Not sure which grips you're using, but I found using the stock foam grips gave me severe wrist pain quite quickly. I changed to Ergon GP1 grips (they have much better hand support) and now ride long distances without discomfort.
New York did some trials with UWB several years ago, which were claimed to have been successful. Since then, there has been very little news of permanent deployment or future developments either in New York or elsewhere.
Not sure whether this means that the various signalling suppliers are waiting for a customer to take on the technical risk of being the first to deploy UWB CBTC, or that there were costs or disadvantages that make it unattractive.
SelTrac has been around since the mid 80s, and was originally a German developed product (Standard Elektrik Lorenz) based on LZB technology.
My understanding of LZB is limited, but it appears to be a fixed block system with wayside detection of trains, albeit with shorter blocks than lineside signals would usually have. This is different to SelTrac which is moving block.
I had it done twice, both times without sedation by choice. I did have analgesics, and a cannula in my wrist in case I changed my mind mid-way.
It was quite tolerable, just a few moments of short lived cramping pains (similar to diarrhea pains) as the endoscope turned the corners of my insides. My recovery was about half an hour of sitting up and having tea and toast, while those that were sedated slept off the drugs.
I'd do the same again if ever I get another one, and recommend it to anyone who can't have or doesn't want sedation.
>Not sure why the conspiracy theorists have decided to make Oxford their place to protest all this stuff
Because they have maliciously or stupidly confused the permits which would allow residents to drive through traffic filters (instead of taking a longer route), with a passport system that wouldn't let them leave the zone at all.
But they will be able to travel without a permit, it's just that those journeys may need to be rerouted to take a less direct route to avoid the traffic filters.
Traffic filters are not new to the UK, and plenty have existed for decades in cities like London without controversy or conspiracy. They do not form an impermeable cordon around an area.
They restrict through traffic on certain streets, in order to provide faster and safer routes for either bikes or buses. As far as I can tell the Oxford proposal is less restrictive than traditional filters as permits allow car driver to bypass the restrictions a certain number of times a month.
That assumes that the tourists and visitors confine themselves to the major tourist areas. If you bother to cycle outside the major tourist areas of the Netherlands, whether to minor cities or villages, you'll still notice many people cycling for local journeys.
The mistake is people used to car dependence being unable to imagine any alternative, thus refusing to believe that it can be true.
Dutch cycling infrastructure is close to ubiquitous, extending practically the length and breadth of the country. The idea that bikes are used only in city centres is another distortion. But of course the bike tends to be used for shorter, local trips.
Your (roughly 130 km) journey would have been less fast had those people making their shorter distance journeys by bike got into their cars instead.
The original poster claimed that car usage is the norm in the Netherlands, which implies that anything else is outside the norm, or unusual. This is obviously incorrectly.
There are various other posts in this thread that also give statistics, and the number of car vs bike journeys is not so far apart.
In a country that famously has more bikes then people, the idea that if half the bike journeys converted to cars there would only be a ten percent increase in traffic is quite clearly ridiculous. Especially within cities bikes carry volumes of people that would overwhelm roads if those people used space-inefficient cars.
>First, let's establish that the Netherlands is a car country...On a typical day, 1 million people use public transport. Cars are the norm, not trains or bicycles.
Anyone visiting a Dutch city can see what a distortion this comment is. The sheer volume of bike traffic on largely safe infrastructure is phenomenal. Imagine if even half of these people took to cars instead, it would be gridlock. Life may be good for Dutch drivers, but only because so many others leave their cars at home.
The 'elderly parent to the doctor' case is still an argument for bike infrastructure. The more people choose to travel by bike instead of by car, the more space is available on the roads for those that need motor vehicles.
I've rented bikes in the Netherlands several times as a UK citizen, but perhaps in different areas.
Part of the reason the Netherlands is the perfect place for a car owner is that so many people are able to go by bike instead, freeing up space on the roads.