To the two lads cycling out the Dublin Rd, in the am, 7.30ish

zulutango

The Netherlands, which is the safest country in the world for cycling, doesn't require cyclists to have mandatory hi-vis.

Also, if you have bike lights, there's no reason you should also need hi-vis to be seen. If a motorist can't see a cyclist that has lights, then it's the motorist that's the problem.

amcalester

s15r330 wrote: »

I'd hope they'd have an excuse if a speed gun gets em, damn cyclists always breaking speed limits

They would, speed limits don't apply to cyclists.

eet fuk

Cars should have high-vis jackets

I love Sean nos

thesimpsons wrote: »

both as black as anything

Are black people not allowed to use roads around Limerick?

dubrov

Hi-Viz jackets are way overrated. I am not even sure if they add to cyclist safety at all.

The problem is that many cyclists think they are ok if they wear one without lights. I see it all the time.
Making them mandatory would just re-enforce this mentality.

The focus needs to be on lights.
Talking about Hi-Viz just clouds the issue.

shootermacg

I think all cars should be day-glow orange and trucks should be day-glow orange. This would help the cyclist easily see parked cars in cycle lanes and then avoid them, although god forbid they avoid them AND get in the way of another very important driver who is is a big rush to get to an invisible point, twenty yards up the road.

Cookiemunster

shootermacg wrote: »

I think all cars should be day-glow orange and trucks should be day-glow orange. This would help the cyclist easily see parked cars in cycle lanes and then avoid them, although god forbid they avoid them AND get in the way of another very important driver who is is a big rush to get to an invisible point, twenty yards up the road.

It goes both ways. Cyclists shouldn't be out in the dark without lights or high vis, shouldn't be breaking red lights, shouldn't be cycling the wrong way down 1 way streets, etc.

eet fuk

Cookiemunster wrote: »

It goes both ways. Cyclists shouldn't be out in the dark without lights or high vis, shouldn't be breaking red lights, shouldn't be cycling the wrong way down 1 way streets, etc.

I don’t think anyone has said that any of those things are ok

carbonceiling

zulutango wrote: »

Also, if you have bike lights, there's no reason you should also need hi-vis to be seen. If a motorist can't see a cyclist that has lights, then it's the motorist that's the problem.

That may be true, but the reality is that those problem motorists are out there and there's no shortage of them.

If a cyclist is unfortunate enough to be hit by a driver with poor night vision and finds themselves hurtling towards the ground / ditch / oncoming bus, they will find little consolation in the notion that the other guy is to blame. Plenty of thoughts will flash through their mind, but not that one.

I'm not saying it's right, or it's the way it should be, but it is the reality that we live in. Until we have a world of perfect bike lanes and problem free motorists, then, as a cyclist who has suffered tremendously from a serious racing crash, I know how your life can turn in just a few seconds, so why not give yourself every chance you can to avoid that miserable experience.

debating the relative merits of hi-vis versus lights is non productive. Both will increase your chances of being seen by motorists, they are widely available, cheap and sometimes even free, so wear both and maximise your safety.

shootermacg

Top be honest, I mostly agree. During the day, clothing shouldn't be an issue, lights either. But in dim dark conditions, if a flashing light isn't going to grab a motorist's attention, good luck with a yellow coat.

The main issue for me as a cyclist is, motorists driving while looking at their mobile phones.

It should be made as easy as possible for me to submit video of a car, licence plate and that person on the phone and for this to result in a ban.

I pass about 20 or more people a day weaving all over the road not even looking up.

zulutango

https://cyclingfallacies.com/en/19/people-should-wear-hi-viz-when-cycling

"It's received wisdom that high-visibility garments make people cycling easily visible, and therefore safe.

But the evidence just doesn't show this at all. Studies suggest that high-visibility clothing has little or no effect on cycling safety, or on the behaviour of people driving. Furthermore, there may be some instances where such clothing actually worsens visibility – there have been instances where high-visibility clothing has been cited as an exacerbating factor in road deaths."

Tefral

zulutango wrote: »

https://cyclingfallacies.com/en/19/people-should-wear-hi-viz-when-cycling

"It's received wisdom that high-visibility garments make people cycling easily visible, and therefore safe.

