Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Pinch Flat · 22-10-2018 11:16pm

Piece on crime call just now, some Garda on recommending hi-vis for pedestrians as the evenings draw in. “There really is no excuse and it’s irresponsible to go walking without a hi vis. You can get a vest free off the RSA”. (Some paraphrasing)

So there you have it. Officialdom says tough luck if you’re walking home and get hit when you’ve no hi vis.

Absolutely no mention of motorists altering behaviour. Slowing down? Driving to the road conditions? Make sure you’re not distracted with a Phelan? No mention of ensuring the criticality of ensuring the left head lamp especially works (although they did have about 30 seconds on basic maintenance of your car that’s includes making sure your lights work - DUh!).

tomasrojo · 23-10-2018 12:02am

The thing that intrigues me is whether they really expect people to do it in large numbers, or do they just enjoy hectoring people? I mean, do they really expect in a few years to traverse a town centre on a Friday night and see everyone dressed like a construction worker or a bin man? Really?

greenspurs · 23-10-2018 9:03am

Can ANYONE on here actually admit that wearing hi viz jacket/vest/clothing at dusk or at night, actually does make you more visible?

When i go for a walk in the evenings, i wear a viz vest, to increase my visibility .When i cycled in low light i wear a hiviz gilet.

Why cant people on here admit that, instead of digging their heels in, just to create/fight an arguement!

magicbastarder · 23-10-2018 9:08am

yes, i will say that a hi-vis jacket makes you more visible.
that's not the crux of the issue that gets people's back up though. go two posts up and you'll see the general argument which is not about whether they make you more visible.

RobbieMD · 23-10-2018 9:18am

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Piece on crime call just now, some Garda on recommending hi-vis for pedestrians as the evenings draw in. “There really is no excuse and it’s irresponsible to go walking without a hi vis. You can get a vest free off the RSA”. (Some paraphrasing)

So there you have it. Officialdom says tough luck if you’re walking home and get hit when you’ve no hi vis.

Absolutely no mention of motorists altering behaviour. Slowing down? Driving to the road conditions? Make sure you’re not distracted with a Phelan? No mention of ensuring the criticality of ensuring the left head lamp especially works (although they did have about 30 seconds on basic maintenance of your car that’s includes making sure your lights work - DUh!).

Wasn't there a national slow down day the other day for motorists?

check_six · 23-10-2018 9:23am

greenspurs wrote: »

Can ANYONE on here actually admit that wearing hi viz jacket/vest/clothing at dusk or at night, actually does make you more visible?

When i go for a walk in the evenings, i wear a viz vest, to increase my visibility .When i cycled in low light i wear a hiviz gilet.

Why cant people on here admit that, instead of digging their heels in, just to create/fight an arguement!

The whole thread goes through the different issues, but in brief, the problem is that the RSA promote the hi viz vests as a panacea for EVERYTHING.
Cycling in low light - hi viz vest.
Walking anywhere - hi viz vest.
Speeding motorists - hi viz vest.
Motorists on mobiles - hi viz vest.
Angry taxi drivers - hi viz vest.
Irish football team's inability to create scoring chances - hi viz vest.

The importance given by the RSA to hi viz vests vastly outweighs their efficacy. On a bike or on foot at night get a light first. If your brakes need fixing, do that before reaching for the hi viz. Also, hi viz is now ALWAYS mentioned in accident reports, when it should be entirely peripheral. This leads to victim blaming.

There's more, but you may have to read back over the thread to find the different nuances.

Grassey · 23-10-2018 9:26am

greenspurs wrote:

Can ANYONE on here actually admit that wearing hi viz jacket/vest/clothing at dusk or at night, actually does make you more visible?

In all situations? Or limited situations?

CramCycle · 23-10-2018 9:28am

greenspurs wrote: »

Can ANYONE on here actually admit that wearing hi viz jacket/vest/clothing at dusk or at night, actually does make you more visible?

