Going for walks in hi vis jackets

Hurrache · 15-02-2019 11:21AM

meeeeh wrote: »

Except someone in tse cycling forum saying that?

We're not binary people, activities aren't mutually exclusive.

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 11:25AM

ImARebel wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you any plans to make it easier for people to see your car from the side? Change of colour or adding hi-vis stripes maybe?

you're just being silly now, you know that wasn't what I was referring to

So by "fully support", you meant that you fully support other people doing things to be seen, but not you doing things to be seen. Gotcha.

gctest50 · 15-02-2019 11:34AM

meeeeh wrote: »

I actually think it should be mandatory for cars to have lights always on and many countries actually have that.

As for hi-vis stripes they are used by emergency vehicles and using stripes on regular would make the situation for emergency service much trickier. I know you are very proud of your 'innovative' arguments because you air them at any opportunity a bit like broken record but I never actually saw any study from you that would prove their usefulness.

A nice silver stripe along the side and a red stripe across the rear bumper

Volvos had that sort of thing :

- http://www.volvogue.com/Volvogue_Reflective_Bumper_Striping.php

meeeeh wrote: »

.........

As for hi-vis stripes they are used by emergency vehicles and using stripes on regular would make the situation for emergency service much trickier.

Lots of long vans have stripes, doesn't make the situaaaation trickier

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 11:34AM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you any plans to make it easier for people to see your car from the side? Change of colour or adding hi-vis stripes maybe?

As for hi-vis stripes they are used by emergency vehicles and using stripes on regular would make the situation for emergency service much trickier.

Why would making vehicles more visible cause problems for the emergency services? They will still have sirens and blue lights for emergencies. The reduced collision rates associated with more visible vehicles will reduce their workload. What's not to like?

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 11:37AM

Hurrache wrote: »

We're not binary people, activities aren't mutually exclusive.

I meant as a source of information. If you type hi vis use into search engines most links will be to cycling forums and to very little other information.

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 11:45AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You did go looking for the same studies before recommending hi-vis for pedestrians and cyclists, right?

You mean except the stuff which is ISO certified as safety gear for the purpose of increasing visibility. I'm sure they are wrong.

Hurrache · 15-02-2019 11:48AM

meeeeh wrote: »

I meant as a source of information. If you type hi vis use into search engines most links will be to cycling forums and to very little other information.

You were asking about helmets and how it's safer for drivers.

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 11:49AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why would making vehicles more visible cause problems for the emergency services? They will still have sirens and blue lights for emergencies. The reduced collision rates associated with more visible vehicles will reduce their workload. What's not to like?

Yeah you are right I give up. Not differentiating services and emergency vehicles from others makes no sense.

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 11:50AM

Hurrache wrote: »

You were asking about helmets and how it's safer for drivers.

And I can't find any research for it except what someone said on some cycling forum. But you are welcome to prove me wrong. (outside motor racing obviously).

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-02-2019 11:53AM

Hurrache wrote: »

So what I gather from this thread is that lots of people have seen people wearing dark clothing at night and safely managed to avoid them.

Well, sadly the road death statistics every year will include some pedestrians. Some of them will be people hit on rural roads.

gctest50 · 15-02-2019 12:00PM

meeeeh wrote: »

You mean except the stuff which is ISO certified as safety gear for the purpose of increasing visibility. I'm sure they are wrong.

Shiny tape can be UN - ECE104

If a goods veehicle has a DGVW over 3,500kg it needs shiny tape

This van has a DGVW > 3,500kg :

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 12:04PM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You did go looking for the same studies before recommending hi-vis for pedestrians and cyclists, right?

You mean except the stuff which is ISO certified as safety gear for the purpose of increasing visibility. I'm sure they are wrong.

Motor crash helmets have ISO standards as well. Does that mean that they should be mandatory for all motorists?

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 12:05PM

gctest50 wrote: »

Shiny tape can be UN - ECE104

Yes and they are used for road maintenance vehicles for obvious reasons.

I think it's obvious that different vehicles have different markings. Emergency and maintenance have it for visibility. Long or tall or wide loads have them to indicate those priorities but if you want to deck out Hyundai i30 as Garda car be my guest but I doubt it will be appreciated.

Hurrache · 15-02-2019 12:06PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, sadly the road death statistics every year will include some pedestrians. Some of them will be people hit on rural roads.

42 pedestrians killed last year, 83 people within vehicles. If a helmet could save just one life then it's worth it.

Daylight hours are also statistically the most dangerous for VRUs, although in 2017 more pedestrians died in hours of darkness.

However Dublin, a city with widespread footpaths and street lights, statistically is the most dangerous for non motorists.

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 12:07PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Hurrache wrote: »

So what I gather from this thread is that lots of people have seen people wearing dark clothing at night and safely managed to avoid them.

Well, sadly the road death statistics every year will include some pedestrians. Some of them will be people hit on rural roads.

Most of the road death statistics will be motorists in cars, vans and trucks. Mandatory bright colours and hi-vis stripes would surely reduce this, along with mandatory helmets of course.

gctest50 · 15-02-2019 12:13PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Yes and they are used for road maintenance vehicles for obvious reasons.

I think it's obvious that different vehicles have different markings. Emergency and maintenance have it for visibility. Long or tall or wide loads have them to indicate those priorities but if you want to deck out Hyundai i30 as Garda car be my guest but I doubt it will be appreciated.

You could buy that van above for your business, it would still need shiny stripes

because it is over 3,500 KG DGVW

meeeeh wrote: »

.........

but if you want to deck out Hyundai i30 as Garda car be my guest but I doubt it will be appreciated.

