Dublin City Cycle - Sunday 14th September 2008

Caroline_ie

... forcing people to wear the hi viz and not a helmet ... that was ridiculous. I wore no hi viz and no helmet ... I attached the hi viz to my bag ... in protest.

niceonetom

how did we all miss each other?

el tonto wrote: »

The hi-viz thing really grinds my gears. So tempted to rant about.

me too, but tonto you're much better at it, so please, go nuts. it's what the internet is there for.

i very nearly had an argument with the chief-bottle-washer woman at the registration desk. i can be a bit, eh, prickly before 9am, and as we were among the early arrivals she obviously hadn't been worn down by the refusals of others of a similar mindset. my 'no thanks' was unacceptable. she was pretty adamant. so was i. red rag to bull = mandatory high-viz jacket to niceonetom. if i'd been on my own there i probably would have pissed off at that point. luckily more reasonable thinking (caroline_ie's) prevailed. ...but i didn't wear the high-viz.

i think the whole thing sent entirely the wrong message about cycling, and i won't be participating in it again.

Chips Lovell

Raam wrote: »

Let's be having it...

There's a creeping pressure for cyclists to wear these things. You see it cropping up in road safety literature, they're being handed out a dime a dozen and then you get some people today being told they should wear them to participate. I mean what's going to happen on closed roads in broad daylight? Are you going to get run over by some errant unicylist?

On the back of these vests is 'be safe, be seen'. The thing is that when you're cycling at night and using a good set of lights, you're perfect visible from a car... if the motorist is paying attention that is. Pressurising cyclists to wear these things is, I feel, moving the burden of resonsibility on to the cylist. If I get hit by a car and am not practically visible from space, the implication is that somehow its partly my fault.

Nevermind the fact that half the characters you see wearing these things around town are the very people breaking traffic lights, wobbling all over the road, riding up the inside of buses etc. But that's alright, you can't ride your bike properly, but at least you're wearing a luminous vest.

The campaign to wear these vests also reinforces the notion that the non-cycling public has that cycling is pretty dangerous and if you aren't looking like a Christmas tree you're going to get killed. Thing is that if you obey the rules of the road, have some cop on how to handle your bike and use a bit of common sense when it comes to big vehicles, you're going to be very unlucky to have an accident.

I can just imagine the crowd in Dublin City Council this morning, seeing hundreds of riders head off in these things and thinking they've done their bit for cycling. It's the easiest thing in the world to run up a few thousand vests and ignore the real issues, which are the crap state of the roads, utterly useless 'cycle lanes' and a general approach that seems to regard cyclists as second class road users who need to be kept out of the way of 'proper' traffic.

Bunnyhopper

@ el tonto Well said

Howitzer

I enjoyed the short spin around Dublin this morning.

More pics
I hope the event continues and grows. I think they should be looking for feedback and improve year on year.
I'm pro vest and don't think the intention of them this morning was to make the event safer.
Now anyone who wouldn't normally have bought one, has one.
Plus I don't have to wash my dull old one!
It served to unit all participants as a hi-viz army.
Bring it on. Blind the drivers with 'em.

Trojan

Howitzer wrote: »

I'm pro vest and don't think the intention of them this morning was to make the event safer.
Now anyone who wouldn't normally have bought one, has one.

I agree, I think that's the reason they were handing as many out as possible.

Here's me in all my dorky Fredness on my trip to Athlone (Galway attempt) last Thursday:


I definitely would not have felt as comfortable on the long, busy road routes (mainly the N4) without a hi-vis. But yeah, they do make you look like a dork.

niceonetom

@Trojan & Howitzer- the issue isn't whether we're "pro vest " or not, it's whether we're pro mandatory vest. if you choose to wear a vest, great. you can even advise me to do the same. fire away. it's when i am told that i must wear one, on closed roads, at a marshalled event, in broad fecking daylight that resistance will be met. the jackets weren't being 'offered'; if they were then they could have been refused.

and that's not even getting to the issue of what it does to the public's perception of what is necessary cycling attire. see el_tonto's post above for that. he is right.

you may think that what they were enforcing was a sense of camaraderie (though i really think that the big-giant-heads behind this event are much more concerned with health and safety, and possible legal indemnity), but forced camaraderie is just as obnoxious as forced nannying. we're all cyclists, isn't that enough to have in common? do we need a uniform?

