One for the London lot...

[BentMikey]

Al78 has it exactly right.

Perhaps not so much in a well lit area, but around where i work the roads are unlit rural B roads. Cyclists wearing dark clothing, even with reasonably bright lights, are much harder to see than cyclists wearing a hi vis vest.Sadly, most cyclists round here seem to think that one or the other is OK, or in the case of a few spectacularly stupid ones, neither.

Oh come on, this is just utterly wrong. Even if you take the very best setup where the reflectives of the vest are reflecting your headlights, then good lights are going to be considerably brighter. Then there are plenty of situations where there will be no reflection from the vest, when even dim lights will show where the vest doesn't.

 

[very-near]

Perhaps not so much in a well lit area, but around where i work the roads are unlit rural B roads. Cyclists wearing dark clothing, even with reasonably bright lights, are much harder to see than cyclists wearing a hi vis vest.Sadly, most cyclists round here seem to think that one or the other is OK, or in the case of a few spectacularly stupid ones, neither.

On my commute this morning, I passed a couple of cyclists on the (rural)road. Neither had lights or reflectors but one had a high viz/reflective jacket which gave me a lot more time to see him and adjust my speed to his until it was clear to pass him.

I also passed an old 205 Pug which was filthy (non reflective) and without his lights on. It would be so easy for another car/bus/van/hgv to turn across his path and not see him at all at dawn when the contrast between the sky and road is at its greatest.

Both were an accident waiting to happen, but the High viz made a hell of a difference.

 

[very-near]

Al78 has it exactly right.



Oh come on, this is just utterly wrong. Even if you take the very best setup where the reflectives of the vest are reflecting your headlights, then good lights are going to be considerably brighter. Then there are plenty of situations where there will be no reflection from the vest, when even dim lights will show where the vest doesn't.

It is a combination of the high viz and the reflective which works so well.

I was following a cyclist last night in town who was wearing dark clothing and my missus said that the guy was very very inconspicuous (organ donor for want of a better description). As we drew level with him, we realised he actually had a very bright rear light, but it was totally obscured by an object on his rack.

Lights are essential at this time of year, but no good if they can't be seen by others.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Oh come on, this is just utterly wrong. Even if you take the very best setup where the reflectives of the vest are reflecting your headlights, then good lights are going to be considerably brighter. Then there are plenty of situations where there will be no reflection from the vest, when even dim lights will show where the vest doesn't.

I'm not sure which bit you disagree with, as we seem to be saying the same thing. But reflectives give a shape to the area behind the light, which helps to identify the light as a cyclist. A reflective on its own is no use at all in circumstances where exernal light sources don't illuminate it, as you correctly point out. My comment was based on the fact that "most cyclists round here seem to think that one or the other is OK, or in the case of a few spectacularly stupid ones, neither." Note that it doesn't say that either lights or a high vis vest is fine.

 

[BentMikey]

OK, your post seems to be saying something entirely different to me - that hiviz is always more visible than lights. Sorry if I misunderstood what you intended to say.

With good lights, I wouldn't expect much of the reflectives to be visible behind those good lights. I also don't think it's good to look like a cyclist, bar a few limited exceptions. Looking like a cyclist causes drivers to pass judgement and treat us differently than they should.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

OK, your post seems to be saying something entirely different to me - that hiviz is always more visible than lights. Sorry if I misunderstood what you intended to say.

Good lord, no. I certainly didn't mean it to come across like that! I just think it helps.

With good lights, I wouldn't expect much of the reflectives to be visible behind those good lights. I also don't think it's good to look like a cyclist, bar a few limited exceptions. Looking like a cyclist causes drivers to pass judgement and treat us differently than they should.

The reflectives halp, in that you're not just faced with a spot of light somewhere on the other side of the road which could be a pedestrian with a torch, a motorcyclist half a mile or so off, or whatever. Certainly I find it helpful from behind the wheel to know there's a cyclist there, rather than the other things I mention. However, I suspect you're talking from a streetlit urban point of view - reasonably enough, given the OP - whereas most of the roads I encounter cyclists on are unlit rural roads. Our perspectives are bound to be a bit different.

