magnatom said:My first though, having got up from the tarmac was: I hope I got that on camera!!
Tynan said:seen loads of people saying it makes them look slow
and to me that tunnel is plain unsafe, there's no vision around the corners and the surface looks unsafe and there's a great deal to hurt yourself on, that rail looks awful
hence too fast, he's wrecked because he hit something he couldn't see coming and then lost control, too fast for the conditions
from what I can see, I'm not sure I'd use it, my limited experience of specialised cycle routes is that they're full of rubbish and other obstructions
Dayvo said:My first thought would have been 'I hope no one saw that'!
As much as I admire your crusade against bad and dangerous driving, I can't help thinking that if some of the motorists you have berated saw that, they would now feel more than a little aggrieved if they knew you just fell down at the drop of a hat!
Glad you weren't injured (except for your pride, of course).
Tynan said:it's your risk, your call natch
you mentioned being lucky you didn't fall onto the railing?
last time honest, for the reasons of bad sight lines, crap on the surface and not much room to fall into, I'd be reluctant to use that from what I can see
magnatom said:Also with regards to cameras and apparent speed. My ATC2000 with the narrow field of view did make me look slower. This camera with a wider field of view makes me look faster. It is a variable of the camera.
magnatom said:You must have been there cab!
neslon said:It looks horrible. I would loath having to ride down nasty wet rubbish & glass strewn windy tunnels. Don't they have roads in Glasgow? I would go miles out of my way to have a picturesque ride, rather than scrat about down dirty little rat holes like that.
Mind you, it looks nicer than riding in London
Hairy Jock said:It goes under the River Clyde... it is easier than cycling on water...
neslon said:No bridges either? Dear God, no wonder they need the oil revenues. (not that they would get spent in Glasgow...)