Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Hurrache · 25-06-2021 12:05PM

ProViz stuff is great, and looks good too.

hesker · 25-06-2021 12:59PM

Hurrache wrote: »

ProViz stuff is great, and looks good too.

But don’t you sweat buckets in them. Agree the reflectivity is great but the sweating thing has put me off up to now

Hurrache · 25-06-2021 01:55PM

I don't think so, my wife wears a running one and hasn't complained yet but I can't say first hand.

AndrewJRenko · 25-06-2021 04:21PM

hots wrote: »

If adding a high-viz makes you 0.0001% less likely to be hit why wouldn't you wear it?

You do have hi-viz stripes on your car, right, to make it 0.0001% less likely to be hit by another car if your lights fail or you forget to switch them on or you don't know how to operate your DRLs?

buffalo · 29-06-2021 08:18AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Interesting jury verdict in a case against a taxi driver who hit an escooter rider clad in dark clothes on a rainy night. I didn't realise that a jury could make recommendations on the legislation.
Seems like a strange recommendation against a victim of a collision in my opinion.
Could this happen against a cyclist knocked down by a driver?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-40320827.html

I'm trying to square up the above judgement and jury comment with the sad case in Galway of a drunk man who apparently jumped out in front of a car.

Scooter user with lights hit from behind by taxi driver, it's wasn't the driver's fault, the scooter user should have been wearing hi-viz.

Drunk pedestrian jumps onto a taxi driver's bonnet, family receives €250k.

I know they were criminal vs civil cases, but it just seems like a bizarre conflict. Does it mean if the scooter user took a civil case now, they could look forward to some compensation (depending on injuries of course) ?

cletus · 29-06-2021 09:24AM

buffalo wrote: »

I'm trying to square up the above judgement and jury comment with the sad case in Galway of a drunk man who apparently jumped out in front of a car.

Scooter user with lights hit from behind by taxi driver, it's wasn't the driver's fault, the scooter user should have been wearing hi-viz.

Drunk pedestrian jumps onto a taxi driver's bonnet, family receives €250k.

I know they were criminal vs civil cases, but it just seems like a bizarre conflict. Does it mean if the scooter user took a civil case now, they could look forward to some compensation (depending on injuries of course) ?

It's possible. The burden of proof is lower in civil cases

Mc Love · 29-06-2021 12:47PM

hesker wrote: »

But don’t you sweat buckets in them. Agree the reflectivity is great but the sweating thing has put me off up to now

Even with the claimed breathability of their garments, I do find you do sweat a lot after a good ride

AndrewJRenko · 29-06-2021 02:39PM

Mc Love wrote: »

I do find you do sweat a lot after a good ride

Me too, but can we stay on the cycling topic please?

Seth Brundle · 29-06-2021 03:04PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Me too, but can we stay on the cycling topic please?

blackwhite · 30-06-2021 09:21AM

buffalo wrote: »

I'm trying to square up the above judgement and jury comment with the sad case in Galway of a drunk man who apparently jumped out in front of a car.

Scooter user with lights hit from behind by taxi driver, it's wasn't the driver's fault, the scooter user should have been wearing hi-viz.

Drunk pedestrian jumps onto a taxi driver's bonnet, family receives €250k.

I know they were criminal vs civil cases, but it just seems like a bizarre conflict. Does it mean if the scooter user took a civil case now, they could look forward to some compensation (depending on injuries of course) ?

The €250k in Galway was a settlement offered by the insurance company. It never made it to trial.

There were plenty of comments from counsel and the judge that liability wasn't clear-cut if it had gone to trial

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 01:09PM

hots wrote: »

Jesus it's not all a tit-for-tat UsVsThem, you have close passes because some drivers are arsehles or incompetent (both). If adding a high-viz makes you 0.0001% less likely to be hit why wouldn't you wear it?

My subjective experience is you get more punishment passes and prank passes when you wear a lot of it.

