Staying safe on the roads

oodboo

I'm sure this topic has been covered loads and I haven't searched the forum to check but here's my take on improving safety for cyclists. It comes down to education, we as cyclists need to remind motorists that we are people, we have lives that matter and people that matter to us. To that end I created a facebook page with the intention of pushing that message. You can find the page here: https://www.facebook.com/We-Are-People-521851514641756/

I haven't had a lot of time to work on it or expand the idea further but if anyone has any feedback on what I've done so far then please let me know. The page was not set up with the intention of finger pointing or blaming anyone, it's simple message is that we are people, not just some t** on a bike.



Thanks

rick_chasey

Wouldn't be a bad idea to tell people that just because you're on a road bike in Lycra, it's not the Tour.

The skinny guy isn't your lead out man or domestique and the other cars and motorbikes aren't team cars and camera bikes respectively.

But that just might be an embankment thing.

smokey_bacon

Rick Chasey wrote:

But that just might be an embankment thing.

Nope that's an everywhere thing unfortunately.

imatfaal

If someone's whole world is on the bike - and we all do agree it is that important - is it such a fashion disaster to not be wearing all black with a black bike and black helmet.

And I am not victim-blaming

oodboo

Once again the point of me being barely visible in the photo has been missed.

rick_chasey

Meh I'm relaxed about that. If you have lights what's the problem? People drive in black cars.

Increasingly my main concern are other bike users.

I tend to commute earlier now because I don't like the stress most cyclists cause, and, to be honest, it's embarrassing to be associated with most of them.

The lights in central London bunch cyclists up so you can't get away. They're rude, sweary, and inconsiderate.

Appreciate it's the pot calling the kettle black but the excessive amounts of Lycra and high viz only serves to remind my that my main hobby and passion is gimpy and excercised by an increasing number of bell ends.

That's particularly galling since I'm well aware of my own tendency to be a bell end, so it only serves as a mirror of my own self hatred.





That and choppers who keep passing on the left because they can't look far enough ahead to see what the hold up is.

rick_chasey

Sorry. Went a bit off pieste there.


Ultimately if you share roads with cars there will be instances where they collide.

Driver education won't do that much. The guy who hits you in his car because he's in a rush is likely not to respond to education.

oodboo

Btw that's a white bike (with black forks) and I carry a large rucksack with a high vis cover. Plus my commute is about 80% off road so I don't really go for the bright yellow high vis look.

Snakebite the 2nd

I'm not to bothered what people wear, but as a car driver I appreciate all the help I can get, and that can mean hi-viz.
As a cyclist I don't care what I look like, I just want every advantage in my favour and that means hi-viz.
Unfortunately.

As for driver education, well if it's comparable, result wise, with "normal" education we are screwed.
Record amounts of people going to university, but record amounts of half witted imbeciles who are, at best, unemployable!

The only way it's going to work is to take peoples licences away if they are proved guilty of crap driving resulting in a cyclist/pedestrian injury.
No matter how slight.

menthel

Hi-vis is not as good as decent reflective gear. I would always prioritize reflectives over day glo colours.

magibob

menthel wrote:

Hi-vis is not as good as decent reflective gear. I would always prioritize reflectives over day glo colours.

To be honest, I think, if you are going purely for safety, both are important. Reflective bounces any light back towards the source, usually headlights, high viz is...well, highly visible. Particularly in say misty conditions, if a driver doesn't have his lights on the reflective won't help at all.

High Viz also helps on my commute where I am on cycle paths in a city, where pedestrians can wander in fron of you. High viz makes you more visible to a glance, where reflectives wouldn't make any difference.

My thoughts

Andy

london-red

I like the idea, but think that it might come across as being quite exclusive. 'We' are this, and want to do that is all well and good but comes across as a bit arrogant and self-obsessed. I think a stronger message would be to try and make cyclists out to be the same as everyone else. The idea of a WVM, or cabbie, or salesman or whatever out for a spin is a stronger message to me than trying to create a sub-culture.

The message that a cyclist could also be someone's drinking buddy is pretty powerful.

Oh, and I agree completely with Rick's rant.

pastryboy

The more I drive my car the more I realise it's not about educating drivers or cycling awareness it's just plain old bad driving and carelessness. I seem to never be able to make a car journey where someone doesn't pull out on me or turn across me or come flying towards me at silly speeds down a road with cars parked either side.

itboffin

I've found that hi-viz is even more invisible, the best bet out in the sticks is ride in the primary position, have multiple good lights and when the traffic gets a bit close as it does the odd well timed wobble does help.

Subtle not insane

oodboo

London-Red wrote:

I like the idea, but think that it might come across as being quite exclusive. 'We' are this, and want to do that is all well and good but comes across as a bit arrogant and self-obsessed. I think a stronger message would be to try and make cyclists out to be the same as everyone else. The idea of a WVM, or cabbie, or salesman or whatever out for a spin is a stronger message to me than trying to create a sub-culture.

