Why wear black?

[Mike Sales]

I know I'm wasting my breath here - most of the Frequent Posters seem to like posting this way - but it is a flipping stupid way to run a forum!

[and yes, I know this is thread drift from the Main Topic i.e. why cyclists in black are organ-donors with great arteries]

Steady on, old boy.

[mattheus]

Steady on, old boy.

What's up? I didn't even *mention* kittens!!!

[fullupandslowingdown]

The reason track workers wear orange rather than any other colour is largely because it cannot be mistaken in the distance for a signal colour.

nope, don't think so ... heres the spec:

https://www.globalrailwayreview.com/article/30804/visibility-rail-safety/

https://www.satra.com/spotlight/article.php?id=209

Those are interesting, especially the Global Review article that emphasises the importance of breathability and waterproofing, but I couldn't find anything in them that says why orange is specified rather than yellow.

The reason why since about the 1960s orange was used as personnel hi vis was because as train speeds increased the traditional white over clothing or arm bands was completely inaffective, let alone mucky grey/brown/black shirts etc, train drivers simply couldn't see track workers far enough away to stop in anything other than good weather conditions. Although the world steam speed record was set in 1938, by and large the majority of trains travelled at only 60mph except at a few mainline locations. But then modern high speed diesel locomotives and electric trains which were inherently quieter, were rolled out in the 60s capable of sustained running at 80 or 100mph, resulting in much greater risk to trackside workers who might not hear them until it was too late to move clear. It was also when diesel and electric locomotives started to have their noses painted yellow to help workers spot them from a distance. Lookouts at work sites use flags to indicate to drivers, green = clear, yellow =caution and red = effing well stop. Drivers are trained to respond to these colours and so a worker wearing yellow even 10 feet from the line could solicit an immediate precautionary application of the brakes. Orange isn't used as a flag colour so a train driver seeing orange near the line but not on, could proceed at speed subject to any other indication. If you look at any railway worksite you will see that any areas cordoned off with temporary plastic fencing is always blue, never yellow or orange. Again to avoid confusion and to give contrast to workers who might be lineside and haven't seen the approaching train but might suddenly move onto the four foot.

[Bmblbzzz]

Right, so we're back to the distinctiveness.

[[XAP]Bob]

Right, so we're back to the distinctiveness.

No - there is a difference between rail and road. You don’t need to be seen at two miles (and forgotten by the time you’re closer).

[mjr]

Right, so we're back to the distinctiveness.

No - there is a difference between rail and road. You don’t need to be seen at two miles (and forgotten by the time you’re closer).

Indeed. Compare the stopping distances. Is there any advantage to being seen a minute before the potential killer needs to act or does it mainly give them time to forget they need to act, maybe fiddle on the phone?

[Bmblbzzz]

Nothing to do with road. It was "back to the distinctiveness" of orange as opposed to yellow in a rail environment.

[fullupandslowingdown]

A lot of savvy road workers now wear a mix of yellow and orange hi-viz top and bottom. And I do think it makes them stand out a tiny bit more. Maybe a sort of mental blindness effect compared to something that's all the same. i.e you do actually see a group of workers stood around all uniformally dressed in either orange or in yellow, but you kinda of close your mind to it, but if some are wearing yellow trews, orange top and some orange trews, yellow top, it makes them pop more in the mind and if someone is a tired company rep speeding down the M1, it might make the difference. Maybe. Dunno.

[TrevA]

Ive encountered 2 black wearing cyclists in the dark in the last 2 days. One was just an ordinary bloke on a bike, wearing normal clothes. Bizarrely, he had a front light but no back light. Driving behind him I could see him due to his pedal reflectors.

The other was a hardcore commuter/racing man out training, dressed head to toe in black, but you could see him because of the reflective detailing on his clothing shining in the headlights, in addition to his bright front and rear lights.

[mjr]

Riding yesterday under black storm clouds, I was puzzled by a hi-vis roadworker buried shoulder deep in the verge rocking back and forth. What could be going on? Are they digging? Why are there no signs or cones out?

As I got closer, my headlight revealed it wasn't a roadworker. It was a dog in a stupid full-body hi-vis yellow jackets which had a horizontal stripe near the bottom and two hoops, just like the shoulders of a proper EN spec hi-vis!

This is another problem with hi-vis overuse. As well as possibly compromising the safety of the wearer in situations where non-standard patterns become dazzle camo and the safety of non-wearers by distraction or misleading drivers to look for hi-vis not humans, it also compromises the safety of roadworkers by robbing them of their distinctiveness and easy identification.

[Ellieb]

So, the purpose of the hi-viz was to ensure you noticed the dog...it worked. Or are you suggesting you would be perfectly happy to run Fido over? Surely, as a cyclist, the presence of an animal is something you would like your attention drawn to? I know I would.