Hi Viz jackets

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby old_windbag » 7 Sep 2017, 8:32pm

The utility cyclist wrote:Given how often motorists crash into each other all motorvehicles should be adorned with such before any calls for the vulnerable to be burdened by same.


Well emergency service vehicles such as traffic police, ambulances and fire engines do use high-viz reflective sections to make us see them from further out and when attending accidents on the road at night. Making all vehicles copy similar may cause some issues I'd have thought.

Personally I think hi-viz is of benefit and as a driver I do appreciate the advance notice of a cyclist or ped on a high speed non-pavement road such as in rural areas. It gives much better notice for the required overtake and more distance to adjust speed in a relaxed manner etc. This is particularly important at night where reflectives work well and lighting is not present outside of cars headlamps. I don't think we should always run to the expression "victim blaming" when highlighting the events, conditions and circumstances of an accident..... both parties are involved and each has to be put under scrutiny to learn and improve the situation to avoid it happening in the first place. Motorists should not speed but if someone walks a rural road dressed head to toe in black it's not really doing either side any favours. When accidents are investigated I'd expect an impartial view of either party, so any points raised wouldn't be apportioning blame rather highlighting factors that may have been relevant in the cause.

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 9918
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby horizon » 8 Sep 2017, 12:07am

I do wear a hi-viz jacket (partly to keep all my other jackets etc clean) but I don't count on any extra visibility from it. I wear it in fact to communicate with drivers, along the lines of:

1. I am here and want you to notice that I am here.
2. I'm serious about what I'm doing.
3. I have some authority (as I'm wearing hi-viz) and I'm important.
4. So when I make hand signals or manoeuvre in a certain way I want you to take notice.

So it's a credibility thing. I'm also tapping into drivers' own beliefs about hi-viz. I feel it works but I can never know for sure - I'm just going on what drivers seem to think.
The experience of travel is something that you have to pay for but can never buy. Ho Ri Zon Chinese philosopher

User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 2656
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby The utility cyclist » 8 Sep 2017, 12:53am

old_windbag wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:Given how often motorists crash into each other all motorvehicles should be adorned with such before any calls for the vulnerable to be burdened by same.


Well emergency service vehicles such as traffic police, ambulances and fire engines do use high-viz reflective sections to make us see them from further out and when attending accidents on the road at night. Making all vehicles copy similar may cause some issues I'd have thought.

Personally I think hi-viz is of benefit and as a driver I do appreciate the advance notice of a cyclist or ped on a high speed non-pavement road such as in rural areas. It gives much better notice for the required overtake and more distance to adjust speed in a relaxed manner etc. This is particularly important at night where reflectives work well and lighting is not present outside of cars headlamps. I don't think we should always run to the expression "victim blaming" when highlighting the events, conditions and circumstances of an accident..... both parties are involved and each has to be put under scrutiny to learn and improve the situation to avoid it happening in the first place. Motorists should not speed but if someone walks a rural road dressed head to toe in black it's not really doing either side any favours. When accidents are investigated I'd expect an impartial view of either party, so any points raised wouldn't be apportioning blame rather highlighting factors that may have been relevant in the cause.
Image Attachments
Capture.JPG

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17065
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby [XAP]Bob » 8 Sep 2017, 6:57am

old_windbag wrote:
Personally I think hi-viz is of benefit and as a driver I do appreciate the advance notice of a cyclist or ped on a high speed non-pavement road such as in rural areas. It gives much better notice for the required overtake and more distance to adjust speed in a relaxed manner etc. This is particularly important at night where reflectives work well and lighting is not present outside of cars headlamps. I don't think we should always run to the expression "victim blaming" when highlighting the events, conditions and circumstances of an accident..... both parties are involved and each has to be put under scrutiny to learn and improve the situation to avoid it happening in the first place. Motorists should not speed but if someone walks a rural road dressed head to toe in black it's not really doing either side any favours. When accidents are investigated I'd expect an impartial view of either party, so any points raised wouldn't be apportioning blame rather highlighting factors that may have been relevant in the cause.


The thing is that as a driver you should be driving according to the distance you can see to be clear. This is different from the distance where you can't see an obstruction...

A business man walking home has the right to do so without dressing up like a highlighter for you.

