Travel

Travel Companies, Airlines, etc.

Bahnstormer Motorrad Alton to Whiteways Cafe Ride Out

| Richard

After a week or so’s seemingly incessant rain, the forecast for last weekend looked fairly good and coincided with a rideout arranged by Bahnstormer Motorrad from their Alton branch to Whiteways Cafe outside Arundel.

So we swapped over our rest days from the Sunday to the Saturday – I’m trying to get fitter and Alison’s in training for a PCA bikini class bodybuilding competition – and got up a little earlier to breakfast and head on down to Bahnstormer for a coffee and to join the other riders. In total, there were 29 of us! Take a look at Bahnstormer’s video of us leaving Alton:

Here’s my little highlights video too:

Oh and there’s a longer version with some added expletives here:

When we bypassed Goodwood because they were having a members’ meeting and our route was blocked, we ended up on a flooded road with bonus mud from the fields, so the RT got absolutely filthy.

Once home, I got the pressure washer out and cleaned it up, but noticed I could see the rear suspension from the left … because the small side cover was missing.  A couple of phone calls and a visit today and they’ve sorted me out without any fuss. I truly cannot recommend them any more strongly than I do and of course they’ll get my order for this RT’s replacement when and if.

I just must stop myself from impulse-buying an M 1000 XR by mistake in the meantime…

 

New Boots and Panties

| Richard

I mentioned a while back that I’d bought some new Klim riding gear for Alison and me. I’d held off from buying the matching Klim Latitude Jeans for me and Klim Altitude Jeans for Alison as we both already had waterproof trousers, but Alison’s didn’t really fit and my Alpinestars ones were waaaaay too big and the Triumph Taloc leather jeans too big (but not massively so).

Klim Latitude Pants Klim Latitude Pants Klim Altitude Pants Klim Altitude Pants

I’d been using a pair of Alpinestars J-6 boots for general riding – as seen in this photo – but as I found out after a long walk in Gran Canaria to collect a bike from CanaryRide, they caused the odd blister after a while.  Now I could use my crashed-in but waterproof Alpinestars SMX Plus boots but they’re a bit heavy for walking around off the bike, so I decided to get another pair of boots that are waterproof, will go better with the light grey trousers, and should be comfortable off the bike. So I bought myself some Alpinestars Fastback 2 Drystar boots and at the same time bought Alison some Alpinestars Women’s J-6 boots, both of which are waterproof and should be good to wear off the bike.

Alpinestars Fastback 2 Drystar Waterproof Boots Alpinestars Ladies J-6 Waterproof Boots

These were all ordered – again – from SPORTSBIKESHOP but on their ‘try before you buy’ option using their Reading store. This was because the Klim sizing can be a little strange, apparently, although I’ve not had any problems.  We set off to Reading on Bank Holiday Monday to try the gear on.

We had followed the sizing guidance and had ordered my trousers in a 34″ waist on the basis that the feedback was they were a little smaller than that. They weren’t. Even with the thankfully adjustable waist cinched up small, they looked like a schoolboy’s first set of school trousers that you’d grow into eventually.  So I tried on some 32″ Klim Badlands Pro trousers and they seemed much better, so we ordered the Latitude trousers in a 32″ waist.  They arrived today – yes, the day after ordering late on a Bank Holiday! – and are fine; I can even cinch the waist up some more if I feel the need to before walking around. It looks like all my exercise might be paying off.

Oh and that noise you can hear? That’s my wallet crying…

 

Spring Has Sprung (and been replaced)

| Richard

With the RT collected after its initial ‘running-in’ service and with the suspension replaced under warranty, it was time for a ride to check everything out with a bonus test of the super-trick “adaptive headlights” which apparently move from side to side when cornering (like they do on my Abarth 124 Spider).

And yes, they’re good and bright and work well:

Then my wife headed off for a family baby shower, leaving me unsupervised for a weekend, so I headed off to the Cotswolds to do some filming:

Grant Shapps and the Travel Green List

| Richard

So we all know that the UK’s Transport Secretary Grant Shapps is out of his depth in a bird bath. He did, after all, go on holiday knowing that his department were about to bring in quarantine last July, and that he’d have to fly back early. What a tosser!

