Cats eyes...

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
pwa
Posts: 17368
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by pwa »

[XAP]Bob wrote:
pwa wrote:Last night I was driving a van on the A4107, which at 527 metres is the highest A-road in Wales. It was very dark, windy and the rain was torrential. I was very thankful for the cats eyes. Without them it would have been a much more hazardous journey.


Assuming you were driving at the limit of what you considered acceptable risk then I assert that it would merely have been a slower journey.


No, slower and more dangerous. In the headlights the wet road and the darkness to the left that was not road looked very similar. The cats eyes provided security. Just like having lights on the front of my vehicle, in fact. And I hope nobody is going to suggest vehicles should not have front lights because they encourage speedier driving.

That particular road has near vertical drops of a hundred metres to the side of the road in a few places, and even travelling at modest speeds you are glad of anything that clearly distinguishes what is road and what is not. I have cycled that road at night and been just as grateful to the cats eyes. And on very dark, remote roads like that a cyclist with reflectives and at least one half decent rear light stands out like a UFO.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by Vorpal »

What I love about the new devices is that after almost 30 years with outdated cycle lighting regulations, we still can't get legislators to do anything. Something cool like twinkley lights for the road comes along, and it's suddenly easy to change the regulations. :roll:
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by MikeF »

Vorpal wrote:What I love about the new devices is that after almost 30 years with outdated cycle lighting regulations, we still can't get legislators to do anything. Something cool like twinkley lights for the road comes along, and it's suddenly easy to change the regulations. :roll:
Not sure I quite understand what you're saying.
This was the email I received this morning
"Dear Stakeholder,

We have now released the Government response to the recent Traffic Signs Consultation which can be viewed at the following link.

Consultation response

Thank you to everyone who responded.

Mr Robert Ringsell

Traffic Engineering and Traffic Signs Policy"


I would have liked consultation about "cyclists dismount" signs, but I don't know what triggers a consultation.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
User avatar
syklist
Posts: 1243
Joined: 19 May 2008, 6:43pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by syklist »

Bmblbzzz wrote:Skylist – thanks for your answer. Camber in particular is a feature that hadn't occurred to me. However, I must say Bob's post gets to the mark: do you (drivers in Norway in general) drive with a little more consideration for unlit things that might be on the road because there is slightly less information marked out for you?

Without cats eyes I have to spend more of my attention watching where the road is going especially when facing a snake of oncoming traffic. After that, I have to pay attention to the road surface, which at this time of year means trying to spot patches of road that have more ice or snow on them. That means that I am not really able to look out for 400kg ambulant burger ingredients on or near the road. If there is a high risk of elk crossing the road then the authorities put up signs in the affected areas. At such times I ask my front seat passenger to keep their eyes peeled and, like pretty much everyone else, drive more slowly.

The advantage of cats eyes and any system that help explain the road to drivers is that you don't spend so much energy trying to work out where the road goes. So you can use more energy trying to work out what other idiots/impediments on the road are doing and drive defensively without a huge queue forming behind you.

A footnote to the disadvantages of marker posts at the side of the road. I checked whilst driving up the valley this evening. More than half of them are not reflective at this time of year as they are covered with a thick layer of ice. The posts are not always there, if there is a crash barrier along the side of the road then they are omitted. If there are a couple of driveways or side roads then they are omitted. So to follow the road you are constantly looking for different types of objects to give you the information you need.
So long and thanks for all the fish...
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by [XAP]Bob »

pwa wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:
pwa wrote:Last night I was driving a van on the A4107, which at 527 metres is the highest A-road in Wales. It was very dark, windy and the rain was torrential. I was very thankful for the cats eyes. Without them it would have been a much more hazardous journey.


Assuming you were driving at the limit of what you considered acceptable risk then I assert that it would merely have been a slower journey.


No, slower and more dangerous. In the headlights the wet road and the darkness to the left that was not road looked very similar. The cats eyes provided security. Just like having lights on the front of my vehicle, in fact. And I hope nobody is going to suggest vehicles should not have front lights because they encourage speedier driving.

