, blind spots.

eeeee

doozerie wrote: »

Even the average car has blind spots. This was hammered home to me several years ago when driving along the M50 in the outer lane and planning to move into the left lane after overtaking a car in there. I look around a lot in the car, as I do on the bike, checking my mirrors like a hyperactive paranoid mad fella. I was always sure that I'd spot anything before it ever moved into my "so-called" blind spot. Thankfully I paused just before moving left on that occasion and a motorbiker zoomed past on my left. I hadn't seen him in my mirrors, but I hadn't looked over my shoulder at the very real blind spot, I would have taken him clean off the bike if I'd moved left when I intended, and it would have been entirely my fault.

I also recall an occasion many years ago where I had to yell at my father as he drove out onto a main road as a cyclist approached. The roof pillar on his side obscured his view of the cyclist, from my position in the passenger seat I could see the cyclist clearly. On another occasion I was in a taxi when the driver did the very same thing. Those incidents have left me always conscious of how much the pillars in my car impede my view while driving, unfortunately I probably forget that all too often when I'm on the bike and approaching a car waiting to pull out of a side road.

So there is a risk of being complacent about the poor field of vision in cars when we focus on trucks. More and more technology is being installed in heavy vehicles to address the blind spots they have (I posted a link some weeks/months back about sensors being fitted to buses somewhere in the UK, which generate an audible "Cyclist on left!" or similar warning to the driver, so there is some progress being made in this area), but there is clearly an onus on all of us too to not put ourselves knowingly in the blind spots. And emphasising the importance of that should hopefully have a beneficial knock-on effect on peoples' behaviour around cars too, with their lesser/smaller, but also very dangerous, blind spots.

Absolutely.

rollingscone

Just saw a Dogma going up Camden St. Swoon.

manafana

rollingscone wrote: »

Just saw a Dogma going up Camden St. Swoon.

most likely a chinarello

doozerie

rollingscone wrote: »

Just saw a Dogma going up Camden St. Swoon.

Was it a religious dogma? Best to give them a wide berth, they have very strong views that they’ll try to impose on you.

Lumen

doozerie wrote: »

Was it a religious dogma? Best to give them a wide berth, they have very strong views that they’ll try to impose on you.

I wonder what happens if you try to cycle a Dogma bicycle with Pragma shoes? They're surely not compatible.

sled driver

rollingscone wrote: »

Just saw a Dogma going up Camden St. Swoon.

Maybe the Dublin bike thieves got into the Sky trailer last night :eek:

doozerie

Lumen wrote: »

I wonder what happens if you try to cycle a Dogma bicycle with Pragma shoes? They're surely not compatible.

I think the regulation footwear for a religious Dogma is sandals:

Wishbone Ash

buffalo wrote: »

Part of me is amazed that such dangerous vehicles are allowed on the roads if they don't have a good field of vision. How many people have to die needlessly before extra mirrors are mandatory on trucks?

The biggest problem is with artics when the tractor is at an acute angle to the trailer. For a few seconds, the nearside mirrors will then just show the shoulder of the trailer while the offside mirrors will show fresh air. One busy junction in Finglas requires one to almost pass the junction with the tractor before putting a 'swan's neck' on it to clear the kerb with the trailer.

buffalo wrote: »

Extra mirrors, cameras, proximity sensors, warning alarms, etc. Obviously every motor vehicle is capable of killing someone given enough speed or lack of care, but when a driver can do everything in his/her power to drive safely, and still crush someone, there's something not right.

It's not that simple as artic units and trailers tend to be interchangable. It would defeat the purpose if they weren't.. If I'm sent down to the docks to pick up a trailer it doesn't matter how many safety features I have if the trailer isn't compatible (bearing in mind that road haulage is an international business with differing regulations between states).

buffalo wrote: »

...And this is why there's a ban on HGVs in the city centre during daytime. O'Connell Street must be one of the busiest streets for pedestrians in the city, and yet we have HGVs regularly performing manoeuvres on it...

