Possible 15mph Legal Loophole

Hello all,

 

I want to start by saying that I do not own an electric bike, and I haven't actually ridden my bike in years.

However, I am trying to make my 60 mile round trip daily commute cheaper, and possibly faster.

I don't want to sit in traffic in a diesel chugging car any more.

 

I posted on the forums on Honest John posing new ideas for commuting and while brainstorming, came up with the following idea.

What if, instead of using a motor to power the bike's wheel, we augmented our legs with an exoskeleton to press the pedals harder? That way, it's just a normal bike, and there no laws that I can find that prohibit powered exoskeletons at the moment. Although I bet they'll quickly spoil our fun eventually.

 

Does anyone with more legal experience than me find any problem with this?

 

Thanks,

Dan

For reference, the Honest John forum was "Uncategorised Vehicles" and it's under the legal section. I'd post a link, but I've not read the forum rules.

Also, if they wanted to be difficult, an unpowered exoskeleton could be used, but I'm not sure how effective they'd be.

There's a couple of other possibilities too:

 

Sail bikes, though could be a bit tricky tacking up the high street

http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Sail-Bike-a-two-person-sailing-bicycle/

 

Propeller powered rider electric version

 

 

Propeller powered rider petrol version

 

Sail and paragliding are out, since the Type Approval exemption from motor vehicle law is expressly for electric motor assistance only.

.

Sail and paragliding are out, since the Type Approval exemption from motor vehicle law is expressly for electric motor assistance only.

.

 

Also, propelling yourself across the land with a propeller isn't the most efficient thing to do. Much more efficient in the sky.

What if, instead of using a motor to power the bike's wheel, we augmented our legs with an exoskeleton to press the pedals harder? That way, it's just a normal bike, and there no laws that I can find that prohibit powered exoskeletons at the moment. Although I bet they'll quickly spoil our fun eventually.

 

I'm afraid this wouldn't pass the legal test Dan, this excerpt from the requirements illustrating why:

 

- - - where the output of the motor is cut off when the cyclist stops pedalling and is otherwise progressively reduced and finally cut off before the vehicle speed reaches 25 km/h;

 

The last part would require some sort of connectivity between exoskeleton and bike, and that would legally make the bike equipped with the drive source. In addition, if the battery was on the bike, that woud also give the necessary connectivity.

 

In any case, any form of motorisation is automatically illegal under the provisions of the Highway Act 1835, unless specifically authorised in law.

.

I'm afraid this wouldn't pass the legal test Dan, this excerpt from the requirements illustrating why:

 

- - - where the output of the motor is cut off when the cyclist stops pedalling and is otherwise progressively reduced and finally cut off before the vehicle speed reaches 25 km/h;

 

The last part would require some sort of connectivity between exoskeleton and bike, and that would legally make the bike equipped with the drive source. In addition, if the battery was on the bike, that woud also give the necessary connectivity.

 

In any case, any form of motorisation is automatically illegal under the provisions of the Highway Act 1835, unless specifically authorised in law.

.

 

Well the exoskelton would be connected via feet to the pedals obviously. But surely you wouldn't need to abide by that motor cutout law if there wasn't a motor on the bike.

The bike itself would pass any legal test as it's just a bike.

 

If the battery couldn't be on the pannier, then I suppose it would have to be in a backpack on my back.

 

Could you point me in the direction of the section of the 1835 highways act that would pertain to motorisation?

 

And if what you say is true, hypothetically, if there was a disabled person who needed walking assistance and decided to go for an exoskeleton, they wouldn't be able to legally ride a bike above 15mph?

But surely you wouldn't need to abide by that motor cutout law if there wasn't a motor on the bike.

The bike itself would pass any legal test as it's just a bike.

That's the same for a propellor powered rider. Whether it's an exoskeleton or a propellor, it makes no difference. The question is what laws apply to a motor assisted person, and if they jump on a skateboard, scooter, bicycle or a 4 wheeled buggy, does that change anything?

 

BTW, if you had a motor powered exoskeleton, you wouldn't need a bicycle. Also, for a bicycle, an exoskeleton will be a lot less efficient than a propellor.

 

One could argue that it's the exoskeleton that is providing the power to the pedals, in which case it's a motor assisted bicycle, but the propellor only interacts with the rider, so is completely independent of the bicycle, which is the same situation as riding with the wind behind you. Doing 30 mph with a force 10 behind you doesn't break any laws, neither does wearing a big coat to get more effect from the following wind.

Well the exoskelton would be connected via feet to the pedals obviously. But surely you wouldn't need to abide by that motor cutout law if there wasn't a motor on the bike.

 

As I already posted, the necessary connectivity will be interpreted as the bike being motorised.

 

Could you point me in the direction of the section of the 1835 highways act that would pertain to motorisation?

 

Section LXX, page 395 contains a ban on any machinery including "engines" within 25 yards of the highway. The language in the 19th century was rather quaint when referring to motors of any kind, generally regarding all motor vehicles as "locomotives". Later laws contained easements, but for motor vehicles, and of course we don't want pedelecs to be those.

 

The key thing is that there is no motor vehicle type approval for pedelecs, only an exemption from type approval if required conditions are met.

 

And if what you say is true, hypothetically, if there was a disabled person who needed walking assistance and decided to go for an exoskeleton, they wouldn't be able to legally ride a bike above 15mph?

 

Yes they would, since bike powering wasn't the intended purpose.

 

As ever with such things, it's the spirit of the law and the usage that counts. If a court decided the intended purpose of a powered exoskeleton was to power assist the bike as you were suggesting, then the law would be breached.

.

Hello all,

 

I want to start by saying that I do not own an electric bike, and I haven't actually ridden my bike in years.

However, I am trying to make my 60 mile round trip daily commute cheaper, and possibly faster.

I don't want to sit in traffic in a diesel chugging car any more.

 

I posted on the forums on Honest John posing new ideas for commuting and while brainstorming, came up with the following idea.

What if, instead of using a motor to power the bike's wheel, we augmented our legs with an exoskeleton to press the pedals harder? That way, it's just a normal bike, and there no laws that I can find that prohibit powered exoskeletons at the moment. Although I bet they'll quickly spoil our fun eventually.

 

Does anyone with more legal experience than me find any problem with this?

 

Thanks,

Dan

I think you've been watching too much Steve Austin, 6 million dollar man. Ahh this takes me back

There's a couple of other possibilities too:

 

Sail bikes, though could be a bit tricky tacking up the high street

http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Sail-Bike-a-two-person-sailing-bicycle/

 

Propeller powered rider electric version

 

 

Propeller powered rider petrol version

 

id like to see him take off with glider and land:)

Running those electric wooden props without a cage is gonna hurt if he falls off, I have a friend who was learning to paramotor, he crashed on take off the cage bent And prop came into contact with his hand,5 years on ,he still wears a glove to hide the gnarly remains of his hand/ fingers.

Why don't you use your exoskeleton on long, clown stilts. That might get you to work pretty fast. Or, maybe some nice fast 'Bladerunners' would do it.

 

So if you were running at 18 mph with exoskeleton on the footpath, would that be illegal? What if you were walking at 4 mph?

 

Would it be illegal if you were getting dragged along the road (no bicycle) by one of those surf kites? Did this guy comit an illegal act?

 

 

What if you were towed while sitting on your bicycle with one? Note that in this vid, the kite is attached to the rider, not the bike. Would this guy be breaking any UK laws, assuming that he's not on private land?