• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Reduce the Number of Cars and Motos!

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

wrinklyvet said:
Lequack said:
What about using lightweight drones?
Who would direct them and where would he be?

I am drawn to the comments of V.I.Lenin under the original CN article "Antoine Demoitié dies following Gent-Wevelgem crash" and I see the need for many motos under the present arrangements. He makes realistic and knowledgeable contributions, tempering some of the less considered posts.

Whether or not drones would reduce the essential traffic or reduce risks is somewhat debatable.
Seriously? 95% of the media motos/cars could be replaced by quadcopters which would greatly reduce traffic and therefore risk. Of course there is the risk that a quadcopter battery could fail and drop it into the platoon.
 
Apr 14, 2010
1,231
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
therhodeo said:
thehog said:
kuko61 said:
More to the point, look how close the first motorcycle is behind the back rider. If there was a crash it would go over all of them.
Definitely. That video is crazy. I wasn't expecting that many.
Again, I wasn't commenting on the amount of motobikes but the proximity.

I realize that. Still was surprised by the number present.
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
wrinklyvet said:
Lequack said:
What about using lightweight drones?
Who would direct them and where would he be?

I am drawn to the comments of V.I.Lenin under the original CN article "Antoine Demoitié dies following Gent-Wevelgem crash" and I see the need for many motos under the present arrangements. He makes realistic and knowledgeable contributions, tempering some of the less considered posts.

Whether or not drones would reduce the essential traffic or reduce risks is somewhat debatable.
Seriously? 95% of the media motos/cars could be replaced by quadcopters which would greatly reduce traffic and therefore risk. Of course there is the risk that a quadcopter battery could fail and drop it into the platoon.
Yes, seriously. As I asked, who would control them and where would he be?

I wouldn't want one of these items to drop into my front wheel if I were riding, or into anything or anyone else. You replace one risk with another.
 
As soon as I heard about poor Antoine, I thought about the Safety Pyramid that was beaten into me from my first day in work.



There are a million variations, but the essential message is always the same.

If you let the little stuff slide, it eventually snowballs into bigger issues, until eventually you end up with someone losing their life.

It's been obvious to everyone since the Flecha & Hoogerland Crash, that there was totally inadequate control over the cars & motos on the roads around races; & yet nothing of significance was done, & the accidents continued & increased in frequency.

It was only a matter of time before someone died :mad:
 
Re: Re:

wrinklyvet said:
jmdirt said:
wrinklyvet said:
Lequack said:
What about using lightweight drones?
Who would direct them and where would he be?

I am drawn to the comments of V.I.Lenin under the original CN article "Antoine Demoitié dies following Gent-Wevelgem crash" and I see the need for many motos under the present arrangements. He makes realistic and knowledgeable contributions, tempering some of the less considered posts.

Whether or not drones would reduce the essential traffic or reduce risks is somewhat debatable.
Seriously? 95% of the media motos/cars could be replaced by quadcopters which would greatly reduce traffic and therefore risk. Of course there is the risk that a quadcopter battery could fail and drop it into the platoon.
Yes, seriously. As I asked, who would control them and where would he be?

I wouldn't want one of these items to drop into my front wheel if I were riding, or into anything or anyone else. You replace one risk with another.
The risk is FAR less. Plus I would rather have that fall on me than a moto any day. Quadcopters only fall out of the sky when the owner forgets to charge the batteries. There would be two to five quadcopter media motos in the race that would control all of the QCs. IE; how that might work: There is a guy here who makes videos of cyclocross races using a "homing device" mounted on his bike. He programs the parameters for the CQ (how high, how far ahead/behind it follows, zoom, etc...). In three years, he has had zero fall out of the sky while filming (CX is only an hour so I don't know how that will translate to longer races). His CQs even avoid object automatically (trees, bridges, signs...).
 
The economics of professional cycling is extremely precarious. I would say the first thing that needs to be looked at for rider safety is actually cycling's economics depending so much on self-generated revenue for the teams and sponsors themselves through multimedia and then on the other side the race organisers depending so much on the TV exposure. There's clearly a huge overlap of cameras and this could certainly be looked at to reduce the number of bikes all needing to be within the racing action all the time at the same time as each other. Other than cameras, i'm not sure there is any more motorbikes than before. Neutral service bikes might be the only change and that again is almost a sponsor revenue stream rather than true support and happened 20 years ago now. The support is really the excuse to sponsor and have a vehicle with a logo in front of the cameras covering the action and broadcasting it around the world.
 
There's no way a lightweight can send live signals to the transmission relay plane like a motorbike and helicopter pairing does. A drone could offer some pre-recorded interest for highlights transmission, but the technology doesn't exist. You would need a drone the size of a motorbike to transmit to the plane and that would be as heavy as a motorbike anyway lol!
 
