Is no pavement-riding rule for cyclists “nuts”? Campaigners in Australia fight to make it legal; Councillor blames police for victim blaming cyclists; Van der Poel wheelies on the beach; National Cyclocross Network; Dream SL8 build + more on the live blog

So the takeaway from that is to always wear Lycra, but make sure it's in blue and red, maybe with a web pattern...  Commuting in Costume, as a safety tip.

brooksby wrote:

So the takeaway from that is to always wear Lycra, but make sure it's in blue and red, maybe with a web pattern...  Commuting in Costume, as a safety tip.

I see a fruitful crossover with "cycling as a sport" here.

How many cyclists dressed as dinosaurs, beefeaters or giant inhalers have been run over? Exactly!

(When I rode a banana yellow Kingcycle recumbent with a tail fairing I became so visible that I had people driving alongside me filming on their phones. Actually, maybe don't try that at home...)

Secret_squirrel wrote:

I lost track but did Ineos actually sign anyone decent to replace Hart and the rest yet?

AJ August (US, 17, described as "like Remco but probably more powerful") and Oscar Rodriguez but still lots of spaces.

It turns out that my post DID have something to do with the articles above. It seems that my delayed clicking of the 'save' button after typing the post (due to that annoying thing called 'work' getting in the way) meant that by the time I acually posted this, the Road.cc peeps had already done a piece on it! My bad!! 

Agreed. We tend to cry 'victim blaming' here, but some of the cyclists I see on the roads of London are very tricky to spot when wearing all black at night with no lights. If one of them got hit by a driver, I don't think the blame would lie solely with the driver.

Agree on the London part, when I use the Brompton to get across London I see some of the worse cycling around.

I normally shout 'get some lights'.

Do it every time I see the guy 

Not the same guy, but at least it's not just me that isn't afraid to speak out.

I hope not, I'm definitely not Scottish !

Maybe try driving to the conditions?

I'm cycling not driving, but congratulations on bringing to light another issue. That of the element of the cycling community that believes it is everyone elses responsibilty and that a cyclist is exempt for taking any part in ensuring their own safety, and that the highway code only applies to motorists.

Maybe brush up on the highway code yourself, specifically:

Rule 60

At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.

Rule 59
Clothing. You should avoid clothes that may get tangled in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights when you are cycling.

Light-coloured or fluorescent clothing can help other road users to see you in daylight and poor light, while reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) can increase your visibility in the dark.

Snipped to avoid the helmet derailment.

It's not victim blaming to suggest that brights and reflectives are a good idea.

Absolutely. On my commute I see a mix of cyclists wearing nothing bright/relective and a number who do, the difference in how far ahead you can see them is clear, and is why I wear a jacket that is reflective myself. The the highway code rule is only advisory on this, but really it is common sense.

Yep. I have recently started doing the 'school run' (at 6pm) through a largely unlit park and, despite having a good dynamo light, was a bit surprised how late I see dark-dressed pedestrians on the path.  

Its funny the only item of flourescent that I've ever found to make any difference is my PassPixi.....

I don't think that wearing fluorescent clothing is going to prevent close passes. Those drivers can see that you're there but don't care enough to actually give a decent amount of space.

Nor will fluorescent clothing do any good when a driver simply doesn't look.

But wearing fluorescent clothing can still make a difference on the odd occasion when it makes the difference between a driver being able to see you from a distance, and not seeing you until they're very close to you. Being in the shade of trees on a sunny day, for example.

Course, there was also a case reported here where someone (perhaps the coroner?) concluded that the dead victim's hi-viz blended in with the trees on a bright day. It seems we can't win. 

I thought (per the rules) the idea was that because less than perfect driving conditions frequently occur* taking appropriate action was therefore basic road craft.  It seems I have the logic wrong.  Because "we had to drive, everybody drives" then apparently it's the responsibility to drive appropriately that can get in the bin (see numerous court reports on road.cc).  So when people didn't take appropriate action for the conditions, those conditions themselves excuse any bad outcomes.

That applies to cyclists also (and there are rules also).  There is a slight difference though: when cycling you're not putting on hi-viz / reflectives / pedal reflectors and shiny spokey dokeys because that's needed to stop you injuring others.

I know pedestrians are sometimes encouraged to make themselves more visible.  However it doesn't seem to be there are capaigns outside clothing stores every autumn.  Of course, people on foot don't generally spend as long on the roads as those cycling** - but there are a lot more of them.

* Sometimes predictably so, like "it gets dark at night" and "bright sun early in the morning / late evening" and "slippery conditions in winter".

** I'm very lucky in the UK in that I can spend quite a lot of my routine journeys completely separated from motor traffic.

So when people didn't take appropriate action for the conditions, those conditions themselves excuse any bad outcomes

Although I am repeating myself too soon, this is indeed the approach of Lancashire Constabulary: when I was hit waiting to leave Sainsbury's, the blame was put onto the dark and rain- presumably because the driver couldn't be expected to know about those. 

Secret_squirrel wrote:

Its funny the only item of flourescent that I've ever found to make any difference is my PassPixi.....

I mean....sure. But here is a snapshot of me leaving in the morning on our security camera, light, reflector, reflective strip on my bag on the pannier and a reflective jacket.

I see guys cycling ahead of me at times who clearly work in the warehouses enroute and wear their work clothes with reflective stripes, and my light picks them up way in the distance due to this.

Of course you are not going to prevent all close passes, but making yourself more visible is never a bad thing.

My newest (minor) addition to my reflective gear is a few of these stickers.

Ouch, sorry to hear that. I hope that you're OK.

It was several years ago now, driver stopped, but wasn't insured to drive that car. I did get money from the insurers, but it didn't cover replacing the bike or damaged clothing.

The good news was that when the ambulance arrived and did my blood pressure it was about 220/120, after starting on a few ant-hypertensives it is controlled beautifully.