The ban only applies to trucks with 5 axles or more transiting through the city centre (e.g. going to/from docks). It doesn't apply to trucks loading/unloading within the ban area nor does it apply to trucks with 4 or less axles. (Some artics have 4 and even 3 axles).

ford2600

"It's not that simple as artic units and trailers tend to be interchangable. It would defeat the purpose if they weren't.. If I'm sent down to the docks to pick up a trailer it doesn't matter how many safety features I have if the trailer isn't compatible (bearing in mind that road haulage is an international business with differing regulations between states). "


This excuse isn't good enough. How difficult would it be to kit the tractor unit out with the technology to "see" what's immediately adjacent to his trailer?

Decent ergonomics would allow for the interface to be usable and uncluttered.

It is not only the sides of trucks that have blind spots, obviously the rear but importantly immediately in front of cab.

Simple, relatively cheap technology can greatly reduce risk to vulnerable road users using same road space. I'd imagine insurers would be delighted with the reduced risk and therefore it would likely be self financing.

wendell borton

People should take responsibility for their own safety rather than expecting others to do it. You're looking for trouble going anywhere near the blind spots of a truck, taking a assertive position on the road and keeping your distance from other vehicles is the best option to keep safe.

Wishbone Ash

Looking for some mechanical help lads. I need to replace the rear wheel bearinings in my fixie/single speed. My LBS doesn't stock them and advised removing them and bring them to Dicksons in Finglas to get the correct size.

I made a start on it but I'm at a dead end. I removed the fixed sprocket easily enough but I'm having trouble with the other side.

I've taken a few pics Do I need to loosen the centre part with the 4 slots in the first pic? If so which direction and can it be done without special tools?

Thanks.

bcmf

WA there should be a number on the seal of the bearings eg 6001RS or somthing like that.
That should be enough for Dicksons.

Harrybelafonte

Special tool is

http://www.parktool.com/product/freewheel-remover-FR-6

I know of no other way that'll let you do it without breaking your heart or wallet.

Harrybelafonte

I'll be coming on here looking for advice on getting the bearings out of my Corima disk and four-spoke wheel soon enough. I really hope it's easier.

Wishbone Ash

bcmf wrote: »

WA there should be a number on the seal of the bearings eg 6001RS or somthing like that.
That should be enough for Dicksons.

Thanks bcmf. I'll have a look to see if there's a number.

Wishbone Ash

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Special tool is

http://www.parktool.com/product/freewheel-remover-FR-6

I know of no other way that'll let you do it without breaking your heart or wallet.

Thanks Harry. Looks simple enough. I was afraid it might be a large expensive yoke!

Harrybelafonte

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Thanks Harry. Looks simple enough. I was afraid it might be a large expensive yoke!

No, but hopefully it's not a time consuming job.

cdaly_

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Thanks Harry. Looks simple enough. I was afraid it might be a large expensive yoke!

It's very easy.

1. Place tool on freewheel
2. Clamp in place with QR skewer
3. Clamp tool in a bench vice (easier method)
4. Rotate wheel anticlockwise
5. Release QR skewer once loose

If you don't have a bench vice, use a big socket or spanner on the tool instead.

furiousox

Reports tonight indicate that Jay-Z will not be singing '99 problems' for the foreseeable future.

The tax man

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Thanks Harry. Looks simple enough. I was afraid it might be a large expensive yoke!

You can borrow mine if you need one quick.

Wishbone Ash

cdaly_ wrote: »

It's very easy.

1. Place tool on freewheel
2. Clamp in place with QR skewer
3. Clamp tool in a bench vice (easier method)
4. Rotate wheel anticlockwise
5. Release QR skewer once loose

If you don't have a bench vice, use a big socket or spanner on the tool instead.

Thanks cdaly.

If the wheel is to be rotated anti-clockwise, I presume the other part is removed by rotating it clockwise (i.e. opposite to normal direction).

Wishbone Ash

The tax man wrote: »

You can borrow mine if you need one quick.

Thanks for the offer tax man. I'm not in any particular hurry as I have several bikes but I'll keep in mind if needed.

Darkglasses

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7aH1bn6yUI

Some great videos coming off this youtube channel at the moment, on-board race videos.