Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16399
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby mjr » 18 Jan 2020, 6:18pm

Mike Sales wrote:The question posed by the O.P. is in the heading, of course.
mjr wrote:It should be police investigators. They include it because it's in the manual. The manual is set by the Department of Transport and I think is supposed to be reviewed every five years. The last review was 2011. We get this changed by convincing the motorists at the DfT writing the manual to remove it in the next review. Past reviews have removed factor codes.

For what it's worth, pedestrians currently suffer far more of these victim-blaming codes, including not only "dark clothing" but also "wrong use of pedestrian crossing" (basically going when the red give-way man is showing, but distinct from the usual failing to give way) and even "playing" if children now dare to play ball in the street!


mjr gives an answer, which demands another question.

"Is failure by the driver to observe H.C. paragraph 126 in the manual too?"

If not, why not?
If it is, why is it not used?
In cases where a driver hits a cyclist from behind it must surely be at least a cause, in strict logic.

The manuals are called STATS20 and CRASH if you'd like to check. I don't have my copy right here right now.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

passing the junction
Posts: 10
Joined: 23 May 2018, 8:48pm

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby passing the junction » 26 Jan 2020, 10:37pm

in relation to HC 126 - stopping distances, under CF 'injudicious actions' there's "following too close" and "travelling too fast for conditions" but there's nothing quantifiable. The disclaimer on the CF form is "these factors reflect the reporting officer's opinion at the time of reporting and may not be the result of extensive investigation". I'm not sure any of them are that much objective use really. But it's not a giant leap of the imagination to see that if someone filling it in arrives with a prejudice, then that's how the form gets used.

"Driving too close to cyclist, horse or pedestrian" is under 'driver/rider error or reaction' but that might or might not be combined "aggressive driving" or "careless reckless or in a hurry" (both under "Behaviour or inexperience") . You can go down a rabbit hole with CFs - as the forms shows, up to six can be recorded and each ranked as 'very likely' or 'possible'. Completing it seems a big ask of someone who has, after all, arrived after the event.

Just as bad, or more so, is the "cycle helmet worn" in the casualty record - but I expect that is already covered comprehensively elsewhere on this forum.

peetee
Posts: 2623
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby peetee » 28 Jan 2020, 7:58am

Speaking as someone who has seen the road and the way it is used from the perspective of pedestrian, cyclist, motorist, horse rider and LGV driver it occurs to me that the statistics relating to hi-vis vs dark clothing is largely immaterial as what the cyclist is wearing is, more often than not, irrelevant. Day after day people take risks; poor observation, driving too close, braking too late, reckless overtaking, the list is endless. I am sure most of us would agree that the vast majority of hazardous situations we find ourselves in are down to risk takers who put their own progress before respect and common sense. Such arrogance when challenged is bound to be veiled with any excuse to distract from their culpability. You could dress like a Christmas tree but it wouldn’t stop impatient, stupid people driving without due care and using any excuse but their own actions as the reason for a collision or confrontation.
Winter had arrived in the land of Kernow. Along with it came wet roads and cool winds.
“Oh, my wheels and coupling rods!” Peetee exclaimed.

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 3405
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby Cugel » 28 Jan 2020, 9:19am

peetee wrote:Speaking as someone who has seen the road and the way it is used from the perspective of pedestrian, cyclist, motorist, horse rider and LGV driver it occurs to me that the statistics relating to hi-vis vs dark clothing is largely immaterial as what the cyclist is wearing is, more often than not, irrelevant. Day after day people take risks; poor observation, driving too close, braking too late, reckless overtaking, the list is endless. I am sure most of us would agree that the vast majority of hazardous situations we find ourselves in are down to risk takers who put their own progress before respect and common sense. Such arrogance when challenged is bound to be veiled with any excuse to distract from their culpability. You could dress like a Christmas tree but it wouldn’t stop impatient, stupid people driving without due care and using any excuse but their own actions as the reason for a collision or confrontation.


Exactly so.

One may observe similar establishment of self-centred little skinbag norms in many other domains of human activity, along with the associated beliefs. One may observe them in oneself, should introspection become habitual rather than a way of thinking shied away from by the pompous or those too embarrassed to admit their many faux-pas.

Personally I'm becoming more ashamed of my human nature every day that goes by. I look at myself (the behaviours) and at their effect on the world and it's other constituents and find .... damage. And I'm quite the careful and considerate fellow compared to the norm. Oh yes I am!

Cugel

Gearoidmuar
Posts: 2237
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 7:35pm
Location: Cork, Ireland. Corcaigh, Éire má tá Gaeilge agat.