When i go for a walk in the evenings, i wear a viz vest, to increase my visibility .When i cycled in low light i wear a hiviz gilet.

Why cant people on here admit that, instead of digging their heels in, just to create/fight an arguement!

They are also specifically designed for daytime visibility or when full beams are shone on them, not the scenarios that the RSA recommends.

The truth of the matter is that in regards cycling, good lights trump Hi Vis any day. Lights are already a legal requirement. Yet for some reason, the RSA seem to promote a sub standard safety item instead of promoting the items that are already required under law.

magicbastarder · 23-10-2018 9:32am

and you can see it in court cases or inquests where it is frequently noted that a cyclist 'was not wearing hi vis' even though it's broad daylight.
and in one of the more recent ones, the motorist clearly stated he'd seen the cyclist anyway.

Hurrache · 23-10-2018 9:36am

greenspurs wrote: »

Can ANYONE on here actually admit that wearing hi viz jacket/vest/clothing at dusk or at night, actually does make you more visible?

When i go for a walk in the evenings, i wear a viz vest, to increase my visibility .When i cycled in low light i wear a hiviz gilet.

Why cant people on here admit that, instead of digging their heels in, just to create/fight an arguement!

I do. I wear a running one when running on country roads around me, in the dark. But I also carry a small hand torch, and usually wear a head torch as there isn't a streetlight light to be found.

But none of that when I'm on a footpath.

Where are you walking? If you're on the footpath, and going to get hit, a flashing blue light won't save you.

Ray Bloody Purchase · 23-10-2018 9:41am

magicbastarder wrote: »

and you can see it in court cases or inquests where it is frequently noted that a cyclist 'was not wearing hi vis' even though it's broad daylight.
and in one of the more recent ones, the motorist clearly stated he'd seen the cyclist anyway.

The recommendation that arose from that case was infuriating. I don't like using the term 'victim blaming' but that was very much the case.

It seems that if you are not lit up with hi-vis and all the other safety gear at ANY time of the day, it is your fault if a negligent driver fcuking mows you out of it.

Jem72 · 23-10-2018 9:44am

I rarely cycle at night but I do consider the low sun in the winter to be the big hazard. Would I be correct to assume that flashing bike lights would be of more benefit than hi-viz? Or should I use both? I'm generally on a road bike on regional or local roads down the country.

Macy0161 · 23-10-2018 9:45am

greenspurs wrote: »

Can ANYONE on here actually admit that wearing hi viz jacket/vest/clothing at dusk or at night, actually does make you more visible?

Hi Viz doesn't help at dusk or the dark. I'm more bothered about wearing something reflective, so I tend to use a browne belt rather than a builders jacket with yellow material that adds little in the circumstances you describe.

I also always use a light or torch, which I deem far more important. My LED torch takes up less pocket space than a builders vest or even the brown belt, and has a greater impact on motorists in my experience.

I wouldn't have had as much of an issue if it was "motorists should slow down in the dark and drive to conditions, and drive to a speed to which they can stop in the distance they can see, and pedestrians should carry a torch and wear something reflective (available for free from the RSA)" from the guard. The focus is completely on the vulnerable road users, and really feeds that idea that roads are for motorised vehicles.

Hurrache · 23-10-2018 9:51am

Jem72 wrote: »

I rarely cycle at night but I do consider the low sun in the winter to be the big hazard. Would I be correct to assume that flashing bike lights would be of more benefit than hi-viz? Or should I use both? I'm generally on a road bike on regional or local roads down the country.

In low light, depending on the background, i.e. trees and bushes, high viz can actually make you blend in and harder to see.

greenspurs · 23-10-2018 9:54am

I did expect those responses.

So Hiviz/reflective clothing is good BUT ......
"why should we........ Drivers should.. " etc etc ....
Im sorry, but i will wear Reflective/hiviz when on the roads in the evenings.
Its better than wearing none ?

Hurrache · 23-10-2018 9:58am

greenspurs wrote: »

I did expect those responses.