And his incompetence and lack of joined-up thinking continue unabated.

India have only just been added to the Red List of countries where you need to isolate in a designated hotel at £1,750 a time because the Tories were trying to negotiate a trade deal. The Indian delegation then came to the UK and reported a number had come down with COVID-19.

At the same time, UK nationals coming back from India were simply taking a 10 day holiday in Istanbul at a fraction of the quarantine cost and then flying in, so adding Turkey to the red list was inevitable.

Last week, a UK representative told the Spanish that the much-heralded Green List would be driven by the science and the Greek and Spanish islands would be reviewed and treated separately. Then yesterday Shapps revealed a truly bizarre list and noted that Spain (on the amber list) included the Balearics and the Canaries, despite the FCDO website still saying this:

“The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to Spain, including the Balearic Islands but excluding the Canary Islands, based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.”

Now, the Canaries – and Fuerteventura specifically – have really low infection rates at the moment, yet to return to London with its much, much higher rates will require quarantine.

That Green List?

  • Portugal
  • Israel
  • Singapore
  • Australia
  • New Zealand
  • Brunei
  • Iceland
  • Gibraltar
  • Falkland Islands
  • Faroe Islands
  • South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands
  • St Helena, Tristan de Cunha and Ascension Island

So most of those do not allow travel from the UK in the first place. Ah.

Portugal and Gibraltar? A pretty open border with Spain, isn’t there?

South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands? You can only travel there by sea and there is no visitor accommodation.

The Falkland Islands? You can only fly there … via Chile (Red List) with commercial airlines or with the MoD via a refuelling stop in Cape Verde (Red List).

You couldn’t make this stuff up!

Ask the Right Question… More Idiocy from Southwark Council

| Richard

Way back in the mists of time, I wrote a bit about how Southwark Council had decided to make traffic congestion worse on Jamaica Road, SE London by stopping local drivers from using a ‘rat-run’.  Their consultation paper – sent to a tiny minority of extremely localised people – asked a series of heavily biased questions without a “none of the above” option.

Well these fuckwits are at it again: solving a problem that doesn’t actually exist and thereby creating a new one.

They’ve decided that people daring to park on the Western part of Rotherhithe Street – which is a no through road and not exactly busy – are going to be penalised, including all the residents who currently park there.  Their proposals , published at http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200140/parking_projects/4039/rotherhithe_parking_zone_study – show only very limited permit parking (at £125 each…) for residents with the rest of the area subject to double yellow lines.

Now there really isn’t an issue with parking on that section of Rotherhithe Street: I walk along it every time I walk to work and there’s plenty of space for parking and no trouble with the road being blocked from the (non-existent) through-traffic by these pesky parkers.

So what would happen when Southwark gets its way? Well quite simply all those vehicles will need to park somewhere else nearby and the nearest parking would be the Eastern side of Rotherhithe Street where there are (currently) very few parking restrictions and no resident-only parking spaces whilst still being a busy through road on the C10 bus route. And when all those vehicles park on ‘our’ street, where will we be able to park? Where will all those coaches that park overnight whilst fetching and carrying kids staying at the local YHA now be able to park? After all, Southwark allowed a new housing development to go up where the coaches used to park. Oh and another new development is going up opposite our house with Southwark’s blessing despite all bar one comment (duplicated 40+ times) objecting to it with no parking spaces included within the development because parking’s not a problem!

Now have a look at the questionnaire. See how it asks what times you’d like the restrictions to apply. There isn’t a “Never” option, is there? Ask the right question…

Modern Toss

Bollocks to this!

Ask the Right Question… More Idiocy from Southwark Council

| Richard

Way back in the mists of time, I wrote a bit about how Southwark Council had decided to make traffic congestion worse on Jamaica Road, SE London by stopping local drivers from using a ‘rat-run’.  Their consultation paper – sent to a tiny minority of extremely localised people – asked a series of heavily biased questions without a “none of the above” option.

Well these fuckwits are at it again: solving a problem that doesn’t actually exist and thereby creating a new one.