 

[thomas]

Depends which one you have on your tail Thomas...

Not the Norwich ones....Though admitidly they might not of know I was racing them

 

[BentMikey]

I'm talking from both urban and rural perspectives, as I have both on my commute. I don't think there's much chance of good lights being mistaken for a pedestrian with torch. For one, in the lane like a vehicle, and for two, brightness and light hue.

 

[gaz]

Al78 has it exactly right.



Oh come on, this is just utterly wrong. Even if you take the very best setup where the reflectives of the vest are reflecting your headlights, then good lights are going to be considerably brighter. Then there are plenty of situations where there will be no reflection from the vest, when even dim lights will show where the vest doesn't.

Exactly, if someone is waiting at a t junction, looks left looks right, and can't see you because no light is reflecting of your reflectors.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I'm talking from both urban and rural perspectives, as I have both on my commute. I don't think there's much chance of good lights being mistaken for a pedestrian with torch. For one, in the lane like a vehicle, and for two, brightness and light hue.

And I'm talking from the perspective of someone who does an awful lot of driving and has sometimes been momentarily confused as to what that tiny pinpoint of light in the distance actually is. Granted, it's never caused a problem for me or for the cyclist, but it does happen. Perhaps with good lights such as those I have on my bike, it's less of a problem, but with the cheap lights most folk around here seem to use - if they use any at all, that is - it's easy to mistake them for something else. Pedal reflectors, hi viz ... anything that helps a driver pick out a cyclist in a sea of darkness is a help.

 

[BentMikey]

Maybe with poor lights, that's a possibility, but never with good lights. Not seeing good lights easily and well simply means you're not looking.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Maybe with poor lights, that's a possibility, but never with good lights. Not seeing good lights easily and well simply means you're not looking.

Seeing the lights isn't a problem. But even with good lights one can interpret them in a number of ways. And, of course, not everyone uses good lights; probably a minority. It's nothing to do with "not looking": a pinpoint of light three hundred yards up a dark road is just that. Anything which helps identify it further - and I include using additional flashing lights front and back, like I use - is a good thing.

 

[BentMikey]

Why do cars not have hiviz jackets, and why can we all interpret car and motorbike lights properly, and yet according to you, not cyclists?

I'm sorry, but you're talking up a storm of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Why do cars not have hiviz jackets, and why can we all interpret car and motorbike lights properly, and yet according to you, not cyclists?

I'm sorry, but you're talking up a storm of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).

But I'm not, or at least, I'm not trying to. I just happen to have more driving experience than most on here and am trying to share my experience of how cyclists are sometimes seen from behind the wheel of a truck. If you don't feel the need to take advantage of that, that's fine, but there's no call to accuse me of scaremongering.
As it happens, I haven't said anywhere that motorbike lights are not open to misinterpretation - in just the same way that a bike light can appear to be a motorbike a long way off, so too can a twin headlight motorbike be mistaken momentarily for a car - and car lights are usually easier to interpret because there are two of them. (At least, there are if they're working properly, which is far from given these days.) But anything that helps distinguish a cyclist from any other road user is a good thing. It doesn't have to be a high vis jacket: pedal reflectors, secondary flashing LED lights and reflectors can all help.

 

[Greenbank]

Hi-vis debate aside...

Not sure that "Council Employees" will have the powers required to stop traffic! Which means if they ask you to stop and you don't there isn't much they will be able to do about it! Come to think about it, I don't think they have the power to demand your name and address either. Which is why the police were called too ascertain a persons ID when they refused. They certainly won't have the power to detain you until the police arrive! And unless it's a designated operation the Police won't be hanging around up the road!

I think that's part of the reason why the LCC were only partly in support of it. Tom Bogdanowicz said:-

“But our enforcement of moving traffic offences needs to be carried out by trained police or police community support officers,” he told the paper.
“They are the best qualified to enforce the regulations on pavement cycling and most other offences as they have the training and authority to do their work.”

The Police don't have to be up the road all the time, just some of the time, often enough to make people think twice about doing it just in case they are there to nab them.