Tips to Make Yourself Visible

[Johnno260]

Doesn't the Chameleon change colour in order to be less visible?

or

do they simply own lots of handbags?

HAHA good point, so anti chameleon?

 

[mjr]

Personally, I am all for ensuring I can be seen, when driving or cycling. Like the rest of us, I have no control over the extent to which other road users are actually looking

So, given that, how do you ensure that you can be seen, then?

Relatedly, I would like to absolutely not be seen sometimes because it would make it easier to, er, repair some infrastructure. How can I achieve this, please?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I don't disagree with you, but, some conflicting rules / suggestions in Highway Code

113
You MUST

• ensure all sidelights and rear registration plate lights are lit between sunset and sunrise
• use headlights at night, except on a road which has lit street lighting. These roads are generally restricted to a speed limit of 30 mph (48 km/h) unless otherwise specified

115
You should also

• use dipped headlights, or dim-dip if fitted, at night in built-up areas and in dull daytime weather, to ensure that you can be seen

Personally, I am all for ensuring I can be seen, when driving or cycling. Like the rest of us, I have no control over the extent to which other road users are actually looking

There's no conflict, both rules amount to the same outcome: you don't need to use headlamps on those roads at night.

On my urban commute through built-up areas of Glasgow I can see several hundred metres ahead at night, well beyond the range of a headlamp so they're unnecessary and only add to the daft ever-brighter lights competition.

 

[SteveF]

No one seems to have conclusive evidence one way or another regards the subject, yet people are arguing as if they know better than anyone else, the mind boggles.

Wear want you want, what you think is right for you.

 

[mjr]

No one seems to have conclusive evidence one way or another regards the subject, yet people are arguing as if they know better than anyone else, the mind boggles.

That's great except that it's wrong in that there are at least three pieces of conclusive evidence: 1. people are already visible so there's no need to make yourself visible; 2. hi vis clothing allows you to be seen from further away in certain situations; 3. almost nothing suggests hi vis clothing makes any difference in casualty rates for cycling in general (only a few flawed self-selected surveys).

Wear want you want, what you think is right for you.

Sure, but is hi vis ever right for anyone not forced to wear it?

 

[Ajax Bay]

Cub leaders are being asked to help indoctrinate small children about drivers not being expected to look where they are going, in a campaign revealingly entitled Be Bright Be Seen - Out of My Way...

I think that your characterisation (as indoctrination) of the Cub Scout activity sheet to which you link is unfair. The worst element is actually the second part of the title, which has no link in the sheet itself.

Perhaps, the tile of the thread should be "Tips to make yourself more visible", or, "Tips to make yourself visible earlier".

Why do you want to be seen earlier. We want drivers to be able to 'see' cyclists in good time. If they look, they can. Cars manage to miss (unlit, not hi-viz, no reflectives) hedges defining a bend in the road nearly all the time. Do these hedges need to be seen earlier?

people are arguing

But only for 12 pages so far. The thread [edit] @theclaud found (well done) managed 33 pages. Way to go.

 

[jefmcg]

But only for 12 pages so far. The thread @jefmcg found (well done) managed 33 pages. Way to go.

Are you confusing me with @theclaud? https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/tips-to-make-yourself-visible.227149/post-5057527

 

[mjr]

I think that your characterisation (as indoctrination) of the Cub Scout activity sheet to which you link is unfair. The worst element is actually the second part of the title, which has no link in the sheet itself.

There's an argument that all organised education is a form of indoctrination, but looking at that specific activity sheet, as well as the "out of my way" headline:

• it's sponsored by a motoring group with nice whooshing car and van graphics on the top - speed is sexy even when subliminal, OK?
• it shows a cartoon character saluting "road safety heroes" - you know, the exponents of the failed methodology which has produced the dystopian scenes on our roads of chickens wearing little hi vis jackets...
  