But the evidence just doesn't show this at all. Studies suggest that high-visibility clothing has little or no effect on cycling safety, or on the behaviour of people driving. Furthermore, there may be some instances where such clothing actually worsens visibility – there have been instances where high-visibility clothing has been cited as an exacerbating factor in road deaths."

I'm sorry I don't buy it. If you're lit up like an Xmas tree you're going to be seen.
If you have no lights on your bike then the next best thing is bright coloured clothing, I don't care what links you post here.

Cycling around in the dark with dark clothing on a carriage way where there are other vehicles and where there are bike lanes you could use and don't is reckless. It doesn't matter if the person driving the car is a dope and crashes into them.

The bottom line is the cyclist is a vulnerable road user, they should be doing everything in their power to mitigate their risk of dying, there's no ifs or buts about it and I say that as someone who cycles and drives around twisty tight country roads.

zulutango

Tefral wrote: »

If you have no lights on your bike then the next best thing is bright coloured clothing, I don't care what links you post here.

That's very irresponsible advice. If you have no lights on your bike then you just shouldn't be cycling on the road at night. It's highly dangerous and it's illegal too. Saying to somebody they should wear hi-vis as 'the next best thing' is the kind of advice that gets people killed. There is no middle ground. You have lights or you simply shouldn't be cycling at night.

I love Sean nos

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Cyclists...shouldn't be breaking red lights, shouldn't be cycling the wrong way down 1 way streets, etc.

The OP didn't mention any of those things, so they are of no relevance here.

Cookiemunster

I love Sean nos wrote: »

The OP didn't mention any of those things, so they are of no relevance here.

Try reading the post I was replying to........

LB6

Can I add one more thing to the mix - cycle lanes (aside from the idiots that park in them outside the hospital), you're supposed to go with the flow of the traffic on whichever side of the road they're on - they're NOT a 2-way system - Don't be freaking cycling into the oncoming traffic..... it's so bloody frightening to try an avoid an idiot coming the wrong way down the cycle lane who's trying to avoid the person cycling the correct way......

Instead of bikes on those lanes - they should put directional arrows

---

>

davo2001

I'm a cyclist and a car user, but to be honest, the attitude of cyclists in general is astonishing, a lot seem to think it is there God given right to act whatever way they like on the open road.

I see it everyday around Limerick, jumping lights / stop signed, riding on paths, using pedestrian crossings nearly running over people on the path. Look at the Condell Road as an example, there is a prefectly good bike lane but you never see people using it and they always cycle on the footpath.

"It's the motorists fault if they cannot see me", while this is generally true, the motorist will walk away but you will be pounded into the road and left seriously injured or killed outright.

It should be in the cyclists own interest to light themseleves up like a ****ing Christmas tree if it prevents them being in an accident. Weither people like it or not, Irish road were not designed for both car and bike traffic but as it's generally the cyclists whom ends up worse off they should do everything to reduce the risk.

Chiparus

davo2001 wrote: »

I'm a cyclist and a car user, but to be honest, the attitude of cyclists in general is astonishing, a lot seem to think it is there God given right to act whatever way they like on the open road.

I see it everyday around Limerick, jumping lights / stop signed, riding on paths, using pedestrian crossings nearly running over people on the path. Look at the Condell Road as an example, there is a prefectly good bike lane but you never see people using it and they always cycle on the footpath.

"It's the motorists fault if they cannot see me", while this is generally true, the motorist will walk away but you will be pounded into the road and left seriously injured or killed outright.

It should be in the cyclists own interest to light themseleves up like a ****ing Christmas tree if it prevents them being in an accident. Weither people like it or not, Irish road were not designed for both car and bike traffic but as it's generally the cyclists whom ends up worse off they should do everything to reduce the risk.

Im a motorists and a cyclists , mostly a motorist I drive 40,000 km per year, I see motorists drive through red lights every day, mostly as the lights turn orange , they acclerate, not stop.
I also see motorists drive on footpaths everyday, mostly outside schools where they park to pick up children.
I see motorists kill pedestrians nearly every week.

Insect Overlord

davo2001 wrote: »

Look at the Condell Road as an example, there is a prefectly good bike lane but you never see people using it and they always cycle on the footpath.

