Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

07Lapierre

Sleeper12 wrote: »

And many have died going slower than some posters have boasted going down the hill of Howth on a pushbike.

As I said, helmets don't bother me as a motorist. You'll either hurt yourself or you won't. It's the dark clothing at night bothers me as there is a much greater chance of me hitting something I don't see

Dark clothing? I think you mean cyclists cycling at night with no lights? This is illegal and nobody here will endorse that type of behaviour! The Gardai have the power to stop any cyclist and issue penalty points to them for this offence. The fact that so many people choose to,cycle without lights at night simply highlights the complete lack of enforcement of this law.

My car is black, the bumpers are black, the tyres are black,even the alloy wheels are black. The interior trim is black, the seats are black and even the carpet is black. I drive at night while wearing a black jacket, dark jeans and black shoes. It's not a problem because my car has LIGHTS.

Oh and as for helmets while cycling? They are useless if you descend Howth at speed! There made of styrofoam for gods sake! Useless!

Brian

07Lapierre wrote: »

My car is black, the bumpers are black, the tyres are black,even the alloy wheels are black. The interior trim is black, the seats are black and even the carpet is black. I drive at night while wearing a black jacket, dark jeans and black shoes. It's not a problem because my car has LIGHTS.

Buy some black jeans.

Tenzor07

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It's the dark clothing at night bothers me as there is a much greater chance of me hitting something I don't see

Hopefully you don't drive with your headlights off? Generally they help to illuminate things on the road...And that you drive at a speed which allows you to stop your vehicle should a horse/cyclist/pedestrian/fallen tree appear in front of you?
Hopefully you wont' require roadside trees to wear high-vis either..

Sleeper12

Tenzor07 wrote:

Hopefully you don't drive with your headlights off? Generally they help to illuminate things on the road...And that you drive at a speed which allows you to stop your vehicle should a horse/cyclist/pedestrian/fallen tree appear in front of you? Hopefully you wont' require roadside trees to wear high-vis either..

I haven't come across any trees on the road and I don't drive in ditches so trees aren't an issue.

There was a lie down protest yesterday by cyclists. They wanted safer roads. It seems that cyclists safety is always someone else's responsibility. If you don't want to ware hi viz clothing why not tie it to the Cross bar, handle bar or back of bike.

Anyone involved in roadworks /maintenance have a wear hi viz clothing. It's part of health and safety. I don't see why cyclists & pedestrians are exempt from from this.

A safety feature in my Ford Connect van is always a on lights. I can't turn off my daylight lights & as a result I'm more visible than other road users.

Hurrache

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I haven't come across any trees on the road and I don't drive in ditches so trees aren't an issue.

There was a lie down protest yesterday by cyclists. They wanted safer roads. It seems that cyclists safety is always someone else's responsibility. If you don't want to ware hi viz clothing why not tie it to the Cross bar, handle bar or back of bike.

Anyone involved in roadworks /maintenance have a wear hi viz clothing. It's part of health and safety. I don't see why cyclists & pedestrians are exempt from from this.

A safety feature in my Ford Connect van is always a on lights. I can't turn off my daylight lights & as a result I'm more visible than other road users.

This is the thread you're looking for
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057864865

droidus

Lights aren't good enough, you need to paint your van in hi-viz. Take some responsibility for your safety.

Tenzor07

Sleeper12 wrote: »

There was a lie down protest yesterday by cyclists. They wanted safer roads. It seems that cyclists safety is always someone else's responsibility. If you don't want to ware hi viz clothing why not tie it to the Cross bar, handle bar or back of bike.

You have the wrong end of the stick there completely! It was a group of vulnerable road users protesting at the lack of budget provisions for road safety measures, the U.N have stated that Ireland is grossly under-performing in the realm of budget expenditure for sustainable transport. If you think that a hi-vis jacket will protect a cyclist from being squeezed off the road or run over than you are sadly misinformed.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Anyone involved in roadworks /maintenance have a wear hi viz clothing. It's part of health and safety. I don't see why cyclists & pedestrians are exempt from from this.

