E Scooters soon to be allowed on UK roads?
Discussion
Toltec said:
Mave said:
Really? From data on a recent tyre discussion, I thought cars were more like 6-7 m/s^2 even with decent tyres.
The highway code braking distance calculation uses near enough 6.5m/s^2ref: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/164841...
Depends on the frictional coefficient between tyres and road surface. I was involved in brake development and certification: 10 m/s^2 was recognised as a practical maximum (effectively 1.0g).
On the road, very few drivers will exceed 7.5 m/s^2 braking deceleration or indeed lateral acceleration during cornering. We were surprised to measure 1.3g (13 m/s^2) on track with List 1B tyres (decel and lateral) but further investigation suggests this peak is feasible.
Toltec said:
Mave said:
Really? From data on a recent tyre discussion, I thought cars were more like 6-7 m/s^2 even with decent tyres.
The highway code braking distance calculation uses near enough 6.5m/s^2https://fastestlaps.com/
Is a good source for test stopping distances.
6.5m/s gives a 100-0 kph distance of 59m. My 2 ton car manages 32m which is 12.05m/s. A Dacia Sandero is 34m which is 11.3
Graveworm said:
Most cars are much better than that.
https://fastestlaps.com/
Is a good source for test stopping distances.
6.5m/s gives a 100-0 kph distance of 59m. My 2 ton car manages 32m which is 12.05m/s. A Dacia Sandero is 34m which is 11.3
Thanks for info but units should be m/s^2 (aka m/s2)https://fastestlaps.com/
Is a good source for test stopping distances.
6.5m/s gives a 100-0 kph distance of 59m. My 2 ton car manages 32m which is 12.05m/s. A Dacia Sandero is 34m which is 11.3
I have to say, one good thing about them compared with bicycles is I have noticed that in all cases around here (where I see loads of teenage chavs riding them all over the place) they all seem to have excellent in-built front and back lights. They must be fairly robust as we know clip-on bicycle lights are s
t, so somehow they’ve integrated lights into these scooters that seem to work well.
t, so somehow they’ve integrated lights into these scooters that seem to work well.bigothunter said:
Toltec said:
Mave said:
Really? From data on a recent tyre discussion, I thought cars were more like 6-7 m/s^2 even with decent tyres.
The highway code braking distance calculation uses near enough 6.5m/s^2ref: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/164841...
Depends on the frictional coefficient between tyres and road surface. I was involved in brake development and certification: 10 m/s^2 was recognised as a practical maximum (effectively 1.0g).
On the road, very few drivers will exceed 7.5 m/s^2 braking deceleration or indeed lateral acceleration during cornering. We were surprised to measure 1.3g (13 m/s^2) on track with List 1B tyres (decel and lateral) but further investigation suggests this peak is feasible.
CoolHands said:
I have to say, one good thing about them compared with bicycles is I have noticed that in all cases around here (where I see loads of teenage chavs riding them all over the place) they all seem to have excellent in-built front and back lights. They must be fairly robust as we know clip-on bicycle lights are st, so somehow they’ve integrated lights into these scooters that seem to work well.
Unless they are on all the time, you are relying on said chavs turning them on. You don't want to be easily seen when you are mugging old ladies and bag snatching from said scooter.........t, so somehow they’ve integrated lights into these scooters that seem to work well.No lights? fair game to get cream crackered when they swerve off the pavement into the road. Sorry guv, didnt see him, no lights, no reflectors, dark clothing.
Donbot said:
The un-illuminated scooters or cyclists . . .
Please give an example.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/six-cyclists...Please give an example.
bigothunter said:
Donbot said:
The un-illuminated scooters or cyclists . . .
Please give an example.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/six-cyclists...Please give an example.
When working at a hospital I was amazed at the amount of presumably intelligent staff who in the winter didn't bother with lights on their bikes.
I can't see how this scenario would play out in a rural area but it seems e-scooter gangs are responsible for heavy machinery theft
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58066465
I can't see how this scenario would play out in a rural area but it seems e-scooter gangs are responsible for heavy machinery theft
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58066465
Donbot said:
At the bottom they all say no-one was arrested. So it doesn't back up your point.
Let's put this issue in practical terms.Driving along a straight country road below the speed limit in the face of oncoming traffic using their headlights, in the dark at 9:20pm. Suddenly two unilluminated cyclists wearing dark clothing appear out of the gloom. Time between sighting and passing them is very short. This actually happened to me recently as recounted on this forum.
Fortunately I missed both cyclists but the outcome could have been disastrous. Potentially two dead cyclists with their mangled bikes strewn across the road. Did evidence remain about whether they were legally illuminated? Certainly not through initial police examination.
Would I have been arrested? Seems highly likely
Charged with a driving offence? Highly likely
Retained in custody? Reasonable chance
Making a court appearance? Almost certainly
Fined and licence endorsed? Highly likely
Custodial sentence? Quite possibly
Emphasis is changing to 'duty of care' where the more vulnerable road users have greater rights. Highway Code is being updated to reflect this change (no pun intended). Kill a cyclist whether legally illuminated or not, and the driver will be in serious trouble. Cyclists and eScooterists need to step up to their responsibilities too.
bigothunter said:
Let's put this issue in practical terms.