The balance of evidence though, from what I've read and based on what Ian Walker has said, is that it doesn't make a lot of difference either way.

(I also could make myself a lot more than 0.0001% less likely to be injured by never drinking alcohol and then walking home, but I continue to do so.)

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 01:18PM

Scooter rear lights are hard to mount at an optimal height though. Bike lights have to be about 35cm above the ground to be legal. I suppose e-scooters still aren't legally allowed on the road, as things stand, and have no official lighting standards at all.

CHESSMUTANT · 30-06-2021 04:28PM

hots wrote: »

I wouldn't mandate it but do I think it's a good idea for...horse riders...to make themselves more visible

You don't think that horses are visible enough?
Horses?

breezy1985 · 30-06-2021 05:13PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

Scooter rear lights are hard to mount at an optimal height though. Bike lights have to be about 35cm above the ground to be legal. I suppose e-scooters still aren't legally allowed on the road, as things stand, and have no official lighting standards at all.

If this was "after hours" ide post a link to a light that can be attached half way up the body to the rear

Eamonnator · 30-06-2021 05:22PM

breezy1985 wrote: »

If this was "after hours" ide post a link to a light that can be attached half way up the body to the rear

But, would that work?

breezy1985 · 30-06-2021 05:37PM

Eamonnator wrote: »

But, would that work?

It would be legal in one sense at least and I'm sure you would be more noticeable to traffic

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 06:58PM

I don't think you can legally light a scooter right now because it hasn't been legislated for. Some sort of a belt with a clip-on light seems a sensible approach, and is allowed as the sole rear light for cyclists in the Netherlands, but it's not the law here. Probably the best solution rather than thin-end-of-the-wedge hi-viz laws.

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 07:08PM

(NL passed legislation years ago to allow cyclists meet lighting requirements with lights worn on their person rather than attached to the bike.)

30-06-2021 07:17PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

I don't think you can legally light a scooter right now because it hasn't been legislated for. Some sort of a belt with a clip-on light seems a sensible approach, and is allowed as the sole rear light for cyclists in the Netherlands, but it's not the law here. Probably the best solution rather than thin-end-of-the-wedge hi-viz laws.

I think I mentioned a lady I see about on a scooter with a decent light setup. I actually got chatting to her there one of the evenings while waiting to cross the road with the dog and it's one of these she uses https://www.decathlon.ie/lights/312549-3782-run-light-250-fw19-running-light-black.html#/demodelsize-200one_size_fits_all/demodelcolor-8573980?search=&display=&KW=&position=&device_model=

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 07:17PM

breezy1985 wrote: »

If this was "after hours" ide post a link to a light that can be attached half way up the body to the rear

Reminiscent of Nabokov's quite weird metaphor of two men inspecting a fallen bicycle's "anal ruby" in Bend Sinister.

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 07:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I think I mentioned a lady I see about on a scooter with a decent light setup. I actually got chatting to her there one of the evenings while waiting to cross the road with the dog and it's one of these she uses https://www.decathlon.ie/lights/312549-3782-run-light-250-fw19-running-light-black.html#/demodelsize-200one_size_fits_all/demodelcolor-8573980?search=&display=&KW=&position=&device_model=

Yeah, a light with a belt clip and a Sam Browne would work fine (and possibly satisfy the people who obsess with hi-viz, though full jackets seem to be the minimum acceptable for many), but at the moment all road vehicles need lights attached to the vehicle, and a certain distance above the ground. Not that e-scooters are road vehicles officially yet.

breezy1985 · 30-06-2021 07:25PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

I don't think you can legally light a scooter right now because it hasn't been legislated for. Some sort of a belt with a clip-on light seems a sensible approach, and is allowed as the sole rear light for cyclists in the Netherlands, but it's not the law here. Probably the best solution rather than thin-end-of-the-wedge hi-viz laws.

Irish rules of the road on lighting are from the 1960s
They still talk about lights in size rather than watts or lumens.

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 07:31PM

Yes, if the gardaí were willing to turn a blind eye, as they do to bike lights that have an insufficient surface area, but they seem quite keen on looking up what the rules are when it comes to e-scooters.

Effects · 30-06-2021 08:23PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

My subjective experience is you get more punishment passes and prank passes when you wear a lot of it.

I can't quote a reference now, but aren't you more likely, statistically, to be involved in an accident if you are wearing hi vis?

tomasrojo · 30-06-2021 08:45PM

Effects wrote: »

I can't quote a reference now, but aren't you more likely, statistically, to be involved in an accident if you are wearing hi vis?

There might be, though I don't recall it here. The study done in Nottingham found no statistically significant effect. There was a Copenhagen study that found a few scenarios where "a yellow jacket" seemed to have a beneficial effect, but it had a response bias I'm not convinced they really corrected adequately for, and Ian Walker said a few interesting but not very enthusiastic things about it:
https://twitter.com/ianwalker/status/1380541925078491139

In other words, it's a study of how hi-viz might work in an environment where A a lot of danger is already removed through infrastructure, B there are presumed liability laws and C a large % of drivers will be active cyclists, rather than just "imacyclistmyself"

This is the take-home message for me, applicable to Ireland too, I think:
https://twitter.com/ianwalker/status/1380831494298566660

I think all we can realistically do is look across a range of studies, each of which comes at it from a different angle. Critically, I've not seen anything to make me think conspicuity aids have a substantial "naked eye sized" effect, especially in a context like UK

Seth Brundle · 21-07-2021 11:51AM

https://twitter.com/SurreyRoadCops/status/1417526738674913280

https://twitter.com/SurreyRoadCops/status/1417526778919280642

21-07-2021 01:48PM

Hadn't seen this thread before, but about six weeks ago I was cycling in the countryside on a very bright and sunny evening. It was about 6.45pm and the start of June but still had front and rear lights going.

A tractor nudged out of a field, glanced my way and the other but never looked back my way. I was wary but still didn't think for a second he would pull out, but he did as I was about 5 metres from him going at 30kph.

I slammed on and bailed into the ditch before I could clip out and somehow managed to avoid going straight into the maws of the tractor and the bailing forks and mower to the rear.

I was shaken but just glad to escape a very close call so I just cycled off. About 20 metres up the road I heard the driver roaring at me and having come to a bit I turned around and went back.

He was shaking his fists and roaring about me not wearing a high vis jacket. I got angry and took photos of his reg and told him I was reporting him to the Gardaí. He said he was reporting me for not wearing a high vis. He seemed to think he was in the right because I was not wearing one.

I suggested we go straight to a nearby Garda station to get some clarity and he got nervous. I explained that he came really close to killing me and all he cared about was roaring at me about high vis when I was prepared to let it go.

I showed him a high vis gilet I always carry in pocket in case the light fades and finally he saw some sense and apologised.

I was very shaken after but it was amazing that the guy seemed to think that nearly killing me was my fault as I wasn't wearing a high vis.

kirving · 21-07-2021 02:00PM

Not excusing his behaviour, and I tend to be in favour of optional "hi-vis" (read: reflective) clothing, but I think what can tend to happen with the likes of builders, and farmers to a lesser extent, is that in their workplaces, everyone is required to wear hi-vis, and so they become accustomed to only looking for hi-vis.

The same of course is likely true for the likes of DRL's and Centre brake lights (I was rear-ended in a friends car without one, and I suspect it was a contributing factor)

magicbastarder · 21-07-2021 02:07PM

maybe we should ban builders and farmers from driving on public roads so, if their ability to spot other road users is compromised to that extent.

Macy0161 · 21-07-2021 02:16PM

Feck all farmers around me where hi-viz as routine anyway, even if I anyway brought that as contributory factor!

Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Comments