Re:

samhocking said:
There's no way a lightweight can send live signals to the transmission relay plane like a motorbike and helicopter pairing does. A drone could offer some pre-recorded interest for highlights transmission, but the technology doesn't exist. You would need a drone the size of a motorbike to transmit to the plane and that would be as heavy as a motorbike anyway lol!
I've looked into this a bit after the previous comments here but have no experience of drones. I think from what I have read you are right and there's no way they could operate from a moving convoy, including landing for new batteries. See http://www.turboace.com/matrix_drone.aspx for example. I particularly like this bit: "Don’t operate near people or pets & do not allow people to approach an operating quadcopter."

I suppose if Google can make a self-driving car that only occasionally crashes and the military can take out terrorists there's room for progress in professional drones for cycle race purposes, but at what cost and with what novel risks to the race? I, like you, am not persuaded. Somebody out there must really know about these things. Are we right, or are we deluded?
 
Re:

MatParker117 said:
Really hope something similar to the BC training and licencing system is implemented soon.
Cookson in September last year, putting the responsibility on the riders and not the motorbikes:

— Cookson insisted rider safety remains of paramount importance, and the UCI is considering more restrictions on the number of motorcycles and cars involved in races. But he also points out, "End of the day, it's the rider's profession. They have a responsibility here."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2015/09/18/uci-president-brian-cookson-remains-in-cyclings-crosshairs/72420062/
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
MatParker117 said:
Really hope something similar to the BC training and licencing system is implemented soon.
Cookson in September last year, putting the responsibility on the riders and not the motorbikes:

— Cookson insisted rider safety remains of paramount importance, and the UCI is considering more restrictions on the number of motorcycles and cars involved in races. But he also points out, "End of the day, it's the rider's profession. They have a responsibility here."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2015/09/18/uci-president-brian-cookson-remains-in-cyclings-crosshairs/72420062/
Interesting and thanks for the link. The article taken as a whole is very fair about Cookson. So far as the quote is concerned, putting "a responsibility" on riders is not saying the sole responsibility is on them and I don't think that was meant. For an example of their responsibility the riders cannot entirely ignore vehicles in the convoy, including those who need to pass or are in the process of passing. That's why they often beep a warning - so that the riders don't move into their path. The drivers have their responsibility too and are often in a better position to avoid contact. (I am particularly NOT commenting on the latest sad accident or in any way blaming the rider so please don't run away with that theme.)
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
MatParker117 said:
Really hope something similar to the BC training and licencing system is implemented soon.
Cookson in September last year, putting the responsibility on the riders and not the motorbikes:

— Cookson insisted rider safety remains of paramount importance, and the UCI is considering more restrictions on the number of motorcycles and cars involved in races. But he also points out, "End of the day, it's the rider's profession. They have a responsibility here."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2015/09/18/uci-president-brian-cookson-remains-in-cyclings-crosshairs/72420062/
Cookson would want to chat with his lawyers before he goes making statements like that !

In a large part of the planet its the employers responsibility to provide a 'Safe working Environment', & it just isn't good enough to wash his hands & say that its the riders choice to participate in a workplace where the organisers are more worried about the colour of the rain capes than, whether or not moto's are driven by people who know the rules of the road.

The NFL players knew the risks of the sport, but it hasn't stopped the lawyers sueing the a$$ of the NFL & settling for a pittance of what they could, & probably should, have gotten off them !

If this terrible incident had happened in the US; the UCI would be looking down the barrel of bankruptcy, & for good reason; they've utterly failed to protect the riders basic safety.
 
Re: Re:

keeponrollin said:
thehog said:
MatParker117 said:
Really hope something similar to the BC training and licencing system is implemented soon.
Cookson in September last year, putting the responsibility on the riders and not the motorbikes:

— Cookson insisted rider safety remains of paramount importance, and the UCI is considering more restrictions on the number of motorcycles and cars involved in races. But he also points out, "End of the day, it's the rider's profession. They have a responsibility here."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2015/09/18/uci-president-brian-cookson-remains-in-cyclings-crosshairs/72420062/
Cookson would want to chat with his lawyers before he goes making statements like that !

In a large part of the planet its the employers responsibility to provide a 'Safe working Environment', & it just isn't good enough to wash his hands & say that its the riders choice to participate in a workplace where the organisers are more worried about the colour of the rain capes than, whether or not moto's are driven by people who know the rules of the road.

The NFL players knew the risks of the sport, but it hasn't stopped the lawyers sueing the a$$ of the NFL & settling for a pittance of what they could, & probably should, have gotten off them !

