Hi-vis Compulsory

[Davey]

YOU'RE A LONG TIME DEAD.

At least you don't have to pay taxes

I think I'd be less visable with a Hi Viz on - whilst wearing my white leathers I had to wear one when I was instructing/ marshalling etc and often wear one if doing long journey or even riding through London but wouldn't want it enforced to be done

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

There's precious little in the way of documented evidence either for or against the use of high visibilty clothing for motorcyclists.
However, I was able to find a reference to it on the sometimes dubious (in my opinion) Wikipedia facility.
It appears that there have been only two major studies of the subject, the Hurt Report in North America and the MAIDS Report in the E.U.

The interesting passage that caught my attention was the following:

A New Zealand study supported the Hurt Report's call for increased rider conspicuity, claiming fluorescent clothing, white or light colored helmets, and daytime headlights may reduce motorcycle injuries and death. The study found that wearing reflective or fluorescent clothing reduced the risk of a crash injury by 37%, a white helmet by 24%, and riding with headlights on by 27%. [10]

However, the MAIDS report did not back up the claims that helmet color makes any difference in accident frequency, and that in fact motorcycles painted white were actually over-represented in the accident sample compared to the exposure data. [11] While recognizing how much riders need to be seen, the MAIDS report documented that riders' clothing usually fails to do so, saying that "in 65.3% of all cases, the clothing made no contribution to the conspicuity of the rider or the PTW [powered two-wheeler, i.e. motorcycle]. There were very few cases found in which the bright clothing of the PTW rider enhanced the PTW’s overall conspicuity (46 cases).There were more cases in which the use of dark clothing decreased the conspicuity of the rider and the PTW (120 cases)." The MAIDS report was unable to recommend specific items of clothing or colors to make riders better seen.

So, once again, our Government, or whoever has decided to grasp the mantle of motorcycle safety on our behalf, is going directly against the findings of a report they have used our tax pounds to pay for.

Still, as always, I shall look on the bright side and the next time my Mother gets robbed by a couple of thieving scroats, I shall know where to find a policeman.

The full Wikipedia page can be found here:
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Motorcycle_sa...of_accidents

[scotchpie]

I wear one in the winter and when its getting dark, I keep it under the seat of the bike, I think the 2.99 the vest cost is well spent if it stops old ethel (or eric) T boning me in their metro. I must admit that I don't wear it in good conditions, but thats about personal choice, and the way it looks I guess.

We all know the risks of biking and are clever enough to make up our own minds about wearing one, I really object to health and safety nazis trying to scare us in all aspects of life. I know the dangers, I will make up my own mind.

[Davey]

Dunno if they're right or wrong as anyone can write stuff on Wikipedia - but on a case of getting knocked off and goes to court due to some dozey idiot pulling out - of course it'll sound better you riding in Hi-Viz etc etc hence me riding withit in London. TBH if they can't see my bright headlights, proper legal road positioning and can't hear my bike a few inches of hi-viz isn't making any difference - but I wear it incase something happens. As an instructor it was different as also gave notice to people behind you and easier to spot students when they'd forgotten thier lefty and rights

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

Dunno if they're right or wrong as anyone can write stuff on Wikipedia - but on a case of getting knocked off and goes to court due to some dozey idiot pulling out - of course it'll sound better you riding in Hi-Viz etc etc hence me riding withit in London. TBH if they can't see my bright headlights, proper legal road positioning and can't hear my bike a few inches of hi-viz isn't making any difference - but I wear it incase something happens. As an instructor it was different as also gave notice to people behind you and easier to spot students when they'd forgotten thier lefty and rights

As I said, I agree with your view of Wikipedia and it's sister websites, but it's not too difficult to use their references to do a personal bit of sleuthing:

http://www.maids-study.eu/

[finbar]

Think I am with Davel on this one.

I have ridden 1000's of miles (over 22 years) as a progressive sporty bike rider and former London courier. I have formulated the following conclusion in my time through the examples and article mentioned below!

1)As a courier I had the worst 'did not see you' accident a week after I decked out my white bike with yellow reflective stickers, conclusion: if the f#cker does not look they will not see you.

2)Chief observer of TVAM (IAM bike club ) wearing the brightest clothing known to man, big fat f#cker too, on a Pan European (bus of a thing) on an IAM ride out (A420 open junction great visability, middle of summer), had a Woman doctor pull out on him in the middle of nowhere, as she'was in a rush' conclusion; see above.

I think what people forget is the mechanics of humans eyes and the wiring of the brain, we percieve change (today is colder/hotter than yesterday etc) much more accutely than pretty colours, especially our peritheral vision; flashing lights, hitting full beam (numerous times) changing road postioning (zig zagging# before a junction....REALLY grabs attention, try it you will see the buggers notice you then! might be a case of what the f#ck is the biker doing... but if it saves me, all is well!) grabs attention way better than a bit of colour. Look up the phenomenon of 'Luming' coming up to junctions, theory goes, at distance the size of an oncoming bike as veiwed from an another vehicle at a junction changes very little untill the bike gets really close to the junction. By this time it is hard for the bike to avoid a collision, this ties in with the limitations of human perception mention above, when I read this article it really clarified ideas I had developed over time and it was nice that proper science had been done on this subject.

Note: # this looks really ugly to the casual observer and IAM types hate the idea as 'it looks messy' having done the IAM stuff there seemed to be an obsession with being smooth, but coming upto junctions (use only near fast open junctions, does not work in towns [smiley=thumbsup.gif]) one needs to be a bit more 'jerky' to be noticed (percieved). ps will not help you on black ice! ;D :'(

[Scotty]

+1 Finbar, if the f*ckers don't look, they won't see you, no matter how gaudily you're decked out.
Putting the cynical hat on for a minute it could be viewed as the thin end of the wedge, "their" way of transferring liability for SMIDSY collisions if we're not perceived as having taken adequate precautions to excuse their sub-standard driving.
When I'm president of the country (as leader of the Voice of Reason Party, our motto: Strength Through Anger), all SMIDSY perpetrators will be hung, drawn and quartered, and their remains paraded through the streets - driver education! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[kawasakiz]

I think it's a case of run before you can walk. Hi vis vest compulsory before protective clothing. I was going to GW'S the other day, driving through Lechlade in my just washed, very white Transit van with lights on and some t##t pulled out in front of me. Good job I wasn't on the Bike, what next.....Hi vis for Transit vans...........

[Ducatista]

it could be viewed as the thin end of the wedge, "their" way of transferring liability for SMIDSY collisions if we're not perceived as having taken adequate precautions to excuse their sub-standard driving.

I understand the danger, but the police are not the least bit interested in civil liability. They really could not care less about that.
So whilst I can see the potential consquence I can't see any reason as to why this would be intentional on the part of the police.

The police will tell you that even with blues and twos and sirens going, people still pull out on you.

[Jon_W]

Ingredients of this artical:

A pinch of information
A bucket of opinion
Simmer for 1hr
Stir
Serve

Bon appetite!

I wouldn't base any debate on an arrtical in MCN... they are so often wrong that you cannot take anything in there as read.

I would point out that liability can be contested in any accident and it is for a court to prove liability, not the goverment. So the transfering of liability onto the rider is just plain nonsence until it is proven in court.

As to hi viz... the police are trialing a scheme to encourage riders to wear hi-viz. That is a long way from compolsery hi-viz and a change in the law will require much more than an artical in the MCN!