  
• the first aim is "To recognise that if you are unable to see traffic, the drivers of vehicles cannot see you" - well, that's blind people farked then!
• the second aim is "To recognise how to make the best choices to be seen" - we've discussed the flaws in the idea that the potential victims are responsible for being seen a lot already;
• Cubs are told to "put your hood down when crossing the road" - yeah, because rain running into your eyes is so helpful for seeing clearly(!) It would be far better to make sure they secure their hood around their face properly and make sure they turn their head enough when looking around, which would help when they've not got hoods up. This advice must have been written by someone who doesn't walk in a hood much.
• the exercise involves "move towards the props in silence (place a boundary) as if they were a driver" - in other words, get the cubs fantasising about driving. Recruit 'em young!
• "draw a street scene with street furniture (obstructions) that may cause them not to be seen i.e. lampposts, post boxes, trees, vegetation etc." - er, no. Those things don't "cause them not to be seen". They may obstruct the driver's view, but what causes them not to be seen is the driver, driving into a space which they cannot see to be clear when they will arrive, failing to treat things like vegetation up against the road as the blind corner it forms. If an area has an obstructed view, the driver should slow down.
• "use dedicated pedestrian crossings, look all around for road safety hazards, and keep to a well-lit area and dress brightly to be seen" - oh goodie, demonising crossing the road and a triple helping of victim-blaming(!)
• "Talk about how driveways can be particularly hazardous, especially if they emerge from between buildings, or have high fences or hedges on either side, meaning the driver cannot see who is crossing and the pedestrian cannot see the driver or the vehicle." - Now the children are to blame if they're walking along the pavement and a nobber driver blasts out of their driveway? Are we heading for http://yehudamoon.com/comic/2009-10-22/ ?
  
  
• "Cubs should move to an area where they are able to see clearly and should avoid crossing a road near big vehicles like vans, buses or lorries, or bends in roads." - Telling the children they should move home if they want to walk?!?!

I despair if anyone doesn't see this as RAC-sponsored indoctrination of children...

 

[Julia9054]

This is a jacket I picked up in the clearance section of TK Maxx a few years ago. It had a battery in it and you could make the blue stripes flash. It was cool and sci fi and made me look like Tron!
Unfortunately it was also as sweaty as a very sweaty thing in a sweat factory.
The last straw was getting my keys jammed in the pocket and having to attack it with a knife. Sadly, consigned to the bin

 

[oldstrath]

I always s wonder whether retro reflective jackets are even visible - surely if the car lights are as well controlled as my STVZO bike light there's minimal light falling on the jacket to be reflected?

Since i don't drive i really don't know the answer.

 

[SteveF]

That's great except that it's wrong in that there are at least three pieces of conclusive evidence: 1. people are already visible so there's no need to make yourself visible; 2. hi vis clothing allows you to be seen from further away in certain situations; 3. almost nothing suggests hi vis clothing makes any difference in casualty rates for cycling in general (only a few flawed self-selected surveys).


Sure, but is hi vis ever right for anyone not forced to wear it?

Your points seem to contradict each other,.

As I said, if people want to wear it then wear it, if they don't then don't, advocating either way without conclusive evidence is pointless, more about the agenda of the person who's advocating than anything else.

 

[mjr]

I always s wonder whether retro reflective jackets are even visible - surely if the car lights are as well controlled as my STVZO bike light there's minimal light falling on the jacket to be reflected?

Since i don't drive i really don't know the answer.

On a car light, as on most (all?) StVZO bike lights, there is a small amount of above-the-horizon spillover light which is what reflects off road signs and will also reflect off a jacket. If you're higher up than a road sign, that's one heck of a tall bike!

However, one problem mentioned earlier is that many retro reflective jacket patterns are designed to follow standards or fashion rather than function to form an identifiable human shape from various angles, so could lead to a cyclist being mistaken for a part-obscured road sign at first.

Your points seem to contradict each other,.

No, they really don't. There are subtle differences between them. Personally, I mostly care about aspect 3.

As I said, if people want to wear it then wear it, if they don't then don't, advocating either way without conclusive evidence is pointless, more about the agenda of the person who's advocating than anything else.

I agree, but we have some conclusive evidence which the promoters deny.

 

[classic33]

Flippin' 'eck, that was 495 posts I had to wade through!
Unfortunately the information I was after isn't in that thread.

Low Sun Warning, last year?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Low Sun Warning, last year?

No, research on the many variations of conspicuity clothing required for all commuting scenarios.

 

[classic33]

https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/25/3/517/2398658