"If cyclists wore hiviz & lights there wouldnt be any accidents!"

[downfader]

Last week the Indi posted an article on how we're being let down by the justice system:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...unprotected-by-police-and-courts-2179752.html

Its pretty damming imo when you read that evidence just isnt collected, or witnesses never contacted. I'm sure many of us have realised this for a long time, but its starting to get some media attention and this could be a good thing if we didnt have to deal with the strawman:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...-online-postings-16-january-2011-2185637.html#

Cyclists should do everything to protect themselves on the road with fluorescent clothing and adequate lights ("Cyclists 'left unprotected by police and courts'", 9 January). Then "I didn't see the cyclist" would not be accepted in court. If a motorist "can't see" a lit cyclist in a hi-viz jacket, they shouldn't be driving at all.Laura Pelling

I have sent a reply stating the Aussie study on dayglow and hiviz being used at night and how drivers failed to "see" it. I have also reminded those non-cyclists why we often call hiviz a "cloak of invisibility" (no good if drivers arent even looking, or their eyesight is so useless that they cant look in the first place).

I also had some figures from a couple of years back that suggested that around only 2-7% of cyclists at night were unlit in collisions. If the Police are failing to collect evidence this may well be higher or lower.

So if people want to chip in with hiviz/lighting-nearmiss stories, or add in some official figures to dissuade the myths then feel free!

 

[dellzeqq]

it's funny, isn't it? When I was hit from behind at night the bike was lit up like a Christmas tree, and I had a geometric jersey with shiny white patches on. As the driver didn't stop I guess we'll never know if his eyesight was up to driving at night or not.

 

[downfader]

it's funny, isn't it? When I was hit from behind at night the bike was lit up like a Christmas tree, and I had a geometric jersey with shiny white patches on. As the driver didn't stop I guess we'll never know if his eyesight was up to driving at night or not.

I've been clipped by a van wing mirror (30mph dual carriageway, doing 30 myself downhill at that point), I've had a Parcel Force van rub down the side of me at a slightly wider traffic island, and I have had a car pull out on me as I rode over a roundabout - that one put me on a spinal board in an ambo (I was very lucky)...

..touble is ALL of those I was wearing a Night Vision rain jacket, and had me lights on (very bright half watters at the time), AND it was daylight. I really do feel some non-cyclists are trying to justify something by making excuses.

 

[ComedyPilot]

As posted elsewhere, I have had two incidents in the last 4 months where I have been riding along in daylight, with hiviz and 2 flashing cateye LED lights on the front and cars still drive at me?

Both incidents happened on the same stretch of road at almost the same place. Country road, no confusing signs, buildings or structures to 'blend' the hi viz in with. I was the only 'vehicle' travelling in my direction on each occasion (ie a clear road behind me) and both incidents were cars overtaking slower cars and coming towards me. Both incidents were what I would class as near-misses, due to the fact I moved and thereby avoided being hit. Neither driver made any avoiding action whatsoever.

I got the reg of the first, reported it, but without any other witnesses, they got a telling off - they claimed they truly 'didn't see me'. I only just got out of the way, because I was pedalling/looking down at the time, just happened to glance up and saw a car coming at me, so I instinctively swung left off the road onto the verge - very close call.

I didn't get the second one, but it was slightly different in that I saw them start to 'creep' out from behind the minibus they were overtaking for a look. As soon as I saw this I moved to primary - not to play chicken (as I have been accused of) - to make me move laterally in their view instead of staying in one place. To illustrate this, move a raised finger towards your head from arm's length. Notice how it looks as if it isn't really moving - that's how we/peds/bikers look to cars - we have a relatively small frontal area that 'seems' static to a car driver. Now do the same, but this time move the finger left or right as you move it towards you. See how much more visible you are?

I did this when the driver was 'looking' to go. I wore a hi viz reflective tabbard and had my flashing cateyes working - and they still pulled out, overtook, and forced me off the road (remember I moved to primary so I had a space to go into).

In my book, they drove at me deliberately, and used their car as a 'weapon' to intimidate me into submitting my position and getting out of their way.

What other reason can someone have for doing it?

Was there enough room for them to overtake the minibus and pass me at the same time? Here

As you can see, the car in the map shows the road/lane width, so there's not a lot of road left when a car overtakes a minibus and drives straight at a cyclist. It also shows the lack of any signs/buildings/road furniture that might 'hide' or lessen the effect of hi viz don't you think?

The net result being the cyclist has to head for the verge - again.

Should peds/cyclists/bikers and any other vehicle just bow down and keep out of their way?

The thing that chills me, is that motorists have become so 'confident' in their position of perceived 'authority' on the road that it is now a very large task to reverse it, and get it anywhere near a cultured driving/cycling environment like the Netherlands, France, Denmark or Germany.

Good thread, but it's a bit 'preaching to the converted' it needs to be spread out there, on 'their' territory - car forums.

 

[ComedyPilot]

it's funny, isn't it? When I was hit from behind at night the bike was lit up like a Christmas tree, and I had a geometric jersey with shiny white patches on. As the driver didn't stop I guess we'll never know if his eyesight was up to driving at night or not.

 

[Davidc]

I find that most drivers give me more space when I wear bright visible clothing, day or night, and that I seem to get a bit more space from most drivers since lighting has got much better.

BUT

There are, and always have been, a proportion of drivers - fortunately a small proportion - who just dont look, or don't care, or don't pay attention, and get too close. That's day or night. A couple of times I've been hit by them and twice they haven't stopped - is that because they didn't even notice then? Fortunately I've survived.

It isn't just cyclists that suffer. My first wife was badly injured by one while driving a car. She could see the driver talking to and looking at the passenger, with head turned, while approaching from behind. The other driver's son, the passenger, was the worst injured. My wife said she pumped the brake to flash the lights - no effect 'cos the woman wasn't looking.

 

[ComedyPilot]

I find that most drivers give me more space when I wear bright visible clothing, day or night, and that I seem to get a bit more space from most drivers since lighting has got much better.

BUT

There are, and always have been, a proportion of drivers - fortunately a small proportion - who just dont look, or don't care, or don't pay attention, and get too close. That's day or night. A couple of times I've been hit by them and twice they haven't stopped - is that because they didn't even notice then? Fortunately I've survived.

It isn't just cyclists that suffer. My first wife was badly injured by one while driving a car. She could see the driver talking to and looking at the passenger, with head turned, while approaching from behind. The other driver's son, the passenger, was the worst injured. My wife said she pumped the brake to flash the lights - no effect 'cos the woman wasn't looking.

And this is someone who will still be driving a ton of metal on our roads after her 'accident'. I didn't realise you HAD to look at someone to talk to them?

 

[HLaB]

It isn't just cyclists that suffer. My first wife was badly injured by one while driving a car. She could see the driver talking to and looking at the passenger, with head turned, while approaching from behind. The other driver's son, the passenger, was the worst injured. My wife said she pumped the brake to flash the lights - no effect 'cos the woman wasn't looking.

OT I once had an 'observant' 4x4 driver, drive straight into the back of my car when I was stopped in the queue at the old toll booths on the Forth Road Bridge. Where else do you expect a queue

Getting back to the original topic the only time I've been hit from behind on the bike (touch wood) was in broad daylight but I can't remember what I was wearing. I was stopped in a right turn lane about 2 cars (& a van) back, with two cars behind me; when I suddenly found myself getting forced towards the van. Thankfully it was low speed but when I turned to shout a warning to the following driver I seen her rumaging in her glove compartment .

Fortunately both times I have escaped non injured; 1st time because I was in a steel cage and 2nd time because it was low speed. I hope your wife wasn't too badly hurt David.

 

[GrasB]

I find that most drivers give me more space when I wear bright visible clothing, day or night, and that I seem to get a bit more space from most drivers since lighting has got much better.

I've found quite the opposite, wearing high-viz &/or when light I get far more close passes. I'm not saying your observations are wrong, I'm saying they're just different to mine.

 

[cyberknight]

I started to read the comments and i lost the will to go on after a while , the same old responses from drivers and as usual they get crushed by the truth and they still come back for more.

Until any government decide to treat the issue with the seriousness it deserves and the police act upon it then we will not see any change.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

There are two different questions here: one relates to whether drivers are looking out for cyclists (or indeed anything else on the road), and one to whether drivers who are looking will see cyclists better who have lights etc.* Clearly in the latter case, lights etc. help. However, nothing is going to be much use in protecting us from drivers who aren't even looking.

Because of the latter, it is also not very sensible to conclude that because you have been in an accident whilst using lights etc. that light etc. are no use (and I hope no-one is doing this). You can't actually tell how many people didn't hit you because they did see you and therefore avoided you. There are rare occasions when one does get to find out from this more positive perspective - I have been congratulated recently by several people where I live on being very visible after dark, so clearly those particular people are seeing me. Of course, this still won't help me with the latter kind of driver though...

*There is of course a whole discussion we've have several times before here about what is the best combination of stuff, but I'm not getting into that now.