Have you seen the state of the bike lanes on the Condell Road over the last two weeks? They're both under several inches of mulch and debris since the two storms hit. You'd need a dirt-bike to make any use of them at the moment.

shootermacg

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Have you seen the state of the bike lanes on the Condell Road over the last two weeks? They're both under several inches of mulch and debris since the two storms hit. You'd need a dirt-bike to make any use of them at the moment.

Exactly and not only that but in general most cycle lanes contain debris and holes that would not only cause a puncture, but could buckle the wheel or worse throw the cyclist. I will never blindly cycle through big puddles, much to the annoyance of some cretins.

Cookiemunster

Chiparus wrote: »

Im a motorists and a cyclists , mostly a motorist I drive 40,000 km per year, I see motorists drive through red lights every day, mostly as the lights turn orange , they acclerate, not stop.
I also see motorists drive on footpaths everyday, mostly outside schools where they park to pick up children.
I see motorists kill pedestrians nearly every week.

No you don't.

davo2001

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Have you seen the state of the bike lanes on the Condell Road over the last two weeks? They're both under several inches of mulch and debris since the two storms hit. You'd need a dirt-bike to make any use of them at the moment.

OK, yeah fair enough comment about the last 2 weeks, but what's the excuse for not using it over the last several years?

zulutango

Cyclists should definitely be well lit at night with lights, because lights are very effective. The hi-vis argument is a red herring because hi-vis doesn't further enhance the visibility of cyclists if they already have lights.

It's also important that traffic speeds are reduced. This is also proven to reduce cycling injuries and fatalities.

granturismo

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Have you seen the state of the bike lanes on the Condell Road over the last two weeks? They're both under several inches of mulch and debris since the two storms hit. You'd need a dirt-bike to make any use of them at the moment.

Then walk the bike on the pedestrian footpaths.

Insect Overlord

granturismo wrote: »

Then walk the bike on the pedestrian footpaths.

Or, you know, cycle in traffic...

davo2001 wrote: »

OK, yeah enough comment about the last 2 weeks, but what's the excuse for not using it over the last several years?

I would imagine the excuses are likely to be youth, inexperience, fear of traffic, and/or not having lights/helmet and feeling safer on the quiet stretches of the path.

Cookiemunster

zulutango wrote: »

Cyclists should definitely be well lit at night with lights, because lights are very effective. The hi-vis argument is a red herring because hi-vis doesn't further enhance the visibility of cyclists if they already have lights.

It's also important that traffic speeds are reduced. This is also proven to reduce cycling injuries and fatalities.

Better segregation is needed. Childers Rd. from the Parkway to Bengal Terrace is the way to do it, rather than painting lines on the edges of busy roads never designed for anything other than cars.

zulutango

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Better segregation is needed.

It really depends on the situation. Segregration is definitely needed if there is fast traffic. But in situations where there isn't space for segregration (which is most urban streets and rural roads), then cyclists and traffic must share the space and that means slowing traffic down.

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Childers Rd. from the Parkway to Bengal Terrace is the way to do it, rather than painting lines on the edges of busy roads never designed for anything other than cars.

This is a suitable solution where there is space available, but as I said above, it is not possible in many instances.

carbonceiling

zulutango wrote: »

The hi-vis argument is a red herring because hi-vis doesn't further enhance the visibility of cyclists if they already have lights.
.

That's just not true.

See the attached picture of a cyclist with lights and high-vis.

Can you spot his vest?

Can you spot his light?

thesimpsons

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Have you seen the state of the bike lanes on the Condell Road over the last two weeks? They're both under several inches of mulch and debris since the two storms hit. You'd need a dirt-bike to make any use of them at the moment.

Condell Road has been cleaned I use it virtually every day. so do other commuters. I find its generally kids or people on city bikes who wouldn't be confident on the road who cycle on the pathway there. Yesterday afternoon there was a runner on the bike lane heading into town with me fast approaching from behind at 30km - bloody idiot she was. I knew if I shouted at her, she'd probably turn around straight into my path. thankfully the bus lane was free so I used that to pass her out. Theres a lovely running path beside the river

Chiparus

Cookiemunster wrote: »

No you don't.

Yes I do,

In my work, and its in the media
about 35 killed every year.