So Hiviz/reflective clothing is good BUT ......
"why should we........ Drivers should.. " etc etc ....
Im sorry, but i will wear Reflective/hiviz when on the roads in the evenings.
Its better than wearing none ?

You didn't clarify where you walk. On a road, on a footpath, street lights, no street lights.

Grassey · 23-10-2018 9:58am

Jem72 wrote: »

I rarely cycle at night but I do consider the low sun in the winter to be the big hazard. Would I be correct to assume that flashing bike lights would be of more benefit than hi-viz? Or should I use both? I'm generally on a road bike on regional or local roads down the country.

Given that the sun just silhouettes you and windscreen glare cuts visibility, lights are a better option. Be it on a cyclist or a car in those conditions!

meeeeh · 23-10-2018 10:05am

Anyone who lived in a country with proper fog will be well aware of benefits of hi-viz. Reflective strips wont help you one bit and usually a safety item comes with both. Moisture in the air can create similar conditions. I don't always wear hi viz but there are circumstances when you are complete moron if you don't. And btw I love how people get all uppity about people in towns looking like construction workers (oh the insult that they are supposed to lower themselves like that) but anyone with three brain cells would realise this is mainly aimed at those who walk in darker areas without sidewalks.

Hurrache · 23-10-2018 10:09am

meeeeh wrote: »

realise this is mainly aimed at those who walk in darker areas without sidewalks.

Get outta here with your sidewalk, it's footpod.

This is an RSA safety announcement. The lady is about to step off the footpod without even looking over her shoulder to see if anything is coming. It's not highvis she needs to keep her safe outside of her home.

https://twitter.com/RSAIreland/status/1046776760849829888

Here's another one from them from the last 24 hours, I think they've used it in the past as I remember the horse is looking like it's wondering WTF this thing is going to do if a motorist can't see a big horse in front of them.

The grandfather still hasn't been carted off to the old folks home for stopping with his grandson in the middle of a road, to take a look at the horse with a vest in the field beside them.

The biker looks like he's on the look out for a hit that's about to go down.

And the young lad is still trying to convince the girl it was only a dare to kiss with her friend at the teenage disco last night, it meant nothing, he still loves her. She's having none of it.

https://twitter.com/RSAIreland/status/1054401996411887621

23-10-2018 10:16am

Spelling isn't the RSA's strong suit

cletus · 23-10-2018 10:21am

I like the fact that the teenage couple who had a row, but were conscientious enough to wear the hi vis stuff

Grassey · 23-10-2018 10:30am

Hurrache wrote: »

The grandfather still hasn't been carted off to the old folks home for stopping with his grandson in the middle of a road, to take a look at the horse with a vest in the field beside them.

Check the background details, the grandad is checking out the woman in her figure flattering day-glo vest (above) crossing the road. Might explain why she isn't looking for cars....

meeeeh · 23-10-2018 10:48am

Is anyone else looking at those leaflets except people looking to be offended by something?

Hurrache · 23-10-2018 10:54am

meeeeh wrote: »

Is anyone else looking at those leaflets except people looking to be offended by something?

No, I just try to get offended.

Grassey wrote: »

Check the background details, the grandad is checking out the woman in her figure flattering day-glo vest (above) crossing the road. Might explain why she isn't looking for cars....

Ha ha, good spot. Is he harassing her I wonder?

07Lapierre · 23-10-2018 11:30am

greenspurs wrote: »

I did expect those responses.

So Hiviz/reflective clothing is good BUT ......
"why should we........ Drivers should.. " etc etc ....
Im sorry, but i will wear Reflective/hiviz when on the roads in the evenings.
Its better than wearing none ?

I wear reflective clothing and i have Lights...I feel safer with lights.

Mc Love · 23-10-2018 11:55am

Next week I'll probably have the dig out my Halo Belt. Its a belt than you can wear across your body or around the waist has LED strip in it. I think its pretty useful.

