If hi-vis jacket/vests are made compulsory, will you comply?

[FJRider]

Yes they can.

And yes they will.

But the Man/Woman in the Judges chair may question the validity of their statements ... besides ... the headlight LAW means we ARE seen ... right ... ???

[Voltaire]

I had my visy vest on this morning, got to work in the rain and as I was turning I lost footing and the bike went down on my leg..... According to P Dath it was lack of planning, Katman would say I should have been more aware, visy was of no use.

[Smifffy]

But the Man/Woman in the Judges chair may question the validity of their statements ... besides ... the headlight LAW means we ARE seen ... right ... ???

I'd like to see more questioning on that:

1: I never saw him
2: Did you look?
1: yes
2: Clearly he was there then?
1: yes
2: But you never saw him?
1: no
2: ARE YOU BLIND, STUPID or LYING?

[awayatc]

Your opinion? proof please, studies/statistics anything to back yourself up, this will be required if you want to stop this requirement going through as law which has been rumoured in the past.
There must have been a overseas study done somewhere.

Yeah...coz we all know the gubbermint only wants the best for us.....

cheesecutters anyone?

[scumdog]

Looking around at other riders I've noticed that if a bike has a tallish screen you can only see the helmet, side on they are visible, from the rear they loose effectiveness if there is a big pack either on a rack, or like me a backpack.
.

I've frequently noticed that too - the hi-vis would be better off on the front fairing....or over the top-box.

[doc]

Yeah...coz we all know the gubbermint only wants the best for us.....

cheesecutters anyone?

All part of the LTSA making it safer for us . European requirements of those triangle things for when you are broken down on the side of the road are probably on their wish list too. Bet they are still trying to figure out how to get around the safety issue of number plates on the front mudguard to pay for more staff.

[Swoop]

Bet they are still trying to figure out how to get around the safety issue of number plates on the front mudguard to pay for more staff.

That is simple. They will just print the rego on the front of the rider's fluoro jacket...

[MarkH]

Looking around at other riders I've noticed that if a bike has a tallish screen you can only see the helmet, side on they are visible, from the rear they loose effectiveness if there is a big pack either on a rack, or like me a backpack.

I have a tall screen (I have to sit up very straight if I want to look over it) and I have a top box on the back. I have a headlight on and a white helmet (which would be the only part visible over the screen). So, can anyone tell me how much less likely to be in an accident I would be if I choose to wear a fluoro vest?

The white helmet is OK, it isn't any more effort to use than a black one would be.
The headlight is OK, I can't turn it off anyway.
A hi-viz vest would be another item to put on and I just can't be arsed doing that if there isn't a noticeable benefit from it, which I just don't see in my case.

My screen is an aftermarket (Givi) one and 150mm taller than the fairly tall factory screen - this works out well because I'm probably 150mm taller then the Japanese designers of my scooter. It is probably only 1/2 of my helmet that is visible over the top of the screen when I am headed towards someone. I haven't really had a lot of car drivers fail to see me and the cases it has happened they probably wouldn't have seen me if I was driving a truck (in one case I could see the driver's head through his side window and he didn't give the slightest glance in the direction of potential traffic (taxi driver!!!)).

I have driven a refrigerated truck (tall, white) and had a car start to pull out before seeing me (I wouldn't have been able to stop) so it isn't only non-threatening vehicles that car drivers can't see.

So, as I said in a previous post, unless they make it a legal requirement, I ain't wearing one!

[Smifffy]

I've frequently noticed that too - the hi-vis would be better off on the front fairing....or over the top-box.

So when they amend the law to mandate Hi-vis, they will also outlaw screens & top boxes.

Problem solved creatively & legislatively!!

[avgas]

So when they amend the law to mandate Hi-vis, they will also outlaw screens & top boxes.

Problem solved creatively & legislatively!!

Nah its just easiest to make it law that if you carrying more than 65kgs you must have an additional wheel.

FattMax would have to get training wheels.

[Usarka]

Don't forget hi-vis bikes......

[MSTRS:Me]

Doing stuff to make motorists see us just allows the pollies to feel/look like they're doing something. It is a waste of time. And only serves to let a false sense of security creep in for many riders. We could stick a big, flashing light on a pole attached to our bikes and we still wouldn't be seen...FFS, people don't see ambulances etc now.

The problem of us apparently being hard to see is more a comment on the poor roadcraft of others. The solution is too hard for TPTB, but unless they get serious, nothing will change - it is up to us to ensure our own safety any way we can.

[Usarka]

....or compulsory spokey dokies.

[Banditbandit]

A bike went passed the other way as I was going to work this morning ... big cruiser with a big screen ... I saw the bike and the light way off ... wasn't till he was alongside and going passed that I noticed the hi-viz vest.

The vest was completely obscured by the screen and of no use from the front at all ... I'm sure the rider was unaware of how useless the jacket was from anywhere in front and he was riding along thinking how safe he was because he was visible ...

At least anyone coming up behind at speed would have seen him ...

[MarkH]

A bike went passed the other way as I was going to work this morning ... big cruiser with a big screen ... I saw the bike and the light way off ... wasn't till he was alongside and going passed that I noticed the hi-viz vest.

The vest was completely obscured by the screen and of no use from the front at all ... I'm sure the rider was unaware of how useless the jacket was from anywhere in front and he was riding along thinking how safe he was because he was visible ...

At least anyone coming up behind at speed would have seen him ...

When you consider that most accidents between cagers & bikers happen because the cagers don't see the bike approaching and the car/van/truck driver turns into the path of the bike - this makes a vest that can't be seen as the bike is approaching next to worthless.
Lucky the hi-vis vest imbues the wearer with a cloak of invincibility then or there wouldn't be any point in wearing one . . .