Scruffmonster
Über Member
- Location
- London/Kent
That's required reading. EVERYONE should read it.
Someone copy/paste and make it a sticky thread or add it to n existing one.
Thank you Hawk.
That's required reading. EVERYONE should read it.
Someone copy/paste and make it a sticky thread or add it to n existing one.
Thank you Hawk.
That's required reading. EVERYONE should read it.
Someone copy/paste and make it a sticky thread or add it to n existing one.
Thank you Hawk.
While it is generally understood that a low sun can make it difficult to see, it is probably not generally understood why: driving into sun reduces contrast, especially when vehicles and pedestrians fall into the shadow of larger, up-sun objects. You must beware that even large vehicles, and especially motorbikes, cyclists and pedestrians, can become completely impossible to see under these circumstances, and you must moderate your driving accordingly. This is why fighter pilots attack from out of the sun!
You want the original, and then take note of how subjective and biased the original is: http://www.verulamcc.org.uk/Uploads/pdfs/2012/How we see - impact on cyclists.pdf
No, it isn't. If you have to you should just read the original, not the piece about it. It is opinion masquerading as science.
I did read the original. I'm surprised you found it biased or subjective?
Looking at the "piece about it" it seems to say very much the same stuff, at times word-for-word.
What was any of it biased in favour of? I don't see it at all...
"Clinically, you are blind in your peripheral vision."
I was updating the above, and things like the following are meaningless:
I was updating the above, and things like the following are meaningless:
Well I am amazed and disappointed. My own dooring incident was held to be the door opener's fault and I was awarded very significant compensation. Police never found the culrpit, only civil action taken.
I trust the culprit will be pursued by the victim's family in the civil courts at least.