 

[downfader]

I started to read the comments and i lost the will to go on after a while , the same old responses from drivers and as usual they get crushed by the truth and they still come back for more.

Until any government decide to treat the issue with the seriousness it deserves and the police act upon it then we will not see any change.

If you think thats bad you wanna see the comments on the story of the Bournmouth Echo article I linked over on the CTC helmet forum...

Paraphrased:

WHY OH WHY OH WHY OH WHY must I have to wait in traffic, cant you see how important MY time is!! The Police are a joke, WHY OH WHY OH WHY cant they manage traffic properly. I'm not suprised they got a load of abuse for their stupidity and arrogance...

WHY OH WHY OH WHY

..and so forth...

A fair few of the comments on the Indi site got removed as a couple of them were pretty nasty and completely irrelevant. Someone made a comment on the Bournmouth site that people should have to sit an exam before being allowed on the interweb.

 

[Davidc]

I've found quite the opposite, wearing high-viz &/or when light I get far more close passes. I'm not saying your observations are wrong, I'm saying they're just different to mine.

That's a reasonable comment. It would take research not a load of anecdotes to get a proper picture. What would make a bigger difference than better lights and bright clothes would be some real action on driving standards and behaviour. Oops - a winged pig has just crash landed in the tree outside.

There are two different questions here: one relates to whether drivers are looking out for cyclists (or indeed anything else on the road), and one to whether drivers who are looking will see cyclists better who have lights etc.* Clearly in the latter case, lights etc. help. However, nothing is going to be much use in protecting us from drivers who aren't even looking.

Because of the latter, it is also not very sensible to conclude that because you have been in an accident whilst using lights etc. that light etc. are no use (and I hope no-one is doing this). You can't actually tell how many people didn't hit you because they did see you and therefore avoided you. There are rare occasions when one does get to find out from this more positive perspective - I have been congratulated recently by several people where I live on being very visible after dark, so clearly those particular people are seeing me. Of course, this still won't help me with the latter kind of driver though...

*There is of course a whole discussion we've have several times before here about what is the best combination of stuff, but I'm not getting into that now.

When driving I certainly see well lit and brightly clothed cyclists earlier, but apart from a few stealth cyclists (matt black clothes, dark coloured bike, no lights, no reflectors anywhere) it's difficult not to see a cyclist if you're looking where you're going. That's not a good reason to do away with lights and bright clothes etc, however I think the responsibility for bike/car collisions day or night rests with the driver 99 times out of a hundred.

Like you I get positive comments about my lighting, and it's nice to know that some drivers do appreciate cyclists' efforts to be easily seen. (I have also had a few moans about my back lights being too bright, and usually say they have a point but the trouble is not everyone's as good at looking where they're going as they are, which goes down quite well).

 

[buggi]

..... this could be a good thing if we didnt have to deal with the strawman:

http://www.independe...11-2185637.html#

This is sooo true tho. Barristers will do ANYTHING to get their clients off and lay blame at the victims feet. they do exactly the same thing with rape victims (what they were wearing, or they might be drunk... it then becomes the victims fault... never mind the fact that it is known that rapist's purposely target anyone dressed like this or drunk as he knows that will help in his defence IF he is caught). So we should make sure we wear hi-viz, not because we will be seen, but only to stop this happening IF we get run over. Again, another example is insurance companies lowering compensation to victims who don't wear helmets. So it doesn't really matter whether you think helmets work or not, and you can debate all you like, but the simple truth is you should wear one to stop them having a mitigation.

and so back to hi-viz...

 

[downfader]

There are two different questions here: one relates to whether drivers are looking out for cyclists (or indeed anything else on the road), and one to whether drivers who are looking will see cyclists better who have lights etc.* Clearly in the latter case, lights etc. help. However, nothing is going to be much use in protecting us from drivers who aren't even looking.

Because of the latter, it is also not very sensible to conclude that because you have been in an accident whilst using lights etc. that light etc. are no use (and I hope no-one is doing this). You can't actually tell how many people didn't hit you because they did see you and therefore avoided you. There are rare occasions when one does get to find out from this more positive perspective - I have been congratulated recently by several people where I live on being very visible after dark, so clearly those particular people are seeing me. Of course, this still won't help me with the latter kind of driver though...

*There is of course a whole discussion we've have several times before here about what is the best combination of stuff, but I'm not getting into that now.

I'm certainly not saying anyone should rely on anecdotes (esp on the internet), but there have been studies done, and just as with the dreaded-helmet - its just not clear cut.

If anything an anecdote does say, its about how complicated a situation we're in. Either way we cant win, especially if a driver fails to look, and that was my main point.