One of the few areas of research on high biz was on railway tracks, which are a fundamentally different situation to the roads (braking distances measured in miles).

I susoect that being seen too early can also be detrimental, since you are completely dismissed by many drivers as 'not a threat' before they get to you...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28685
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby thirdcrank » 8 Sep 2017, 8:35am

To use a couple of clichés, let's accept that the jury's still out on the effectiveness of hi-viz. It's probably difficult to test the differences between not seeing and ignoring what has been seen. I once arrived at work in my bright day-glo Gamex jacket and a very experienced colleague remarked on how I stood out. I grumbled that it seemed to make little difference and he commented that nobody could say they hadn't seen me. "If they did, they'd be laughed out of court." Although he meant nobody would believe them, we agreed that it's in the aftermath where these things become important. We'd both done plenty of aftermaths.

It might be easy to be laughed out of court by alleging that dark clothing is as safe or even safer than hi-viz.

It's a peace-of-mind thing, and I get a lot more of it in a flo jacket. (Reflective at night.)

millimole
Posts: 491
Joined: 18 Feb 2007, 5:41pm
Location: Leicester

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby millimole » 8 Sep 2017, 8:48am

I don't wear HiVis clothing, but I have been seduced by the notion that bright daytime lights (as used by TT riders) may have some benefit.
This came about while driving ipsum on the mainland of Europe and seeing cyclists on main roads, by their rear lights, from a much greater distance than HiVis would have been noticeable from.
I think (or believe, or hope) that I get less close passes when cycling with a vet bright rear light in daytime.
(I'm happy to dress up in reflective garb at night - but I feel that's a slightly different discussion)

I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my stupid phone.
Leicester; Riding my Hetchins since 1971; Audaxing on my Dawes; Riding to work on a Decathlon Hoprider

old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby old_windbag » 8 Sep 2017, 10:11am

[XAP]Bob wrote:The thing is that as a driver you should be driving according to the distance you can see to be clear. This is different from the distance where you can't see an obstruction...

A business man walking home has the right to do so without dressing up like a highlighter for you.


Yes but as a "businessman" who does walk rural roads in darkness when using a bus I carry either slapstraps or a tabard in my laptop bag. This isn't because I pander to the inadequacies of uk drivers( and they aren't great ) but rather I pander to the inadequacies of the human brain to regulate the speed of a car, drive within seeing distance of headlights. Being seen at greater distance by a biological machine with inherent flaws is preferable I feel. Humans cannot even obey the simple round 30 signs through villages at any time of day. I'm acting in my own self preservation by attempting to offer greater visibility beyond the reach of any headlight.

If people did drive within the distance of say dipped beam everyone would be travelling very slowly considering the reduction of reaction times with age and eyesight etc.

old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby old_windbag » 8 Sep 2017, 10:19am

thirdcrank wrote:It's a peace-of-mind thing, and I get a lot more of it in a flo jacket. (Reflective at night.)


Beyond wearing reflectives, clearly when percy shaw saw the reflectiveness of the animals eyes on a low visibility road it had a marked effect. The resultant cats eyes we have today delineating many carriageways and the carriageway on dangerous bends clearly must have reduced the amount of accidents there could have been. Why would we continue using them worldwide. They are reflectives that drivers see way beyond the beam of their headlights. I know many will say well that just pushes up speeds but isn't that not classed as "progress"......? Like it or loathe it.

old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby old_windbag » 8 Sep 2017, 10:28am

Utility Cyclist:

There will always be instances of say a police car getting hit by a motorist for whatever reasons, not awake, on drugs, fainted at wheel......

But for every police car hit when stationary there will have been thousands not hit because drivers clearly see them, unlike the non-police cars that get hit on hard shoulders etc where they advise you get out and stay over the barriers. One day we may have very able AI systems on driverless cars, in a perfect world accident free but realistically perhaps just with markedly fewer accidents than human driven cars.