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby Gearoidmuar » 28 Jan 2020, 9:21am

peetee wrote:Speaking as someone who has seen the road and the way it is used from the perspective of pedestrian, cyclist, motorist, horse rider and LGV driver it occurs to me that the statistics relating to hi-vis vs dark clothing is largely immaterial as what the cyclist is wearing is, more often than not, irrelevant. Day after day people take risks; poor observation, driving too close, braking too late, reckless overtaking, the list is endless. I am sure most of us would agree that the vast majority of hazardous situations we find ourselves in are down to risk takers who put their own progress before respect and common sense. Such arrogance when challenged is bound to be veiled with any excuse to distract from their culpability. You could dress like a Christmas tree but it wouldn’t stop impatient, stupid people driving without due care and using any excuse but their own actions as the reason for a collision or confrontation.

While carless people will not become careful, there still is the problem of camouflage.. Why do you think animals wear camouflage? Is it so it'll be easier for their prey to see them, or more difficult?

The fact of the matter is that human vision isn't great at spotting camouflaged articles, including camouflaged cyclists. There's no getting around this fact. British Rail invented hi-vis clothing (Orange) a long time ago for workers working on Railway lines.

Why are people so illogical about this?

peetee
Posts: 2623
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby peetee » 28 Jan 2020, 9:33am

Gearoidmuar wrote:
peetee wrote:Speaking as someone who has seen the road and the way it is used from the perspective of pedestrian, cyclist, motorist, horse rider and LGV driver it occurs to me that the statistics relating to hi-vis vs dark clothing is largely immaterial as what the cyclist is wearing is, more often than not, irrelevant. Day after day people take risks; poor observation, driving too close, braking too late, reckless overtaking, the list is endless. I am sure most of us would agree that the vast majority of hazardous situations we find ourselves in are down to risk takers who put their own progress before respect and common sense. Such arrogance when challenged is bound to be veiled with any excuse to distract from their culpability. You could dress like a Christmas tree but it wouldn’t stop impatient, stupid people driving without due care and using any excuse but their own actions as the reason for a collision or confrontation.

While carless people will not become careful, there still is the problem of camouflage.. Why do you think animals wear camouflage? Is it so it'll be easier for their prey to see them, or more difficult?

The fact of the matter is that human vision isn't great at spotting camouflaged articles, including camouflaged cyclists. There's no getting around this fact. British Rail invented hi-vis clothing (Orange) a long time ago for workers working on Railway lines.

Why are people so illogical about this?


I never said the problem of low-vis cyclists didn’t exist. I was emphasising that behaviour is so big a problem as to overshadow fallibility. Or put it an other way, risk taking is far more prevalent than poor judgement.
Winter had arrived in the land of Kernow. Along with it came wet roads and cool winds.
“Oh, my wheels and coupling rods!” Peetee exclaimed.

mattheus
Posts: 1564
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby mattheus » 28 Jan 2020, 9:44am

Does anyone - Gearoidmuar? - think that if you stand on a railway line in bright enough Hi-Viz, then eventually a train will glide gently to a halt 5m before reaching you?

reohn2
Posts: 40220
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby reohn2 » 28 Jan 2020, 10:00am

peetee wrote:......... Or put it an other way, risk taking is far more prevalent than poor judgement.

I'm not disagreeing with you but risk taking on the road is poor judgement to a greater or lesser extent.
In the case of road users,risk is high,mainly because of the many unknown factors.
To put it in context a racing car driver takes risks but they're calulated on a narrower risk factor eg; all vehicles going the same way,all other drivers and their driving styles are largely known and there's safety barriers,etc,etc.
On the roads anything can happen,from a dozy pedestrian walking off the pavement without looking to a tree falling over or a cow in the road aroumd the next bend or an even bigger risk taker coming the opposite way,etc,etc,etc,ad infinitum.
I witness daily some of the most appalling risk taking by road users,most are overwhelmingly by private car drivers,it beggars belief at times just what some drivers will risk to overtake,and don't get me on about tailgaters :evil:
-----------------------------------------------------------

mattheus
Posts: 1564
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby mattheus » 28 Jan 2020, 10:15am

I think peetee is making a distinction between your overall approach (in a rush, or safety first, etc) and
the quick, snap judgements we make in many situations (e.g. will that bike get to me before I pull out?). "Decisions" a better word?

The argument FOR visibility is that it can make the decisions more accurate, cos you can see people better.

The counter-argument is that most crashes are caused by impatience etc, not a lack of correct information.

reohn2
Posts: 40220
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby reohn2 » 28 Jan 2020, 10:31am

mattheus wrote:I think peetee is making a distinction between your overall approach (in a rush, or safety first, etc) and
the quick, snap judgements we make in many situations (e.g. will that bike get to me before I pull out?). "Decisions" a better word?

