A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

High visibility law yields no improvement in safety



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old April 5th 18, 04:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,907
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 11:25:46 +0200, Sepp Ruf
wrote:

I was going to suggest riding while wearing night vision goggles:
https://www.google.com/search?q=image+intensifier+night+vision+goggles&tb m=isch
You might appear rather strange looking, but you'll be able to see the
moving black holes on bicycles before you hit them.

Black lycra matters, too!


"Car crash by colour"
https://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/articles/car-crash-by-colour/
"One study concluded that black cars are 47% more likely to be
involved in road accidents than vehicles of other colours.
(...)
During daylight hours, black cars were up to 12% more likely
be involved in crashes than white vehicles."

For the ultimate in invisibility, you need Vantablack,
https://www.surreynanosystems.com/super-black-coatings/vantablack-s-vis
which offers a non-reflective black that can also become invisible in
the infrared spectrum:
https://www.surreynanosystems.com/super-black-coatings/vantablack-s-ir
Not only will you be invisible to ordinary drivers, but you also will
not appear on the LADAR of driverless cars.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Ads
  #82  
Old April 5th 18, 04:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,907
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 08:42:56 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

I was going to suggest riding while wearing night vision goggles:
https://www.google.com/search?q=image+intensifier+night+vision+goggles&tb m=isch
You might appear rather strange looking, but you'll be able to see the
moving black holes on bicycles before you hit them.


"Mountain Biking at Midnight with Top Secret Night Vision Goggles"
https://www.wired.com/2015/04/mountain-biking-at-midnight-with-top-secret-night-vision-goggles/

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #83  
Old April 5th 18, 05:13 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,423
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 2:25:50 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
Joy Beeson wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:


We shouldn't be telling people they have to
change clothes before they ride a bike, just as we shouldn't be telling
people they need to change clothes before going for a walk.


Instead, maybe we should send jbeattie to mullah-land for some attention
training. Consulting an ophthalmologist there is cheaper than in Portland, too.

When I go for a walk after dark, I always wear light-colored clothing.


"Light" colors, in grayscale-value, might not be farther distanced from the
visual backdrop than black. So don't feel safe just yet, you also need a
strong pedestrian safety flasher. And for a walk in the park in Toxic
Theresa's England, this gear is "absolutely" essential, as any guerilla
marketing expert knows:


At least mullah-land has bright sun. When you go outside and everything is cement colored, including the sky -- and your eyes are doing that switch from cones to rods -- someone in cement and asphalt colors blends right in, particularly when coming down a descending road with the road surface as a back drop -- and particularly with wet pavement and headlight glare or light glare from other sources on the road. And at night, pedestrians in all black might as well be invisible. Why be invisible? I'm no DRL fan, but I use a blinky when there is hard over-cast and low light.



-- Jay Beattie.
  #84  
Old April 5th 18, 07:04 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sepp Ruf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 217
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 2:25:50 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:


We shouldn't be telling people they have to change clothes before
they ride a bike, just as we shouldn't be telling people they need
to change clothes before going for a walk.


Instead, maybe we should send jbeattie to mullah-land for some
attention training. Consulting an ophthalmologist there is cheaper
than in Portland, too.


At least mullah-land has bright sun. When you go outside and everything
is cement colored, including the sky -- and your eyes are doing that
switch from cones to rods -- someone in cement and asphalt colors blends
right in, particularly when coming down a descending road with the road
surface as a back drop -- and particularly with wet pavement and
headlight glare or light glare from other sources on the road.


Agreed. Still, once you are aware of these pitfalls (and of a population of
cycling dopeheads), you are obliged to adjust your behavior to account for
them. Even if it means moving slower than other traffic and waiting longer
to check for subtle clues of ninja movement.

And at
night, pedestrians in all black might as well be invisible. Why be
invisible? I'm no DRL fan, but I use a blinky when there is hard
over-cast and low light.


