Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Primary schools teach the Be Safe programme for walking, cycling and PT, but kids cycling to school are among the most vulnerable road users, that’s why many are seen cycling on footpaths, it’s safer than the road for them. One of the best things in recent years has been more cycle lanes, but they are not available everywhere. A road training programme for cyclists would be helpful imo.

A training programme like this perhaps? It's being replicated all over the country.

It's great to focus the training on kids, as it avoids having to do anything effective with the group of users involved in 99% of road deaths and injuries.

No but when a poster calls for road tests and then tries to fob off the idea of kids cycling on roads with nonsense about footpaths then it's worth pointing out.

You've loads of opinions about cyclists and pedestrians though, and very few opinions about what drivers should do. Isn't that a bit twisted?

We've had two recent court cases regarding pedestrian fatalities due to drivers not seeing red lights at crossings. Clearly all traffic lights should now be encased in hi-vis.

Levity aside your car has these things called lights, which allow you to see things which may not be lit up, so far they've worked for me as I haven't hit anything. Of course I was looking where I was going too which helps.

I don't know if this helps or hinders the discussion, but the new Dublin Bus electric vehicles have cameras for "rearview mirrors" , in the early (dark) mornings and nighttime, they are feckin useless, but there is an infra red button I can press to assist with the dark.

Anyone behind me wearing their hi viz in the yard is instantly visible - well their reflective stripes light up like mad, and when I'm out on the road, roadsigns in my mirror are stand out.

I always presumed it was the visible lights on reflective things that made them "shine", but apparently not.

I presume the above technology could be confused by different lights, or how the sensor perceives them.

Cannot understand why this racket is allowed to continue.

Buying your safety collateral from a company with a known connection to a board member of the RSA - have we no problem with this?

Has it been rectified recently? I haven't stayed in touch with it.

Its an interesting topic. High vis can't be a bad thing as I feel that anything that makes me slightly more visible to motorists is probably useful. However, I'll still go running at night dressed like the man from the milk tray ad and not give it a second thought if I am running on footpaths. My wife gives me an absolute bollocking when i get home dressed like that because she has concerns that i will get run over. I counter with the footpath argument - if a vehicle mounts the footpath whether i am wearing hi vis or not is not going to make a difference, and i am very aware when crossing roads / junctions etc. That said, last nights run was on some unlit back roads with no foot path so i was wearing a bright yellow jacket and had a good bright head torch on also. When i hear a car coming I stand in out of the way of the road fully expecting that they do not see me and i wait till they pass before moving on. Self preservation is paramount.

When cycling i have lights on the bike, two front and two back, one flashing and one solid. I tend to choose lighter coloured cycling jackets and have a bright yellow gillet that generally goes over the top of whatever i am wearing. I generally avoid dark coloured jackets / jerseys but i do have one black jacket that i bought in decathlon cause it was a bargain. If i am wearing that one at night I will throw the yellow gillet over it. And also conscious during the day that it doesn't stand out like brighter clothing and adjust my road position / lights to accommodate.

I see a lot of cyclists on weekend mornings heading past the end of our road on their spins and i would say about half would be dressed in predominantly dark clothing, which seems a little daft to me personally when you compare them to cyclists who are wearing lighter coloured clothing or high vis. The difference in visibility is remarkable. I fully agree that it is the motorists responsibility to ensure they are paying attention at all times and observing the road and the traffic, including cyclist and pedestrians, and driving appropriately for the type of road they are on. However, it seems a bit daft to dress in dark clothing, even during the day, when a lighter option makes you stand out a lot more and increases the chances of the motorist seeing you in lots of time. I regularly run the roads around kilcoole, newcastle, rathnew, etc with no footpaths and when doing so i take a lot of precautions - lighter clothing, waving at approaching cars, crossing the road at bends etc. Similarly, when cycling on narrower roads i give myself the best chance of being seen by not wearing predominantly dark clothing.

Yes, drivers need to be better - pay more attention and get off their phones / devices. Equally, i'm going to ensure i do what i can to help them see me. I'm not going to wear white bib tights because that would be a crime and unnecessarily cruel to anyone who happened to look at me, but i'm certainly going to have some lighter / brighter / coloured top on to maximise my chances of getting home in the same state i set out. Sure, i might look cooler, faster, more svelte, dressed head to toe in black lycra, but I'd prefer to give the dozy motorists out there a fighting chance of seeing me before they crash into me.

Mandatory - no, i don't agree that we should force all of the black clad cyclists / pedestrians to lighten up. Personal choice and responsibility. However i will make sure that if i am taken out of it by a motorist they won't be able to blame my clothing for the incident.