Driving along a straight country road below the speed limit in the face of oncoming traffic using their headlights, in the dark at 9:20pm. Suddenly two unilluminated cyclists wearing dark clothing appear out of the gloom. Time between sighting and passing them is very short. This actually happened to me recently as recounted on this forum.
Fortunately I missed both cyclists but the outcome could have been disastrous. Potentially two dead cyclists with their mangled bikes strewn across the road. Did evidence remain about whether they were legally illuminated? Certainly not through initial police examination.
Would I have been arrested? Seems highly likely
Charged with a driving offence? Highly likely
Retained in custody? Reasonable chance
Making a court appearance? Almost certainly
Fined and licence endorsed? Highly likely
Custodial sentence? Quite possibly
Emphasis is changing to 'duty of care' where the more vulnerable road users have greater rights. Highway Code is being updated to reflect this change (no pun intended). Kill a cyclist whether legally illuminated or not, and the driver will be in serious trouble. Cyclists and eScooterists need to step up to their responsibilities too.
If they were pedestrians?Driving along a straight country road below the speed limit in the face of oncoming traffic using their headlights, in the dark at 9:20pm. Suddenly two unilluminated cyclists wearing dark clothing appear out of the gloom. Time between sighting and passing them is very short. This actually happened to me recently as recounted on this forum.
Fortunately I missed both cyclists but the outcome could have been disastrous. Potentially two dead cyclists with their mangled bikes strewn across the road. Did evidence remain about whether they were legally illuminated? Certainly not through initial police examination.
Would I have been arrested? Seems highly likely
Charged with a driving offence? Highly likely
Retained in custody? Reasonable chance
Making a court appearance? Almost certainly
Fined and licence endorsed? Highly likely
Custodial sentence? Quite possibly
Emphasis is changing to 'duty of care' where the more vulnerable road users have greater rights. Highway Code is being updated to reflect this change (no pun intended). Kill a cyclist whether legally illuminated or not, and the driver will be in serious trouble. Cyclists and eScooterists need to step up to their responsibilities too.
Your closing speed would have been higher.
They'd have been entirely legal road users. E.g. the darkly dressed pedestrian I passed who was walking along the A303 after dark - quite possibly tied to the broken down car a mile or two further along.
Fact remains it was entirely legal for him to walk down the side of the dual carriageway. It's incumbent on vehicle drivers to be able to stop in the distance that they can see to be clear.
The fact that the cyclists in question were breaking the law doesn't absolve you of that responsibility - in fact, the lights I've just outfitted to my bike turn off after about 4 minutes of being stationary, including waiting at a junction - and that's entirely legal, as the rear light integrates a red reflector. The flipside is that the lights are powered by a dynamo, so never run out of charge...
Talking of running out of charge, there's the time I did a bike-train journey with a 4 mile ride home from the station. Only there was a bus replacement service, which didn't take bikes. Late Sunday night, I'm unceremoniously ditched 30 miles from home, without any water. And it was a 40 mile ride, as after a lap of the Salisbury Ring Road, I couldn't find the A30 West, so decided the A354 was close enough...
At 3am, about 2 miles from home, my front light ran out of charge. Frankly, it wasn't hugely important. Illegal, yes, but the hazard was not being seen at junctions or by pedestrians. I just was particularly wary of junctions, even where I'd have priority, being entirely prepared to cede it.
So compare to a legal road user. If they had red rear reflectors, and were riding in a position similar to a cyclist pulled over? Yeah, it would probably be your fault if you hit them.
Think of it this way - if you're driving at 75 mph on a motorway, it doesn't mean HGVs can just pull out and whap you - "oh, he was speeding, his fault". If you were doing 150 mph, it almost certainly would be your fault - but it's entirely right that it's looked at through the lens of how much the illegality contributed to the collision, and whether you'd have hit a law abiding road user.
bigothunter said:
Would I have been arrested? Seems highly likely
Charged with a driving offence? Highly likely
Retained in custody? Reasonable chance
Making a court appearance? Almost certainly
Fined and licence endorsed? Highly likely
Custodial sentence? Quite possibly
No one in your examples were charged.Charged with a driving offence? Highly likely
Retained in custody? Reasonable chance
Making a court appearance? Almost certainly
Fined and licence endorsed? Highly likely
Custodial sentence? Quite possibly
I'm still waiting for some examples. If, according to you it is highly likely, it shouldn't be too difficult.
Wasn’t there an incident similar to this on police camera action or 999 what’s your emergency a while back.
Drunk cyclist dressed in black riding down a dual carriageway at night during heavy rain.
Some poor young girl clipped him. Thought it was an animal but rang the police. Turned out the cyclist was dead.
Nothing happened to her.
Drunk cyclist dressed in black riding down a dual carriageway at night during heavy rain.
Some poor young girl clipped him. Thought it was an animal but rang the police. Turned out the cyclist was dead.
Nothing happened to her.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff