Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Boards.ie: Mark

Testing

what_traffic

Hurrache wrote: »

Yeah, they've been at it a while. First one or two times they've had gardai on bikes with them, but it all seems to be going well ever since. I think they've only missed one day and that was due to weather.

True - was a Met Eireann Orange Weather Warning on that day.

magicbastarder

have spotted two different people using electric scooters for their commute on griffith avenue recently.
interestingly, on one of them - for a battery powered vehicle - the rear light is utterly pitiful. an old school fairy light on a christmas tree would be brighter.

anyway, reason i'm posting in this thread is that it was interesting to note how much harder the 'pilot' (rider?) was to see when they're not actually moving on the vehicle, and it didn't help that this particular chap was dressed in black clothes either. he was essentially just standing still on a moving board so you didn't even have leg movement to act as a visual hook for your eyes.

griffith avenue can be a little dark in the mornings too.

check_six

magicbastarder wrote: »

have spotted two different people using electric scooters for their commute on griffith avenue recently.
interestingly, on one of them - for a battery powered vehicle - the rear light is utterly pitiful. an old school fairy light on a christmas tree would be brighter.

Saw a dude recently on some kind of electric motorised machine in Sandymount. I think it was like a single wheel affair where you leaned forward to go and leaned back to slow. No handle or anything like that, just a stand on thingy like a skateboard. Two interesting things about it were that the rear light was a strip of high intensity red which, I think, reacted when the device slowed, and that it went like the clappers. I was heading for 40kmh by the time I was able to catch and overtake it. The light was noticeably great (and the acceleration seemed very strong too!).

rubadub

magicbastarder wrote: »

anyway, reason i'm posting in this thread is that it was interesting to note how much harder the 'pilot' (rider?) was to see when they're not actually moving on the vehicle,

I was posting about this a few months back. I no longer see my guy about.

rubadub wrote: »

Last week nearly ran head on into a guy on a weird electric scooter going the wrong way down a cycletrack.

I have seen him a lot, more often than not going the wrong way yet he totally stands his ground, staying dead central on the track at full speed, as though he is in the right to be going the direction he is (let alone the legality of the scooter), and expecting others to get out of his way.

As you see no head or leg movement at all it is all the more surprising, as you see a guy in the distance who looks like he is walking, but he is actually pissing along. It must be much more powerful than the other scooters you see.

Looks something like this, guy looks spanish or brazilian.

magicbastarder

what is it with those proviz jackets? i've seen three people recently (though to be fair, could be the same guy three times) who has invested nearly a ton in a reflective jacket and seems to think it absolves him of the need for lights.

eeeee

magicbastarder wrote: »

what is it with those proviz jackets? i've seen three people recently (though to be fair, could be the same guy three times) who has invested nearly a ton in a reflective jacket and seems to think it absolves him of the need for lights.

Saw 4 of them today. 1 with lights. So strange.

tomasrojo

check_six wrote: »

Saw a dude recently on some kind of electric motorised machine in Sandymount. I think it was like a single wheel affair where you leaned forward to go and leaned back to slow.

https://twitter.com/CiaranCuffe/status/1061016232441405441

tomasrojo

nee wrote: »

Saw 4 of them today. 1 with lights. So strange.

I'm seeing a lot of them these nights in the Bleeding Horse/Grand Canal area. I must check to see how many have no lights.

CramCycle

There are about 5 on my commute, lights are on 80% but only half again are satisfactory by my standards.

Macy0161

Are you sure it's a proviz jacket? You can get fully reflective jackets for about €15 on Ali!

I have one (and lights obviously, hoping I passed the Cram test ), but I didn't pay near a 100. My usual "medium" is an XS in their sizing, so it was being sold off on amazon for about stg£30!

what_traffic

May need to don sunglasses before clicking on this link.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/for-three-innovations-it-s-all-about-safety-first-1.3711105

Chips Lovell

what_traffic wrote: »

May need to don sunglasses before clicking on this link.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/for-three-innovations-it-s-all-about-safety-first-1.3711105

“I got tired of getting run over going to work...I got hit by three cars in a month.”

Either he's the unluckiest man in the world or...

radia

Irish Times wrote:

“Trying to get people to wear them then has been the next step. Some people love them and won’t go anywhere without them, and some people wouldn’t be seen dead in them. There’s a lot of mamils (middle-aged men in lyrca) knocking around that like to dress in black and that doesn’t really help drivers. It’s an obligation on cyclists and road-users to make themselves seen.

“We don’t have a culture like the Dutch do where the cyclist is king. Or the Danish. You wouldn’t get hi-viz on these people if you tried. They barely wear helmets because everybody cycles, and if anyone hits you on a bike with their car there will be serious repercussions.”

I find this incredibly depressing. Has the RSA really indoctrinated us, and created a victim blaming culture, to such an extent that instead of there being an obligation on drivers to look for everybody irrespective of what they're wearing, there is a perceived obligation on cyclists to dress up like Christmas trees, and an acceptance that in Ireland 'serious repercussions' don't (shouldn't) flow from a motorist hitting a cyclist.

"Oh, in Denmaek/Holland they don't wear high viz and you still can't mow them down without getting into trouble, but it's different over there" is the tone. Eh, no, it's not acceptable to go randomly driving your car into unsuspecting people here either, just because you don't think their clothing is bright enough, and any article that fosters the impression that the motorist is blameless in such circumstances is dangerous.

magicbastarder

He's trying to sell a product, and creating the demand for it. But it's a pity it's being reported without comment.

Eamonnator

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

“I got tired of getting run over going to work...I got hit by three cars in a month.”

Either he's the unluckiest man in the world or...

He said he wasn't visible. That's why he was hit.
He should be in the movies, I can think of a perfect role for him.

rubadub

magicbastarder wrote: »

He's trying to sell a product, and creating the demand for it. But it's a pity it's being reported without comment.

you can find him here, there is a link to the article so can comment underneath it.

https://twitter.com/legliteireland1

CramCycle

Eamonnator wrote: »

He said he wasn't visible. That's why he was hit.
He should be in the movies, I can think of a perfect role for him.

If only there was some other product, already on the market, required by law, that he presumably wasn't using.

Eamonnator

Eamonnator wrote: »

He said he wasn't visible. That's why he was hit.
He should be in the movies, I can think of a perfect role for him.

And it's not The Invisible Man.

Mickiemcfist

what_traffic wrote: »

May need to don sunglasses before clicking on this link.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/for-three-innovations-it-s-all-about-safety-first-1.3711105

The most amazing thing is that it somehow took him 5 years to create the product.....he put reflective strips on a pair of socks.

magicbastarder

i bought a pair of hi viz leggings last year or the year before. i wonder if he goes into aldi at all?

spookwoman

radia wrote: »

I find this incredibly depressing. Has the RSA really indoctrinated us, and created a victim blaming culture, to such an extent that instead of there being an obligation on drivers to look for everybody irrespective of what they're wearing, there is a perceived obligation on cyclists to dress up like Christmas trees, and an acceptance that in Ireland 'serious repercussions' don't (shouldn't) flow from a motorist hitting a cyclist.

"Oh, in Denmaek/Holland they don't wear high viz and you still can't mow them down without getting into trouble, but it's different over there" is the tone. Eh, no, it's not acceptable to go randomly driving your car into unsuspecting people here either, just because you don't think their clothing is bright enough, and any article that fosters the impression that the motorist is blameless in such circumstances is dangerous.

Denmark Holland have proper infrastructure, cycle lanes etc. Complain all you want about the lack of infrastructure here but the fact is there is none and therefore it is up to EVERYONE on the roads to be careful and make things a safe as possible for themselves and everyone else. If someone is cycling or driving on a road at night with no lights on, busted reflectors and get in a accident of course the person with no lights or reflectors is going to get no sympathy and probably blamed. You also cannot expect to slow cars down further just because someone has a bee in their bonnet about having to have lights on or wear a hi vis vest.
It's like driving down the white line expecting everyone to move out of your way and then giving out if you get hit. There is an Irish mentality that people think they have a right to do this and that and no one should tell us what to do, a bit like some people who won't pay tax on their car because they think they have paid for it through the tax on fuel etc. I think it's a throwback to the day of when we were under British rule. The fact is there are rules and laws about using the roads and well if you don't like the rules then don't use the road

magicbastarder

spookwoman wrote: »

it is up to EVERYONE on the roads to be careful and make things a safe as possible for themselves and everyone else.

you're falling into the false equivalence trap. or else that's just badly worded.

motoring is seen as the default option in ireland, and that everything else should be moulded to fit.

