Cycling, Safety and Sharing the Road

[Davidc]

I also find there's something about cars running daytime lights in good conditions as a 'hey, look, I'm here, get out of my way' mentality. And with some of these modern super-bright lights I find I can be dazzled even when they're dipped.

I've never found daytime lights giving me that feeling, but I find some of the current discharge lights objectionably bright. In daylight they're too bright but at night they're just ridiculous, leaving me temporarily blinded even when they're dipped. I find the best daytime vehicle lights the LED ones now fitted to Audis, VWs and busses among others. They seem to show up very well without dazzling.

 

[Davidc]

Err, in Poland there was a 6% increase in road fatalities since the introduction of DRL on 17 April 2007!

I thought that was down to increased drink drive mainly.

 

[Ravenbait]

Road Position > Hi Vis, ime.

I don't think anyone's denying that we all have responsibilities here, but for my money, they skew heavily in the UK towards those who are in danger, not those who present the danger, and that is fundamentally wrong. The duty of the driver to account for others, and to drive according to conditions is barely mentioned, rarely backed up by enforcement, and beyond a one off test in most people's late teens, never assessed.

Exactly. I come back to selective inattention blindness. A cyclist in hi-viz at the side of the road, particularly if he's in a marked cycle lane, will be of less interest to a driver than a cyclist wearing perfectly ordinary clothing slap bang in the middle of the lane in front of the car. The cyclist off to the side is not going to register as something that warrants much change in behaviour and thus the brain is likely to dismiss him as irrelevant. The cyclist in front of the car will definitely be seen because the brain registers him as an object requiring a response.

All drivers are necessarily required to filter the incoming data simply because there is so much of it. Peer-group identification is the major reason why cyclists behave better towards cyclists. They are more likely to see cyclists because they identify with them. For non-cyclists a guy on a bike is just a mobile obstacle. I found it particularly noteworthy that the report mentioned drivers feeling a need to overtake a cyclist no matter what because they didn't want to hold up the drivers behind them. The acceptance of their peer group is more important than the safety of a cyclist.

Fluorescent clothing is not going to change driver behaviour. The only thing that can change driver behaviour is the driverand he's not going to do that just because cyclists dress to impress. Humans are tribal and instinctively assign "us" and "them" labels. Road sharing comfortably will only be achieved by accepting that road users of all stripes are "us", not "them". Wearing funny-coloured clothes and plastic hats merely reinforces the idea that cyclists are different.

It's about time someone did a proper psychological study into all of this. Where's Ian Walker when you need him?

I've really had enough with people putting the responsibility for road safety on the most vulnerable users. If that's idealism, so be it. Nothing's going to change, ever, unless there are people prepared to say the status quo is wrong and put their money where their mouths are.

Sam

 

[BSRU]

Err, in Poland there was a 6% increase in road fatalities since the introduction of DRL on 17 April 2007!

When I was learning to ride a motorcycle, our instructor, ex-Police rider, spoke about research that showed lights on motorbikes made them more visible but motorists had a harder job judging their speed.

 

[Origamist]

I thought that was down to increased drink drive mainly.

No, there was only a v slight increase in DD.

Most of the work I've seen on DRL (it was a few years ago) was inconclusive and often contradictory.

 

[StuartG]

I'm intrigued with this Hi-Viz stuff and 24/7 headlighting that we don't look to the car.

Can't see it? Well that probably because it is metallic grey - programmed to fade into the background on any dull day. Maybe a reversion/perversion of Henry Ford's "Any Colour As long As It Is New York Taxi Yellow With Chevron Accompanient" might help the motorist ponder a little ...

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Until the government breaks free of the "Car is King" culture we have to do what we can to mitigate the risks.

I would agree with that. I always carry lights, regardless of the weather, and turn them on when I am going through dark wooded areas, even when it's the middle of the day. I don't want to get hit, and I know how useless some drivers are. My bike has got three reflectors at the rear, one on the mudguard, two on the pannier bags.


But at the same time, I resent the fact that I feel increasingly compelled to present myself as a Christmas tree to compensate for other people's incompetence.


The "risk" is presented both by the driver's attentiveness, and my degree of visibility. It's a two way street.

 

[BSRU]

Exactly. I come back to selective inattention blindness. A cyclist in hi-viz at the side of the road, particularly if he's in a marked cycle lane, will be of less interest to a driver than a cyclist wearing perfectly ordinary clothing slap bang in the middle of the lane in front of the car. The cyclist off to the side is not going to register as something that warrants much change in behaviour and thus the brain is likely to dismiss him as irrelevant. The cyclist in front of the car will definitely be seen because the brain registers him as an object requiring a response.

So the cyclist has done something to help the car driver see them better.

All drivers are necessarily required to filter the incoming data simply because there is so much of it. Peer-group identification is the major reason why cyclists behave better towards cyclists. They are more likely to see cyclists because they identify with them. For non-cyclists a guy on a bike is just a mobile obstacle. I found it particularly noteworthy that the report mentioned drivers feeling a need to overtake a cyclist no matter what because they didn't want to hold up the drivers behind them. The acceptance of their peer group is more important than the safety of a cyclist.