The argument FOR visibility is that it can make the decisions more accurate, cos you can see people better.

The counter-argument is that most crashes are caused by impatience etc, not a lack of correct information.

I agree,I was merely pointing out that risk by drivers is unbelievable at times.
I'm either getting more nervous in my old age(not unknown)or a significant increasing element of UK drivers are taking more dangerous risks which becomes more apparent in threat of injury personally when cycling.There doesn't seem to be an appreciation of the dangers involved with such actions ,that or that significant element simply don't care :?
-----------------------------------------------------------

peetee
Posts: 2623
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby peetee » 28 Jan 2020, 10:32am

mattheus wrote:I think peetee is making a distinction between your overall approach (in a rush, or safety first, etc) and
the quick, snap judgements we make in many situations (e.g. will that bike get to me before I pull out?). "Decisions" a better word?

The argument FOR visibility is that it can make the decisions more accurate, cos you can see people better.

The counter-argument is that most crashes are caused by impatience etc, not a lack of correct information.


Kind of. I am emphasising that the common behaviour is to drive in too close proximity to others, be it vehicle, cyclist, pedestrian, whatever. Safety campaigns and knowledge of the circumstances of other accidents have left people in no doubt that what they are doing is risky but having done it habitually for years in their minds it’s low risk and justifiable. When something does happen it’s bad luck, someone else’s fault, etc etc.
Winter had arrived in the land of Kernow. Along with it came wet roads and cool winds.
“Oh, my wheels and coupling rods!” Peetee exclaimed.

Oldjohnw
Posts: 5372
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby Oldjohnw » 28 Jan 2020, 10:36am

reohn2 wrote:
mattheus wrote:I think peetee is making a distinction between your overall approach (in a rush, or safety first, etc) and
the quick, snap judgements we make in many situations (e.g. will that bike get to me before I pull out?). "Decisions" a better word?

The argument FOR visibility is that it can make the decisions more accurate, cos you can see people better.

The counter-argument is that most crashes are caused by impatience etc, not a lack of correct information.

I agree,I was merely pointing out that risk by drivers is unbelievable at times.
I'm either getting more nervous in my old age(not unknown)or a significant increasing element of UK drivers are taking more dangerous risks which becomes more apparent in threat of injury personally when cycling.There doesn't seem to be an appreciation of the dangers involved with such actions ,that or that significant element simply don't care :?


Funnily enough, I am often afraid walking on uneven pavements and I am terrified of slipping on ice when going outside. I have few fears when on my bike, whatever I wear. I hate driving long distances - which I only do to visit my children. I am not exactly afraid but I find exhausting driving on a motorway. Tailgating is more likely to make me angry than afraid: which I have to get over because being angry mitigates against good decision making.
John

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18508
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby Vorpal » 28 Jan 2020, 10:37am

Gearoidmuar wrote: While carless people will not become careful, there still is the problem of camouflage.. Why do you think animals wear camouflage? Is it so it'll be easier for their prey to see them, or more difficult?

The fact of the matter is that human vision isn't great at spotting camouflaged articles, including camouflaged cyclists. There's no getting around this fact. British Rail invented hi-vis clothing (Orange) a long time ago for workers working on Railway lines.

Why are people so illogical about this?

Are people illogical about this? There is a difference between being easily seen, and being safer. Studies & data support that hi viz makes people more easily seen. They don't support any case that it makes us safer. And there is furthermore the problem that no one suggests hi viz for cars or trees. But they do for pedestrians and cyclists. Furthermore, hi viz is not always the most appropriate attire. There are certainly circumstances where white or light colours will be most easily seen, and circumstances where black will be most easily seen (e.g. against snow, or oil seed rape in bloom). There are circumstances where reflective material will be more easily seen, and circumstances where it will not.

Does that mean you shouldn't wear hi viz? Of course not. But it also doesn't mean that someone who chooses otherwise is being illogical.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

Oldjohnw
Posts: 5372
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby Oldjohnw » 28 Jan 2020, 10:39am

I have read but I couldn't begin to remember where that white and silver cars were involved in less accidents. I really don't know.
John

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16399
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Why does ‘cyclist wearing dark clothing' exist as a contributory factor in KSIs

Postby mjr » 28 Jan 2020, 10:49am

Oldjohnw wrote:I have read but I couldn't begin to remember where that white and silver cars were involved in less accidents. I really don't know.

Surveys are inconsistent. There are also lots of confounding factors, such as stereotypical boy racers favouring red and blue cars and being involved in more collisions than average.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.