They’ve decided that people daring to park on the Western part of Rotherhithe Street – which is a no through road and not exactly busy – are going to be penalised, including all the residents who currently park there.  Their proposals , published at http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200140/parking_projects/4039/rotherhithe_parking_zone_study – show only very limited permit parking (at £125 each…) for residents with the rest of the area subject to double yellow lines.

Now there really isn’t an issue with parking on that section of Rotherhithe Street: I walk along it every time I walk to work and there’s plenty of space for parking and no trouble with the road being blocked from the (non-existent) through-traffic by these pesky parkers.

So what would happen when Southwark gets its way? Well quite simply all those vehicles will need to park somewhere else nearby and the nearest parking would be the Eastern side of Rotherhithe Street where there are (currently) very few parking restrictions and no resident-only parking spaces whilst still being a busy through road on the C10 bus route. And when all those vehicles park on ‘our’ street, where will we be able to park? Where will all those coaches that park overnight whilst fetching and carrying kids staying at the local YHA now be able to park? After all, Southwark allowed a new housing development to go up where the coaches used to park. Oh and another new development is going up opposite our house with Southwark’s blessing despite all bar one comment (duplicated 40+ times) objecting to it with no parking spaces included within the development because parking’s not a problem!

Now have a look at the questionnaire. See how it asks what times you’d like the restrictions to apply. There isn’t a “Never” option, is there? Ask the right question…

Modern Toss

Bollocks to this!

City of London 20mph Speed Limit

| Richard

On 20th July 2014, a blanket speed limit of 20mph was introduced in the City of London:

20mph City of London Limit

20mph City of London Limit

Why did they decide to do that? It was apparently part of their “Road Danger Reduction Plan“. And yet, reading that, it’s not speed that’s the issue with the highest at-risk groups of cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists.

Cyclists:

  • “… 84% of casualties are involved in collisions at intersections or junctions. This is in line with the Greater London average.
  • Collisions are more likely to occur in the middle of junctions rather than on their approaches.
  • Failure to see a cyclist appears to be a significant causal factor.
  • The main contributory factors identified in cyclist casualties are “turning right”, “changing lanes”, “opening vehicle doors” and “undertaking of large vehicles turning left across cyclists path”. The last factor being the most significant in KSI casualties.”

Uh-huh. So speed isn’t really at issue at all here and indeed it looks like the main issue is cyclists with a deathwish undertaking – no pun intended – large vehicles.

Motorcyclists and Scooterists:

“…As 72 per cent of motorcyclists were injured due to the actions of other road users, a significant reduction in motorcyclist casualties will only be achieved by addressing the behaviour of other road users, particularly car, taxi, and goods vehicle drivers and by increasing motorcyclists’ awareness of other road users. The most common causes of a motorcyclist being injured are pedestrian lack of attention, motor vehicles turning right across their path, and vehicles U turning.”

I see. So the trouble here is pedestrians and vehicles doing right and U turns, neither of which are speed-related.

Pedestrians:

“Goods vehicles, coaches and buses are disproportionately involved in collisions….

“Pedestrian inattention” has been identified as the main contributory factor for pedestrian casualties.”

Interestingly, it also notes that there are clusters of casualties around the stations where “the City experiences considerable over-crowding of footways, particularly at peak times, with pedestrians stepping onto the carriageway.” So it appears that people stepping off the overcrowded pavements into the path of slower-moving vehicles is the risk here, again rather than speeding. Perhaps investment/improvement into the pedestrian walkways is the key here?

According to the London Evening Standard:

Michael Welbank, speaking on behalf of City of London council, said: “For the City of London to continue its success as an international business hub it is critical that its streets should be safe for all who use them be they commuters, pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, motorcyclists, shoppers or cultural wanderers and dreamers.”

So maybe infrastructure investment might be a better idea, along with enforcement of other legislation and education of pedestrians and cyclists? Or why not simply reintroduce the Locomotive Act 1875, although this would mean fewer speeding fines and less “Being Seen To Be Doing Something”:

"Red Flag" Act

“Red Flag” Act