I think you are being too stereotypical about drivers, a minority may be like this but the majority are not.

Fluorescent clothing is not going to change driver behaviour. The only thing that can change driver behaviour is the driverand he's not going to do that just because cyclists dress to impress. Humans are tribal and instinctively assign "us" and "them" labels. Road sharing comfortably will only be achieved by accepting that road users of all stripes are "us", not "them". Wearing funny-coloured clothes and plastic hats merely reinforces the idea that cyclists are different.

HI-viz clothing is not about changing driver behaviour it is about being more visible, even if that is 1% more then to me it's worth it. You obviously have not noticed that we are all different, thankfully, otherwise it would a very boring world.

I've really had enough with people putting the responsibility for road safety on the most vulnerable users. If that's idealism, so be it. Nothing's going to change, ever, unless there are people prepared to say the status quo is wrong and put their money where their mouths are.

Sam

Road safety towards the most vulnerable users is the responsibility of all road users and all road users have a responsibility to themselves for their own safety.

 

[Ravenbait]

So the cyclist has done something to help the car driver see them better.

I think you are being too stereotypical about drivers, a minority may be like this but the majority are not.

Really? This isn't malicious, it's more careless. The majority of drivers would like to be more considerate but have too much demanding their attention. If the majority of drivers were careful and considerate then my commute would be much more pleasant.

HI-viz clothing is not about changing driver behaviour it is about being more visible, even if that is 1% more then to me it's worth it. You obviously have not noticed that we are all different, thankfully, otherwise it would a very boring world.

We're not that different. On the level of the individual, a 1% increase in visibility will make a difference to a fraction of drivers. Hi-viz at the side of the road is not as effective as being in the middle of the road no matter what you're wearing, and there's a danger that someone wearing hi-viz will expect to be seen when selective inattention blindness means the driver is merrily ignoring anything that doesn't necessitate a blatant change in his driving behaviour.

My argument is that the report (that is what this thread is about, after all) doesn't concentrate on what can be done to improve driver behaviour so much as it suggests ways of encouraging/compelling cyclists to change theirs, and not always in the best way. There was little discussion of getting the "guarded" style of cyclist to adopt the more assertive style. That's not terribly edifying or helpful.

Sam

 

[dellzeqq]

I'm bound to point out that people are arguing from a point of principle, which is fine in its way, whereas the study didn't make a big deal about principle, but rather, concerned itself with uncovering a spectrum of attitudes and practice. We may all of us regret the requirement for lighting on bikes, but I can't see much of an argument for not having a set of working lights on a bike.

 

[Origamist]

Road safety towards the most vulnerable users is the responsibility of all road users and all road users have a responsibility to themselves for their own safety.

Is this equitable though? It is overwhelmingly motorists who create and perpetuate the hazardous nature of the street environment by being in control of potentially lethal machinery on our roads. As such, the greatest burden of responsibility for avoiding a collision should lie with them.

It is appalling that a minority of drivers treat the roads as some kind of liminal space where the sanctity of human life can be treated with disdain.

 

[Davidc]

This is a report on sharing the road, and covers issues around that. It isn't about causes of collisions.

There is a document from the same source called "Collisions involving pedal cyclists on Britain's roads: establishing the causes"

This covers more of what this thread has moved on to.

Edit: the sizes of fonts on this post have gone wrong - apologies

I've just tested the link and realised you have to give some details to get to the pdf file.

 

[Davidc]

It is appalling that a minority of drivers treat the roads as some kind of liminal space where the sanctity of human life can be treated with disdain.

Yes. It's also appalling that little is done to stop it. Car culture has taken over, the Car is King attitude pervades national culture (not just here), and the sort of abuse you're identifying just gets accepted.

 

[StuartG]

Car culture has taken over

Yes - and quite naturally so. I came from a cycling town in the sixties but then I found my first car much more convenient. Going places in comfort at speed and with little hassle. Why I first came to London I use to pootle down Oxford Street on my way home in the mini during the rush hour.

Trouble is car travel was so good and superior that everybody joined in. Result is that it is no longer fast comfortable and hassle free. But giving up the car is possibly more difficult than giving up fags. We ourselves have created a structure that locks us in and isn't really reversable - yet.

Visionaries like Ken tried to sort out London. Defeated at first by Bromley and possibly now by Boris (repeal of outer congestion zone and 4x4 tax plus cancelling of most public transport projects) things are not looking bright atm. And bicycle culture is often not that different in the UK. Defying traffic regulations, cutting people up, racing on a public road (commuters not TT!!) obsession with mechanical bits ... many of us are only 4 cylinders apart and even more have a spare 4 in the garage.

Its not others who are the problem. Its us.

 

[CotterPin]

Until the government breaks free of the "Car is King" culture we have to do what we can to mitigate the risks.

Unfortunately, by doing what we can to mitigate the risks we perpetuate the "Car is King" culture, by taking on the responsibility that should be the drivers. Personally I don't see why my choice of attire should be dictated by a bunch of strangers who are too busy fumbling around for that minto, texting their mates to tell them when they will get there, or shouting at the kids in the back seat.