Reckless Cyclist

[Atonchia]

On 4/15/2021 at 2:52 PM, Beregond said:

talk until got tiger and dragon, the 1 and only reason cyclist reject a number plate is once a number plate is install, they cannot do this and get away anymore. heaven know, earth know u know i know

https://youtu.be/_MNT7VyV-BE

No leh.... 

I scared it affect the aerodynamic of the ride. 

I don't mind identification... 

But must do it appropriately.

I don't mind using small LED light shining the ID on the tarmac. 

No matter what bike the cyclist ride. 

The light can be transferred to any bike he ride.... Like the driving licence. 

Edited April 17, 2021 by Atonchia

[Atonchia]

On 4/16/2021 at 3:16 PM, Jellandross said:

you mean do this?

 

This is the type - hot blooded teenage boy. 

 

The bus driver also CB, haven't turn green already start to move. 

[Beregond]

1 hour ago, Atonchia said:

No leh.... 

I scared it affect the aerodynamic of the ride. 

 

actually not really.

dun have the mindset the number plate must be like a motorcycle 1.

we can design it other way to look nice , and less resistance to wind.

for example,  can do it from top to btm, behind the rear wheel, in a semi circle like the wheel arc, or the mudcover. ( if u can picture it)

or can print double side, and stick in flat against the body in the middle, put water bottle that area. 

[Atonchia]

1 hour ago, Beregond said:

actually not really.

dun have the mindset the number plate must be like a motorcycle 1.

we can design it other way to look nice , and less resistance to wind.

for example,  can do it from top to btm, behind the rear wheel, in a semi circle like the wheel arc, or the mudcover. ( if u can picture it)

or can print double side, and stick in flat against the body in the middle, put water bottle that area. 

Think a tail fin type is still ok.

I don't think those with aero wheels will want anything on wheels... a pair will set at least minimally $2k for entry level type..... 

And with wheel spinning...... can't really see anything 😅😅

Unless Rolls Royce wheels😅😅

[macrosszero]

Tie the cyclist’s right to claim against the other party with the prerequisite to be licensed and registered.

The right to be on the road must come with accountability and responsibility.

Don’t give any BS that you have multiple bikes, your pet mouse has its own bicycle, foreign workers cannot afford, visitors cannot.

We did that for drivers’ licenses and we can do it for pedal bikes if there’s enough willpower.

[inlinesix]

47 minutes ago, Macrosszero said:

Tie the cyclist’s right to claim against the other party with the prerequisite to be licensed and registered.

The right to be on the road must come with accountability and responsibility.

Don’t give any BS that you have multiple bikes, your pet mouse has its own bicycle, foreign workers cannot afford, visitors cannot.

We did that for drivers’ licenses and we can do it for pedal bikes if there’s enough willpower.

For motor vehicles, it has a duty of care towards pedestrian, motorcyclist and cyclist.

That’s the fundamental of our legislation.

On the other hand, cyclist has a duty of care towards pedestrian when cyclist uses walkway.

Accordingly, for accountability and responsibility, all cyclist is required to have licensed and registered.

[inlinesix]

1 hour ago, Atonchia said:

Think a tail fin type is still ok.

I don't think those with aero wheels will want anything on wheels... a pair will set at least minimally $2k for entry level type..... 

And with wheel spinning...... can't really see anything 😅😅

Unless Rolls Royce wheels😅😅

For 50mm stack height, where got $2k so cheap?
Only 50mm and above is considered aero

[Atonchia]

9 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

For 50mm stack height, where got $2k so cheap?
Only 50mm and above is considered aero

Chain Reaction price is lower. 

Few hundred pounds for one wheel 

[Lethalstrike]

2 hours ago, Macrosszero said:

Tie the cyclist’s right to claim against the other party with the prerequisite to be licensed and registered.

The right to be on the road must come with accountability and responsibility.

Don’t give any BS that you have multiple bikes, your pet mouse has its own bicycle, foreign workers cannot afford, visitors cannot.

We did that for drivers’ licenses and we can do it for pedal bikes if there’s enough willpower.

Sounds good, I am assuming that you are for licensing the rider, and it's not about registering the bike right? 

