Trivial brake law question.

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Brucey
Posts: 42162
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby Brucey » 29 Nov 2014, 9:25am

pete75 wrote:
beardy wrote:Tractors did have a link between the two pedals that allowed you to lock them together giving dual wheel braking if needed, however most of the tractors I remember driving had the brakes so poorly balanced that that system was positively dangerous to use.


What were they - Ford Dexters, Majors and the like? The brakes on modern tractors are a lot more sophisticated.....


and the rest, too. In fact apart from the look of the tyres you wouldn't recognise them as being tools made for the same kind of work, I reckon. Soon they won't even need drivers, they'll trundle round the fields under their own steam, according to some GPS-mapped route.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17971
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby [XAP]Bob » 1 Dec 2014, 11:34am

Tigerbiten wrote:I'm not too sure that independent brakes on the front wheels of a tadpole trike are legal ...... :(
And if they are I think you still need a back brake ...... :cry:

From the CTC page on brakes.........
The basic requirement is for two efficient braking systems, by which the front wheel (or wheels) can be braked independently of the rear wheel (or wheels). This means that if there are two wheels at the front and/or the rear, the relevant system must act on the pair.


So it sounds to be legal you need for front wheels braked off a single lever and have a back brake.

Mind you, recumbents aren't legal at night, so you may as well be illegal during the day as well ........... :lol:


Yeah - I have two independent braking systems, either of which can bring the trike to controlled halt in a reasonable distance.
The fact that they operate on the front wheels is somewhat irrelevant, it's safer to have them independent, so yet another law I ignore... or I measure the height of the seat, not the seat back.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

pete75
Posts: 13646
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby pete75 » 7 Dec 2014, 8:43am

Brucey wrote:
pete75 wrote:
beardy wrote:Tractors did have a link between the two pedals that allowed you to lock them together giving dual wheel braking if needed, however most of the tractors I remember driving had the brakes so poorly balanced that that system was positively dangerous to use.


What were they - Ford Dexters, Majors and the like? The brakes on modern tractors are a lot more sophisticated.....


and the rest, too. In fact apart from the look of the tyres you wouldn't recognise them as being tools made for the same kind of work, I reckon. Soon they won't even need drivers, they'll trundle round the fields under their own steam, according to some GPS-mapped route.

cheers


Under their own steam??? Like this you mean :lol:

Image

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1242
Joined: 14 Dec 2006, 8:27pm
Location: Lancing, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby admin » 10 Dec 2014, 6:16pm

My Windcheetah has twin front hub brakes controlled from a single lever on the joystick, and as-supplied had a "spoon" brake for the back wheel operated by a gear lever under the seat. It's main use was as a parking brake, but I suspect it was also there as a legal "independent braking system". It would have been almost useless in any emergency as braking puts all the weight onto the front wheels and can lift the back wheel off the road completely. Let alone the fact that an aluminium "spoon" acting on the rubber tyre did not provide much useful friction. Quite fun having "penny farthing" technology on a modern trike though :)

I used to do Dr Bike sessions in Worthing for National Bike Week. I'd say that on average the bikes I'd see had perhaps 0.9 working brakes per bicycle. A typical teenager's bike would have no working brakes at all. Oh, and probably 90% of bikes had tyres flat enough to make steering spongy.

User avatar
andrew_s
Posts: 5300
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 9:29pm
Location: Gloucestershire

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby andrew_s » 10 Dec 2014, 11:59pm

I'm pretty sure that spoon brakes are only legal if they operate on a solid tyre.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1242
Joined: 14 Dec 2006, 8:27pm
Location: Lancing, West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby admin » 11 Dec 2014, 2:38pm

Interesting. In which case the Windcheetah probably doesn't have two independent braking systems, as far as the law is concerned, then. There are two brakes, one on each front wheel, and they have separate cables, but they are operated from a single lever. Perhaps they aim to use the seat height get-out clause, instead, or some other get-out clause given that it's not really a mass-produced bicycle (perhaps more of a go-kart!).

Herts Audax
Posts: 44
Joined: 17 Aug 2018, 1:59pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby Herts Audax » 19 Dec 2020, 1:58pm

Reviving this.

Saddle refers to the areas of the anatomy that would touch a saddle when one is riding a horse. These include the lower groin, perineum and buttocks regions.

From the above definition I’d also apply it to “bicycle saddle”. Within the above definition the back rest would not be the saddle portion of the seat. The highest point of the “saddle” is the area of the seat the saddle areas of your anatomy come into contact with.

