Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

GreeBo

07Lapierre wrote: »

No, that's not what i said. I said Lots of people cycle. Lots of people cycle in Urban and rural areas.

My point is, cycling is not unique to urban/city area's.

And yet I never said it was unique to those areas?!

I said
"I'd wager that the majority of 'night' cycling is done in areas with lots of other light sources."

and you replied

"No. Lots of people cycle at night"

so what exactly are you arguing about?

07Lapierre

GreeBo wrote: »

And yet I never said it was unique to those areas?!

I said
"I'd wager that the majority of 'night' cycling is done in areas with lots of other light sources."

can you post a link to show where you got this info?

GreeBo

07Lapierre wrote: »

can you post a link to show where you got this info?

I believe I said "I'd wager" rather than "I found this fact"?

I any case, I think its pretty obvious that more people commute in cities and suburban areas than elsewhere, since thats where all the buildings people work in live. :rolleyes:

https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/new-study-reveals-huge-numbers-commuting-bike-dublins-quays

07Lapierre

GreeBo wrote: »

I believe I said "I'd wager" rather than "I found this fact"?

I any case, I think its pretty obvious that more people commute in cities and suburban areas than elsewhere, since thats where all the buildings people work in live. :rolleyes:

https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/new-study-reveals-huge-numbers-commuting-bike-dublins-quays

I think it's pretty obvious that people should use lights. If its dark use lights, if it's dark and there are street lights, use lights, if it's dark and raining, use lights, its its dark, raining and there are no other light sources, use lights. I mean good descent lights.

GreeBo

07Lapierre wrote: »

I think it's pretty obvious that people should use lights. If its dark use lights, if it's dark and there are street lights, use lights, if it's dark and raining, use lights, its its dark, raining and there are no other light sources, use lights. I mean good descent lights.

I hope you dodge potholes as well as you dodge questions.

Macy0161

GreeBo wrote: »

Tbf, I dont think the remit of the RSA is "get the gardai to do their jobs".

Key functions
The RSA works to improve road safety in Ireland by:

Developing and implementing information and education campaigns to increase awareness of road safety and promote safer driving
Improving vehicle standards
Establishing and monitoring a standard for driver instruction
Overseeing the system of driver licensing and undertaking certain enforcement activities
Working with stakeholders to ensure a co-ordinated response and ensure our collective resources are used wisely and efficiently
Undertaking accident and road safety research in order to develop measures and recommendations to improve road safety
Advising the Minister for Transport on road safety policy
Producing road safety strategy documents and monitoring their implementation

I think you could make the case on other points of the list, but at least the two I highlighted (from the RSA website) would suggest it is part of their remit.

07Lapierre

GreeBo wrote: »

I hope you dodge potholes as well as you dodge questions.

I do...because i can see them with my LIGHTS!

GreeBo

07Lapierre wrote: »

I do...because i can see them with my LIGHTS!

Indeed.:rolleyes:

Plastik

Thread hurts brain.

CramCycle

GreeBo wrote: »

Exactly, its far from the worst rain yet already there are several light sources reflected. I count 17. Which of them are bike lights and which are cars, or street lights, or shop lights or a million other potential things?

The picture is also not focused in the way your eyes would focus on the mirror but despite that, I find it very easy to distinguish which light sources are not from cars or bikes. It is incredibly simple. Where they can be, where they cannot be and there is even enough info in that really poor shot to say the distance at which those that maybe vehicular are. This said, most Hi Vis vests would blend with the road so hopefully anyone using them would also have supplementary lights to stand out from the noise.

Grassey

blackbox wrote: »

On rural roads especially, hi-viz vests make pedestrians and cyclists much more visible in ALL light conditions.

But not more visible in no-light conditions such as... night time?

blackbox wrote: »

Lights are not mandatory (unfortunately) during daylight hours.

They are for the 30 mins before sun set, and 30 mins after sun rise for all road users. But you'd have to question what use on a bright sunny summers day would have?

AndrewJRenko

Kevin Irving wrote: »

There's absolutely more than just a shred of truth in the general public's opinion of cyclists.

Not really, when you compare it to the general public's opinion of motorists who routinely break speed limits, red lights, mobile phone laws and kill 3 or 4 people each week.