If we proceed with issuing bicycle licenses, do you have any solutions or suggestions to the problems which I've wrote in a long post as below previously? From the way you wrote about willpower and resolution, I think you might have some practical suggestions in mind. 

Quote

I've given the matter of licensing and putting license plates on bicycles some serious thought. And I happened to be very free before dinner... 😂

I don't cycle myself, so I welcome feedback from those few who cycled here, I know there's a few. And then there are advocates of registering bicycles, you know who you are and feel free to share your serious views. 

It's not that its totally impossible to license and issue license plates for cyclists, but first, the framework had to be well thought out and fair across all users of bicycles. How this framework will fit into the future of a car lite society is also important. 

1) Before we can slap license plates on, we need to issue license. I think most can agree that licensing the rider makes more sense than registering the bicycle. There are just too many existing bicycles in Singapore alone and some households have multiple bicycles. The cost and effort to register ALL the bicycles will be an expensive and futile exercise. And if the bicycles had changed hands, there is a need to maintain an up to date database just for this. 

2. Then we need to decide on age. Perhaps going with age 16 makes sense, as that's the age which we issue IC. The license number is tagged to the IC number. Doing so, means anyone below age 16 don't need license to ride a bicycle, and they are not allowed on the roads. This automatically means children don't need license and aren't allowed on the roads. Age 16 is also aligned with the current min. age limit for PAB / PMD. Those already with valid driving licenses are automatically exempted from taking bicycle license, the demerit points system will apply when they ride a bicycle on the road.

3. Next it's the demographics. The LTA is then required to enforce and ensure everyone who are out there riding bicycles above age 16 to take up a bicycle license. This will include teenagers, foreign workers, foreigners residing here, adults and the possibly illiterate elderly to register and be issued with a license. Assuming that this onerous task can be done, there is a need to address foreigners and tourists riding bicycles here on short term visits. Do we ask them to take up a test first then they can ride a bicycle and be issued with a temporary license plate, assuming for someone above age 16? Remember no such thing as direct license conversion because no one else will have a foreign bicycle license, and not all will have a foreign driving license. 

4. Then its the usage of bicycles. Not all bicycles are to be ridden on pavements, PCNs and the roads. Serious mountain bikers ride their bikes predominantly in the trials, do we also enforce these bicycles to put on license plates? They may argue it isn't fair to them since they don't cause problems on the roads, but too bad because its the law. What about grey areas such as when an unlicensed cyclist below 16 is required to cycle on the roads for a short while to get to the destination, where do we draw the line? 

5. Because it's going to be impossible for bike paths, pavements and PCNs to cover every inch of this island, there has to be a road usage framework in order for unlicensed below 16 cyclists to use their bicycles as a last mile mobility tool. This is critical if we want to promote car lite. Do we only restrict them from the main roads & expressways, but allow them to ride on the smaller minor roads? There is a need to define what's a major road and minor road then. It does complicate things and it will be extremely challenging to enforce. 

6. Let's talk costs. It's only fair to expect the LTA to recover a very low cost when issuing a bicycle license, because we are talking about a very broad demographic (ranging from teenagers, low wage workers, retirees all the way to working adults). So this means a large part of the related costs to administer, enforce and maintain a valid database of licensed cyclists had to be borne by the government. That means taxpayers. 

7. Since cyclists above 16 are now licensed, bicycle rental businesses will also have to the responsibility to ensure that only those with a valid bicycle license can rent from them. This absolves these businesses of the responsibility, in the event that someone without a license rode their rented bicycles on the roads. It's the same as renting a car. Below 16 and no bike license? Too bad for you as there is no guarantee that you will just keep to the PCNs/pavements. 

8. Lastly, mandatory insurance which many motorists have advocated. More companies have to come in to do the underwriting and offer third-party insurance to be competitive and to keep costs low. Else, since this new law is the doing of the government, ask NTUC to stomach and keep costs low for all cyclists lor. That's a tall order, is likely to be Ng Chee Meng's response. 

As an example, ETIQA offers comprehensive 3rd party insurances for mobility devices. Such premiums isn't that affordable if you ask me. Try asking a Bangladeshi foreign worker to fork out $78 per year for the most basic plan, when their well beaten bicycles which passed through many hands may have cost less than that to buy. 