The law specially refers to the seating area of the saddle, not the seating area of a bicycle. The two are not the same.

thirdcrank
Posts: 30529
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby thirdcrank » 19 Dec 2020, 2:11pm

When did "saddle" creep into the thread?

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 3751
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby Bmblbzzz » 19 Dec 2020, 2:31pm

drossall wrote:...but not necessarily on modern trikes, which is, I believe, the reason for the exemption allowing a conventional delta trike to have two (independently operated) brakes, acting on the same (front) wheel. Also, of course, a trike has more weight at the back, and going over the bars is improbable, even on an upwrong.

So it's to do with the effect on steering? I thought it was to do with weight distribution, the weight on the back being shared being two wheels meaning it was easier to inadvertently lock them up and that they did little to slow the machine down anyway. But that was just a vague impression from talking to (upright delta) trikies.

Herts Audax
Posts: 44
Joined: 17 Aug 2018, 1:59pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby Herts Audax » 19 Dec 2020, 2:35pm

thirdcrank wrote:When did "saddle" creep into the thread?


Right at the start as that is the term used in the relevant law.

atlas_shrugged
Posts: 469
Joined: 8 Nov 2016, 7:50pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby atlas_shrugged » 19 Dec 2020, 2:51pm

Irrespective of what you are allowed to get away with as regards the law, for tadpole trikes and velomobiles two independent brakes on the front wheels are a very good idea. Agreed about the steering issue it is nice to be able to apply the same pressure to each brake if the intention is to stay in a straight line.

Those riders traversing mountains like the alps also often carry an emergency parachute. Although I am not quite clear what happens if this gets tangled up in a vehicle coming in the opposite direction!

Sid Aluminium
Posts: 186
Joined: 26 Feb 2019, 7:38pm
Location: Beyond the edge of the wild

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby Sid Aluminium » 19 Dec 2020, 7:02pm

And of course, a cycletourist visiting the UK would only need one brake on the cycle they brought with them per the International Convention on Road Traffic, 1968, Chapter V, Article 44.

I wonder if the committee members had in mind Stålfarfar riding his Swedish roadster to the Holy Land in 1959 when they agreed to this? :D

drossall
Posts: 5098
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby drossall » 19 Dec 2020, 9:34pm

Bmblbzzz wrote:So it's to do with the effect on steering? I thought it was to do with weight distribution, the weight on the back being shared being two wheels meaning it was easier to inadvertently lock them up and that they did little to slow the machine down anyway. But that was just a vague impression from talking to (upright delta) trikies.

It's quite probably both. If putting rather basic brakes on a tadpole trike just doesn't really work well, on either ground, that would be a good reason! I've never really thought about tadpole-trike braking, since I've never ridden one. But you'd have to have front braking of some kind, since rear-wheel brakes are so ineffective by comparison.

thirdcrank
Posts: 30529
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby thirdcrank » 19 Dec 2020, 10:02pm

Herts Audax wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:When did "saddle" creep into the thread?


Right at the start as that is the term used in the relevant law.


I should have included "And what does it say?" Unfortunately, the regs seem only to be available in PDF format so as penance, I've had to do some copy typing. Anyway, the regs include a definition of what they mean so I'm unclear why we need another.

(2) The reference in paragraph (1)(b) to the height of the saddle is a reference to the height above the ground of the part of the seating area of the saddle which is furthest from the ground when the cycle to which the saddle is attached is vertical and the saddle is raised to the fullest extent compatible with safety and the tyres on the wheels of the cycle are fully inflated.


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... 176_en.pdf

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 3751
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Trivial brake law question.

Postby Bmblbzzz » 19 Dec 2020, 10:30pm

drossall wrote:
Bmblbzzz wrote:So it's to do with the effect on steering? I thought it was to do with weight distribution, the weight on the back being shared being two wheels meaning it was easier to inadvertently lock them up and that they did little to slow the machine down anyway. But that was just a vague impression from talking to (upright delta) trikies.

It's quite probably both. If putting rather basic brakes on a tadpole trike just doesn't really work well, on either ground, that would be a good reason! I've never really thought about tadpole-trike braking, since I've never ridden one. But you'd have to have front braking of some kind, since rear-wheel brakes are so ineffective by comparison.

I do know someone who rides a tadpole recumbent trike and he's definitely got two independent brakes but I think they're left and right. Not sure he's got anything on the back wheel. But then I'm also not sure if his trike is completely legal (though I am confident it's safe).