Journalism and cycling

meeeeh

Pinch Flat wrote: »

We and the uk must surely be the only European countries with the hi vis obsession, especially when it comes to road safety. Although from memory when driving in France a hi vis was needed in case of breakdown. But I’ve driven the length and breath of France and rarely seen hi vis either on cyclists or pedestrians

How many villages with no street lighting, no sidewalk or space at the side of the road did you come across? Where I come from, kids are encouraged to have reflective objects or high viz accessories. Main difference is though is the sidewalk or at least path besides the road. There is none in Ireland. I used to live in a village, I never wore high viz or torch light before I moved to Ireland. It would be suicide not to at least bring torch light when walking where I live now. You adapt to local circumstances.

what_traffic

meeeeh wrote: »

How many villages with no street lighting, no sidewalk or space at the side of the road did you come across?
.
..
... You adapt to local circumstances.

Why do the RSA not advocate that those local circumstances be changed.
Not saying that it would work for every area, but you never hear them say this.

meeeeh

what_traffic wrote: »

Why do the RSA not advocate that those local circumstances be changed.
Not saying that it would work for every area, but you never hear them say this.

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly. Outside of the towns it would be incredibly expensive in Ireland. We actually live in village but there are parts of the road when you walk the dog that are designed completely unsuitably for pedestrians. Yes ideal it would be to redevelop the roads but I can understand why high viz is encouraged where we live. You also need a torch, that is non negotiable.

cdaly_

meeeeh wrote: »

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly.

Alternatively, you could install traffic calming hardware on the roads.

I was on holiday in France this summer, there was a country road that was a nice little rat run to the local hypermarche. But it was modified with chicanes, proper speed ramps and the like so you couldn't drive fast and so it wasn't getting used as a rat run and was nice to be on and safe to walk...

Chips Lovell

This "unsuitable for pedestrians" kind of thing drives me around the twist.

The road is a shared space. If there's no footpath, as a driver you need to anticipate that pedestrians may also be using it, maintain observation, and drive at an appropriate speed.

meeeeh

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

This "unsuitable for pedestrians" kind of thing drives me around the twist.

If you don't mind I will take care to be visible and my kids to be visible on the part of the road I deem dangerous. I prefer not to be statistic someone like you will be able to use to bang on about how drivers don't know how to drive. But if you want to volunteer yourself and walk down the road where we live dressed in black waiting to be moved down be my guest. Maybe something good will come out of your sacrifice but I would rather not do it myself, thank you very much.

Edit: and just to add, I explained why I consider Irish country roads much more dangerous. it's fine if you don't believe me but I can only compare my experiences. I'm not a hi wiz enthusiast but I feel it is necessary where I live now, I didn't feel that where I used to live despite much worse driver behaviour.

Chips Lovell

I think you kinda missed my point there.

Duckjob

cdaly_ wrote: »

Alternatively, you could install traffic calming hardware on the roads.

I was on holiday in France this summer, there was a country road that was a nice little rat run to the local hypermarche. But it was modified with chicanes, proper speed ramps and the like so you couldn't drive fast and so it wasn't getting used as a rat run and was nice to be on and safe to walk...

Agree. Carve out some protected walking / cycle space on the existing roads and slow them down. If necessary, cut the car space down to 1 way at a time with specific passing points. Speed ramps, Chicanes, raised kerbs for cylists and pedestrians. These measures are normal in advanced places like the Netherlands, but unthinkable here because of the "what about the motorists ?" mentality.

CramCycle

meeeeh wrote: »

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly. Outside of the towns it would be incredibly expensive in Ireland. We actually live in village but there are parts of the road when you walk the dog that are designed completely unsuitably for pedestrians. Yes ideal it would be to redevelop the roads but I can understand why high viz is encouraged where we live. You also need a torch, that is non negotiable.

meeeeh wrote: »

If you don't mind I will take care to be visible and my kids to be visible on the part of the road I deem dangerous. I prefer not to be statistic someone like you will be able to use to bang on about how drivers don't know how to drive. But if you want to volunteer yourself and walk down the road where we live dressed in black waiting to be moved down be my guest. Maybe something good will come out of your sacrifice but I would rather not do it myself, thank you very much.