Trojan

niceonetom wrote: »

@Trojan & Howitzer- the issue isn't whether we're "pro vest " or not, it's whether we're pro mandatory vest.

Well if that's your position then I'm 100% with you. I think they're a good idea sometimes, but when cycling in a group of 1000 other cyclists all they'll do is help you blend in

Gavin

I didn't go along, same story, slept in. I also found the idea of pre-registering as being somewhat pointless and even slightly offensive. I am sick of giving my personal information when it is not needed.

I thoroughly agree with el tonto and his comments about the high-vis jackets. Closing off streets and making people wear high-vis simply reinforces the erroenous belief that it is not safe to cycle in the city center otherwise. The marhalls discussion as above about how they could not allow buses to interact with the cyclist is another example of this attitude.

How can the general public be blamed for thinking cycling is dangerous when those promoting cycling think the same ? They appear to be poorly informed with the repetitious focus on helmets/high-vis and as el tonto says, pushing the responsibility onto the cyclist. Things are not going to change until local and national government actually do some research into cycling and best practice.

It's all very frustrating. How does one go about getting something done about it?

Trojan

Verb wrote: »

It's all very frustrating. How does one go about getting something done about it?

I don't know, but if you go about it, can you try get rid of the ridiculous mandatory use of what are laughingly described as cycle lanes?

Victor

How about making all cars and other motorised vehicles hi-vis pink?

vektarman

Did I miss something, neither I or any of my friends on the cycle were told that wearing the hi-vis vests were mandatory, they were simply handed out at registration without a word. Was anyone actually told they had to wear them?

rflynnr

It was less a direct instruction than a fairly clear implication (see my above about handing them out to kids manifestly too small to wear them). It did occur to me to politely refuse mine but I was as always torn between the eternal twin poles of "Jesus, free stuff" and "Jesus, more stuff to find space for". For what its worth I'm open to the possibility that the intent was create a visually coherent peloton: surely the point about these events is less to communicate to the participants (i.e. the already converted) than to those witnessing the event. That said, and forgive the repetition, the visual effect was clearly lessened by scheduling the ride at a time when Dublin seems solely populated by permanently perplexed tourists. Furthermore, whatever the intent, the hi-viz thing (especially in the circumstances of this particular event) does seems to suggest that only someone who valued their life slightly more than a gnat's would get on a bike in the city.

During the winter commute, in addition to wearing a jacket with reflective scotchlite, I use two rear lights, a Cat-Eye NC-200 front light (with 10w and 6w bulbs) and a down-low glow (http://www.rockthebike.com/lights/downlowglow). I still have cars pulling out in front of me, even though the front lights literally blind them. Being seen isn't the problem, being taken seriously is.

Chips Lovell

rflynnr wrote: »

...and a down-low glow (http://www.rockthebike.com/lights/downlowglow).

That's a pretty pimping bike light.

rflynnr

I know. In a parallel universe I drive a 1992 Honda Civic with tinted windows, low profile tires, spoilers etc.

Vélo

Howitzer wrote: »

I enjoyed the short spin around Dublin this morning.

More pics
I hope the event continues and grows. I think they should be looking for feedback and improve year on year.
I'm pro vest and don't think the intention of them this morning was to make the event safer.
Now anyone who wouldn't normally have bought one, has one.
Plus I don't have to wash my dull old one!
It served to unit all participants as a hi-viz army.
Bring it on. Blind the drivers with 'em.

I see there's only a handful of people wearing helmets or did they put them on when they got going?

niceonetom

Were those vests mandatory?

yes, they were mandatory, though enforcement of this rule was typically irish, thank god. the helmet rule was never mentioned as far as i know.

when i refused the offer of a vest i was told i had to wear one to ride. i said that there was no legal requirement to wear them on public roads and i wouldn't be wearing it, and that basically she couldn't make me. she said that as the organiser of an event she "absolutely had the right" to make up rules like this. i stuffed the jacket in my bag, obviously others did the same.

