how would you react?

[Deleted member 26715]

I seem to get noticed in this

Are the ribs fluorescent? I was driving the other week & & picked up somebody wearing one of these in the headlights, for a split second it was a real WTF moment

 

[Edwardoka]

my old Dad taught me to ride a bike, and he drummed into me the benefit of craning your neck round in traffic to glare at the opposition. Motons seem to give me more room because I turn a lot before any manoeuvre, do a few fake wobbles and make sure they can see me. Or so I believe.

I remember reading a study (although I couldn't find it just now) that said that drivers gave the closest passes to cyclists they perceived to be "experienced". That is, hi-vis, helmets, no wobbles. Throwing fake wobbles and shoulder checks will apparently make them perceive a rider to be more vulnerable and inexperienced and so they will give you more space. Keep on doing it!

Contrast colour is useful in work safety. I worked in forestry contracting for years, and without bright hard hats, the next feller would be invisible.

Absolutely - but PPE is at the bottom of the hazard hierarchy for a reason - in forestry I'd hope that there's a whole bunch of safety checks in place to stop someone taking a chainsaw (or one of those terrifyingly-efficient tree-cutting trucks) to a tree without everyone in the crew accounted for and the certain knowledge that the felling area was clear. Your hard-hat would ideally only ever be needed if every single item in the safety checklist was ignored or somehow failed.

 

[Milkfloat]

Wrong on every level - you seem to have some problems here, not just with comprehension. Hint: the clue is in the expression.

Have you ever been to Cannes, or, more significantly, crossed the road there? The man was crossing the road from the beach side towards a background of a green park, cafés and a grey coloured hotel, nicely matching the road I was cycling on. Black would have been a stupid colour to wear at any level, unless you enjoy getting really hot.

I was not nearly hit, by the way, I nearly hit someone.

By the way, to my knowledge the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. This was late summer, so have a think where the sun would be at that time. I’m assuming you know the topography of Cannes near the quay where the boats from the cruise ships come in. Mind you, I did get a chuckle from your lost in the sun comment, you couldn’t be more wrong

You stated it was "noon on a bright sunny day" on your OP, now you seem to changing the story. However, none of that matters, you were wearing high vis and were not seen, there is no conclusive evidence that high vis makes a difference and if you look at countries with the lowest per kilometer death and serious injury rates, high vis is not something a cyclist would ever use. To say that you 'must wear' it is missing the point entirely.

 

[Drago]

Now, a question for avole.

There is little doubt that hi-vis can (when an appropriate type is worn for the environment) aid in conspicuity. This has been researched and demonstrated fairly well.

However, among vulnerable road users the evidence is less clear cut. It has not been reasonably established that the wearing of hi-vis translates to a lower casualty rate. This has been researched at Government level, most notably by the DfT as previously cited by myself, and they failed to identify any reduction in the casualty rate attributable to the wearing of hi-vis among their own employees.

So I must ask you, do you actually understand what hi-vis is actually all about? It is failing to make vulnerable road users safer, so why do you think it is such a good idea?

 

[Randomnerd]

Your hard-hat would ideally only ever be needed if every single item in the safety checklist was ignored or somehow failed.

The colour of the hat - bright orange, yellow, white - would allow you to see where the next worker was, and you’d be able to calculate safe felling distance. His helmet-wearing only saved him from a rogue branch falling from his own tree when working, and certainly would do nothing in the event you felled a tree on him, except to help you find his corpse.

 

[Edwardoka]

The colour of the hat - bright orange, yellow, white - would allow you to see where the next worker was, and you’d be able to calculate safe felling distance. His helmet-wearing only saved him from a rogue branch falling from his own tree when working, and certainly would do nothing in the event you felled a tree on him, except to help you find his corpse.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at. That's a context in which hi-vis makes a ton of sense, where controlled circumstances mean that you're looking out for people wearing bright hard hats against a green background. The hard hat enables the safety checks further up the chain to be done more efficiently, and as you say, they don't provide any functional protection in the event of a breach in safety protocol.

Contrast that controlled situation with Johnny B. Random walking out in front of a cyclist where both people's outlines may be broken up by all manner of backgrounds/lighting conditions/colour clashes that call into question any single strategy for maximum visibility.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I think high visibility clothing is a must for cyclists, and black is not a good idea.

In the context of someone arguing that hi-vis for cyclists was a must, this was the reaction from the West Midlands Traffic Police on their Twitter account:

"...[If you] want to be seen, go for contrast, concentrate on road position & add lateral movement towards hazards, these are the things that will get you noticed. It's all in here https://trafficwmp.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/junction-malfunction-and-a-new-dawn/ "
​

 

[glasgowcyclist]

This has been researched at Government level, most notably by the DfT

There's also this study which showed no protective effect:

http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/12855/

Conclusion

This study was designed to assess the effect of conspicuity aid use on the risk of crash for commuter and utility cyclists. A slightly greater proportion of cases than controls reported using conspicuity aids. There was therefore a raised odds ratio of collision crash involvement for those using conspicuity aids even after adjustment for a large number of important confounders. The study results do not demonstrate a protective effect as expected given previous work testing the effects of such aids on drivers’ awareness of cyclists and pedestrians. This study demonstrates the importance of understanding why many cyclists remain at risk of collision crash resulting in injury despite the use of conspicuity aids.​

 

[classic33]

That must have been quite an outfit.

Not all at once!

 

[Deleted member 26715]

@glasgowcyclist very good article

 

[raleighnut]

Are the ribs fluorescent? I was driving the other week & & picked up somebody wearing one of these in the headlights, for a split second it was a real WTF moment

No but the jacket is white with the black being printed on so the white really stands out in headlights, it also does have 'retro reflective' flashes sewn in.

 

[User66445]

You stated it was "noon on a bright sunny day" on your OP, now you seem to changing the story. However, none of that matters, you were wearing high vis and were not seen, there is no conclusive evidence that high vis makes a difference and if you look at countries with the lowest per kilometer death and serious injury rates, high vis is not something a cyclist would ever use. To say that you 'must wear' it is missing the point entirely.

It was noon on a bright sunny day - no story change, just your trying to avoid the truth, that's all.

Also, you're is taking two words out of context - naughty, naughty. Let me try to explain.

Do these two statement mean the same:

I think noise cancelling headphones on aircraft are a must.
Noise cancelling headphones on aircraft are compulsory.

If you think they are the same, then its back to school for you !

Also, read my first post carefully. You seem to have missed the sense of it entirely.

 

[Milkfloat]

@avole I think we just need to agree to disagree and in some cases agree to agree. We are just going around in circles.

 

[Drago]

Just for the record, I quite often wear it when out on the bike. not because I think it keeps me safer (it doesn't), but because if some chump isn't looking and runs me over that's simply one less stick for an insurer to try and beat me with for a spot of light hearted victim blaming. It is sad that I feel I have to do that, but as long as ill informed people insist on bandying around pre-conceived notions based upon little or no evidence, then then insurers will use is as an excuse on their ill informed clients behalf.

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

I wear an orange jacket so rescue helicopters can find me in the snow at Winscar Reservoir when my energy bars run out.
It int as glamorous as Cannes up theer!