Oregon's law seems quite close to a DRL law already in demanding that one
switches on a bike light during conditions in which one cannot discern a
vehicle or a person -- certainly including a mourning, one-armed midget, on
a skateboard, on black asphalt -- from a full 1,000ft distance.
  #85  
Old April 5th 18, 08:24 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,423
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 11:04:49 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 2:25:50 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:


We shouldn't be telling people they have to change clothes before
they ride a bike, just as we shouldn't be telling people they need
to change clothes before going for a walk.

Instead, maybe we should send jbeattie to mullah-land for some
attention training. Consulting an ophthalmologist there is cheaper
than in Portland, too.


At least mullah-land has bright sun. When you go outside and everything
is cement colored, including the sky -- and your eyes are doing that
switch from cones to rods -- someone in cement and asphalt colors blends
right in, particularly when coming down a descending road with the road
surface as a back drop -- and particularly with wet pavement and
headlight glare or light glare from other sources on the road.


Agreed. Still, once you are aware of these pitfalls (and of a population of
cycling dopeheads), you are obliged to adjust your behavior to account for
them. Even if it means moving slower than other traffic and waiting longer
to check for subtle clues of ninja movement.

And at
night, pedestrians in all black might as well be invisible. Why be
invisible? I'm no DRL fan, but I use a blinky when there is hard
over-cast and low light.


Oregon's law seems quite close to a DRL law already in demanding that one
switches on a bike light during conditions in which one cannot discern a
vehicle or a person -- certainly including a mourning, one-armed midget, on
a skateboard, on black asphalt -- from a full 1,000ft distance.


Don't get me going on the skateboarders.

The Oregon law is basically just a re-organized version of the UVC provision. http://iamtraffic.org/wp-content/upl...01/UVC2000.pdf (12-201 (when lights required) and 12-702 (lights required)).

Oregon: https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/815.280 (when lights required) and https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/801.325 (defining "limited visibility conditions")

I don't think Oregon is more demanding than most places, and DRLs on sunny days clearly aren't required or SOP in PDX. http://www.dollface.net/post_images/portland-bike.jpg

-- Jay Beattie.
  #86  
Old April 5th 18, 08:46 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,423
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 9:52:40 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 4/3/2018 8:16 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 10:53:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/31/2018 12:00 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The fallacy also works for the absence of evidence. (Absence of
evidence is not evidence of absence). An unchanged accident rate
after the introduction of mandatory reflective clothing does not mean
that reflective clothing does NOT have an effect on accident rate.
There could easily be a counter balancing effect. For example, it
might be that riders tend to ride more aggressively when wearing a
reflective vest on the assumption that the vest would protect them
from harm. At the same time, vehicle drivers would more easily notice
bicyclists. The two effects cancel each other resulting in an
unchanged accident rate.

In the cycling community, there are many who believe absence of evidence
is trumped by an anecdote or two - as in "I _know_ that people no longer
pull out in front of me when I wear my lucky fluorescent socks!"

Whatever the magic talisman, users deem it every bit as effective as
medieval indulgences. Anyone who doubts is a heretic to be shouted down.

  #87  
Old April 5th 18, 09:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,331
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On 4/4/2018 7:15 PM, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:57:40 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

We shouldn't be telling people they have to
change clothes before they ride a bike, just as we shouldn't be telling
people they need to change clothes before going for a walk.


When I go for a walk after dark, I always wear light-colored clothing.


This is a big issue in my area. People out walking at night in dark
clothing. There have been people killed because of this.

But Frank is right, we shouldn't be telling people that they should be
wearing visible clothing by law. People should be smart enough to figure
this out for themselves. Education is better than legislation.
  #88  
Old April 5th 18, 10:04 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,764
Default High visibility law yields no improvement in safety

On 4/5/2018 2:46 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 9:52:40 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 4/3/2018 8:16 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 10:53:35 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/31/2018 12:00 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

The fallacy also works for the absence of evidence. (Absence of
evidence is not evidence of absence). An unchanged accident rate
after the introduction of mandatory reflective clothing does not mean
that reflective clothing does NOT have an effect on accident rate.
There could easily be a counter balancing effect. For example, it
might be that riders tend to ride more aggressively when wearing a
reflective vest on the assumption that the vest would protect them
from harm. At the same time, vehicle drivers would more easily notice
bicyclists. The two effects cancel each other resulting in an
unchanged accident rate.