A single stripe is not decking out a "Hyundai i30 as Garda car "

See here :

.

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 12:19PM

gctest50 wrote: »

You could buy that van above for your business, it would still need shiny stripes

because it is over 3,500 KG DGVW

We have white van for business it doesn't have shinny stripes and doesn't need it.

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 12:20PM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why would making vehicles more visible cause problems for the emergency services? They will still have sirens and blue lights for emergencies. The reduced collision rates associated with more visible vehicles will reduce their workload. What's not to like?

Yeah you are right I give up. Not differentiating services and emergency vehicles from others makes no sense.

Why do emergency vehicles need to differentiate, other than in emergency situations where they use siren and blue lights?

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 12:23PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why do emergency vehicles need to differentiate, other than in emergency situations where they use siren and blue lights?

There might be a benefit to seeing the stationary vehicle at the side of the road where we expect vehicles to move. Possibly not and all the international practices are wrong because you want to make an argument for walking around in the dark dressed in black.

gctest50 · 15-02-2019 12:31PM

meeeeh wrote: »

We have white van for business it doesn't have shinny stripes and doesn't need it.

Is it over 3,500kg DGVW ?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-02-2019 12:32PM

Hurrache wrote: »

42 pedestrians killed last year, 83 people within vehicles. If a helmet could save just one life then it's worth it.

Daylight hours are also statistically the most dangerous for VRUs, although in 2017 more pedestrians died in hours of darkness.

However Dublin, a city with widespread footpaths and street lights, statistically is the most dangerous for non motorists.

With a quarter of the country’s population there, that makes sense. A greater volume of traffic, more corners etc. The reasons for urban pedestrians deaths are likely different.

Growing up rurally, we had a lot of close shaves at twilight and at night with darkly-dressed pedestrians. This was with a driver who never speeds. You will highlight that we never did hit anyone but it only has to happen once. There were pedestrian deaths in our locality for this reason. The walking groups I know of take in both well-lit roads and roads with no lights at all and no footpaths. Walks generally happen in the evening, so for a good chunk of the year that’s in fading light and darkness. I cannot fathom why it would bother anyone to see people wearing clothing with reflective strips in this type of scenario. It does make them more visible. This I know from experience. Do I have to have actually struck and killed someone before I’m allowed to make this observation?

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 12:32PM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why do emergency vehicles need to differentiate, other than in emergency situations where they use siren and blue lights?

There might be a benefit to seeing the stationary vehicle at the side of the road where we expect vehicles to move. Possibly not and all the international practices are wrong because you want to make an argument for walking around in the dark dressed in black.

Expecting other vehicles to do anything, whether it be to move or to stay, is a bit of a hiding to nothing. Expect the unexpected.

gctest50 · 15-02-2019 12:34PM

850,000 accidents over 20 years -

Compared to white vehicles, a number of colours were associated with higher crash risk. These colours are generally those lower on the visibility index and include black, blue, grey, green, red and silver

https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/1045297/muarc263.pdf

freshpopcorn · 15-02-2019 12:40PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why do emergency vehicles need to differentiate, other than in emergency situations where they use siren and blue lights?

If there blue lights failed at the scene of an incident.
There reflective strips would come in useful.

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 12:43PM

gctest50 wrote: »

Is it over 3,500kg DGVW ?

No it's not. But I think regulation is for trailer with DGVW over 3500kg and HGV's over 7500kg. I could be wrong about that though because I can only find UK sources.

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 12:47PM

freshpopcorn wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why do emergency vehicles need to differentiate, other than in emergency situations where they use siren and blue lights?

If there blue lights failed at the scene of an incident.
There reflective strips would come in useful.

They sure would. There is no suggestion that emergency services should remove their hi-vis stripes.

meeeeh · 15-02-2019 12:52PM

gctest50 wrote: »

850,000 accidents over 20 years -

Compared to white vehicles, a number of colours were associated with higher crash risk. These colours are generally those lower on the visibility index and include black, blue, grey, green, red and silver

https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/1045297/muarc263.pdf

Would not then exactly the same color visibility apply for people walking and cyclists. With the added fact that the lights they are using (if they are using them) are smaller.

freshpopcorn · 15-02-2019 12:53PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

They sure would. There is no suggestion that emergency services should remove their hi-vis stripes.

Thanks for clearing that up.
It's the same reason why cars/trucks don't remove there rear reflectors because it would be dangerous.
It's similar to pedestrians and cyclists who don't wear reflectors when it's dark. They are dangerous

gctest50 · 15-02-2019 12:55PM

meeeeh wrote: »

No it's not.

Well it won't be needing stripes then.

meeeeh wrote: »

But I think regulation is for trailer with DGVW over 3500kg and HGV's over 7500kg. I could be wrong about that though because I can only find UK sources.

If it's a goods vehicle over 3,500kg DGVW or

a trailer combination > 11 meters you need shiny stripes

AndrewJRenko · 15-02-2019 01:12PM

meeeeh wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why do emergency vehicles need to differentiate, other than in emergency situations where they use siren and blue lights?

because you want to make an argument for walking around in the dark dressed in black.

I've never made this argument.

In general, the argument that I've been making is that all of the stuff pushed on cyclists and pedestrians by motorists about helmets and hi-vis also applies to motorists, equally if not even more so.

It raises questions about the credibility of the advice if those who are giving the advice do not "walk the talk" themselves. Indeed, it raises a question about why so many motorists are so full of enthusiasm and creativity when it comes to ideas for 'fixing' cycling or walking, while they largely sit back and ignore the carnage on the road caused by motorists.

Going for walks in hi vis jackets

Comments