The message that a cyclist could also be someone's drinking buddy is pretty powerful.

Oh, and I agree completely with Rick's rant.

Thanks, some useful feedback to help me develop the idea.

menthel

itboffin wrote:

I've found that hi-viz is even more invisible, the best bet out in the sticks is ride in the primary position, have multiple good lights and when the traffic gets a bit close as it does the odd well timed wobble does help.

Subtle not insane

Agreed- hi-vis is ubiquitous, it is so every day and found in so many places that the impact has been lost. Reflective is better because of this. Lights are best of all!

pastryboy

In my experience a front helmet light is the best safety accessory there is.

rick_chasey

pastryboy wrote:

In my experience a front helmet light is the best safety accessory there is.

Not if a) you're the f@cker being blinded by your light since you won't always have it pointed down and b) when said light slams into your skull in an accident ala Micheal Schumacher.

So no, it isn't.

pastryboy

I see what you've done there, you've taken my comment and made an assumption about what I'm referring to.

Here's a picture of what I was actually referring to. I think it would struggle to blind anyone and I speak from unfortunate experience when I say that, in a crash, it flies straight off its (very small) mount.

rick_chasey

Pretty much exactly what I was referring to?

Poitr

Plus the story about Schumacher was speculation by a journo and has since been recanted.

awavey

pastryboy wrote:

I see what you've done there, you've taken my comment and made an assumption about what I'm referring to.

Here's a picture of what I was actually referring to. I think it would struggle to blind anyone and I speak from unfortunate experience when I say that, in a crash, it flies straight off its (very small) mount.

you blind the people before they crash into you because they cant then see where they are going thats the point, because the light beam and I bet its a stupidly bright light too, is then following whichever direction your head is bobbling in because you wont be able to hold your head and neck rock steady, so you see a car coming towards you, you naturally look towards it, thats the light straight in the drivers eyeline, you turn your head to shoulder check, thats the light in the drivers eye behind you as well, but as youve done that your head switches back to the front and youve blinded the driver coming towards you again.

theres a reason headlights on cars are not (supposed to be) setup to dazzle other drivers. a light on a helmet dazzles other road users and they are annoying as hell, they dont increase your safety in any measurable significant way, unless you think being annoying makes you safer

daniel_b

awavey wrote:

pastryboy wrote:

I see what you've done there, you've taken my comment and made an assumption about what I'm referring to.

Here's a picture of what I was actually referring to. I think it would struggle to blind anyone and I speak from unfortunate experience when I say that, in a crash, it flies straight off its (very small) mount.

I bet its a stupidly bright light too

I think it is not:
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/topeak-headlux-helmet-light/rp-prod47006

pastryboy

I'm not some noob who started riding a bike last week. If you look at Daniel B's link it confirms what I said.

It's similar to one of those little Knog lights - it's incapable of actually lighting anything up let alone blinding anyone.

There are videos of them in use on youtube if you are incapable of getting your head around the concept.

warreng

Christ you'd hate me then. I thought those Topeak lights, if anything, insufficient on their own - the only way you'd blind someone with those would be if they got stuck in your eye. I pair them with those Exposure flare/trace things.

itboffin

i must admit the one time i've seen a rider coming towards me out here in the stick with only a headlight i couldnt workout their distance, i guess if you're not used to seeing a hovering light approaching then it is confusing.

wolfsbane2k

itboffin wrote:

i must admit the one time i've seen a rider coming towards me out here in the stick with only a headlight i couldnt workout their distance, i guess if you're not used to seeing a hovering light approaching then it is confusing.

This is my experience as well, when it's just a helmet light. Makes them appear significantly further away than they are as the brain converts the perspective.

roger_merriman

Wolfsbane2k wrote:

itboffin wrote:

i must admit the one time i've seen a rider coming towards me out here in the stick with only a headlight i couldnt workout their distance, i guess if you're not used to seeing a hovering light approaching then it is confusing.

This is my experience as well, when it's just a helmet light. Makes them appear significantly further away than they are as the brain converts the perspective.

A few years ago, late night/early coming though Richmond Park some inline skaters had just head torches, the height and movement, meant I couldn't work out a) what they where or b) how far they where.

wolfsbane2k

roger merriman wrote:

Wolfsbane2k wrote:

itboffin wrote:

i must admit the one time i've seen a rider coming towards me out here in the stick with only a headlight i couldnt workout their distance, i guess if you're not used to seeing a hovering light approaching then it is confusing.

This is my experience as well, when it's just a helmet light. Makes them appear significantly further away than they are as the brain converts the perspective.

A few years ago, late night/early coming though Richmond Park some inline skaters had just head torches, the height and movement, meant I couldn't work out a) what they where or b) how far they where.

That weaving would cause odd effects on the perspective processing. I find it hard enough to distance a runner with a single headlight just bobbing up and down.