Cyclist likely to be convicted of manslaughter..

Cyclist likely to be convicted of manslaughter..

Author
Discussion

Fastpedeller

3,848 posts

145 months

Saturday 23rd September 2017
quotequote all
FiF said:
Fastpedeller said:
fblm said:
Fastpedeller said:
...like with a manual car, when you lift the accelerator and it slows, and gives added stability around corners...
yikes
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.
To be frank, it's not clear. One thing a rather well known Scandinavvian rally driver taught me was the technique of disengaging clutch, ie freewheel, when you are in such a position that you need every bit of available grip to get round a bend. It works, it really does. Furthermore the same technique is taught by skidpan instructors, certainly the police instructors teach that, sadly they frown upon delicately held opposite lock drift circuits round the skid pan, at least they did when I was enjoying myself.
I believe the disengage the clutch technique is valid if you are driving a 2 wheel drive car, would it apply to a 4 wheel drive? I'm unsure.
Why with a 2 wheel drive, because if the power is on and the 2 driven wheels suddenly find grip then the car will become unstable. For normal (not on the limit) driving it would seem prudent to be driving the wheels when cornering, but once a skid starts?
Bike are very different of course....... You can't fall OFF a car!

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Fastpedeller said:
I believe the disengage the clutch technique is valid if you are driving a 2 wheel drive car, would it apply to a 4 wheel drive? I'm unsure.
Why with a 2 wheel drive, because if the power is on and the 2 driven wheels suddenly find grip then the car will become unstable. For normal (not on the limit) driving it would seem prudent to be driving the wheels when cornering, but once a skid starts?
Bike are very different of course....... You can't fall OFF a car!
Putting any braking or acceleration forces through a tyre limits the amount of cornering force it can provide, so by ensuring braking and accelerative forces are zero you can maximise the cornering force the tyres are capable of. It doesn't matter how many wheels are driven, the basic physics remains the same.

I'd always though the lack of brakes, single gear and no freewheel hub on a track bike was to minimise weight?

Fastpedeller

3,848 posts

145 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Unless you've raced a bike on a banked track it's difficult to envisage.

Donbot

3,892 posts

126 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00

Fastpedeller

3,848 posts

145 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Donbot said:
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00
As I explained a few notes above....
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.

Donbot

3,892 posts

126 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00
As I explained a few notes above....
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.
I just don't see how this applies to cycling, or where you have got this from. I haven't heard this argument before (not that I'm saying you are totally incorrect).

This talk of cars and direct drive seems irrelevant. Especially when brakes act on the wheels in a more consistent way than a pulsing pedalling force (or purely frictional force when coasting).


BMWBen

4,899 posts

200 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Stickyfinger said:
oyster said:
The fact you open your post with the claim that ALL cyclists ignore the rules marks you out has having little to add.

I work near Smithfield and probably see less than 1 in 20 cyclists use the pedestrian-only bits.
That is a large number
...Right but have you ever counted what proportion of cars ignore the rules? Why do you think bikes are any worse for it than cars are?

Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
BMWBen said:
Why do you think bikes are any worse for it than cars are?
I don't...............

Fastpedeller

3,848 posts

145 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Donbot said:
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00
As I explained a few notes above....
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.
I just don't see how this applies to cycling, or where you have got this from. I haven't heard this argument before (not that I'm saying you are totally incorrect).

This talk of cars and direct drive seems irrelevant. Especially when brakes act on the wheels in a more consistent way than a pulsing pedalling force (or purely frictional force when coasting).
The reference to car direct drive was by way of an example to offer something people might understand more if they haven't ridden fixed. I'll give up now.

FiF

43,960 posts

250 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00
As I explained a few notes above....
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.
I just don't see how this applies to cycling, or where you have got this from. I haven't heard this argument before (not that I'm saying you are totally incorrect).