Cycling and walking aren't considered as being hazardous occupations like in construction, therefore one does not need to dress up like Bob the builder to cycle or walk to the shop, what you should be paying attention to is the root cause of your assertion that hi-vis is needed if you're a vulnerable road user, in that the roads are being made hazardous by the almost complete lack of cycle related road infrastructure.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

A safety feature in my Ford Connect van is always a on lights. I can't turn off my daylight lights & as a result I'm more visible than other road users.

I think most people would have lights on in daytime, however if someone has an issue seeing a big white van approach them then that's an issue for them and there optician!

John_Rambo

Sleeper12 wrote: »

If you don't want to ware hi viz clothing why not tie it to the Cross bar, handle bar or back of bike.

It could get caught in the spokes of the wheel or the workings of the brakes/gears causing an accident.

You’ve a lot to learn about safety on the road.

Chips Lovell

High-viz discussion has been moved to the High-viz megathread

07Lapierre

Brian wrote: »

Buy some black jeans.

Black jeans? nobody wears black jeans anymore!

Grassey

Sleeper12 wrote: »

If you don't want to ware hi viz clothing why not tie it to the Cross bar, handle bar or back of bike.

How does a piece of fabric tied in a knot around a a bar increase visibility? Won't the cyclists body obscure the double fist sized lump?

Think I'll stick with my DLR on the bike for commuting all the same

brianomc

Sleeper12 wrote: »

There was a lie down protest yesterday by cyclists. They wanted safer roads. It seems that cyclists safety is always someone else's responsibility. If you don't want to ware hi viz clothing why not tie it to the Cross bar, handle bar or back of bike.

What about those of us who have had front and rear lights on, wearing hi-vis top (fluorescent yellow gabba), fluorescent yellow gloves, helmet and still been hit by a van who turned left without indicating when I was going straight on?

His first excuse was that I came up his inside, I did, but the lack of an indicator told me he was going straight on. It was also an on-road cycle lane I was in, same as I was in when I passed everyone else on the inside. When I told him he wasn't even indicating his next excuse was that he didn't see me. SMIDSY

All the hi-viz and lights did SFA at the end of the day when he didn't look in his mirror. Clearly my fault though for being in the cycle lane. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Macy0161

My most recent near miss was on Saturday, when I got the "sorry I didn't see you" apology. Apart from it being a lovely bright day, I was wearing my retro Once Tour De France Pink Jersey. Not sure I could've been more hi viz - even my legs and arms were bright pink as I was sunburnt by that stage too!

My partner got a lovely new bright red jersey last week and I commented how she'd really stand out wearing it to which she laughed "not if the drivers aren't watching the road"

It's true though no amount of high vis clothing is going to counter the danger of inattention

Sleeper12

brianomc wrote:

What about those of us who have had front and rear lights on, wearing hi-vis top (fluorescent yellow gabba), fluorescent yellow gloves, helmet and still been hit by a van who turned left without indicating when I was going straight on?

Maybe if you didn't dress brightly you would have been hit more often? Bright clothing might already have saved your life

brianomc

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Maybe if you didn't dress brightly you would have been hit more often? Bright clothing might already have saved your life

What I was wearing was irrelevant that day. The driver "didn't see me". I was dressed as most motorists want cyclists to dress, it made no difference. So hi-viz is not the be-all and end-all you want it to be.

07Lapierre

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Maybe if you didn't dress brightly you would have been hit more often? Bright clothing might already have saved your life

Of the 17 cyclists killed last year, only ONE was during the hours of darkness.

Visibility is not the problem, its Observation.

Sleeper12

brianomc wrote:

What I was wearing was irrelevant that day. The driver "didn't see me". I was dressed as most motorists want cyclists to dress, it made no difference. So hi-viz is not the be-all and end-all you want it to be.

What you were wearing might have saved your life a different time.

The logic that someone wasn't looking so hi vis = useless is flawed. It's not the answer to all the problems but if I have a better chance of seeing you then I have a better chance of not hitting you.

Hi vis are very successful for road maintenance workers.

Fighting Tao

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What you were wearing might have saved your life a different time.

