CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 1 hour 26 min ago

Re: High-vis top with zero insulation

29 August 2014 - 8:00pm
mjr wrote:Hi-vis waistcoats are available from Wickes, Screwfix, Toolstation and probably other similar industrial park builders shops. Best price found just now £2.98 http://www.toolstation.com/shop/Workwea ... 188/p43997 - I've worn a mesh waistcoat in the past and there's only very slight insulating effect, especially if you leave it flapping, which only annoyed me when it got over 30 degrees or so.

But now I don't think hi-vis is proven and carrying and using special clothes annoys me: I'm slow enough to park/unpark the bike already. I think reflectives are good and put lots on my bikes because I always have a bike with me when I ride. I tend to wear large blocks of solid colour (most often blue, and that works well because most of the time I'm riding past green countryside, red brick or sandstone buildings) in daylight. At night/twilight, I tend to wear black/white or blue/white jackets with reflective detailing.,,,,,EN 471 is the H&S standard for yellow mesh waistcoats Yes they are brilliant (in both senses). Very light and airy.
Personally I've no doubt at all about their effectiveness - you can feel the difference in driver behaviour as soon as you put one on. The reason being that the right shade of yellow plus reflective stripes can mean police, road-worker, lollipop lady, ambulance person etc and a driver on auto-pilot knows this subconsciously and isn't going to discriminate when it's just a cyclist, whereas a different colour, even if hi viz, may not trigger the same alarms.

Re: High-vis top with zero insulation

29 August 2014 - 7:44pm
EN 471 is the H&S standard for yellow mesh waistcoats as worn by many whose job involves being in the road. As pointed out by others above, they are widely available from workwear suppliers and the like for under a fiver and by buying over the counter, you can check the fit and avoid p&P.

Any ideas?

29 August 2014 - 7:36pm
Thinking about making something like those reflectors on an arm that you could attach to your bike. Wondering what would be a reasonable length to expect drivers to avoid. Don't normally have a problem, but, been on main road/dual carriageway a couple of times and have had close passes with outside lane completely clear, mad. Thought I would make a drop down arm purely for main road, and flexible. Don't want to be confrontational, and perhaps use fluoro' with thanks for space written on it. Anyone have any thoughts/suggestions?

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 7:33pm
One limitation of that explanation is that it deals with the behaviour of drivers but not the reaction of others affected by it. Vulnerable road users modify their behaviour to avoid putting themselves - or their children at risk. That's relevant to cyclists.

Having mentioned children, it seems a bit rich to advance as "exceptional hardship" that if a driver is disqualified, his children's privacy will suffer.

Re: Shocking behaviour from a Range Rover Vogue

29 August 2014 - 7:29pm
Disgusting, at least a 10 year ban.....!

Re: Four 4x4's on a forty mile ride

29 August 2014 - 6:26pm
The Mechanic wrote:Living in the north east of Scotland we have a lot of 4x4 vehicles. I have not noticed any particular discourtesy shown by them than other vehicles. Unlike other posters, I do not claim this as a fact, only my observation but it seems to me that, generally speaking, drivers are a bit more considerate up here than they reportedly are in Englandshire.
I'd make a guess that this is because most people up there both need them and know how to drive them properly, because they have to be able to to get around in bad weather on narrow roads. Unfortunately that's not the case in many other places. Some people (and I stress the 'some' as I've had many positive experiences with 4x4 drivers as well) have 4x4s- especially the bigger ones- as status symbols, and drive accordingly, i.e., in an 'I'm important, me first' sort of way. They're so worried about getting any dirty mud on their shiny clean tyres and bodywork that they wont go 2" onto a verge on a narrow road to let a small car/bike/pedestrian cross alongside safely. I've had one drive me into nettles, and then reverse after me at speed when I objected.

Re: High-vis top with zero insulation

29 August 2014 - 5:50pm
Good point about runners.

I thought I may as well get one that meets EN471 standards, after learning about the rules in places like France and Italy (though I highly doubt they're enforced).

Going to try one of these http://www.provizsports.com/en_gb/provi ... ility-vest to see how I get on, it's 2 for 1 so a fiver each, still a bit more than some of the suggestions above but I am a bit skeptical of cheap ebay things. I suspect it might be too warm though and I'll end up going with a mesh Tabard or a running bib or similar..

Re: Shocking behaviour from a Range Rover Vogue

29 August 2014 - 5:50pm
Ayesha wrote:Did you clock the driver?

Was she in her eighties and wearing a tiara?
I think someone else did:

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 5:23pm
kwackers wrote:It's all explained by the pyramid of risk.