Bunnyhopper

In principle, I'm in favour of a Dublin City Cycle and my experience of it in 2006 was, on balance, positive. This time around, however, it was disappointing and it seems a lot of people here feel a similar sense of frustration that a potentially very positive event for cycling isn't fulfilling that potential.

Howitzer said something about hoping the event continues, grows and improves. Compared to 2006 this event was shorter, more inconveniently scheduled for the participants, and (I would estimate) less well-attended. That doesn't bode well (and that's before you add in the hi-viz arguments).

My suggestions would be that they return it to a weekday evening in the summer, and that they have a longer route (or, if possible, two interlinked loops that give people the option of picking the long or the short route). A less heavy-handed attitude to hi-viz tops (and the same for helmets - encourage but don't require) would help, by the sound of it.

Is that more disruptive and inconvenient? No - not for the participants. It might be for vehicular traffic, but then we get one evening and they get the other 364.5 days.

If you're not going to prioritize cycling and cyclists then what is the point of the event??

(BTW There's an interesting article relevant to the hi-viz argument here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080903112034.htm

It quotes 'Sydney University's Dr Chris Rissel, co-author of a 2008 research report on cycling'. He says 'transport authorities should highlight the fun, convenience and health and environmental benefits of cycling, rather than what he views as an undue emphasis on danger and safety messages, which can deter cyclists: "We should create a cycling friendly environment and accentuate cycling's positives rather than stress negatives with 'safety campaigns' that focus on cyclists without addressing drivers and road conditions. Reminding people of injury rates and risks, to wear helmets and reflective visible clothes has the unintended effect of reinforcing fears of cycling which discourages people from cycling."')

Bunnyhopper

Just by way of comparison here's a couple of pictures I took of the 2006 event. They were taken on Westmoreland Street at about 7.30pm on a Wednesday. Note the large number of participants (and that's only part of the total field) - and, indeed, the low number of hi-viz jackets

rflynnr

Nice pic of the start on page 6 of today's Irish Times if anyone's interested.

gaffmaster

Wow 2006 looks great!

It's annoying that people are scared out of cycling.

Hopefully next year's event will be better. Who organises it? Is it DCC? Has it got anything to do with the minister of transport?

I was really disappointed we didnt get to go over to the Northside. Booooo

Thomas_S_Hunterson

rflynnr wrote: »

Nice pic of the start on page 6 of today's Irish Times if anyone's interested.

I'm famous:pac::p

niceonetom

rflynnr wrote: »

Nice pic of the start on page 6 of today's Irish Times if anyone's interested.

anyone got a link? i might be famous too :pac: ...

Civilian_Target

Victor wrote: »

How about making all cars and other motorised vehicles hi-vis pink?

YES! Colour-code the roads! Yellow for cyclists, Pink for cars, Green for trues and purple for pedestrians.

kenmc

I want to be green

Thomas_S_Hunterson

niceonetom wrote: »

anyone got a link? i might be famous too :pac: ...

http://www.irishtimes.com/photosales/WebObjects/PSITShop.woa/wa/p?c=wj-VgwflwZ26BURGm5mgrMbzEIlqgCQGm

It's a lot clearer in the hard copy.

Caroline_ie

niceonetom wrote: »

anyone got a link? i might be famous too :pac: ...

Not there ... we're hidden under a sea of Hi Viz ... Hi Viz made us invisible!!! ( quite ironic actually )

niceonetom

thanks Sean_K - i didn't think to look in their shop.

RapidResults

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

Just by way of comparison here's a couple of pictures I took of the 2006 event. They were taken on Westmoreland Street at about 7.30pm on a Wednesday. Note the large number of participants (and that's only part of the total field) - and, indeed, the low number of hi-viz jackets

I was at the Tour of Britain in Stoke on Trent last week. Before the stage finish the city council hosted a ride similar to the Dublin one. No high-vis dictat and most people came in whatever they were comfortable wearing.