Edit: and just to add, I explained why I consider Irish country roads much more dangerous. it's fine if you don't believe me but I can only compare my experiences. I'm not a hi wiz enthusiast but I feel it is necessary where I live now, I didn't feel that where I used to live despite much worse driver behaviour.

I don't get you here at all, it is for the most part driver behaviour that drives the need for Hi Vis (pointless in lit up areas at night BTW) and torches. If a car has both lights working and driving at a speed for which they can react to the unexpected, then even if you forgot your Hi Vis or Torch you would be fine. I use a torch when walking, but not because the roads are unsuitable for pedestrians, but because the drivers of many vehicles are unsuitable for the roads.

I constantly have people driving up my ass when driving on country roads as I slow coming into bends. Simple reason being if there is a person or animal, and I have to react, going at a faster speed means I will either hit the aforementioned or I will lose the road if I twitch or hit an oncoming vehicle.

The only good thing about Ireland is that the RSA have put the fear of god into most people so they don't walk, which is why when people tell you if my point was true we would have more deaths, when you look at the bigger picture, we have more deaths they are just not caused in the fashion that the RSA stats like to present.

meeeeh

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think you kinda missed my point there.

No I didn't. I just have experience of dark roads, overgrown hedges that can't be cut half of the year and blind corners. I use that road as cyclist, driver, pedestrian, runner and adapt to situation but that doesn't mean I consider it safe.

magicbastarder

hi-vis probably neatly fits into the X, in the common 'if X is the answer, you're asking the wrong question' construct.

Seth Brundle

meeeeh wrote: »

If you don't mind I will take care to be visible and my kids to be visible on the part of the road I deem dangerous. I prefer not to be statistic someone like you will be able to use to bang on about how drivers don't know how to drive. But if you want to volunteer yourself and walk down the road where we live dressed in black waiting to be moved down be my guest. Maybe something good will come out of your sacrifice but I would rather not do it myself, thank you very much.

Edit: and just to add, I explained why I consider Irish country roads much more dangerous. it's fine if you don't believe me but I can only compare my experiences. I'm not a hi wiz enthusiast but I feel it is necessary where I live now, I didn't feel that where I used to live despite much worse driver behaviour.

Do you wear a high-vis to be seen in general or specifically because traffic frequently moves at inappropriate speeds such that without it you won't be seen?
If traffic drove at a speed that suited the conditions and drivers were anticipating pedestrians (so drove giving space and appropriate braking distances, etc), would you continue to wear high-vis?
Even wearing high-vis, have you experienced close shaves? Were these close shaves your fault?

meeeeh wrote: »

No I didn't. I just have experience of dark roads, overgrown hedges that can't be cut half of the year and blind corners. I use that road as cyclist, driver, pedestrian, runner and adapt to situation but that doesn't mean I consider it safe.

Why is it not safe? Who should the RSA be targetting to make it safe? Pedestrians?

meeeeh

CramCycle wrote: »

I don't get you here at all, it is for the most part driver behaviour that drives the need for Hi Vis (pointless in lit up areas at night BTW) and torches.

All I can say is that visibility on Irish roads is much worse and there is no path after the white line or edge of the road where you can walk on. If you think that's not a design flaw fine but I can go only on what I experienced and what I deem safe.

Hurrache

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Who should the RSA be targetting to make it safe? Pedestrians?

Seems so, you're not even safe walking on pavements with all the cars and trucks randomly mounting footpads.

https://twitter.com/RSAIreland/status/1046776760849829888

Rechuchote

meeeeh wrote: »

You would want to negotiate with local farmers and more importantly environmentalists to cut down the ditches significantly. Outside of the towns it would be incredibly expensive in Ireland. We actually live in village but there are parts of the road when you walk the dog that are designed completely unsuitably for pedestrians. Yes ideal it would be to redevelop the roads but I can understand why high viz is encouraged where we live. You also need a torch, that is non negotiable.

