Glasgow e-bike rider crashes into Italian pros on cycle path, falling into river and ruling Simone Consonni out of world championships

Interesting question. Does the RTA cover cycle paths?

It does cover cycle paths, but I think the requirement to report relates only where a mechanically propelled vehicle is involved - s.170 RTA 1980. Mechanically propelled vehicle doesn't seem to be defined, but it seems to exclude pedal and ebikes. 

"Press Charges" is when the SNP want to stop a story .

check12 wrote:

Great daily mail esc headline, careful you don't get headhunted 

Agreed, where is the fact that it was an e-bike relevent. It's two cycles, one or both of which were likely traveling too quickly, coming together on what is probably a typically crap piece of infrastructure.

It's actually not a bad path. I used to use it all the time - but people riding it too quickly or on the wrong side are things I could definitely imagine happening. 

It could be relevant.
E-bike riders are still quite often elderly people who are not always very confident on their bikes, and not really skilled/experienced enough for the higher speeds you easily reach with an e-bike.
To a lesser degree this also goes for many younger e-bike riders, and here in The Netherlands there's also youth who ride like crazy on their (often souped up) e-bikes.

Sredlums wrote:

It could be relevant.
E-bike riders are still quite often elderly people who are not always very confident on their bikes, and not really skilled/experienced enough for the higher speeds you easily reach with an e-bike.
To a lesser degree this also goes for many younger e-bike riders, and here in The Netherlands there's also youth who ride like crazy on their (often souped up) e-bikes.

Youare confused about the e-bikes. They're only e-bikes up to 15.5mph, after which they're an ordinary bike, sometimes a very heavy one that's difficult to get to go a lot faster than when the engine is helping (only up to that 15.5mph, I repeat, in case you missed it).

Souped-up e-bike? Not really an e-bike then but a motorbike.

Now, about this age thing ..... In my 74 years of contact with the humans, I've noticed that they can be divided into all sorts of classifications, some meaningful in various contexts (but not others); some not meaningful at all.

One class differentiator is the degree to which a human is considerate of the other humans (and other things, like hedgehogs and drystone walls) or nor considerate. When one juxtaposes this classification on that for age, its noticeable that the considerate and inconsiderate humans are more or less the same proportion in every age group.

Of course, its often nice for a certain kind of thinking to have nice stereotypes concerning, say, older folk, younger folk and even folk who are pink rather than yellow. Sadly these stereotypes often prove to be worthless because they fail to reflect anything real in the world, other than the fact that many humans enjoy their baseless prejudices. 

Leaving aside that E-bikes as a category do not exist in the UK, we don't know whether it was a legal EAPC or an E-motorbike.

Nor do we know that the 'he rode into me' story from the pro-cyclist is an accurate report.

Cugel wrote:

Wots this!? A cycling helmet breaks the bones of a cyclist, perhaps two!!?  Time they were banned for the dangerous things they are.

If the mental states of all concerned were to be examined at the time, I'm sure it would soon be discovered that they were all going too fast for the conditions because they believed that in any crash, "a helmet will save my life". 

Did the e-bike rider's polystyrene hat save him from drowning in the river he fell into by acting as a float?

I can't wait for Road.cc's float test of current bike helmets

It says clearly in the article that it was by the SECC.

Broomielaw isn't far from the SECC. Those bridges are the nearest blind spots on that cycle track that I can think of.

I'd bet it happened somewhere in this area:

That's very near the SECC, but it's not blind at all. Plus, the cycle path goes straight there - only the the road that kinks (with good visibility, and not near enough to Clyde for anyone to fall in really).

As per my reply to the other reply, where the path goes under those 2 bridges is the nearest spot I can think of that has blind bends - also very narrow there. Fairly poor standard part of the route, not really suitable for cycling faster than walking speed.

About 100m East and 200m west of the Bells Bridge there are spots where the path turns away from the river. Visibility isn't great at either of those - although no problem if you slow down a bit and are paying attention. That the collision was sufficient to send the e-bike rider over the barrier into the river suggests there must have been some speed involved...

Looks like quite a big drop over the barriers into the river too.

HoarseMann wrote:

Looks like quite a big drop over the barriers into the river too.

It is!