Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Tenzor07

07Lapierre wrote: »

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.

There are cars with auto braking and lane control, however to be truly effective the speed limiting devices must be compulsory for all new cars...

07Lapierre

Tenzor07 wrote: »

There are cars with auto braking and lane control, however to be truly effective the speed limiting devices must be compulsory for all new cars...

Yes, but sure that's not necessary....after all, to drive a car All drivers must pass a driving test..so they are clearly far superior to us mere cyclists (in my case I've been cycling for over 40 years and driving for over 30!)

Sleeper12

Tenzor07 wrote:

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.

I never said mandatory anything.

Cyclists constantly moan about safety & quite rightly imo. However it's a bit rich wanting everything around you to change to make it safer yet there's plenty cyclists can do themselves.

Cyclists are the hardest to see on the road. It's in your power to make yourself more visible. Plenty of cyclists do this already.

I'm the motorist. I'll most likely be be OK if we ever have an accident. You are the vulnerable one. You need to protect yourself.

Fighting Tao

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I never said mandatory anything.

Cyclists constantly moan about safety & quite rightly imo. However it's a bit rich wanting everything around you to change to make it safer yet there's plenty cyclists can do themselves.

Cyclists are the hardest to see on the road. It's in your power to make yourself more visible. Plenty of cyclists do this already.

I'm the motorist. I'll most likely be be OK if we ever have an accident. You are the vulnerable one. You need to protect yourself.

I never thought "I never saw that cyclist". If you do not see cyclists then you are not concentrating on the task at hand.

Sleeper12

Fighting Tao wrote:

I never thought "I never saw that cyclist". If you do not see cyclists then you are not concentrating on the task at hand.

Has to be the most ridiculous statement of the week.

I'm driving over 30 years & never hit anyone but it's hard to see cyclists at times. Some weave in & out of the traffic. Some go through red lights. I rarely see a hand signal. The best I can hope for is a half turn of your head so I as you want to change lane. I'm supposed to be a mind reader. I'm supposed to assume that the cyclist will break the red light. I'm to guess is he going straight or turning left because a hand signal is too much effort.

There used to be a road safety campaign. Think once, think twice, think bike. The gist of it was that motorbikes are much harder to see on the road. In fact invisible at times. Well bikes are twice as hard to see


All I'm saying is that cyclists have some responsibility for their own safety. You can't blame the big bad motorist for everything.

I've never gotten the whole cyclist against the motorist type of mentality or the motorist against the cyclist. We all share the same road

Tenzor07

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I never said mandatory anything.

You're basically on the cusp of calling for mandatory hi-vis

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Cyclists constantly moan about safety & quite rightly imo. However it's a bit rich wanting everything around you to change to make it safer yet there's plenty cyclists can do themselves.

"Moan" about safety, or just require that the government commit a sufficient percentage of the transport budget on cycling..

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Cyclists are the hardest to see on the road. It's in your power to make yourself more visible. Plenty of cyclists do this already.

"They" are if a distracted motorist is on the phone, looking onto the backseat, or driving too fast to be able to react to things on the road... Hi-vis won't protect your bones from a truck driver not paying attention..

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm the motorist. I'll most likely be be OK if we ever have an accident. You are the vulnerable one. You need to protect yourself.

Again, "protecting" yourself using a €20 piece of styrofoam and a €3 hi-vis vest isn't like wearing a kryptonite hat/vest when Superman is about to knock your head off, hi-vis won't stop a careless driver..!

Tenzor07

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm driving over 30 years & never hit anyone

All I'm saying is that cyclists have some responsibility for their own safety. You can't blame the big bad motorist for everything.

..doesn't mean anything...

You're still trying to shift the burden of responsibility for road safety onto the most vulnerable road users, don't you think that's wrong?

Fighting Tao

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Has to be the most ridiculous statement of the week.

I'm driving over 30 years & never hit anyone but it's hard to see cyclists at times. Some weave in & out of the traffic. Some go through red lights. I rarely see a hand signal. The best I can hope for is a half turn of your head so I as you want to change lane. I'm supposed to be a mind reader. I'm supposed to assume that the cyclist will break the red light. I'm to guess is he going straight or turning left because a hand signal is too much effort.

There used to be a road safety campaign. Think once, think twice, think bike. The gist of it was that motorbikes are much harder to see on the road. In fact invisible at times. Well bikes are twice as hard to see


All I'm saying is that cyclists have some responsibility for their own safety. You can't blame the big bad motorist for everything.

I've never gotten the whole cyclist against the motorist type of mentality or the motorist against the cyclist. We all share the same road

Thank you for not hitting anyone. Well done! From what you’re saying it sounds like you’ve been lucky and need to learn to use your mirrors better.