The logic that someone wasn't looking so hi vis = useless is flawed. It's not the answer to all the problems but if I have a better chance of seeing you then I have a better chance of not hitting you.

Hi vis are very successful for road maintenance workers.

What do you notice here? I presume it's the lights first.


Black jumps out more here:


And when every other Tom, Dick and Harry is wearing it on the streets, it is ineffective.

As for the road maintenance workers, it is bits of hi-vis, not the plaster in a bright colour that people want cyclists to wear because they are too bloody lazy and self absorbed to drive with care.

brianomc

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What you were wearing might have saved your life a different time.

The logic that someone wasn't looking so hi vis = useless is flawed. It's not the answer to all the problems but if I have a better chance of seeing you then I have a better chance of not hitting you.

Hi vis are very successful for road maintenance workers.

I never said hi vis = useless, I said it was irrelevant "that day" because he "didn't see me". He would have had a better chance of not hitting me had he used his mirrors before turning. Had he looked he would have seen the brightest yellow yoke he had ever seen in his life. But he wasn't paying attention.

Anyway, I'm more in favour of contrasting colours to your background. And basically, in daylight there is no colour that a moving cyclist can wear that a driver shouldn't be able to see. Even wearing black and moving against hedgerows you can be seen, otherwise basically none of us would be here posting as we would all be dead. Why were we seen? Well the driver was paying attention, driving to suit the conditions.

There's plenty of instances of bridges (with hi-vis signs) being hit, garda/police cars, traffic wands, etc being hit by cars/trucks. Why were those hi-vis items hit? Driver inattention?

Sleeper12

Fighting Tao wrote:

What do you notice here? I presume it's the lights first.

If my lights hit you I see the hi vi's clothing better than any bike light. Hi vis is hi vis. There is a hint in the name. There is a reason that it's compulsory for road maintenance workers. There is a reason that emergency response vehicles are hi vis worldwide. Just because you say it do work doesn't make it so.

Fighting Tao

Sleeper12 wrote: »

If my lights hit you I see the hi vi's clothing better than any bike light. Hi vis is hi vis. There is a hint in the name. There is a reason that it's compulsory for road maintenance workers. There is a reason that emergency response vehicles are hi vis worldwide. Just because you say it do work doesn't make it so.

So you are now talking exclusively about night time? Right so.... More cars crash into other cars and walls, trees etc than cyclists. Shouldn’t they be plastered in hi vis too?

Now for bike lights, mine can be seen from 2km away. You can drive like so many others without lights on the car and if you don’t see me then you shouldn’t be allowed near a motor vehicle.

Firemen don’t wear anything near full dayglo/hi vis clothing. Yet again it’s only partial in specific parts that move. Mainly arms and legs because they attract the most attention.

All that is going on in your head has already been answered in this thread. Have a read.

brianomc

Sleeper12 wrote: »

If my lights hit you I see the hi vi's clothing better than any bike light. Hi vis is hi vis. There is a hint in the name. There is a reason that it's compulsory for road maintenance workers. There is a reason that emergency response vehicles are hi vis worldwide. Just because you say it do work doesn't make it so.

You will see our lights way before your car lights have a chance to hit our hi-vis.

Fighting Tao

brianomc wrote: »

You will see our lights way before your car lights have a chance to hit our hi-vis.

The key word is ‘hit’. In an area with street lights car lights should not hit hi vis as dipped lights should only be used. Therefore, hi vis jerseys are pointless.

Sleeper12

Fighting Tao wrote:

So you are now talking exclusively about night time? Right so.... More cars crash into other cars and walls, trees etc than cyclists. Shouldn’t they be plastered in hi vis too?

You are deflecting. If hi vis doesn't work why does every developed country in the world use it in safety clothing, emergency vehicles etc.

BTW hi vis works very well during the day too but at night it's ridiculous to compare your little led light with a car or motorbikes lights.

Bottom line is we all have responsibility with our own safety. I'm sick to death of the RIP threads here on boards.ie. The loss of life is shocking. If hi vis saves one life per year then it is worth it. I don't find seat belts comfortable but I wear it.

