HI-VIS conpulsory in France from 2013 [Archive]

SunEye

09-01-2012, 03:33 PM

You'll only need 150 square centimetres of hi-viz material on your upper body. That's a couple of strips up each arm or a couple of arm bands. No need for a full hi-viz waistcoat. Even a mankini might contain more than enough hi-viz material. I think that makes it a fairly pointless law.

The problem is that the French have a big problem with the number of accidents on their roads. Considering the lower population density and the lower amount of traffic compared to the UK their accident rate is not as good as it should be. They have tried to stop speeding over recent years, but they still have an accident problem.

The truth is (from my experience) that the general standard of driving in France is poor and the condition of some cars is appalling. As far as scooters are concerned the standard of riding is fairly poor and the bikes can be poorly maintained because they aren't MOT'd. Riders of bikes of less than 125cc are not subject to this new law. A large proportion of people drink wine with meals regardless of whether they are driving. Many people go home from work for lunch (a two hour lunch break is common and many people live close to their workplace) and therefore drive immediately after drinking. None of these causes of accidents are addressed by this new law.

The French already prevent the registration of bikes over 100hp in the mistaken belief that high powered bikes result in more accidents.

In the UK approximately 60% of road accidents involving motorcycles are caused by other road users. I don't believe that the figure is significantly different in France. I don't think that having a hi-viz armband on will significantly reduce accidents. I know from wearing hi-viz stuff when cycling that it appears to make no difference to the likelyhood of an accident. On a daily 1.5 mile commute I would narrowly avoid being hit by other road users almost every day, usually at junctions and roundabouts.

Unfortunately the French government does not want to address the true causes of their high road accident rate.

He11cat

09-01-2012, 03:38 PM

I used to have to ride up to the US airbase I was based at and put on a high vis vest or the military police would have you.
It was a law there also your pillion had to wear hi viz .

Always thought hold on I'm riding with fighter pilots and some good drivers here!!
Why hi viz ?? Then maybe it was the people in Dunkin doughnuts who where more prone to hit you :)

I got used to it ...but it was a pain in the arse!!

I want pink high viz !!

Yes there is an article somewhere stating that high viz does not make you be easier spotted.
Basically if they can't see you or don't want to see you , you could be lit up like an Xmas tree and still they would hit you!

SunEye

09-01-2012, 03:38 PM

So is now legal to ride though France in a mankini as long as you have a helmet and a high-viz waistcoat on and a spare pair of light bulbs?

… Cretins!
Just a hi-viz mankini and helmet would suffice. You don't have to carry spare bulbs. You just have to be able to replace a blown bulb at the roadside. If the police stop you and you have a blown bulb they can prevent you from riding until the bulb is replaced. If the police stop you and your lights are ok they will not do anything if you do not have spare bulbs with you - they won't even check that you have any.

LVC

09-01-2012, 04:30 PM

LOL spare bulbs on bikes are not a compulsory requirement and I've never heard of anyone being stopped for a broken headlight either - if it was true most of the "farm vans" over here would spend their life in the Police compounds.

The new law is an ass and as usual as with all good French laws we're ignoring it.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll38/LVC1/WTF/french.jpg

For your info: The 100cv limit (actually 106cv) is due to be removed but CT (controle techniques = MOTs) for bikes is likely to be introduced.

Riding UK plated bikes over here and playing the "tourist" has worked for me over the last 10 years (small plates, in excess of 106CV, well over 80dB of noise, etc. etc.) despite being a full time resident :chuckle:

More importantly Sat Navs that show the location of radar cameras are now illegal in France and you can be fined for having one - this includes TomToms, etc. with the Camera location software etc. you need to have this removed from your GPS hardware prior to coming to France or you risk a fine and confiscation of the unit - the police are honing in on this as most visiteurs to France have GPS units which will show the Camera locations :toilet:

tricolore

09-01-2012, 04:31 PM

I noticed yesterday how many people are now wearing them, certainly growing in popularity over here, seems odd though to have a loud exhaust, small number plate and black visor but wearing a hi-vis vest !!

uksurfer

09-01-2012, 04:38 PM

i would quite happily wear one if i had too, i wear one everyday, so not a problem if it stops me from getting knocked off......

LVC

09-01-2012, 04:42 PM

I'm lovin this >>

MAG’s Ian Mutch said: "We contend that a motorist who is incapable of identifying a normally dressed rider and motorcycle in conditions of good visibility is not fit to hold a driving licence.

"Making extreme demands of motorcyclists in respect of their clothing is to effectively persecute the victims of problem to accommodate the failings of those who often cause them."

Note: This law is not applicable to under 125cc - Why are they easier to see than big cylinder bikes, I don't think so :fou:

Nickj

09-01-2012, 06:05 PM

SunEye

10-01-2012, 02:55 AM

More importantly Sat Navs that show the location of radar cameras are now illegal in France and you can be fined for having one - this includes TomToms, etc. with the Camera location software etc. you need to have this removed from your GPS hardware prior to coming to France or you risk a fine and confiscation of the unit - the police are honing in on this as most visiteurs to France have GPS units which will show the Camera locations :toilet:

That is bonkers. Many studies have shown that excessive speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents. Poor driving is the biggest cause of accidents. These ridiculous laws will do nothing to reduce the number of deaths on French roads.

I also believe that they will be removing the speed camera signs from roads so you'll have to keep a look out because they don't paint them bright yellow like in the UK.

I believe that this is because of the 13% increase in road fatalities in Q1 2011. The French government wants to reduce road deaths, but without addressing the true causes. What a bunch of idiots.

SunEye

10-01-2012, 03:15 AM

I don't think that wearing a tiny amount of hi-viz will prevent motion camouflage which is thought to be one of the causes of the "Sorry mate I didn't see you" accidents for bikers.

I have always thought that if everyone was trained to drive/ride to the standard of what used to be Police Class 1 and always rode/drove in that manner there would be far fewer accidents.

Saint aka ML

10-01-2012, 03:31 AM

That is bonkers. Many studies have shown that excessive speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents. Poor driving is the biggest cause of accidents. These ridiculous laws will do nothing to reduce the number of deaths on French roads.

I also believe that they will be removing the speed camera signs from roads so you'll have to keep a look out because they don't paint them bright yellow like in the UK.

I believe that this is because of the 13% increase in road fatalities in Q1 2011. The French government wants to reduce road deaths, but without addressing the true causes. What a bunch of idiots.

On SatNav simple have it in your phone and have phone pin locked. When they stop you before they come to you pull the headphones out so they do not see them. Never take phone out.

SunEye

10-01-2012, 04:57 AM

On SatNav simple have it in your phone and have phone pin locked. When they stop you before they come to you pull the headphones out so they do not see them. Never take phone out.
Absolutely. It seems like an unenforceable law to me.

I don't use a sat nav, but I have got a French road map that has the positions of speed cameras marked on it. I presume that isn't illegal. So if I was driving through France it would be ok for my passenger to warn me about an upcoming speed camera, but not if I had a sat nav warn me. How ridiculous is that.

I'm sure as LVC said this law will be widely ignored by most of the French.

Sometimes I'm looking forward to moving to France, at other times I really dispare at some of the nonsense that I may encounter.

gary tompkins

10-01-2012, 09:31 AM

Horse riders seem to have it sussed

http://www.yourhorse.co.uk/upload/14656/images/V-Bandz%20Fluorescent%20Fly-Mask%20with%20Ears.jpg

So with that in mind... I'm blagging some of these for trips into France in 2013

Just need to work out how to stop them blowing off my lid ;)

http://www.clubbertoys.com/media/catalog/product/cache/3/image/376x/c10bbe30bfb7b222540af6217239dd96/f/l/flashing-bunny-ears-1_2.jpg

Dukedesmo

10-01-2012, 09:51 AM

That is bonkers. Many studies have shown that excessive speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents. Poor driving is the biggest cause of accidents. These ridiculous laws will do nothing to reduce the number of deaths on French roads.

I also believe that they will be removing the speed camera signs from roads so you'll have to keep a look out because they don't paint them bright yellow like in the UK.

I believe that this is because of the 13% increase in road fatalities in Q1 2011. The French government wants to reduce road deaths, but without addressing the true causes. What a bunch of idiots.

Sounds to me like they're looking to increase fine revenue rather than reduce casualties.

Just like our parasitic speed camera 'partnerships'...

He11cat

10-01-2012, 10:21 AM

We are quite lucky to have yellow painted speed cams ..... other coutries I have been to mainly grey and unless you know where they are not much chance of seeing them.

I am so sick of watching for cameras and worst still average speed cams your so busy worrying about your speed and getting caught that it detracts from your riding or driving I am sure...
Most people just slow down for the camera then belt off again .... waste of time really.

Rally

10-01-2012, 10:34 AM

I was told that we paint ours yellow with a special paint, which then allows them to burn hotter than normal and ensure a better melted finish. From what I have seen on websites, it seems to work well!

As to hi-viz, apart from building sites (cause they move so slowly) they are really for slower riders so we don't run into the back of them. If you place yourself correctly on the road for seeing and being seen and have good observation skills with decent reactions, you stay out of trouble. This is why the Police trainers wear them when training people and remove them to ride home. :thumbsup:

LVC

10-01-2012, 11:14 AM

Absolutely. It seems like an unenforceable law to me.

I don't use a sat nav, but I have got a French road map that has the positions of speed cameras marked on it. I presume that isn't illegal. So if I was driving through France it would be ok for my passenger to warn me about an upcoming speed camera, but not if I had a sat nav warn me. How ridiculous is that.

I'm sure as LVC said this law will be widely ignored by most of the French.

Sometimes I'm looking forward to moving to France, at other times I really dispare at some of the nonsense that I may encounter.

There's even talk about declaring the use of handsfree kits illegal as well - they really are bonkers over here - I'd rather they made smoking in a car illegal but then you may as well add talking, listening to the radio, opening the window, sneezing, scratching your nose and anything that takes your eyes off the road for more than 0.2secs. I agree with texting being illegal but can't see how speaking on a handsfree kit is any different to having a conversation with a passenger and much less distractful than kids screaming/fighting on the back seat.

As already mentioned the real reason for all these laws has nothing to do with safety just revenue - little fact for you: in 2011 630million euros was raised in France from speed fines alone. (530 million euros from speed less than 10kmh over the limit and 100 million from more excess) - now you can see why these laws exist :cens:

SunEye

10-01-2012, 11:59 AM

As already mentioned the real reason for all these laws has nothing to do with safety just revenue - little fact for you: in 2011 630million euros was raised in France from speed fines alone. (530 million euros from speed less than 10kmh over the limit and 100 million from more excess) - now you can see why these laws exist :cens:
It's much more of a money earner in France than in the UK.

In the UK there are about 6000 speed cameras. The annual income from speeding fines is about £100 million.

In France I think there only about 2000 cameras. Apparently three cameras on the A8 near Cannes and Nice generated an estimated €20 million in 2010.

I can only conclude that the French are not very observant when driving (based on observations of my girlfriend's driving, which quite frankly scares the hell out of me and would not pass a UK driving test by a long long way) and that their roads are congestion free enabling lots of them to speed. In the UK the roads are so congested that most of the time you can't break the speed limit (in a car).

the_adam

10-01-2012, 12:42 PM

There's even talk about declaring the use of handsfree kits illegal as well - they really are bonkers over here - I'd rather they made smoking in a car illegal but then you may as well add talking, listening to the radio, opening the window, sneezing, scratching your nose and anything that takes your eyes off the road for more than 0.2secs. I agree with texting being illegal but can't see how speaking on a handsfree kit is any different to having a conversation with a passenger and much less distractful than kids screaming/fighting on the back seat.

I was thinking about this recently, they've shown that concentrating on a phonecall decreases your reaction times significantly, and once the answer button has been pressed it's really no different to using a handsfree kit or talking to someone that's already there. Except for the fact that you only have one hand on the wheel, which isn't particularly dangerous by itself or they would ban manual gearboxes too. So why not ban communication in general?

I guess the difficulty is more in enforcing it than anything - you can easily tell whether someone is driving with a phone held to their ear so they (attempt to) ban that first. Handsfree kits are more difficult, you'd have to stop any suspicious cars and end up annoying a lot of people that were just talking to themselves. Fortunately, until they make it an MOT requirement for every car to have an incredibly annoying echo I can't see them getting too much evidence to prosecute people for talking to each other :D

Altaian

10-01-2012, 12:59 PM

rather they made smoking in a car illegal but then you may as well add talking, listening to the radio, opening the window, sneezing, scratching your nose and anything that takes your eyes off the road for more than 0.2secs.

Let's not make all distractions which take your eyes off the road for more than 0.2secs illegal LVC - it could make riding/driving/life rather dull... :rolleyes:

I was told that we paint ours yellow with a special paint, which then allows them to burn hotter than normal and ensure a better melted finish. From what I have seen on websites, it seems to work well!

UK speed cameras weren't always yellow. I believe they had to make the change so as to show that they were 'not' meerly revenue generating, but to highlight accident black spots (sure) So to prove the point they then made them more visible... Bit like SatNavs aren't marketed with speed cameras, but with accident blackspot locations (aka speed cameras). I'm sure there's a connection now with some being decommissioned, as they're probably not as profitable...

JerryT

10-01-2012, 01:05 PM

Talking to a passenger is not the same as talking on the phone: a passenger usually knows when to shut up. A phone caller won't know that you are just entering a complex junction or some other situation that demands more attention than normal, so will just keep on expecting you to pay attention to what they're saying... So phone calls are more taxing than talking to a passenger. Mind you, if you keep looking at your passenger while you're talking to them (like in the movies) that would probably be a lot worse than a phone call!!
Most accidents are the result of a loss of concentration by somebody.

Dukedesmo

10-01-2012, 01:38 PM

It's much more of a money earner in France than in the UK.

In the UK there are about 6000 speed cameras. The annual income from speeding fines is about £100 million.

