http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Why cycling in high-vis may be not as safe as you think en Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:06:33 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96435 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 18:45:03 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 96435@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>No they looked like <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205821/Drivers-scared-lifelike-child-bollards-aimed-slowing-speeders.html">this</a>.</p> <p>Trying to find the pics of the one that was hit... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96434 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 18:39:08 +0000 MV 96434@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Do you mean this type: "<a href="http://www.step2uk.com/prodpage.asp?productid=310">kidAlert</a>" ? I've seen them in the Netherlands but not yet in the UK. It did have the intended effect on me the first time I saw it, for a split-second I thought a (bright yellow) child was going to run across the road.</p> <p>Of course, the next time a child in hi-viz crosses the road at that point I'll subconsciously ignore it... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96406 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:35:17 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 96406@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Somewhere down south someone had the bright idea entering a traffic calmed street of making the bollards in the shape of young children to drive home the message.</p> <p>Within a week one had been flattened. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96396 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:02:29 +0000 fimm 96396@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I seem to recall someone on another forum saying that in the US you can get points on your licence for things like running into such a bollard. You need more points before you lose your licence. The logic, as the poster explained it, is that if you are incapable of avoiding large yellow bollards and the like, then you must be deemed incapable of avoiding smaller and more vulnerable things like children and cyclists. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96382 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 13:04:49 +0000 lionfish 96382@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Intriguing logic Uberuce!</p> <p>Over the summer the road near my parent's house was reduced from 40mph-&gt;30mph. Traffic calming was also installed: some raised road sections and a bollard/island thing put in, so cars coming into the village had to give way to those coming out. It definitely seems to have slowed traffic, and I think traffic noise and general horribleness has reduced a little bit.</p> <p>The bollard/island thing has a massive fluorescent, yellow/reflective panel in the middle. Warning signs exist before reaching it to tell drivers there's an obstacle ahead and rumble strips on the road to remind them again. And yet, it was run into 3 times in as many months after it was installed. It has now been made even bigger and brighter and moved slightly.</p> <p>No one (as far as I know) was seriously injured in the collisions, and I think maybe Uberuce's logic applies well here: This collision object has meant several people maybe now don't drive or take more care? If they don't notice a massive 6 foot high reflective (sign posted) wall in front of them, what chance that they'll spot a pedestrian or cyclist?</p> <p>Maybe more collidable objects should be placed on roads?! (They do it with cycle paths: A black bollard is a key design feature of UK cycle paths I believe?)</p> <p>[somewhat tongue-in-cheek :] </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96368 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:03:52 +0000 Uberuce 96368@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>My reasoning(not necessarily reasonable) on the matter: <a href="http://uberuce.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/does-a-pontiff-poop-in-the-woods/" rel="nofollow">http://uberuce.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/does-a-pontiff-poop-in-the-woods/</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96361 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:31:01 +0000 lionfish 96361@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Thanks for the link.<br /> "But – and this is the key – don't head out there assuming you'll automatically be seen just because you've dressed head to toe in incandescent yellow."</p> <p>I usually start wearing my high-viz in the winter as a default. But I'm starting to be aware that even though it appears to be impossible not to see me, it doesn't quite achieve that.</p> <p>I was turning onto Gillespie Place on my bike and didn't spot a cyclist approaching on my first-look, only on my second "double check" did I notice him: Even though he was in high-vis, light (not blinking), etc. I was doing the old "looking for cars" mistake I guess? It's made me try even harder when looking, but also more likely to assume people haven't seen me.</p> <p>On a side note, I feel the high-vis some how makes cars-drivers more polite! I'm sure I'm let in more, and receive more courtesy. I don't know if it's because of the link people make with police-in-high-vis or because they feel I must be a responsible-citizen, or maybe the high-vis means I'm just higher up their thought queue? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96359 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:28:36 +0000 gembo 96359@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>quite an interesting piece</p> <p>journalist arguing for nuances to be investigated</p> <p>quotes the TRL report as saying [hi viz] may not always work [for motorcyclists] dependent on background of the environment and that white or even black might be more suitable colour to stand out from certain backgrounds. also that these backgrounds can change over a journey. A hi viz green, black and white mixture like a hi viz camoflage jacket might be best? [that last bit is me not the journo]</p> <p>We have had hi-viz discussions before, this link is reasonably impartial tho journo confesses to a 'mistake' on his police cycle test viz-a-vis not wearing a hi-viz vest </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96353 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:21:55 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 96353@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think that backs up what many of us already knew.</p> <p>In some circumstances a hi-viz jacket will be more visible than a black jacket;<br /> In some circumstances a black jacket will be more visible than a hi-viz jacket;<br /> It all depends on what's around you, the quality of light, and so on;<br /> What we really need is some sort of anti-chameleon jacket.</p> <p>Or, in short, wear what you want, ride safe. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9245#post-96349 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:06:11 +0000 tarmac jockey 96349@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>From the Bike Blog in the Guardian today.<br /> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2013/jan/10/cycling-high-visibility-safe-fluorescent" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2013/jan/10/cycling-high-visibility-safe-fluorescent</a><br /> Maybe it's about time we cyclists had either a yellow or blue flashing beacon on our heads or hats? </p>