It's ok to use compulsory purchase in Dublin, but not in rural Ireland, eh?

meeeeh

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Do you wear a high-vis to be seen in general or specifically because traffic frequently moves at inappropriate speeds such that without it you won't be seen?
If traffic drove at a speed that suited the conditions and drivers were anticipating pedestrians (so drove giving space and appropriate braking distances, etc), would you continue to wear high-vis?
Even wearing high-vis, have you experienced close shaves? Were these close shaves your fault?
Why is it not safe? Who should the RSA be targetting to make it safe? Pedestrians?

1. I wear high viz on a country road with high hedges in the dark.
2. I'm making sure that even if traffic doesn't drive at speed suitable to the conditions I have a chance to be seen.
3. I didn't experience any close shaves and I don't want to. The aim is too avoid them.
4. Pedestrians should adopt to road conditions too.

And now a question for you, on what side of the white line on the road in the link would you walk? And do you notice the distinct lack of greenery by the side of the road?

https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-austria-tyrol-close-innsbruck-country-road-view-karwendel-europe-nordtirol-140551608.html

meeeeh

Rechuchote wrote: »

It's ok to use compulsory purchase in Dublin, but not in rural Ireland, eh?

Will you pay for it?

CramCycle

meeeeh wrote: »

All I can say is that visibility on Irish roads is much worse and there is no path after the white line or edge of the road where you can walk on. If you think that's not a design flaw fine but I can go only on what I experienced and what I deem safe.

It is a design flaw if you were building it now, but these were built initially when there were no cars on the road, fastest vehicles probably not faster than 30kmph (and that is at a stretch), people walked home without lights and Hi Vis. To retroactively fit such infrastructure in Ireland is ridiculous for several reasons, cost aside though, the environmental damage would be catastrophic.

The truth is though, with what we have, those roads could be made far safer for pedestrians and cyclists, by simply altering one thing. Typical drivers behaviour. It would cost little if people went along with it. As smart cars come more into use, it may be alot easier to do in a few years.

I understand why you use Hi Vis and Lights and think Irish roads are unsafe but just to be clear, you not wearing Hi Vis does not make them more dangerous, it just means in a set of very narrow circumstances, the cause of the danger may move that danger slightly away from you (although in my experience, not by much).

Would country roads be safer if every car was fitted with a speed limiter that topped out at 30kmph on anything other than motorways and national roads? Would roads be safer if sensors detected a driver falling asleep or drunk, and gave a timeout to engine cut off (or warned them that if they did not pull over and turn off the engine in 2 minutes, the Insurance company would be notified (far more terrifying than calling the Gardai)).

Duckjob

Hurrache wrote: »

Seems so, you're not even safe walking on pavements with all the cars and trucks randomly mounting footpads.

https://twitter.com/RSAIreland/status/1046776760849829888

Jesus, that's depressing.

We have a transport infrastructure that makes it acceptable to tell people they need to "armour up" before they go out for a walk.

Rechuchote

meeeeh wrote: »

Will you pay for it?

Cycling and walking are incredibly cheaper for society than driving.

An initial compulsory purchase of strips alongside roads will be paid back by years of cheaper healthcare (cyclists and walkers are less likely to become or stay obese or to contract type 2 diabetes, heart disease, cancer and a host of associated illnesses, and more likely to survive them; fewer road "accidents" means less hospital treatment and less treatment for depression and other mental illness for survivors and relatives); cheaper road costs (cyclists and walkers cause virtually no road wear); more productivity (cyclists and walkers get ill less often and recover better); better localism (cyclists and walkers will attract shops, restaurants and cafes to local areas rather than sending people to some bleak shopping estate)…

Duckjob wrote: »

Jesus, that's depressing.

We have a transport infrastructure that makes it acceptable to tell people they need to "armour up" before they go out for a walk.

At least it's not America. There, we'd be told to arm, arm, he cried, for they've come to kill you, for walkers' freedom, we'll fight or die.

Hurrache

Rechuchote wrote: »

It's ok to use compulsory purchase in Dublin, but not in rural Ireland, eh?