This talk of cars and direct drive seems irrelevant. Especially when brakes act on the wheels in a more consistent way than a pulsing pedalling force (or purely frictional force when coasting).
The reference to car direct drive was by way of an example to offer something people might understand more if they haven't ridden fixed. I'll give up now.
Personally it seems to be not a good example and just confused the issue.

I could understand the situation considering that in sprint races the cadence is so high that there might be instances when the legs struggle to keep going at the rate required. If the back hub were freewheel could be a temporary loss of and reconnection of drive which might cause instability.

Finlandia

7,803 posts

230 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
FiF said:
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00
As I explained a few notes above....
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.
I just don't see how this applies to cycling, or where you have got this from. I haven't heard this argument before (not that I'm saying you are totally incorrect).

This talk of cars and direct drive seems irrelevant. Especially when brakes act on the wheels in a more consistent way than a pulsing pedalling force (or purely frictional force when coasting).
The reference to car direct drive was by way of an example to offer something people might understand more if they haven't ridden fixed. I'll give up now.
Personally it seems to be not a good example and just confused the issue.

I could understand the situation considering that in sprint races the cadence is so high that there might be instances when the legs struggle to keep going at the rate required. If the back hub were freewheel could be a temporary loss of and reconnection of drive which might cause instability.
I'm not sure I get this, but then I'm only used to driving on ice and snow, and the main rule is that a freewheeling wheel
has better sideways grip than a driving och braking wheel.

I also thought that no brakes and fixed gear on track bikes was to save weight.

FiF

43,960 posts

250 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Finlandia said:
FiF said:
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
Fastpedeller said:
Donbot said:
I've 'raced' at a velodrome and have ridden BMXs in parks for years. I don't believe that being able to freewheel on a banking would cause any problems whatsoever. It's fixed hub so the bikes don't need brakes to slow down in a reasonable distance.

As for stability, on a motorbike, going round a corner with the throttle fully closed is the last thing you should be doing. ETA That has a lot to do with the change in suspension geometry, which doesn't apply to track bikes.

Edited by Donbot on Sunday 24th September 20:00
As I explained a few notes above....
Why the yikes? Maybe some confusion? I was meaning the direct drive gives stability in corners (c/f a freewheel), not 'lifting off the accelerator in corners gives more stability' Sorry if that wasn't clear, but thought it would be obvious.
I just don't see how this applies to cycling, or where you have got this from. I haven't heard this argument before (not that I'm saying you are totally incorrect).

This talk of cars and direct drive seems irrelevant. Especially when brakes act on the wheels in a more consistent way than a pulsing pedalling force (or purely frictional force when coasting).
The reference to car direct drive was by way of an example to offer something people might understand more if they haven't ridden fixed. I'll give up now.
Personally it seems to be not a good example and just confused the issue.

I could understand the situation considering that in sprint races the cadence is so high that there might be instances when the legs struggle to keep going at the rate required. If the back hub were freewheel could be a temporary loss of and reconnection of drive which might cause instability.
I'm not sure I get this, but then I'm only used to driving on ice and snow, and the main rule is that a freewheeling wheel
has better sideways grip than a driving och braking wheel.

I also thought that no brakes and fixed gear on track bikes was to save weight.
Completely agree with both those, and as earlier was taught exactly this technique, again for snow and ice, but it works generally if you are totally and utterly on the limit, well a bit over what's sensible really. Also agree on weight issue.

I've never ridden a bike on a banked track but there does seem to be some insistence about it helping stability which either has some foundation in fact, or may be just complete ballocks. Trying to throw a theory that may support, would be useful if someone could explain why, away from car analogies, because personal experience suggests application to cars doesn't make sense.

oyster

12,577 posts

247 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Stickyfinger said:
oyster said:
The fact you open your post with the claim that ALL cyclists ignore the rules marks you out has having little to add.

I work near Smithfield and probably see less than 1 in 20 cyclists use the pedestrian-only bits.
That is a large number
Well that's a subjective opinion. I was responding to a post claiming that ALL cyclists rode through there - which is plainly censored.