Fighting Tao

Plastik wrote: »

Thread hurts brain.

Yep. This and other threads in the forum lately highlight that some people would argue with their toenails.

Grassey

GreeBo wrote: »

Exactly, its far from the worst rain yet already there are several light sources reflected. I count 17. Which of them are bike lights and which are cars, or street lights, or shop lights or a million other potential things?

One thing that seems to be missed is that you say you'd see a high vis in the mirror... but by dint of the cyclist being a large light blocking mass the closer they get to the car mirror the more background light they would block thereby reducing the amount of light sources directly hitting the wing mirror, not to mention that their front light should also be bright enough to drown out the minor other lights? That's what I'd tend to observe when I'm driving .

GreeBo

Grassey wrote: »

One thing that seems to be missed is that you say you'd see a high vis in the mirror... but by dint of the cyclist being a large light blocking mass the closer they get to the car mirror the more background light they would block thereby reducing the amount of light sources directly hitting the wing mirror, not to mention that their front light should also be bright enough to drown out the minor other lights? That's what I'd tend to observe when I'm driving .

The light shining on a cyclist is coming from in front of them, not behind them.
if it was only behind them you wouldn't seen them.

Your point about their front light drowning out other lights would only work if they are right on top of your mirror, if thats the first time you see them its too late.

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Yep. This and other threads in the forum lately highlight that some people would argue with their toenails.

Oh boo hoo. Someone on the internet disagrees with you.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

Oh boo hoo. Someone on the internet disagrees with you.

I must have touched a nerve. It really doesn’t bother me. Some are getting very riled up though about big bad people on the internet. Some here are speaking more sense than others. Some are grasping at straws from an empty box. It’s mildly entertaining. Keep it up please. It’s passing a bit of time for me. Also, try not to get worked up by this post like you did my last one. It’s bad for your health. Go for a spin (on a bike) instead.

Chips Lovell

Mod Note



Back on topic. Less of the bickering please.

magicbastarder

Mod note: All - can we keep the bickering out of it - no need for pot-shots at each other, if you have an issue with another poster you can report it or otherwise not engage with that poster.
it's not as if it's, eh, a matter of life and death...

magicbastarder

ah, you beat me to it.

07Lapierre

GreeBo wrote: »

I believe I said "I'd wager" rather than "I found this fact"?

I any case, I think its pretty obvious that more people commute in cities and suburban areas than elsewhere, since thats where all the buildings people work in live. :rolleyes:

https://www.dublincycling.com/cycling/new-study-reveals-huge-numbers-commuting-bike-dublins-quays

Heres a better one: https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp6ci/p6cii/p6mtw/

Statistically speaking...very few builders cycle, so even less reason to wear a "Builders hi-viz vest" maybe the RSA should look at Hi-viz 3 piece suits as Male office workers seem to make up the majority of cyclists? (in urban areas too)

Grassey

GreeBo wrote: »

The light shining on a cyclist is coming from in front of them, not behind them.
if it was only behind them you wouldn't seen them.

Your point about their front light drowning out other lights would only work if they are right on top of your mirror, if thats the first time you see them its too late.

If you see lights in the wingmirror then those lights must be behind you. So if there is a cyclist between mirror and light source they wont be illuminated. I'm therefore confused as to "the light shining on a cyclist is coming from in front of them Is it the car rear lights that are illuminating a high vis wearing cyclist? Or oncoming cars lights blocked by cars to right of cyclist? or overhead streetlights? or is the cylist shining a light from handlebars onto their chest (yes I've seen this recently)

If it's a bright light then it'd be visible much further back than right on top of the wing mirror.

P_1

I'd suggest this thread needs an asparin but u suspect itd give it a headache

GreeBo

Grassey wrote: »

If you see lights in the wingmirror then those lights must be behind you. So if there is a cyclist between mirror and light source they wont be illuminated. I'm therefore confused as to "the light shining on a cyclist is coming from in front of them Is it the car rear lights that are illuminating a high vis wearing cyclist? Or oncoming cars lights blocked by cars to right of cyclist? or overhead streetlights? or is the cylist shining a light from handlebars onto their chest (yes I've seen this recently)

If it's a bright light then it'd be visible much further back than right on top of the wing mirror.