In the cycling community, there are many who believe absence of evidence
is trumped by an anecdote or two - as in "I _know_ that people no longer
pull out in front of me when I wear my lucky fluorescent socks!"

Whatever the magic talisman, users deem it every bit as effective as
medieval indulgences. Anyone who doubts is a heretic to be shouted down.

Here's an anecdote -- I just about got whacked by some dumb f*** on a bike tonight with no light and ninja black outfit. I couldn't see him against the background of other gray and black objects like the pavement. It was heavy overcast but still daylight. In a city with lots of dopes on bikes, it's good to be able to see the dopes -- no blinding lights necessary, but something that isn't funeral attire would be appropriate in low-ish light conditions.


Wearing highly-visible clothing seems like a good idea, though for
vehicles there was no advantage found, in terms of safety, of a more
visible color. There have been advantages found for daytime lights, for
motorcycles, bicycles, and vehicles.

For motorcycles, modulated front daytime lights were found to be more
visible than non-modulated, but there was no study comparing accident
rates. Contrary to what some people on r.b.t. seem to believe, the
absence of a double-blind, case-controlled study, is not a reason to
abstain from using common sense.


Crap, I'm dumping my lights for night riding:


ABSTRACT
• Visibility aid prevalence is low among injured bicyclists.
• In daylight, white or light upper body clothing decreased the odds of a bicyclist–motor vehicle crash.
• In the dark, red/orange/yellow upper body clothing and tail lights increased the odds of a bicyclist–motor vehicle crash.
• Using multiple visibility aids is associated with reduced odds of severe injury in bicyclists.

5 Conclusions

During daylight conditions, wearing white or light coloured clothing on the upper body reduced the odds of a bicyclist MV collision. During dark conditions, red/orange/yellow clothing on the upper body, and use of a tail light increased the odds of a bicyclist MV collision. Among those struck by a MV, the use of more than one visibility aid reduced the odds of hospitalization (severe injury). These results provide evidence that the use of visibility aids has a role to play in reducing the risk of severe injury from a bicyclist MV collision. Conversely, this research highlights the need to consider other injury prevention strategies such as the separation of bicyclists from MVs or reducing MV speed limits.

(2014) 65 ESACAP C 85-96

As for night time visibility,


3.3 The relationship between visibility aids and MV collisions during dark
The crude and imputed adjusted ORs for the relationship between visibility aids and MV collision during dark conditions are presented in Table 5. There were 42 cases and 217 controls who reported bicycling during dark conditions at the time of the crash. The crude estimates indicated that reflective clothing (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.01, 4.18), any reflective articles (clothing or other) (OR 2.55; 95% CI 1.29, 5.04), red/orange/yellow (OR 4.15; 95% CI 1.17, 14.8) compared with black front upper body clothing, fluorescent clothing (OR 3.09; 95% CI 1.07, 8.94), using a headlight (OR 3.09; 95% CI 1.48, 6.44) or using a tail light (OR 5.28; 95% CI 2.12, 13.12) all increased the odds of a collision. Due to the small number of cases in this analysis, adjusted estimates could only be calculated from the imputed data. With the imputed data, only the estimates for red/orange/yellow (OR 4.11; 95% CI 1.06, 15.99) front upper body clothing compared with black, and using a tail light (OR 2.54; 95% CI

1.06, 6.07) remained statistically significant.

Don't use a tail light!



hmmm. For us Cibie & Soubitez glass bulb w/side dynamo
riders wearing mostly black, and a red mudguard reflector,
crashes are statistically insignificant. Good.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cheap high-visibility vest for cyclists. Mr. Benn[_4_] UK 79 December 29th 10 01:30 AM
High visibility vest just 1.35 Mr Benn[_2_] UK 18 December 11th 09 03:05 PM
High Visibility Gear for Daylight Steveal UK 21 July 12th 09 07:23 PM
Plain high-visibility jerseys...? Kenneth General 9 August 19th 04 05:29 AM
leeds afety high visibility clothing mike UK 1 December 11th 03 12:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.