Fire away, guys. Want to hear some constructive suggestions and inputs. 

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by Lethalstrike

[macrosszero]

8 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

Sounds good, I am assuming that you are for licensing the rider, and it's not about registering the bike right? 

If we proceed with issuing bicycle licenses, do you have any solutions or suggestions to the problems which I've wrote in a long post previously? From the way you wrote about willpower and resolution, I think you might have some practical suggestions in mind. 

 

Two separate things here. The rider/driver and the vehicle/bicycle. In the Class 3 context, you must be qualified to drive the vehicle class, but the vehicle itself must be registered and be roadworthy. In addition the insurance scheme should cover you whilst driving it,, even if it doesn't belong to you.

In the bicycle context, it is hard to license everything from a Radio Flyer kiddie push bike all the way out to a 20k full carbon disc braked road bike so yes I am talking about the rider. The rider is the one that handles the machinery and so if you happen not to be licensed when a car plows into you, you waive your legal rights to claim for damages. I feel that that would "encourage" sign-ups, but the side benefit is that with registrations cyclists are likely to become more responsible because they are now accountable. 

After the law is passed, it only takes a few incidents to take place where cyclists (or their families) can't claim because they didn't have road-going status, and the registrations will start coming in.

[inlinesix]

14 minutes ago, Macrosszero said:

Two separate things here. The rider/driver and the vehicle/bicycle. In the Class 3 context, you must be qualified to drive the vehicle class, but the vehicle itself must be registered and be roadworthy. In addition the insurance scheme should cover you whilst driving it,, even if it doesn't belong to you.

In the bicycle context, it is hard to license everything from a Radio Flyer kiddie push bike all the way out to a 20k full carbon disc braked road bike so yes I am talking about the rider. The rider is the one that handles the machinery and so if you happen not to be licensed when a car plows into you, you waive your legal rights to claim for damages. I feel that that would "encourage" sign-ups, but the side benefit is that with registrations cyclists are likely to become more responsible because they are now accountable. 

After the law is passed, it only takes a few incidents to take place where cyclists (or their families) can't claim because they didn't have road-going status, and the registrations will start coming in.

It goes against spirit of legal system.

Rather than protecting the victims, you are victimizating the victim.

 

[Lethalstrike]

49 minutes ago, Macrosszero said:

Two separate things here. The rider/driver and the vehicle/bicycle. In the Class 3 context, you must be qualified to drive the vehicle class, but the vehicle itself must be registered and be roadworthy. In addition the insurance scheme should cover you whilst driving it,, even if it doesn't belong to you.

In the bicycle context, it is hard to license everything from a Radio Flyer kiddie push bike all the way out to a 20k full carbon disc braked road bike so yes I am talking about the rider. The rider is the one that handles the machinery and so if you happen not to be licensed when a car plows into you, you waive your legal rights to claim for damages. I feel that that would "encourage" sign-ups, but the side benefit is that with registrations cyclists are likely to become more responsible because they are now accountable. 

After the law is passed, it only takes a few incidents to take place where cyclists (or their families) can't claim because they didn't have road-going status, and the registrations will start coming in.

Okay, so learning it thru the hard way might be the way forward to push thru with licensing, and the mandatory insurance which goes along with it in order to ride a bicycle on the roads.

For this to happen, some fundamental changes to the basis of the Road Traffic Act will also have to be made, since the bicycle is now a licensed vehicle, and no longer regarded automatically as the more vulnerable road user in the event of an accident with a motorized vehicle. And the original premise that the drivers/riders operating motorized vehicles which are capable of higher speeds, thus greater damages and the onus of responsibilities, also go out of the window. This will surely require some political will to hammer through as public outcry is likely to great, maybe that's when Ho Ching should come in again. 

   

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by Lethalstrike

[Wt_know]

A picture is worth a thousand words

[inlinesix]

14 minutes ago, Wt_know said:

A picture is worth a thousand words

Sadly, picture can also be mislead.

Go to Mandai Road on Saturday or Sunday.

What you see is 1 BIG group of cyclist.

Is that the true picture?