Grassey · 23-10-2018 11:56am

Hurrache wrote: »

Is he harassing her I wonder?

Doubtful, high-vis protects against unwanted advances from everything, man, animal, mechanical etc

CramCycle · 23-10-2018 12:06pm

greenspurs wrote: »

I did expect those responses.

So Hiviz/reflective clothing is good BUT ......
"why should we........ Drivers should.. " etc etc ....
Im sorry, but i will wear Reflective/hiviz when on the roads in the evenings.
Its better than wearing none ?

Again your missing the point. Firstly it is only useful in certain situations. I live on a rural.urban border. Going out cycling with Hi Vis gear is not beneficial in any of the cycles I would take. It certainly isn't beneficial when out walking but I have footpaths for almost the entire distance.

I never mentioned drivers, but as someone else said, during daylight, you may actually blend more if in a rural setting. Hi Vis has use on building sights during daytime hours, where typically the working area is saturated with dark greys and browns.

If I was out and concerned about my visibility, i would not fall back on or rely on it as a visibility aid for other road users. I would have good lights.

I ahve nothing against Hi Vis and it has its uses in certain, limited scenarios but this idea that it makes you more visible in all situations and is therefore safer is simply untrue.

Take the ad linked above, jokes aside. The grandads Sam Browne belt actually blends in with the grass. The big, most noticeable thing about him is that he is all in black and this contrasts strongly at that time of day with the road and hedgegrows/ditches.

The same with the horse, it is a horse, in the middle of the day, in the countryside, if you don't see it without Hi Vis, you won't see it with Hi Vis, unless in a very different placement, and even then.

The motorbikes Hi Vis is barely noticeable at all in that PIC but may provide better contrast than the yellow ones in country settings. this said, a range of clothes would have this affect.

Finally the girl and her not so subtle stalker, the most contrasting aspects of them both in regards the background is not their Hi Vis, it is in fact their trousers.

I have no issue with Hi Vis except when it is used as a panacea for better and more useful alternatives but treated as if it does the same job as them. Useful in certain situations, dangerous when the countries road safety authority teaches the masses that it is useful and sufficient in all situations.

Macy0161 · 23-10-2018 12:24pm

I actually view one of the options as a Browne Belt as progress within the RSA tbh. What use it is in daylight though...

Posters can dismiss the naysayers all they want, but in the vast majority of cases that are quoted as why we "need" hiviz, it's the reflective bits that are important, not the hi viz bits. Most cycling and running gear has that. And it's only any good accompanied by a torch/ light.

I commute wearing either a hi viz/ reflective gillet (mainly reflective rather than hi viz) or a proviz 360 jacket. I don't feel they particularly add anything above my decent lights, but I'm fecked if some motorist that isn't looking is going to get off the hook for killing me. That's how bad I think victim blaming is in this state.

CramCycle wrote: »

dangerous when the countries road safety authority teaches the masses that it is useful and sufficient in all situations.

Speaking of which, the clocks changing must mean its nearly be time for the RSA and gardai to blitz the commuter routes handing out builders vests, and totally inadequate lights.

CramCycle · 23-10-2018 12:32pm

I have a 400 and 300 lumen light on front, and a 50 and 300 lumen light on the back. If they don't see me, there are two reasons possible, they are not looking or are severely visually impaired, or they wanted to hit me. Hi Vis does not make me more visible although some of my gear has it stitched in AFAIK.

I have had a Garda pull me over at the annual lets get everyone wearing Hi Vis before, often they just wave me by though, which is good to see common sense policing.

The lights they give out are so sub standard that should anyone using them be hit, I hope they take the RSA to task over it, not forgetting the non hi vis, hi vis vests they gave out a few years ago that had matt grey strips instead of reflective ones and the yellow was not hi vis yellow but also, dulled.

You'd think when they got them from their neighbours, they would have pointed it out, but no, AFAIK they didn't even get a refund from the company.

Hi vis discussion thread (read post #1)

Comments