All sorts of light sources are shining on the cyclist, (my rear lights, the rear lights of the car in front of me, the rear lights of any car in front of the cyclist & the front lights from cars travelling in the opposite direct to the cyclist) your point (as I understand it!) was that the cyclist would block out the light from behind them.
I'm saying that this is irrelevant as I cant see their back anyway.

Grassey

GreeBo wrote:

I'm saying that this is irrelevant as I cant see their back anyway.

Hardly irrelevant if they block all the additional sources of light you see in the wingmirror, leaving their front light as the only, or primary light visible.

buffalo

GreeBo wrote: »

All sorts of light sources are shining on the cyclist, (my rear lights, the rear lights of the car in front of me, the rear lights of any car in front of the cyclist & the front lights from cars travelling in the opposite direct to the cyclist) your point (as I understand it!) was that the cyclist would block out the light from behind them.
I'm saying that this is irrelevant as I cant see their back anyway.

You're saying all the light shining on the cyclist is bright and shiny and visible, but an actual light isn't? Are you serious?

GreeBo

07Lapierre wrote: »

Heres a better one: https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp6ci/p6cii/p6mtw/

I'm failing to see how this disproves my belief and/or proves yours?

07Lapierre wrote: »

Statistically speaking...very few builders cycle, so even less reason to wear a "Builders hi-viz vest" maybe the RSA should look at Hi-viz 3 piece suits as Male office workers seem to make up the majority of cyclists? (in urban areas too)

I'm not aware of reflective material achieving consciousness that would mean it is aware of what type of material its on, perhaps you have access to newer publications than I do however?

GreeBo

Grassey wrote: »

Hardly irrelevant if they block all the additional sources of light you see in the wingmirror, leaving their front light as the only, or primary light visible.

Unless our cyclist is a rather rotund individual I dont believe they are blocking all the light hitting my wing mirror until they are directly in front of it.

buffalo wrote: »

You're saying all the light shining on the cyclist is bright and shiny and visible, but an actual light isn't? Are you drunk?

No, I am saying that I cant see the back of the cyclist no matter what light is or is not shining on them*. I dont know what relevance the back of the cyclist has to the argument, but if you keep bringing it up, I'll keep knocking it down.

In my numerous years of both cycling in and driving alongside bike lanes/tracks/areas in the city, at night:

1) There are a ton of light sources hitting my mirror, one of which is hopefully the cyclists own light
2) These all interfere with each other making it difficult to distinguish individual sources
3) Reflective material on the cyclist, in this scenario, will be easier to distinguish than their bike light.

* does apply if cyclist is cycling backwards

CramCycle

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm not aware of reflective material achieving consciousness that would mean it is aware of what type of material its on, perhaps you have access to newer publications than I do however?

MOD VOICE: No need to be facetious. It was quite clear what the poster meant, presumably in jest but I could be wrong.

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm saying that this is irrelevant as I cant see their back anyway.

GreeBo wrote: »

No, I am saying that I cant see the back of the cyclist no matter what light is or is not shining on them*. I dont know what relevance the back of the cyclist has to the argument, but if you keep bringing it up, I'll keep knocking it down.

You appear to be the only one bringing up seeing the cyclists back. It again, would appear to be other posters implying some sort of silhouette effect. This is a warning, not just to you but all posters, if you or anyone else continue to willfully ignore or clearly misinterpret the obvious intentions of a post, and reply in such a manner then you will be asked to stop posting in this thread. Any questions via PM only. This is not After Hours, I have better things to be doing than modding a Hi Vis thread.

tomasrojo

Grassey wrote: »

One thing that seems to be missed is that you say you'd see a high vis in the mirror... but by dint of the cyclist being a large light blocking mass the closer they get to the car mirror the more background light they would block thereby reducing the amount of light sources directly hitting the wing mirror, not to mention that their front light should also be bright enough to drown out the minor other lights? That's what I'd tend to observe when I'm driving .

Yes, the one thing clear from that image of a wing mirror is that there isn't a nearby(*) cyclist with a good headlight approaching from behind on the left. Because physics, to quote somebody or other.

(*)I suppose a cyclist further away might look like one of the other points of light, but who cares about the image of a cyclist who's far away and behind a car moving forward. It's only important if the cyclist is passing, at which point their light is much bigger and brighter.