At the top you have deaths.
On the next tier down you have injuries which are some multiple of the number of deaths.
Under that you have minor collisions which are some multiple of injuries.
Under that you have near misses.
Under that you have risky behaviour.

So basically to reduce the risk further up you have to address the issues at the base of the pyramid - in this case risky behaviour.
The problem is of course the multipliers; you need (say) 100 instances of risky behaviour for every near miss, 100 near misses for every minor collision, 100 minor collisions for every serious injury and 100 serious injuries for every death.

So your average motorist can persist in risky behaviour and never experience causing anything further up and thus consider themselves 'safe' (since the odds rapidly work out in his/her favour).
Against this you have to convince them that their behaviour needs changing but that's difficult when having been caught speeding several times society fines you pocket change and refuses to do anything that might actually change that behaviour.
This,

Clearly not all risky behaviour ends up killing people, but without that risky behaviour being taken (and effectively condoned) society wide the deaths will occur. Reduce the instances of risky behaviour and the consequences will also be reduced.

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 4:54pm
IMHO every driver should start with say an arbitrary number of points, say 30, use the same totting up and banning procedure but when the total has been reached revoke the licence for good.

There are some people who should never be allowed behind the wheel.

Re: Shocking behaviour from a Range Rover Vogue

29 August 2014 - 4:49pm
Did you clock the driver?

Was she in her eighties and wearing a tiara?

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 4:45pm
Meanwhile, there's a clue to why the case in the OP ended in the way it did.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-28979459

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 4:39pm
Yeah, agreed. I was just trying demonstrate the folly of waiting for somebody to kill or maim before doing anything about their driving. Rather than just penalise those few after the event it is much better to do something about the greater number of drivers who show signs of poor driving before finding out which ones are going to maim and kill

Re: Four 4x4's/SUV'S on a forty mile ride

29 August 2014 - 4:27pm
We wouldn't be able to drive safely down into the neighbour's woodland with a 2-wheel drive, let alone up again. Of course I could walk, but not carrying any tools I may need and I'd not be able to give the disabled owner of the horses down there a lift ...
The same vehicle gets used for occasional local run-about duties: So shoot me?

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 4:04pm
Bicycler wrote:There can be no proof that a prolific speeder is going to kill a cyclist - most won't.

But there is a established strong relationship between speed and the risk of an accident. Every kph increase in speed increases the risk of an accident by a few percent. In addition between 20 and 40mph there is a very strong relationship between survival of a vulnerable road user and speed of the motor vehicle. So the faster a driver goes, the higher the risk that they will hit you and that they will kill you when they hit you.

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 3:58pm
It's all explained by the pyramid of risk.

At the top you have deaths.
On the next tier down you have injuries which are some multiple of the number of deaths.
Under that you have minor collisions which are some multiple of injuries.
Under that you have near misses.
Under that you have risky behaviour.

So basically to reduce the risk further up you have to address the issues at the base of the pyramid - in this case risky behaviour.
The problem is of course the multipliers; you need (say) 100 instances of risky behaviour for every near miss, 100 near misses for every minor collision, 100 minor collisions for every serious injury and 100 serious injuries for every death.

So your average motorist can persist in risky behaviour and never experience causing anything further up and thus consider themselves 'safe' (since the odds rapidly work out in his/her favour).
Against this you have to convince them that their behaviour needs changing but that's difficult when having been caught speeding several times society fines you pocket change and refuses to do anything that might actually change that behaviour.

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 3:57pm
Bicycler wrote:Speeding once may be an unfortunate oversight, being caught on four separate occasions ......

Probably five separate occasions as the first time probably resulted in a speed awareness course rather than points. Fat lot of good that it seems to have done in this case though.

Re: 10 year ban for killing cyclist

29 August 2014 - 3:54pm
Bonefishblues wrote:Where can I go to better understand this and the statistics involved in the debate - has anyone studied this?


http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaign/road-justice is a good place to start.

Re: High-vis top with zero insulation

29 August 2014 - 2:55pm
The Halfords tabard I got were kept to gether by velcro straps. so were very open at the sides

Re: High-vis top with zero insulation

29 August 2014 - 2:54pm
If you want to try before you buy, seek out your nearest specialist running shop and pop into it. Runners generate a lot more heat than cyclists do and they're obsessive about keeping cool.

Something like this would do the trick - a decent price for an mesh tabard from a reputable running clothing manufacturer. Zoom in on the picture and you'll see how open the mesh is compared with non-running hi-vis jackets.
http://www.sportsshoes.com/product/tho1 ... oduct-tabs

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

 

Terms and Conditions