Edited by odie.mod on Tuesday 26th September 15:32

Stickyfinger

8,429 posts

104 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
oyster said:
Stickyfinger said:
oyster said:
The fact you open your post with the claim that ALL cyclists ignore the rules marks you out has having little to add.

I work near Smithfield and probably see less than 1 in 20 cyclists use the pedestrian-only bits.
That is a large number
Well that's a subjective opinion.
Not if you are a Ped faced with a Lycra warrior bearing down on you....EVERY day !.....one or two would be a lot

Donbot

3,892 posts

126 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
FiF said:
I've never ridden a bike on a banked track but there does seem to be some insistence about it helping stability which either has some foundation in fact, or may be just complete ballocks. Trying to throw a theory that may support, would be useful if someone could explain why, away from car analogies, because personal experience suggests application to cars doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure how a fixed hub would provide stability either. I'll ask my coach about it when I'm at the velodrome Wednesday if they have an opinion on this.

will_

6,027 posts

202 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
AJL308 said:
Leaving aside the idea of testing (although I do agree with it) it has always puzzled me as to why cyclists aren't required to have any form of third party insurance. I fail to see any possible reasonable objection to it, quite frankly.
Do you have it as a pedestrian? If not, why not?

IroningMan

10,154 posts

245 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
will_ said:
AJL308 said:
Leaving aside the idea of testing (although I do agree with it) it has always puzzled me as to why cyclists aren't required to have any form of third party insurance. I fail to see any possible reasonable objection to it, quite frankly.
Do you have it as a pedestrian? If not, why not?
Or as a mobility scooter user?

Angrybiker

557 posts

89 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
will_ said:
AJL308 said:
Leaving aside the idea of testing (although I do agree with it) it has always puzzled me as to why cyclists aren't required to have any form of third party insurance. I fail to see any possible reasonable objection to it, quite frankly.
Do you have it as a pedestrian? If not, why not?
You do, it's Household insurance. Some time ago a pedestrian knocked me off my motorbike, his insurance paid for my repairs. Probably not held by everyone but it should be.
Wonder if that works for cyclists too.

Edited by Angrybiker on Monday 25th September 16:53

WestyCarl

3,217 posts

124 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Donbot said:
FiF said:
I've never ridden a bike on a banked track but there does seem to be some insistence about it helping stability which either has some foundation in fact, or may be just complete ballocks. Trying to throw a theory that may support, would be useful if someone could explain why, away from car analogies, because personal experience suggests application to cars doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure how a fixed hub would provide stability either. I'll ask my coach about it when I'm at the velodrome Wednesday if they have an opinion on this.
Fixed hub improving stability, complete rubbish, if anything it's the complete opposite. It's takes a reasonable amount of skill to ride a fixed hub around a track. (if you stop pedaling or significantly reduce pedaling force you usually go straight over the bars) The point of a fixed hub is to allow you to modulate your speed and simplicity of the bike (the free hub would have to be super strong to withstand the forces) as the bikes have no brakes (for aero reasons)

Riding around a track is all about speed, as long as you are going fast enough you'll be OK.

King Herald

23,501 posts

215 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Donbot said:
FiF said:
I've never ridden a bike on a banked track but there does seem to be some insistence about it helping stability which either has some foundation in fact, or may be just complete ballocks. Trying to throw a theory that may support, would be useful if someone could explain why, away from car analogies, because personal experience suggests application to cars doesn't make sense.
I'm not sure how a fixed hub would provide stability either. I'll ask my coach about it when I'm at the velodrome Wednesday if they have an opinion on this.
In a car or bike a smooth delivery of power can help cornering, but on bicycle you don't have smooth power. You have a fluctuating on off on off of power, as the pedals come under load, then back off a bit. generally speaking.

Yes, strapped in shoes (whatever they are called) keep it more regular compared to a normal pedal bike, as you can pull as well as push each pedal, but it is still not a turbine smooth flow.