[inlinesix]

10 hours ago, Lethalstrike said:

Okay, so learning it thru the hard way might be the way forward to push thru with licensing, and the mandatory insurance which goes along with it in order to ride a bicycle on the roads.

For this to happen, some fundamental changes to the basis of the Road Traffic Act will also have to be made, since the bicycle is now a licensed vehicle, and no longer regarded automatically as the more vulnerable road user in the event of an accident with a motorized vehicle. And the original premise that the drivers/riders operating motorized vehicles which are capable of higher speeds, thus greater damages and the onus of responsibilities, also go out of the window. This will surely require some political will to hammer through as public outcry is likely to great, maybe that's when Ho Ching should come in again. 

In short, when king kong lorry bang car, king kong lorry will have smaller responsibilities as compared to NOW.

[macrosszero]

10 hours ago, Lethalstrike said:

For this to happen, some fundamental changes to the basis of the Road Traffic Act will also have to be made, since the bicycle is now a licensed vehicle, and no longer regarded automatically as the more vulnerable road user in the event of an accident with a motorized vehicle. And the original premise that the drivers/riders operating motorized vehicles which are capable of higher speeds, thus greater damages and the onus of responsibilities, also go out of the window. This will surely require some political will to hammer through as public outcry is likely to great, maybe that's when Ho Ching should come in again. 

   

 

I don’t think you understood. I talked about licensing the rider, not the bicycle. If you put your bike on the road and have to interact with other motor vehicles, you’d better be licensed. You might not be made to wear a prominent license plate on your posterior, but if you get into a road traffic accident, that license qualifies you. Otherwise you might even be charged for riding on the road without a valid license even if the incident is not your fault.
 

Lots of riders are using the roads today as “sovereigns” - I have rights, but the rules do not apply to me.

For people who only ride their bicycles in parks, off-road, or on Park Connectors, they can continue being unlicensed since they aren’t likely to meet motor vehicles there.

[inlinesix]

19 minutes ago, Macrosszero said:

I don’t think you understood. I talked about licensing the rider, not the bicycle. If you put your bike on the road and have to interact with other motor vehicles, you’d better be licensed. You might not be made to wear a prominent license plate on your posterior, but if you get into a road traffic accident, that license qualifies you. Otherwise you might even be charged for riding on the road without a valid license even if the incident is not your fault.

Lots of riders are using the roads today as “sovereigns” - I have rights, but the rules do not apply to me.

For people who only ride their bicycles in parks, off-road, or on Park Connectors, they can continue being unlicensed since they aren’t likely to meet motor vehicles there.

Disagree with you on the highlighted part.

For those who cycle in parks, off-road or PCN, they have a duty of care towards pedestrian.

Accordingly, all the more they should have been licensed and insured.

[Atonchia]

1 hour ago, Macrosszero said:

I don’t think you understood. I talked about licensing the rider, not the bicycle. If you put your bike on the road and have to interact with other motor vehicles, you’d better be licensed. You might not be made to wear a prominent license plate on your posterior, but if you get into a road traffic accident, that license qualifies you. Otherwise you might even be charged for riding on the road without a valid license even if the incident is not your fault.
 

Lots of riders are using the roads today as “sovereigns” - I have rights, but the rules do not apply to me.

For people who only ride their bicycles in parks, off-road, or on Park Connectors, they can continue being unlicensed since they aren’t likely to meet motor vehicles there.

I will be caught speeding on PCN almost all the time...... if I ride there.....bcos PCN Speed limit is 25km/hr.

Road cyclist average speed is 30 to 45km/hr. 

 

I already have a valid driver licence more than 20 years ago. So not much issue for driver/cyclist like us....

I think almost all driver/cyclist follow traffic rules. If breaks rule... demerit points also apply to class 2/3/4/5 licence. 

Now if want to licence road cyclist.... They must know traffic rules. Its a basic  understanding for traffic rules 

Even for delivery riders...... 

 

Once licensing applies.... all drivers and motorcylist should treat cyclist like any road users. 

It will also allow any licence road cyclist to road in the middle of the lane.... 

Any lane. 😅😅😅

Edited April 18, 2021 by Atonchia