dark cycle kit!!

[snorri]

It appears that the authorities determined that because he was not lit up like a christmas tree or dressed like a fluoro timmy mallet the driver did not see him and he was run over..

I would hope the "authorities " would have had a word with Norm from Nanaimo regarding his protective attitude to careless drivers.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Mix a black top with a sam browne belt for example and you stand out a mile more as an on the road cyclist because they are almost exclusively the preserve of the cyclist and provide a very vibrant and eye catching contrast both on yourself and from the street scene around you whether it is 3 in the afternoon or 3 in the morning.

same way pedal reflectors scream cyclist more than a blinky light from a distance.

Black clothes with reflective trim/piping- check
Spoke reflectors on white wheels - check
Black and white houndstooth (see pic further up thread) highly reflective Sam Browne - check
B&W Houndstooth highly reflective wristbands - check
Reflective ankle bands - check
Pedal Reflectors (@User - Border Force have given in and are refunding the money - woot!) - check
Gizzilion lumen front light x 3 - check
Very very bright rear light x 1 - check
Very bright rear light x 2 - check

Number of SMIDSY types I've interacted with since the clocks went back this year = three. (One of whom nearly rammed me from behind at a T junction and still had her phone in her hand as she gave me the old "Sorry mate I didn't see you")

Wearing Space Lemon clothing would not have made them see me. Therefore, ime/imo, wearing Space Lemon clothing does not increase my safety. Nor does wearing black decrease it. Therefore making oneself "as visible as possible" - whatever that means... portable floodlight towers anyone? - is pointless because the drivers who are looking see you anyway regardless, hence unlit ninja's hardly ever die, and the drivers who aren't looking don't, hence folk dressed in Space Lemon do.

THE PROBLEM IS THE DRIVERS!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

If a cyclist puts himself in a position , by cycle position or by wearing black at night with no lights, were the driver cannot see him is it the drivers fault, no - the cyclist chose to do that , so it's his responsibilty.

Do you drive at night?

Are unlit cyclists ACTUALLY invisible at night?

I've encountered hundreds of BSO ninjas whislt driving since passing my driving test. Not hurt a one. And I don't wear night vision googles. So how come I can see them and other drivers cannot?

 

[Licramite]

I note that you continue to drag lights into this.

Well its about wearing dark clothing, which is all part of visibility (as I interpret it) so hi-viz and lights fall into the same thing. lights/reflectors ect.

yes bright colours in daylight - like yellow - is a good idea as it makes you stand out from the background (baring fields of ripe rap seed)
Maybe I'm to fixating on night time when I see the danger as greatest. - Oh hang on cycling isn't dangerous,
I keep getting told this, so that's not the case.

If it's not dangerous it don't matter what you wear really then does it.

unless of course, when your hit by a car your no longer cycling so then it's really dangerous

 

[GrumpyGregry]

That is good news and quite right too. Was it a simple arith error?

They admit no error. A pro-forma letter arrived in which they simply say "Here is the calculation we have performed, you have paid too much, and a payment order will be on its way to you within 30 days"

and I'm happy.



but it won't last

 

[GrumpyGregry]

unless of course, when your hit by a car your no longer cycling so then it's really dangerous

1. If I ride along a road, a NSL dual carriageway for instance, that is otherwise deserted at 03:30, as I am wont to do being a bid odd like, would you describe cycling as dangerous?
2. If I ride along the same road, the same NSL dual carriageway, that is carrying high volumes of high speed traffic at 17:30, as I am wont to do being a bid odd like, would you describe cycling as free from danger?

The presence of whom, doing what, increases the danger to me in scenario 2. Cos it ain't the fact I'm cycling....

 

[shouldbeinbed]

The driver has an absolute responsibility to see me: so why do we bother with pedestrian crossings? let people step out at will as it is someone elses absolute responsibility to do something about it ? why do we have costly road safety campaigns? lets shoot Tufty the Squirrel, why on here do we argue about headphones and moan about stupid peds?

If you want to play that game then the more the vunerable road user by default has absolute impugnity to step off the pavement, turn their bike across traffic without indicating, stand in a cycle lane pointing at planes, stop mid carriageway and pull out their mobile and spend half an hour updating their facebook page, walk up the fast lane of the M6 into traffic without a single jot of responsibility for their own safety or the consequence of their actions. ts all down to the driver/cyclist to see them and take evasive action regradless of the knock on consequence that may have, Yes?

extrapolate that into a bike v ped incident, The cyclist is the faster moving, we have hard pointy bits of metal under our control, we have the 'weaponry' (as in describing a car as a ton of metal with lethal consequence analogises a weapon) to do more damage than the squidgy thing on foot. We have an absolute responsibility to mitigate their inattentive, plugged in, texting, rushing, 6year old stepping out from behind an ice cream van focussed solely on the 99 in hand?
Even if it means swerving directly into the path of a bus and hoping that they're mindful of their absolute responsibility all of a sudden too?

