Suicide wallabies

TimC wrote:

I have a cold (well, and generally unfit, dammit; I wish there was a
BR(x) up here)

Ride it and they will come..!

--
Bean

Remove "yourfinger" before replying

On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 16:52:23 +1000, Bean Long wrote:

Ride it and they will come..!

I'm pre-emptively piking on that one.

--
Dave Hughes |
"Hey, watch the 'fro" - Danny Glaze

On 2007-09-02, Resound (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
Ok so it took you a bit over 6 mins to get down. How long did the return run
take?

19 minutes today, but that's not all the way to the top again.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-8zN3TGBnjo

I wasn't aware how far over the centreline my head was -- my wheels
were to the left of the centerline almost always, apart from about the
third corner which I overshot quite often in testing. I always get
nervous with those reflector posts -- it's about knee height, so I get
the last minute heeby geebies and tend to overcook the corners rather
than risk bashing my knee.

The helmet mount has no altitude adjustment, which means a lot of
lashing up is required to point it properly. And no viewfinder, so
much experimentation between the bike, a good run along a road in your
normal riding posture, and back to your laptop or TV. And now that I
know that the camera is pointing just a little bit too far down (in
testing, it was fine. The difference between a proper ride down the
mountain in an aero position, and a tootle around outside), I'm
dreading having to change the lashup.

All in all, I'm not sure that I would recommend Oregon Scientific's
action cam 2000. Colour saturation poor, contrast too high, dynamic
range too low, video encoding not that crash hot (but then again, it's
got to be low bandwidth to be able to record onto a 2GB maximum SD
card), too heavy. Wait a few more years for the next generation. And
now that I know how important it is to keep the weight and size down
on the helmet, I'd probably reconsider my adversion to the systems
with a lense and detector, a cable, and a recording device in one's
backpack or jersey. If you could have a lipstick cam, and a cable to
the rest of the electronics of the ATK2000 in my jersey pocket, then
I'd be happier. Then you could also make the recorder bigger and more
sophisticated.

As to my use of the "extreme" tag in my list of tags (exteme commute
perhaps, for us soft roadie types), it's got nothing on this:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rHuQMxKKcrY

Now I want to get a riding partner and film behind them. That could
be spectacular.

--
TimC
Radioactive cats have 18 half-lives.

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:01:52 GMT
TimC wrote:
I wasn't aware how far over the centreline my head was -- my wheels
were to the left of the centerline almost always, apart from about the

A common problem with motorcyclists, and cause of some crashes. The
rider tends to use the centreline as a guide, and doesn't realise how
far across they are leaning.

On a steep descent on a bicycle I can bet the lean angle is enough to
have much more than your head in the way of oncoming traffic... Add
in a largish car drifting out a bit and it could be *splot*.

I'm hyper aware of it on a motorcycle having seen others with their
heads in 4WD-attraction mode. Haven't been on a fast enough curvy
enough bicycle ride for it to be a problem yet.

Zebee