https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/90471/1211%20Road%20Survival%20Guide%20Final.pdf
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2014/04/12/when-more-visible-≠-safer-target-fixation/
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
A couple of interesting articles on visibility and safety
(26 posts)-
Posted 8 years ago #
-
Actually, a different debate but this quote from the first article sums up my feelings on helmets succinctly :P
"So is wearing a helmet - every fighter pilot wears a helmet, even though it won’t make much difference if they hit the ground at 700 miles an hour! It’s about reducing the chances of less dramatic incidents causing fatal cranial injuries, unnecessarily. Go figure."
Posted 8 years ago # -
Fighter pilots have to survive being ejected through a canopy into an airstream in excess of 600 knots before they get anywhere close to the ground...
Wind Blast. During ejection at high speed, wind blast can give raise to serious injuries. About 350 Knots is the safe limit for such an exposure. Above this speed, wind blast forcibly separates the knees resulting in severe damage to the hip joints. Leg restraint prevents this from happening. Arms and shoulders are equally vulnerable to wind blast. Other parts of the body such as the abdomen and chest do not appear to suffer any ill effects from short duration wind blast up to the level of sonic speeds. Above 350 Knots, gloves, shoes, helmets and masks are frequently lost and flying clothing is torn.
Google "ejection windblast" for more info.
Posted 8 years ago # -
It’s about reducing the chances of less dramatic incidents causing fatal cranial injuries, unnecessarily. Go figure.
By that reasoning you would need to wear a h****t every time you got in the bath, went up a ladder, walked along a pavement*, drove in a car - these are all activities that carry a similar risk of head injury as cycling.
Why not just wear one all the time? Just to be sure.
Posted 8 years ago # -
The article's not about helmets, and is interesting. Ignore the helmet thing.
(Are you saying with that link that the cyclist was ok because he was wearing a helmet?)
Posted 8 years ago # -
Target fixation, where you are looking you will go to. Interesting article. Fair bit of speculation. Also generalising from one riding condition to another.?
I am fairly sure I am more visible with multiple small lights some blinking some not. I do not have a powerful blinding front light as my commute is largely lit. I would like these blinding front lights to be inserted in a slanted frame so that no matter how they are attached they are always dipped down to the left.
Light wars a couple of months away but they are coming.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Apologies for going off on a rant about h****ts.
@smash, the article in the Scotsman is describing a pedestrian who suffered severe head injuries while walking after being hit by a car (presumably on the pavement judging by the fact the car ended up crashed into the set of traffic lights). So my point is that pedestrians are also likely to suffer head injuries (through no fault of their own).
Regarding the article, if humans have so many blind 'episodes' then the only safe thing to do is to remove them from operating heavy and dangerous machinery (that relies on vision and 100% attentiveness) altogether.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I wouldn't say so....the point that I took from it is that through being aware of our limitations we can train ourselves to overcome these by (fairly simply) altering our behaviour.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Is there an issue with auto pilot?
If you are on a regular route (cycling or driving) how much attention do you need to give, compared with say going on holiday and driving on the other side of the road.
Clearly driving a car on autopilot is very dangerous.
Daft article on R4 today prog regarding the distance men will drive beyond the point they are lost before they will ask directions. Much further than women, apparently.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I imagine auto - pilot is always dangerous.
IMO it boils down to actively paying attention. You can't rely on your eyes and brain to passively detect hazards.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Risky, rather than dangerous...
Posted 8 years ago # -
Problem is we can't even get drivers to actively not look at their mobile phones and to actively look at and obey their speedometers, never mind actively behaving like a fighter pilot 100% of the time.
Posted 8 years ago # -
YEs, I have noticed many more cars just not moving off from traffic lights when they go green. THis inattention is I believe mostly caused by the fact they are on their phones.
Posted 8 years ago # -
In general, (unfortunately) you can't change other people's behaviour, only your own.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@edd1e_h surely this is all the more reason to actively behave like a fighter pilot 100% of the time?
I'm a big believer in defensive driving (and cycling).
Posted 8 years ago # -
You can only be 'so' defensive though. Unless you stop at every single joining side street in case someone pulls out of it.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Interesting how the two articles contradict each other. One says wear more hi-viz while the other says less.
Bits of the fighter pilot one read a bit like an apologists manual for motoring. Oddly for a article by an RAF bloke the pictures all show cars on the wrong side of the road.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I'm not saying there shouldn't be efforts in society to improve people's behaviour on the roads, be it education, infrastructure, punitive measures, but as an individual "in the moment" you can only control your own behaviour.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Surely stopping at every joining street would probably be riskier though because no one would be expecting you to stop when you have right of way. However, someone driving defensively behind you would have left sufficient stopping distance and be paying enough attention so that they wouldn't rear end the lunatic cyclist in front of them screeching to a halt at every side street.
Posted 8 years ago # -
taking primary which some people might consider to be an offensive manouevre as in going on the offence (rather than being rude), is of coures one of the main tenets of defensive cycling
Posted 8 years ago # -
I do wonder sometimes whether a faster cyclist taking primary might annoy drivers less, or do you think we are always going too slowly regardless of whether we are going at 10mph or 25mph?
Posted 8 years ago # -
Quote from the Australian Prime Minister today, who has spent $100 million investigating a fatal travel incident.
“We owe it to the hundreds of millions of people who use bicycles, we owe it to the 24 million Australians who use our roads, we owe it to them to try to ensure that bicycle travel is as safe as it possibly can be, to try to get to the bottom of this terrible mystery”
I think I got that right.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Wow....a rare outburst of sanity from that dangerous lunatic.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Sorry, IWRATS did not in fact get it quite right, as sad as that case is.
Posted 8 years ago # -
ah IWRATS was employing the deep irony he is famous for
Posted 8 years ago # -
I'm new here :P
Posted 8 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