If this terrible incident had happened in the US; the UCI would be looking down the barrel of bankruptcy, & for good reason; they've utterly failed to protect the riders basic safety.
I tend to agree, considering the motorbike in question was a UCI commissionaire vehicle, speaks volumes to the current silence by the UCI on the matter. They are protecting their legal position and not the riders nor paying respect to the recent incident.
 
I don't know what the answer is. The only official driver in races that are governed by the UCI are the head international commissaires. I'm pretty sure all other UCI, press, TV and sponsors official drivers in all races are governed by each countries national cycling federation, not the UCI. I would say the UCI could look at a BC style driver accreditation across the board. Works very well in BC on UK anyway.
 
Jul 28, 2010
17
0
0
Definitely a tragedy, but race support is necessary.

I know that in races 25 and 35 years ago we were having these problems. I can remember a couple of riders hit by officials, and this was with far fewer motos. Everyone volunteered, so there sure wasn't any training. Occasionally, well intentioned officials contributed to an accident in some way. We also had completely oblivious cars going the wrong way on courses, and other mind-bogglingly dangerous conditions. We had spectators wandering out, drunks, people with hoses, dogs, cows, oil slicks, thumb tacks. Vehicles served as bailouts, generous technical supports, and -importantly- volunteer "ambulances." Motos, race cars and the like absolutely helped make it safer, despite the accidents.

I applaud all the calls for safety, regulations and enforcement. However, cyclists will get hit by moving vehicles, even in races. This is a dangerous sport, and on-course officials are part of the solution, not just part of the problem!

RIP, fellow rider and racer. God bless his family.
 
Re:

samhocking said:
There's no way a lightweight can send live signals to the transmission relay plane like a motorbike and helicopter pairing does. A drone could offer some pre-recorded interest for highlights transmission, but the technology doesn't exist. You would need a drone the size of a motorbike to transmit to the plane and that would be as heavy as a motorbike anyway lol!
The CQs wouldn't replace the main TV transmission.

EDIT: Death does make people take notice, in 6 months this thread had three pages. Now that someone died, it has doubled in a few days.
 
You guys are all missing the point. Go to YouTube, check races from 20-30 years ago, see the difference, and now we talk. Great broadcasts, in many cases better than what we get these days, nothing like this nonsense when GVA loses a race unbeknownst to all of us, no accidents like when Sagan gets wrecked and others barb-wired, or when Antoine gets his life cut short.

In the meantime the CPA and the UCI do nothing. Nothing.
 
Re:

samhocking said:
I don't know what the answer is. The only official driver in races that are governed by the UCI are the head international commissaires. I'm pretty sure all other UCI, press, TV and sponsors official drivers in all races are governed by each countries national cycling federation, not the UCI. I would say the UCI could look at a BC style driver accreditation across the board. Works very well in BC on UK anyway.
Of course it works well in the UK. With half the field of a Euro race and infinitely less media on motorcycles. The comparisons is dreadfully poor.
 
Jun 3, 2012
360
0
0
Tonton said:
You guys are all missing the point. Go to YouTube, check races from 20-30 years ago, see the difference, and now we talk. Great broadcasts, in many cases better than what we get these days, nothing like this nonsense when GVA loses a race unbeknownst to all of us, no accidents like when Sagan gets wrecked and others barb-wired, or when Antoine gets his life cut short.

In the meantime the CPA and the UCI do nothing. Nothing.
Yeah I watched a MSR from the early 90s. Coverage was awesome.
 
Feb 23, 2011
446
0
0
Tragic as this incident is the issue of race traffic should form a wider discussion on race safety. It is incredible the risks riders take getting back on sometimes-literally mm's off the bumpers of cars, holding onto cars etc etc.

What is worse is that the riders shouting the loudest for race radios to remain are the same riders that "get back on" taking the worst risks.

It's not a case off two wrongs don't make a right but if you are going to be "safe" everyone needs to play their part.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
samhocking said:
I don't know what the answer is. The only official driver in races that are governed by the UCI are the head international commissaires. I'm pretty sure all other UCI, press, TV and sponsors official drivers in all races are governed by each countries national cycling federation, not the UCI. I would say the UCI could look at a BC style driver accreditation across the board. Works very well in BC on UK anyway.
Of course it works well in the UK. With half the field of a Euro race and infinitely less media on motorcycles. The comparisons is dreadfully poor.
I'm talking about how BC Coaching accreditation has now been set-up under BC now in UK and not accredited by clubs directly?

My point is, like BC, the UCI should bring all drivers of race vehicles under one UCI accreditation scheme for approval by a board of safety like how the BC coaching has now been set-up n UK. At the moment the UCI only accredit national commissare drivers, nobody else - that;s currently managed by each countries national cycling federation. A French TV cameraman will be accredited by French Cycling, an Italian press bike by Italian Cycling Federation - There's clearly nobody managing a cohesive accreditation for race vehicle drivers - this is my point.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS