Invisible cyclists: Eye-tracking experiment finds drivers don't see more than 1 in 5 riders (+ video)

Cyclists are not invisible, drivers are not looking.

Obvious conclusions from this are that cyclists should all be wrapped in cotton wool.
This will both protect them in an accident and make them look like more visible clouds.

So it would seem that if we cover our hi viz in cotton wool it will stop us being a danger to all those car drivers.

Vicky Bristow, spokesperson for the car insurance company said

“For the first time we know exactly where people focus their eyes when driving and the results are frightening.

“Blaming motorists seems like an easy option, but this issue can only be really addressed if both motorists and cyclists accept responsibility.

Well vicky all I can say is; it's not only an easy option but in this case with all the evidence from your study it is the ONLY option.

I would like to see the same test done for cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians so that there is a broad view ( no pun intended) of how much or how little we all observe. As a long time cyclist in London I am always surprised how many cyclists are unaware of how traffic and pedestrians are moving around them. As someone noted above, you need to ride so that you can be seen but equally you need to ride with anticipation and focus. Putting yourself in a dangerous position because you haven't learnt to read the movement of vehicles can make you as culpable as the driver. It's all shared space and everyone needs to look out for each other.

terrible headline, even worse comments. Bad science at its best.

I had an interesting chat with the MET police yesterday, they are up here all the time on royal protection and one of their drivers put right out and almost got my in the mini bus.

For a change I was fully light up, had my flat on, was wearing light coloured clothing.

So flagged him over for a chat. It seems and I did see his point of view. He was looking, I know that, when he looked to see anything coming down the road, a car had just pasted and blocked his view of me, even with the flag at around 5.5ft from the ground. Fair enough, I am not the most visible that low down, I have quick reactions, which saved me going into the side of the van. If it had been a kid at a similar height to my recumbent, they would have been squashed, I made that point, it was taken on board and we went on our way. Really nice guys the MET

Eye Contact & always riding, when solo, with Flashing lights are a practical option. Neither are cure all.
Slightly more outlandish options would An Obama style motorcade or a Team Badged Skoda with 2 motor bikes outriders. With Partridge Harmon on a Tannoy berating your pedalling style. With Big Maggy chipping in with “ Yeaah Its not the best” on loop.

Certainly not a 'cure-all' for the problem but I make a point of trying to make eye contact with drivers at junctions - it's really incredible how much of a difference it makes in getting them to notice you!

So all that hi-vis fashion only works at 80% http://innercitymobility.blogspot.de/2013/04/london-fashion-visibility-i...

i guess one solution is to slow cars down, at least if they do hit something they will do it slowly and cause less damage.

bring back the red flag man!

Ride in the driver's eyeline rather than over to the left, and turn your head to look behind you periodically (make sure the road is clear ahead). The latter can make the driver become aware of you and pass you safely, or will give you a clue if they are on autopilot and so you might need to take action.

I would like to the see the make/model of vehicle involved in an accident with a cyclist. I would wager a fecking great big 4x4;s are right up there as the owners are incapable of driving safely

I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host of oh bloody hell where did those nuns on bikes come from?

Clouds? I mean, seriously, clouds?

it's clear that we are often not seen. However, I would question the test based on peripheral visison. If I am looking at the car as the user was doing - I see the cyclist in my peripheral vision - that doesn't mean I don't register that they are there [just because I don't look directly at them]. Best advice is to ride with purpose and make your self seen - also don't ride very close to the curb as this will lead to motorists coming way too close (attemting to stay in lane whilst passing you).

Its also worth noting that drivers are almost equally not noticing motorcyclists. I've always thought that drivers only look for big boxes of metal.

They will happily see a 'cyclist but just not register their existence.

So who wants to brainstorm ways of making drivers look at cyclists instead of clouds, buildings or what was likely lovely lassies? Its obviously my responsibility to make sure drivers pay attention to their driving.

It seems like allowing sat navs into the car has normalised the use of gadgets at the wheel, I think a lot of people think it is perfectly ok to use a smartphone while driving. after all its just a box with a screen on

Also astonished to see promotion for 'in car wifi' or 'google send to car' features in new cars and a whopping great touchscreen in the centre console - it's just insane putting those kind of distractions in front of a driver. Surely there must be some legislation about what can and can't be placed there?

That film footage is bloody terrifying

Well they can't very well blame the people who pay them their wages can they so the two wheeled demons, who apparently don't even pay for the roads, can take some responsibility for their own injuries. I do despair

Hey Crazy-Legs, thanks for posting the pilot article...well worth a read.

Makes me much more inclined to have flashing lights during the day as well as night.

The only thing about this is how do you know what the brain is recieving on the peripehery? From the video there's a cyclist heading in the same direction as the car and they never recieve a red dot of attention but it doesn't mean that the driver doesn't know they are there.

Typo in the headline on homepage, FYI: CYLISTS rather than cyclists, presumably?

This article:
http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/ was also a very interesting read on what drivers do and don't see - it came form the perspective of an RAF fighter pilot, someone who knows a thing or two about seeing hazards and reacting in microseconds! Very similar conclusions to this study.

Quote:

Blaming motorists seems like an easy option, but this issue can only be really addressed if both motorists and cyclists accept responsibility.

Bloody hell, did she even read the study?

It's also worth pointing out that there are pretty shocking stats for motorcycles too, lets not pretend this is limited to cyclists.

Another point is that the use of the term jaywalker, meaning a person crossing illegally (not possible in the UK AFAIK) or irresponsibly (of course, possible anywhere) is in my view pushes responsibility from the car driver onto the pedestrian crossing. What constitutes a jaywalker? Anyone crossing the road?