Macy0161

magicbastarder wrote: »

i bought a pair of hi viz leggings last year or the year before. i wonder if he goes into aldi at all?

Or the arm/ ankle bands that lidl and aldi regularly have. Without having to look like a triathlete with this ridiculous knee length compression socks.

Chips Lovell

I don't think anyone's arguing for cycling without lights.

AndrewJRenko

spookwoman wrote: »

radia wrote: »

I find this incredibly depressing. Has the RSA really indoctrinated us, and created a victim blaming culture, to such an extent that instead of there being an obligation on drivers to look for everybody irrespective of what they're wearing, there is a perceived obligation on cyclists to dress up like Christmas trees, and an acceptance that in Ireland 'serious repercussions' don't (shouldn't) flow from a motorist hitting a cyclist.

"Oh, in Denmaek/Holland they don't wear high viz and you still can't mow them down without getting into trouble, but it's different over there" is the tone. Eh, no, it's not acceptable to go randomly driving your car into unsuspecting people here either, just because you don't think their clothing is bright enough, and any article that fosters the impression that the motorist is blameless in such circumstances is dangerous.

You also cannot expect to slow cars down further just because someone has a bee in their bonnet about having to have lights on or wear a hi vis vest.

We can just expect drivers to drive in a manner that allows them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear, as they are legally required to do.

All cyclists should have lights after the hours of darkness. Anything else is a distraction.

spookwoman

magicbastarder wrote: »

you're falling into the false equivalence trap. or else that's just badly worded.

motoring is seen as the default option in ireland, and that everything else should be moulded to fit.

Everyone as in pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and drivers.
Pre 1966 cycling was probably the default because there was not many people on the roads driving then in 1966 a law was introduced for drink driving because the saw people where dying on the roads. The law keeps changing with times, the limits go down , drugs where introduced and then drunk cycling was introduced. People are still bitching and complaining about how it's their right to drink and drive but in the end this is about saving lives, just like the possibility of High Vis. The law changes with the times and if it means wearing a high vis to save lives all the better. Is someones pride really worth their life?

AndrewJRenko We can just expect drivers to drive in a manner that allows them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear, as they are legally required to do.

All cyclists should have lights after the hours of darkness. Anything else is a distraction.


I agree with the distance thing that what its meant to be but hwo is wearing a hi vis a distraction?

AndrewJRenko

spookwoman wrote: »

I agree with the distance thing that what its meant to be but hwo is wearing a hi vis a distraction?

Because

a) Darkness/light is not a significant factor in cyclist deaths (just 2 out of 15 cyclists killed last year were killed in hours of darkness)
b) There is no evidence that hi-vis saves lives.


What colour is your car? Does it have hi-vis stripes all around so that it is visible from all directions as night?

tomasrojo

spookwoman wrote: »

People are still bitching and complaining about how it's their right to drink and drive but in the end this is about saving lives, just like the possibility of High Vis. The law changes with the times and if it means wearing a high vis to save lives all the better. Is someones pride really worth their life?

You haven't read much of this thread, have you?

Grassey

spookwoman wrote:

. The law keeps changing with times, the limits go down , drugs where introduced and then drunk cycling was introduced. People are still bitching and complaining about how it's their right to drink and drive but in the end this is about saving lives, just like the possibility of High Vis. The law changes with the times and if it means wearing a high vis to save lives all the better. Is someones pride really worth their life?

Drink driving laws introduced to stop drunk drivers. Targeted at the people causing deaths.

Speeding laws introduced to stop speeding drivers. Targeted at the people causing deaths.

High vis laws introduced to stop drivers killing VRUs. Targeted at victims to absolved the causers.

Implementation of such a law would be completely in line with the current times... Insofar as deflecting blame onto victims rather than tackle causes of the issue.