But thats a quite a way ahead.

thirdcrank
Posts: 28685
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby thirdcrank » 8 Sep 2017, 10:41am

old_windbag wrote: ... Beyond wearing reflectives, clearly when percy shaw saw the reflectiveness of the animals eyes on a low visibility road it had a marked effect. The resultant cats eyes we have today delineating many carriageways and the carriageway on dangerous bends clearly must have reduced the amount of accidents there could have been. Why would we continue using them worldwide. They are reflectives that drivers see way beyond the beam of their headlights. I know many will say well that just pushes up speeds but isn't that not classed as "progress"......? Like it or loathe it.


The question is how safety improvements are consumed. Unfortunately, the benefits of things like cats' eyes, reflective road markings and signs, and stronger headlights are consumed by going faster, rather than as an aid to going at the same speed more safely.

Psamathe
Posts: 10607
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby Psamathe » 8 Sep 2017, 11:05am

I would think a lot must depend of what you wear if not wearing Hi-Vis. In summer I wear a red T-shirt which is fairly bright but more importantly contrasts well against most backgrounds I cycle around.

In winter the top I wear is dark drab blue and on a dull day around trees it will merge into the background well - so I wear a Hi-Vis waistcoat - not because it is hi-vis but because it is a bright contrasting colour and convenient.

I wonder if the debate about Hi-Vis is confused as some people are discussing bright contrasting colour whilst others the fluorescent properties (i.e. the UV light effects as well as visible light emission ...).

Ian

old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby old_windbag » 8 Sep 2017, 11:34am

thirdcrank wrote: rather than as an aid to going at the same speed more safely.


I agree but if humans were totally self disciplined then we'd have no requirement for speed restrictions or a police force. Unfortunately as much as the majority may drive at a "progressive" but not excessive speed aided by the cats eyes etc there are many who will simply have their own internal laws that they obey. In other words if it says 30 then to them it means 60. But on the whole I think reflective road signs, cats eyes and the like have improved road safety and accident rates...... get ready for a flood of hyperlink studies to demonstrate they have no effect :) .

Psamathe wrote:I wonder if the debate about Hi-Vis is confused as some people are discussing bright contrasting colour whilst others the fluorescent properties (i.e. the UV light effects as well as visible light emission ...).


I think for me it may be confused as I treat hi-viz as the general cover term for bright coloured clothing with possible reflectives qualities too. But that probably doesn't fit with a British Standard defining what Hi-viz actually is, I just go by what I tend to wear when cycling( day and night ) and if I'm on a site visit to comply with site H+S regs.

At the end of the day hi-viz is the complement to helmets in terms of forum debate and responses. We all end off divided and doubtful will ever see eye to eye....... throw in brexit to those two as well :wink: .

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3829
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby pjclinch » 8 Sep 2017, 11:47am

You can go by anecdote and "common sense" or you can look at more carefully collected evidence. And as CUK have pointed out, the evidence doesn't support bright clothes reducing your chances of an ambulance trip. Until such evidence is there it really comes down to your personal gut feeling: it's entirely reasonable to wear it, and it's also entirely reasonable to not wear it.

Policy (i.e., advice to others) should be based on clear evidence. Personal choice can be based on anything you want.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

jgurney
Posts: 554
Joined: 10 May 2009, 8:34am

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby jgurney » 8 Sep 2017, 12:07pm

old_windbag wrote: both parties are involved and each has to be put under scrutiny to learn and improve the situation to avoid it happening in the first place. Motorists should not speed but if someone walks a rural road dressed head to toe in black it's not really doing either side any favours.


The motorists have started bringing cars onto roads where pedestrians have been walking for a very long time wearing whatever they liked. They have introduced the new risk, they should control it, not expect other people to dress up as Christmas trees so they can drive faster or with less attention.

old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Hi Viz jackets

Postby old_windbag » 8 Sep 2017, 12:22pm

jgurney wrote:The motorists have started bringing cars onto roads where pedestrians have been walking for a very long time wearing whatever they liked.


Motorist, pedestrian, cyclist........... we are all humans simply interacting with each other in different modes of transport. How difficult can it be? Should we take those roads back to trackways that perhaps our neolithic ancestors may have walked or do we progress and modify our interaction accordingly?

I say how difficult but seeing the news last night with floods of aimless refugees and guards mistreating people etc it makes me put my head in my hands at what a wasted species we are. Fantastic mental abilities( often totally wasted ) yet cannot even live in peace alongside each other. We really are a lost cause at all levels.