Should cyclists be required to wear High-Visibility Vests or Jackets?

[MJ01 439]

illumination legislation.

 

They were massive in the 80s - think I saw them supporting Simple Minds

[Guest makapaka]

Was behind a moronic cyclist at western bank this morning.

 

Dressed like he was about to join the Tour de France and flying down the hill at pace a foot away from the bumper of the car in front.

 

Empty cycle lane to his left.

 

Then straight across the roundabout at pace after a casual glance right.

 

Really dangerous it was.

[ads36 219]

Berberis

 

Being seen is still going to be a problem even if every car was eradicated as cyclists would need to see each other also.

 

they don't bother with hi-viz (or all the other things some of us seem to think are important) in Copenhagen (or etc.) where ~50% of all commutes are by bike...

 

makapaka

 

Was behind a moronic cyclist at western bank this morning.

 

Dressed like he was about to join the Tour de France and flying down the hill at pace a foot away from the bumper of the car in front.

 

Empty cycle lane to his left.

 

Then straight across the roundabout at pace after a casual glance right.

 

Really dangerous it was.

 

1) who cares what he was wearing? - what were you wearing? - that's just as relevant to your story.

2) a foot? really?

3) do you mean the bus lane? - that's currently blocked off past the lights?

4) were any laws broken?

5) what's your point?

Edited July 14, 2017 by ads36

[Berberis 10]

they don't bother with hi-viz (or all the other things some of us seem to think are important) in Copenhagen (or etc.) where ~50% of all commutes are by bike...

 

Some do http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/2cea8702a28d490c82f9479acdc08844/cyclists-in-copenhagen-denmark-h8e0a8.jpg but most of the images of cycling people are not, however I do not think Copenhagen is a fair comparison to Sheffield. They seem to have much better provision for cyclists.

 

---------- Post added 14-07-2017 at 14:13 ----------

 

This is interesting. It does not take a side and gives opposing points of view: http://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/1016/does-fluoro-kit-make-you-safer

 

The final paragraph is kind of my position:

 

So should you wear fluoro? The science says it’s more noticeable to the eye but, in the complex world of riding on the road where you are dealing with a variety of human factors, it is not proven to protect you. The bottom line, though, is a bit of fluoro never hurt anyone.

 

I suspect a number of people who refuse are more akin with the comments by Tim Gummer at the bottom.

 

Not it's not true that 'a bit of flouro never hurt anyone'. Donning what is effectively roadworker kit devalues the brand of cycling, which sans dangerwear and mamil culture is otherwise an aspirational activity.

[Bargepole23 337]

Some do http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/2cea8702a28d490c82f9479acdc08844/cyclists-in-copenhagen-denmark-h8e0a8.jpg but most of the images of cycling people are not, however I do not think Copenhagen is a fair comparison to Sheffield. They seem to have much better provision for cyclists.

 

---------- Post added 14-07-2017 at 14:13 ----------

 

This is interesting. It does not take a side and gives opposing points of view: http://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/1016/does-fluoro-kit-make-you-safer

 

The final paragraph is kind of my position:

 

 

 

I suspect a number of people who refuse are more akin with the comments by Tim Gummer at the bottom.

 

 

Is your car painted in fluoro colours? If not, why not?

[Chazndave 10]

Not read through this thread but Im a cyclist and not a driver.

 

Yet I can imagine in the evening if a cyclist is wearing dark clothes and no lights on bike then to be frank, he is asking for trouble!!!!!!

 

I was in the car with my partner once when someone pulled out on a bike, it was darkish, he had a dark hoodie on, no helmet and no lights on bike. So was that my partners fault for not seeing him and nearly hitting him? No! It was the prats fault for being an absolute divvy!! 1) no awareness to how he was riding on the road as he shot out into on coming traffic and 2) no self awareness of how to make himself stamd out in the dark!!

Edited July 14, 2017 by Chazndave

[monkey104 10]

Not read through this thread but Im a cyclist and not a driver.