In France I think there only about 2000 cameras. Apparently three cameras on the A8 near Cannes and Nice generated an estimated €20 million in 2010.

I can only conclude that the French are not very observant when driving (based on observations of my girlfriend's driving, which quite frankly scares the hell out of me and would not pass a UK driving test by a long long way) and that their roads are congestion free enabling lots of them to speed. In the UK the roads are so congested that most of the time you can't break the speed limit (in a car).

Bear in mind that the fines in France are significantly higher than in the UK, that and the fact that until relatively recently there was virtually no speed enforcement whatsoever, so drivers tended to be less 'disciplined' than UK drivers...

LVC

10-01-2012, 02:42 PM

I agree (with all of you) ....and one of the main reasons I moved here is the long, empty, good condition roads - and to be fair the road I take to Le Mans (almost daily) is a 100/110 Km/h route for 45mins with virtually no one on it and plenty of space to overtake and even at that speed (the legal limit is 90Km/h) I'm still being overtaken.

So you're spot on that the fines for speeding in France is a bit like shooting rats in a barrel :pedro:

The trick is now knowing the roads that have no cameras nor cops as there's not enough traffic (and revenue) to warrant their placement and then you can still enjoy them hassle free. :mand:

Getting older (and maybe wiser) speed is no longer the draw for me, I enjoy the freedom of a bike rather than the knee down experience and a reflective armband isn't going to stop that either.

French drivers are mad but nothing like those in Saudi I encountered back in the 90s - no laws, no insurance, no license just a mad rush and may the quickest survive - oh the fond memories :rolleyes:

STIVH

14-01-2012, 11:36 PM

In the North West England in 1979 with no speed cameras, no sat navs, no mobile telephones, no airbags, no restricted daft speed limits and very little signage, plus a lot more road coppers around there was over 8,000 serious vehicle road casualties and in 2008 with most of the above present on the roads and if the stats are to be believed a lot less coppers driving around and an awful lot more vehicles on the road, there was just over 3,000 serious vehicle road casualties.

The only group to flat line between the period 1998 - 2008 with respect to road deaths was us - the motorcyclist

The only thing we don't have that the rest have had access to is airbags

But I have seen them demonstrated at the NEC last year?

Lima071

15-01-2012, 06:13 PM

Anyone heard of target fixation?

Anyone know how to make them selves a target?

That'll be simple wear something bright that stands out against the background.

It should make it slightly easier for theose that are at the root of casual accidents to hit more bikes with a greater degree of accuracy.

you get this a lot when overtaking, the driver you are passing sees you and automatically moves toward you, also when you position yourself on the white lines, watch how many of the slow thinkers move on to the line with you (not always on purpose) by accident.

as for camouflage, with no green string or netting the army used to camouflage tanks using lights. As the tank crested the hill/ dune all of the lights blanked out the tank, to the enemy, allowing it be the first to fire. This was due to the sky behind the tank being light and the front of the tank also being covered in lights facing forward.
Sometimes bikers are not seen due to the aspect of the driver and also because some ride with full beam and effectively could hide a tank!

He11cat

15-01-2012, 11:29 PM

I am just going to buy some big belly warmer pants in high viz and pull em up high ... its a soft target and the size should easily cover the cm required and I don't care .... plus keep my back warm :)

southfrance

16-01-2012, 07:44 AM

Well, while the French are really annoying and they have anal laws, I love it here and can't think of a better place to be for biking, the Pyrenees & Spain an hour to my left, the Auvergne and the Cevennes 30 mins North and the Alps a bit further ( 4hrs ) to my right, so if the Gendarmes would just *&&*^$%n off it would be like heaven......................................

utopia

16-01-2012, 10:29 AM

There's even talk about declaring the use of handsfree kits illegal as well - they really are bonkers over here - I'd rather they made smoking in a car illegal........

Talking to a passenger is not the same as talking on the phone: a passenger usually knows when to shut up. A phone caller won't know that you are just entering a complex junction or some other situation that demands more attention than normal, so will just keep on expecting you to pay attention to what they're saying... So phone calls are more taxing than talking to a passenger.

I (very much) agree with Jerry here.
And I can't see how smoking in a car can be a distraction any more than reaching for a packet of Worther's Originals, and is probably less distracting than retuning the radio or changing a CD.
Personally, I never use a phone of any kind while on the move.

Being easily visible must surely be of some benefit to one's own road safety, but as has been said already, there are other factors such as road positioning, anticipation and good roadcraft in general which are far more relevant factors.
But since it is the wearers own safety, rather than that of other road users, which is primarily affected (for bikers), my opinion is that hi-viz should be left to personal choice rather than be a legal requirement.
There is also perhaps the chance that, in a hi-viz world, drivers will expect spotting a bike to be easy and may therefore become even more complacent and inattentive.