Sleeper12

Tenzor07 wrote:

You're basically on the cusp of calling for mandatory hi-vis

I'm calling on cyclists to take responsibility.

Tenzor07 wrote:

"Moan" about safety, or just require that the government commit a sufficient percentage of the transport budget on cycling..

Tenzor07 wrote:

You're still trying to shift the burden of responsibility for road safety onto the most vulnerable road users, don't you think that's wrong?

I think most cycle lanes aren't fit for purpose. Sharing a small footpath with children walking or mothers with buggies isn't a suitable solution. I agree that the roads are crap for the most part for cycling but maybe part of the safety changes will be hi vis & helmets. Maybe not

07Lapierre

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Has to be the most ridiculous statement of the week.

I'm driving over 30 years & never hit anyone but it's hard to see cyclists at times. Some weave in & out of the traffic. Some go through red lights. I rarely see a hand signal. The best I can hope for is a half turn of your head so I as you want to change lane. I'm supposed to be a mind reader. I'm supposed to assume that the cyclist will break the red light. I'm to guess is he going straight or turning left because a hand signal is too much effort.

There used to be a road safety campaign. Think once, think twice, think bike. The gist of it was that motorbikes are much harder to see on the road. In fact invisible at times. Well bikes are twice as hard to see


All I'm saying is that cyclists have some responsibility for their own safety. You can't blame the big bad motorist for everything.

I've never gotten the whole cyclist against the motorist type of mentality or the motorist against the cyclist. We all share the same road

Only you can drive your car...it's up to you to ensure you can see where you are going at all times. I'm not condoning cyclists who make your life difficult but you are driving a car that has the potential to kill someone. With great power comes great(er) responsibility.

There used to be a safety ad on the tv and it said " if you had The only car in the world, you could drive as you please...but you haven't, so you can't"

Sleeper12

Fighting Tao wrote:

Thank you for not hitting anyone. Well done! From what you’re saying it sounds like you’ve been lucky and need to learn to use your mirrors better.

Here's the thing I drive a van. No back windscreen so no rear mirror. I have 2 good side mirrors. I constantly glance in both. However it's easy to miss a cyclist with a split second glance. As I say at times I'd have several cyclists weaving either side or both sides of me no hand signals yet it's my fault if I hit them.

Fighting Tao

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Here's the thing I drive a van. No back windscreen so no rear mirror. I have 2 good side mirrors. I constantly glance in both. However it's easy to miss a cyclist with a split second glance. As I say at times I'd have several cyclists weaving either side or both sides of me no hand signals yet it's my fault if I hit them.

I had a van for years and I drove a truck for a few years. These days it’s only a car that I’m in. So here’s the thing, I am speaking from experience too.please stop trying to shift the blame.

07Lapierre

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Here's the thing I drive a van. No back windscreen so no rear mirror. I have 2 good side mirrors. I constantly glance in both. However it's easy to miss a cyclist with a split second glance. As I say at times I'd have several cyclists weaving either side or both sides of me no hand signals yet it's my fault if I hit them.

I don't agree with that. It's not your fault if the cyclist has done something illegal?

Tenzor07

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Here's the thing I drive a van. No back windscreen so no rear mirror. I have 2 good side mirrors. I constantly glance in both. However it's easy to miss a cyclist with a split second glance. As I say at times I'd have several cyclists weaving either side or both sides of me no hand signals yet it's my fault if I hit them.

Oh come on, when bicycles filter through motor vehicles, there's hardly enough room to fit the handlebars through, never mind wave your hands around and give a hand signal! Instead of giving a split second glance, why not use your mirrors for a sufficient amount of time to see what's around you? Other road users don't always have headlights and indicators fitted..

Cookie_Monster

Tenzor07 wrote: »

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.

no, not at all. DOn't you see, just the annoying cyclists and pedestrians need to look ridiculous. No need to have motorised vehicles impacted by the high vish requirement at all, per usual.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm the motorist. I'll most likely be be OK if we ever have an accident. You are the vulnerable one. You need to protect yourself.

short of some kind of steel cage with an aero shell and probably some kind of motor to drag it around what level of protection is adequate for motorists not paying attention and driving into me in reality?
Motorists as the people in charge of heavy, fast moving machinery need to use it responsibly, it's not up to others to clear out of the way and have excessive safety gear just so motorists can abdicate responsibility.

Pinch Flat

Beep beep out of my way I’m a motorist

https://youtu.be/5GqCHdG1dLQ

Thinkingaboutit

If the excise on diesel, plus motor tax on it, is suitably increased (so what if people were taken in by that German green diesel con-trick, decisions have consequences, at least an incentive to crush new VWs), there'll be less young asthmatics, existing ones (like me) will have less misery, and that hi viz work jacket I wear when cycling won't keep turning a dull grey. Diesel is only suitable for freight vehicles.

peasant

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Oh come on, when bicycles filter through motor vehicles, there's hardly enough room to fit the handlebars through, never mind wave your hands around and give a hand signal!