 

Yet I can imagine in the evening if a cyclist is wearing dark clothes and no lights on bike then to be frank, he is asking for trouble!!!!!!

 

I was in the car with my partner once when someone pulled out on a bike, it was darkish, he had a dark hoodie on, no helmet and no lights on bike. So was that my partners fault for not seeing him and nearly hitting him? No! It was the prats fault for being an absolute divvy!! 1) no awareness to how he was riding on the road as he shot out into on coming traffic and 2) no self awareness of how to make himself stamd out in the dark!!

 

Ooh! You standby for incoming. I can feel the rage from the cycling lobby already!

There will be at least one, I would stake a fortune on who it would be as well.

[altus 540]

Not read through this thread but Im a cyclist and not a driver.

 

Yet I can imagine in the evening if a cyclist is wearing dark clothes and no lights on bike then to be frank, he is asking for trouble!!!!!!

You should really read the original post. It's clear this thread is about Berberis trying to assuage the guilt the are feeling for pulling out on a cyclist in conditions when they should really have seen him by claiming they would have if only the cyclist had been wearing hi-vis clothing. Those of us who have cycled in both hi-vis and not know it makes little difference to whether drivers notice us or not and that the real problem is motorists with poor observation skills.

 

Berberis needs to accept that poor observation skills were the real cause of this incident and to stop making excuses.

[Chazndave 10]

You should really read the original post. It's clear this thread is about Berberis trying to assuage the guilt the are feeling for pulling out on a cyclist in conditions when they should really have seen him by claiming they would have if only the cyclist had been wearing hi-vis clothing. Those of us who have cycled in both hi-vis and not know it makes little difference to whether drivers notice us or not and that the real problem is motorists with poor observation skills.

 

Berberis needs to accept that poor observation skills were the real cause of this incident and to stop making excuses.

 

I HAVE read the post. What Im saying is at night time a cyclist should NOT be riding in dark clothes with no lights. How are vehicles supposed to see them!!

[altus 540]

I HAVE read the post. What Im saying is at night time a cyclist should NOT be riding in dark clothes with no lights. How are vehicles supposed to see them!!

Nobody has suggested they should.

[mike142sl 10]

Is your car painted in fluoro colours? If not, why not?

Because a car is about 5 times wider than a cyclist and therefore easy to see!!! if not impossible to miss? I agree with ChaznDave, if we make ourselves difficult to see we are asking for trouble. I've now read the arguments by the Cycling UK about perceived health benefits outweighing legislation but find it to be the flimsiest argument which ignores the safety of those who are cycling.

There have been plenty of Stats posted on this thread but there is a problem with Stats in that they tend to be quoted in a particular way. We have also been told that legislation is a barrier and led to believe it would prevent take up of cycling, however that seemed to change later as we are now told it just slows the take up down. Well if the latter is the case then there isn't a problem, and introducing legislation which clearly improves the safety of cyclists would surely be be a good thing.

As for HiViz making cycling look extremely dangerous..hmmm So the preferred option is not to tell them, and if they get knocked off to console them with the statement that it wasn't their fault as the driver should have been more observant??? I'm sure that will make them feel a whole lot better.

[Becky B 31]

Was behind a moronic cyclist at western bank this morning.

 

Dressed like he was about to join the Tour de France and flying down the hill at pace a foot away from the bumper of the car in front.

 

Empty cycle lane to his left.

 

Then straight across the roundabout at pace after a casual glance right.

 

Really dangerous it was.

 

I thought that was a bus lane - the one where all the roadworks/contraflow and so on is?

 

Anyway, I cut 10 minutes off my travel time to the station last night, by not using the cycle lane on Penistone Road. On a 25 minute journey that's quite a considerable proportion.

Would a motorist willingly increase journey time by a third to use a road that is poorly surfaced, interrupted by obstacles and takes you on a detour?