Cyclists are some of the most vulnerable on the road and the hardest to see day or night. Anything that helps make you more visible has to be a good thing.

Over 40 years ago we wore reflective armbands going to school on the dark mornings.

Fighting Tao

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You are deflecting. If hi vis doesn't work why does every developed country in the world use it in safety clothing, emergency vehicles etc.

BTW hi vis works very well during the day too but at night it's ridiculous to compare your little led light with a car or motorbikes lights.

Bottom line is we all have responsibility with our own safety. I'm sick to death of the RIP threads here on boards.ie. The loss of life is shocking. If hi vis saves one life per year then it is worth it. I don't find seat belts comfortable but I wear it.

Cyclists are some of the most vulnerable on the road and the hardest to see day or night. Anything that helps make you more visible has to be a good thing.

Over 40 years ago we wore reflective armbands going to school on the dark mornings.

Thank you for coming here to tell me what is good for me. Drivers know best and should know their audience. I drive far more than I cycle and most cyclists drive too.

Have a look on the interwebs for See.Sense Icon+. They are the lights I’m running. If you can’t see them then you shouldn’t have a driving licence.

Dayglo is only good in the day if te conditions are right, not everyone is plastered in it (as they currently are and the situation is getting worse), and of drivers concentrate on driving. If drivers aren’t concentrating and driving to the conditions, a cyclist could look like a hi-vis Xmas tree and it won’t make an ounce of difference.

Contrasting colours are more noticeable and I say that as a driver.

On the Hi vis being used everywhere, it’s simple to shift the blame from drivers.

Anyway, what do you think about painting all walls and cars in hi vis for their safety?

Tenzor07

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Bottom line is we all have responsibility with our own safety. I'm sick to death of the RIP threads here on boards.ie. The loss of life is shocking. If hi vis saves one life per year then it is worth it. I don't find seat belts comfortable but I wear it.
Cyclists are some of the most vulnerable on the road and the hardest to see day or night. Anything that helps make you more visible has to be a good thing.

So what you're basically saying is Mandatory Hi-vis for all road users, due to the dangerous nature of our roads, which are the same as a construction site in your opinion.

Wouldn't you rather the root causes of the danger on the roads get addressed?

The lack of cycle infra, the lack of MPD laws, general lack of road traffic law enforcement by Gardai, parking in cycle lanes, dangerous overtaking, intimidation, careless and distracted driving.
Until those matters are fully resolved no amount of hi-vis clothing will prevent a truck from running you over...

07Lapierre

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You are deflecting. If hi vis doesn't work why does every developed country in the world use it in safety clothing, emergency vehicles etc.

BTW hi vis works very well during the day too but at night it's ridiculous to compare your little led light with a car or motorbikes lights.

Bottom line is we all have responsibility with our own safety. I'm sick to death of the RIP threads here on boards.ie. The loss of life is shocking. If hi vis saves one life per year then it is worth it. I don't find seat belts comfortable but I wear it.

Cyclists are some of the most vulnerable on the road and the hardest to see day or night. Anything that helps make you more visible has to be a good thing.

Over 40 years ago we wore reflective armbands going to school on the dark mornings.

How many people were killed in car crashes in Ireland last year?

I think we should introduce a law that all cars must have 5point restraints and bucket seats fitted as standard. All drivers and passengers must wear full face helmets with neck supports (same ones F1 drivers wear) .... after all..if it saves just one life it'll be worth it right?

Tenzor07

07Lapierre wrote: »

... after all..if it saves just one life it'll be worth it right?

Would rather see all motor vehicles become fitted with GPS tracked speed limiting devices, which can scan the area and it's speed limit therefore reducing the numbers of vehicles breaking the speed limits, sure if it saves one life...

07Lapierre

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Would rather see all motor vehicles become fitted with GPS tracked speed limiting devices, which can scan the area and it's speed limit therefore reducing the numbers of vehicles breaking the speed limits, sure if it saves one life...

Some cars already have this...the car will display the speed limit of the road your currently driving on. But of course, it's up to the driver to adhere to that speed limit.