Then maybe, just maybe you shouldn't get yourself into such tight situations in the first place.
Indicating your intentions in advance (by blinker or hand signal) is part of the rules of the road. Don't squeeze yourself into situations where you can't do that and then try to shift the blame on others.

Tenzor07

peasant wrote: »

Then maybe, just maybe you shouldn't get yourself into such tight situations in the first place.
Indicating your intentions in advance (by blinker or hand signal) is part of the rules of the road. Don't squeeze yourself into situations where you can't do that and then try to shift the blame on others.

How would you suggest I give a handsignal here?

07Lapierre

peasant wrote: »

Then maybe, just maybe you shouldn't get yourself into such tight situations in the first place.
Indicating your intentions in advance (by blinker or hand signal) is part of the rules of the road. Don't squeeze yourself into situations where you can't do that and then try to shift the blame on others.

Your right...hand signals and good road position (and making eye contact) with drivers are vital skills that more experienced cyclist use on a daily basis. Knowing when to "Filter" between cars is also a skill that needs to be learned and seems to be lacking by a lot of cyclists.

eeeee

Tenzor07 wrote: »

How would you suggest I give a handsignal here?

<snip>

Unless the cyclist (ahead in the pic) was already there and the buses pulled up beside them, that's a wildly dangerous, irresponsible and indefensibly stupid position to be in. Absolutely no need to follow that whatsoever.

Tenzor07

nee wrote: »

Unless the cyclist (ahead in the pic) was already there and the buses pulled up beside them, that's a wildly dangerous, irresponsible and indefensibly stupid position to be in. Absolutely no need to follow that whatsoever.

That's reality of cycling in Dublin CC unfortunately!


http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/photo-captures-scary-reality-of-dublin-cycling-and-story-behind-it/

eeeee

Tenzor07 wrote: »

That's reality of cycling in Dublin CC unfortunately!


http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/photo-captures-scary-reality-of-dublin-cycling-and-story-behind-it/

Nope. I've cycled around Dublin city centre for 13 years now and have never ended up in a position like that. That's in front of the garda station coming onto college green isn't it?
You stay behind the buses, or if you have to rush on by get off your bike and walk through the junction. Stupidly dangerous and utterly unnecessary position for the cyclist pictured to be in.

Hurrache

Westmoreland Street heading to O'Connell Street apparently. ****ty street for driving, never mind cycling, which I've always avoided doing.

eeeee

Hurrache wrote: »

O'Connell Street apparently.

Ah I see.
Anywhere that's an inexcusable position to be in.

07Lapierre

nee wrote: »

Nope. I've cycled around Dublin city centre for 13 years now and have never ended up in a position like that. That's in front of the garda station coming onto college green isn't it?
You stay behind the buses, or if you have to rush on by get off your bike and walk through the junction. Stupidly dangerous and utterly unnecessary position for the cyclist pictured to be in.

Your an experienced cyclist and you know the danger. But to be fair, a lot of cyclists do filter between buses and are totally oblivious to the danger they are putting themselves in.

eeeee

07Lapierre wrote: »

Your an experienced cyclist and you know the danger. But to be fair, a lot of cyclists do filter between buses and are totally oblivious to the danger they are putting themselves in.

That's true, but even when I was starting out cycling around the city going up between a load of buses never seemed like an even vaguely good idea! I hope that was the first and only time the cyclist pictured did that...

It was cemented once for me early on, similar looking situation to the above, the buses were moving. I stayed behind, but a courier went up between them. banging their bars off each bus several times as they filtered through.
So utterly, utterly, utterly unnecessary.

Tenzor07

nee wrote: »

Ah I see.Anywhere that's an inexcusable position to be in.

Plenty of other similar instances of bicycle users being squeezed into dangerous positions whilst cycling in Dublin, how is it "inexcusable" when through no fault of there own the bicyclist finds themselves surrounded by traffic? As you say get off and walk, so therefore these city center areas are effectively "No go" areas for cyclists who don't have 13 years of cycling experience in DCC...

Chips Lovell

Seriously, it doesn't take 13 years experience to realise that cycling up between two buses is a very, very dangerous thing to do.

tomasrojo

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...

Apparently vehicles that strongly cajole the driver into obeying the speed limit are already completely feasible. There's no will to impose them though.

(My understanding is that the accelerator resists the driver's foot at the speed limit and you have to push through the resistance if you absolutely need to go faster. I only say this because someone always mentions how important it is to break the speed limit in some circumstances, which usually sound reminiscent of the hijinks in a 70s cop buddy movie, but I suppose might occasionally be applicable to someone who is driving in measured fashion.)