Why do road maintenance vehicles need bright flashing lights?

[SWMc]

I thought he went into the back of un unlit hay waggon? If it was the a head on the I would think it would be a miscarriage of justice?

He did hit the back of the tractor on a 70mph section of dual carriageway which is the only road class where a tractor (with maximum speed of 25mph or less) requires a beacon.

The problem I have with some of the assist vehicles and lorries using flashing lights all the time, is that it can mask the indicator lights and I've noticed a few occasions when they have made turns that I didn't expect because their indicator lights didn't stand out over all the other flashing lights.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

I thought he went into the back of un unlit hay waggon? If it was the a head on the I would think it would be a miscarriage of justice?

At night? Do you have a link.

 

[classic33]

At night? Do you have a link.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwe9e523vgm2o

 

[Richard A Thackeray]

An attempt to reduce the risk of this, presumably:

View: https://x.com/fietsprofessor/status/2106684366281662514

Likewise

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Why is this discussion even a thing? It's down to basic visibility and trying to mitigate and protect yourself legally from every retard on the road, even when they do crash into you. 🙄🤦‍♂️

Simples.

Quite honestly, from a bunch of cyclists who can be lit up like a Christmas and STILL be hit, I thought it would be beyond obvious.

Clearly not. 🤔

 

[T4tomo]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwe9e523vgm2o

It doesn't say it was a night so assuming it was day time, aren't you supposed to travel at the speed of your safe stopping distance for the distance you can see?

What if it had been a stationary object on the road, such as a fallen tree or two other crashed vehicles?

 

[Drago]

It doesn't say it was a night so assuming it was day time, aren't you supposed to travel at the speed of your safe stopping distance for the distance you can see?

What if it had been a stationary object on the road, such as a fallen tree or two other crashed vehicles?

You are indeed wise.

I once had a woman with mental health difficulties run out and throw herself in front of my car on a dual carriageway. Because I always expect the unexpected I wasnt hooning like most drivers and managed to just haul up in time.

Stuff appears, pulls out, runs out, falls out, amd we should all be driving at a speed that will allow us to stop when it does. Just because it looks clear now doesnt mean it will be in one seconds time.

 

[Jameshow]

You are indeed wise.

I once had a woman with mental health difficulties run out and throw herself in front of my car on a dual carriageway. Because I always expect the unexpected I wasnt hooning like most drivers and managed to just haul up in time.

Stuff appears, pulls out, runs out, falls out, amd we should all be driving at a speed that will allow us to stop when it does. Just because it looks clear now doesnt mean it will be in one seconds time.

On my drive to South Wales I had a lad with head phones on cross a 60mph road, I hit the brakes, my daughter hit the dashboard, skidded, he turned and looked at the car went back to the pavement like nothing had happened!

 

[SteveH80]

What a peculiar thread this is. So my combination of science, observations and wild guesses are...
Flashing lights are used because the brain is tuned to detect movement, a flashing light is interpreted as movement so more likely to be registered. It's why we sometimes set our light to flash (they are more readily seen, but are harder to judge distance).
Orange as opposed to sky- blue-pink I don't know, possibly because the natural world isn't surrounded by orange and it won't be mixed up with reds, greens and blues which as road users we are trained to know as other things.
It's not perfect but better than the other options. It's a bit like wearing lime green while cycling, we know that in the spring it blends into new foliage, but it's still safer than wearing black.

 

[Drago]

As aforementioned, there is little proven link between conspicuity and safer outcomes.

It is done because...

1) "It must be safer", it's one of the things always done in the name of safety because logic tells us it must be good. Indeed, the logic behind it seemingly so obvious that people don't bother checking the evidence. Things done in the name of safety simply because its the obvious thing to do rarely lead to a safer outcome, and sometimes even can be detrimental to that goal.

2) The real reason, to make it well and truly the other parties fault when they still mange to crash into it.

 

[Sea of vapours]

It's a bit like wearing lime green while cycling, we know that in the spring it blends into new foliage, but it's still safer than wearing black.

Is it really safer than black though?

In bright sunlight the commonly-worn yellow/green colours are close to camouflage against glowing, green/yellow foliage, whereas black provides an unbroken silhouette effect, and humans are very good at spotting the shape of other humans, even those on a bike.

 

[Happy_Days]

The real reason, to make it well and truly the other parties fault when they still mange to crash into it.

Indeed. It prevents someone’s lawyer from taking the Mickey by claiming reduced compensation because you weren’t conspicuous. It’s worked at least once. A fellow club member had their compensation reduced because their bike clothing wasn’t deemed visible. A law professor is also a club member; he told me that he wears hi-vis to avoid a legal palaver if he were ever hit by a car.

When a driver hit me, the legal form I completed asked what I was wearing but didn’t explicitly mention hi-vis. It also asked a separate question on whether I had lights on, so my conspicuity was evidently material.

None of this relates to the evidence for hi-vis clothing’s efficacy.

 

[Drago]

And the dibble when recording incidents involving cyclists dont record anything other than whether or not they were showing lights at night or in times of poor visibility.

Imagine the outrage if the CICS started asking rape victims if they had been wearing short skirts and high heels when they were attacked before awarding compensation! And yet us cyclists are fair game to blame for someone elses negligence.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

I think we should start a campaign that ALL tree branches should have automatic lights on them

so that when they drop onto a road the light come on automatically

otherwise how can an innocent, careful and considerate car driver - that has always looked after his granny - have any chance of spotting them???

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

I think - as said above - the main driving force is legal

firms want to be able to show that they are taking all possible precautions to protect their staff
for the insurance and so any lawyers cannot say they are not so it was their fault

Insurance companies - whether through an employer or not - will use it to say that it was partly the fault of the victim because they did not take enough precautions and/or made themselves vulnerable
(the parallel to women wearing short skirts was a good point!)

so the stats are interesting
but not the main driving force

I am still wearing my hi-vis when I go out riding

partly because I think it makes me more visible
partly because I think it makes me seem less threatening to some people (bloke on ebike and all that)
partly because it makes me not look like a "real cyclist" which some people hate for "reasons"

but mostly because it makes my wife feel happier that I am being sensible

and if I ever wake up in a hospital bed with her sitting beside me then I don;t want to think "maybe I could have done something to make it less worse for her"
which is quite similar to insurance in some ways - if you think in strange ways!