In fairness I'd have an issue myself with the removal of many ditches.

Rechuchote

Hurrache wrote: »

In fairness I'd have an issue myself with the removal of many ditches.

Wouldn't have to be removal of ditches - it would be possible and socially good to buy a strip along the inside of ditches and hedges to make a walking/cycling lane.

meeeeh

Rechuchote wrote: »

Wouldn't have to be removal of ditches - it would be possible and socially good to buy a strip along the inside of ditches and hedges to make a walking/cycling lane.

Tell them to put down decent fiber and underground electricity cables too while they are at it.

Hurrache

Rechuchote wrote: »

Wouldn't have to be removal of ditches - it would be possible and socially good to buy a strip along the inside of ditches and hedges to make a walking/cycling lane.

I wouldn't agree that it's socially good, hedgerows and ditches are massively important to our eco system, you can't just cut a strip away from one.

Anyway, it shows you how bad it is that we're even discussing the destruction of them in order to facility the importance of the car over everyone else.

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

I wouldn't agree that it's socially good, hedgerows and ditches are massively important to our eco system, you can't just cut a strip away from one.

Anyway, it shows you how bad it is that we're even discussing the destruction of them in order to facility the importance of the car over everyone else.

So you don't want roads to be made safer and you get outraged when pedestrians are asked to adapt to the conditions on the roads to make themselves safer? OK.

Rechuchote

Hurrache wrote: »

I wouldn't agree that it's socially good, hedgerows and ditches are massively important to our eco system, you can't just cut a strip away from one.

Anyway, it shows you how bad it is that we're even discussing the destruction of them in order to facility the importance of the car over everyone else.

Absolutely agree with you - and I wasn't suggesting destroying them, of course not. I was suggesting that they should stay in place, and a strip behind them, parallel with the road, should be made into cycling and walking infrastructure.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

So you don't want roads to be made safer and you get outraged when pedestrians are asked to adapt to the conditions on the roads to make themselves safer? OK.

I don't recall saying any of that?

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

I don't recall saying any of that?

What are you saying then? That we should just rely on drivers always being 100% attentive, never loose moment of concentration, have excellent eyesight and never make a mistake. You can do that, I won't.

As for separate cycling and walking paths, I would be delighted. Realistically though Ireland is low population density country with people spread out. I don't think it will happen any time soon judging by the rural wifi project. Similarly overhead electricity lines aren't that common on continent either for decades. I can only assume that there is either no political will or too expensive to do it in Ireland.

CramCycle

meeeeh wrote: »

What are you saying then? That we should just rely on drivers always being 100% attentive, never loose moment of concentration, have excellent eyesight and never make a mistake. You can do that, I won't.

As for separate cycling and walking paths, I would be delighted. Realistically though Ireland is low population density country with people spread out. I don't think it will happen any time soon judging by the rural wifi project. Similarly overhead electricity lines aren't that common on continent either for decades. I can only assume that there is either no political will or too expensive to do it in Ireland.

How about we just speed limit cars and actually start enforcing the RTA for poor driving. A car doing 80 on a windy country road isn't going to miss you because of Hi Vis, they are going to hit you because they are not driving for the conditions. I agree with you about helping yourself but implying that is that is ridiculous. That should be an interim measure (that can continue after its needed if you want), until drivers are brought to account for poor behaviour. All of which is easily done only there is no political will for it

meeeeh

CramCycle wrote: »

How about we just speed limit cars and actually start enforcing the RTA for poor driving. A car doing 80 on a windy country road isn't going to miss you because of Hi Vis, they are going to hit you because they are not driving for the conditions. I agree with you about helping yourself but implying that is that is ridiculous. That should be an interim measure (that can continue after its needed if you want), until drivers are brought to account for poor behaviour. All of which is easily done only there is no political will for it

How will you bring driver to account if speed limit is 80. Personally I think it's too high and should be lowered but they are not breaking the law. But it still doesn't change the facts roads in Ireland have very poor visibility. I posted a photo earlier and that would be fairly representative photo of how little hedging etc is actually around the road. That type of roads are much safer.