If that nonsensical arttitude was correct then why is there even a court case when a car hits anyone else? absolute responsibility means there can't possibly be doubt about who was at fault.

onerous? I must have missed out on the high viz that has spikes on the inside or weighs as much as a ford fiesta?

look like something other than they are? I don't get where you're coming from with this, its not a panto horse costume that is being advocated it is clothing of more vibrant nature possibly with some reflective tape added.

I also take issue with Because we know that drivers do not always take this responsibility seriously We know no such thing and that is grossly insulting to the millions of drivers who do.

Drivers can be taking their resposibility entirely seriously but are momentarily distracted by someone lunging on the pavement, a flash of light from a mobile camera or a car/bike headlamp suddenly switching on or becoming visible as an obstruction moves off (all happened to me on bike and in car) and boosh, they're over the top of a ninja that they hadn't seen in advance, whereas if said ninja was more distinct against the background, driver would have subconsciously at least registered their presence further in advance and even with momentary distraction would have factored in that there was someone else in the vicinity and that little bit of awareness may be the difference between a brown pants moment and a body bag. Then again maybe not but its both reckless and arrogant not to give it a your best go at helping your fellow road users out.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

1. If I ride along a road, a NSL dual carriageway for instance, that is otherwise deserted at 03:30, as I am wont to do being a bid odd like, would you describe cycling as dangerous?
2. If I ride along the same road, the same NSL dual carriageway, that is carrying high volumes of high speed traffic at 17:30, as I am wont to do being a bid odd like, would you describe cycling as free from danger?

The presence of whom, doing what, increases the danger to me in scenario 2. Cos it ain't the fact I'm cycling....

if a tree falls over in the forest...........

 

[shouldbeinbed]

THE PROBLEM IS THE DRIVERS!

In that case SURELY WE NEED TO GIVE THEM ALL THE HELP WE CAN TO GET IT RIGHT

aren't caps and smileys fun

 

[snorri]

In that case SURELY WE NEED TO GIVE THEM ALL THE HELP WE CAN TO GET IT RIGHT

Modern cars have effective lighting, efficient brakes, a speedometer, heaters and window demisters, screen wipers, screen washers, fog lights, weather and road condition reports regularly available from in car radios.
How much more help do drivers need?
Don't you think we UK drivers should be required to accept a little more responsibility for our actions in line with our mainland European counterparts?.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

In that case SURELY WE NEED TO GIVE THEM ALL THE HELP WE CAN TO GET IT RIGHT

aren't caps and smileys fun

and if we don't give them all the help we can we only have ourselves to blame if we have an accident? Victim blaming. Nice one.

Who determines what constitutes 'giving them all the help we can' and does it include staying off the roads at night?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Modern cars have effective lighting, efficient brakes, a speedometer, heaters and window demisters, screen wipers, screen washers, fog lights, weather and road condition reports regularly available from in car radios.
How much more help do drivers need?
Don't you think we UK drivers should be required to accept a little more responsibility for our actions in line with our mainland European counterparts?.

Snorri, we are special in the UK.

Lots of other countries have police forces and paramedics and fire fighters and breakdown services, etc cetera, yet very few, if any, feel the need to wrap them head to toe in flouro and reflectives. But then Johnny Foreigner with his exotic foreign was is barking mad and thus beneath our contempt.

Maybe it is an island thing.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Some typo there??
There can be no timescale, it's an ongoing task, we will never be in a position to achieve total safety, but in the meantime let's not waste time arguing about the dubious value of hi-viz and unite to call for measures which will improve safety for vulnerable road users.

Some typo? Am I missing something obvious? (been known before) ok the grammar isn't crash hot but.....

What makes you think that both conversations can't be had simultaneously or that one precludes the other?

Completely agree that as you say we can never be in a position to achieve total safety, so surely picking off the marginal gains now can only help emphasise the real issues and the big conversations that need to be had to facilitate a move to Europeanise or Portlandise our streets for the longer term.

Even if it is dubious value (and I'm not arguing that any more than I would helmets or not wearing headphones) it is a perception thing that allows drivers to look at the Strawmen and see it as 'our' problem not theirs. Why wouldn't you want to take away all of the false arguments that they throw at us and make them face up to the realities of the serious issues on segregation and infrastructure etc. If I have to turn up to a meeting wearing a silly plastic hat and yellow coat to not give someone that easy out and make them explain to me why the environment is so poor that I have to dress as I have done then so be it - it is wrong but it is also human nature. I lose nothing and may gain a hell of a lot.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

and if we don't give them all the help we can we only have ourselves to blame if we have an accident? I PERCIEIVE WHAT YOU HAVE SAID AS Victim blaming. Nice one.

Who determines what constitutes 'giving them all the help we can' and does it include staying off the roads at night?

added a bit rather than requoting.

Where have I blamed a victim, have a read and you'll see it was me that linked to the Cyclist that died in Southampton yesterday in context of the comment on his high viz.

No it doesn't constitute staying off the road at nights, (it'd put paid to 70% of my commuting for a start) that is simply stupid and again is imagining what you want to have seen put to vindicate your argument rather than anything actually written.


I'll step away from this one now since we seem to be in Narnia.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I'll step away from this one now since we seem to be in Narnia.

A flounce via a magic wardrobe?