That particular road has near vertical drops of a hundred metres to the side of the road in a few places, and even travelling at modest speeds you are glad of anything that clearly distinguishes what is road and what is not. I have cycled that road at night and been just as grateful to the cats eyes. And on very dark, remote roads like that a cyclist with reflectives and at least one half decent rear light stands out like a UFO.


Then you would have underestimated the amount slower that you would be driving to maintain the barely acceptable risk level...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
bluemootwo
Posts: 101
Joined: 21 Aug 2015, 7:14am

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by bluemootwo »

I find driving in France, where I am sure there are far fewer cars eyes, exhausting. I think I am a bigger danger to everyone - cyclists, pedestrians, other drivers, myself - without excellent cats eyes especially at the edge of the road and at junctions.
pwa
Posts: 17368
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by pwa »

Driving a van over a mountain road in the rain at night demands concentration (which I think I manage) and at every corner I am conscious of the need to keep my wide vehicle on my own side of the road without putting my wheels on the verge. The little bit of help that the cats eyes give enables me to be accurate with that, making me and other road users a bit safer. Taking them away would increase the accident rate on that stretch of road.

I also believe that a driver in "cats eye watching" mode is alert to small points of light on the road ahead and is going to pick out a rear cycle light quickly.
drossall
Posts: 6115
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by drossall »

Without research akin to that which I described on page 1, this is surely all just speculation?
pwa
Posts: 17368
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by pwa »

drossall wrote:Without research akin to that which I described on page 1, this is surely all just speculation?


The trouble is, to properly assess the effect of removing cats eyes you would have to do it and then allow enough accidents to happen to give a statistically significant result. And it would be in defiance of what most road users consider to be "the bleedin' obvious". I find driving at night tiring and occasionally stressful as things are, and making it more difficult by removing cats eyes would not improve my driving.
old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by old_windbag »

80 years of cats eye use so I'd imagine they have been positively beneficial to helping drivers see the lie of the road ahead. I personally think they are one of those ideas, simple in principle, yet very novel in implementation/design that I'd rather not be without. They go with the safety bicycle and three pin plug for being simply excellent in their form and function( amongst many other designs/inventions that benefit us, not teasmades and hair tongs :) ).

On a serious note countryfile had an item on the experimental painting of ponys/horses ( I think dartmoor ) with luminous( glass bead reflective ) paint so car drivers can avoid collisions. This was also mooted for farm livestock, the casualty figures were very bad the woman interviewed quoted 15 large animal deaths in one month alone. It's a great shame and unnecessary loss so hopefully the luminous paint may help lower this figure. Volvo's lifepaint is being pushed similarly for pedestrians, cyclists, dogs etc but it seems to wash off easily from comments I read and it's expensive at £10 an aerosol. I like the idea of infrared head up displays in cars to highlight animals and humans at night where headlights hide them, this I think was tested by GM about 10+years ago but has now made an appearance on one of the high end mercs or similar, you know the cars we all can afford :evil: . Ideas like this should be brought in a bottom level.... the electronics won't be that expensive if made in millions.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by Vorpal »

drossall wrote:Without research akin to that which I described on page 1, this is surely all just speculation?

Most studies show benefits....
http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=64881
http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=452614
http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/18/6/521.abstract
But there was one Finnish study in 1991 that I have seen references to, but have not read myself, that found increases in speed. This has generally been interpretted to mean that an appropriate level of informaiton needs to be provided to drivers. If we make it too easy, they will engage in risk compensation. So, we need to provide the right level of information.

I'm not certain that there is enough research to determine what the right level of information is, but the guidelines for installing roadside reflectors generally reflect what we know from the existing studies.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Brucey
Posts: 44517
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by Brucey »

I quite like cat's eyes (of the conventional sort) and -at risk of pointing out the b-obvious perhaps- if you can see a retroreflective cat's eye, then you ought to be able to see anything else that is similarly reflective at the same kind of distance. This effectively includes most cyclists, if not most small (or large) furry animals....

By contrast cat's eyes with LEDs bear no such comparison; they may illuminate (very brightly) beyond the useful range of headlights. This will likely have two effects;

1) the contrast ratio between another object (pedestrian or cyclist) may be considerably reduced (i.e. you won't so easily be 'seen'), and
2) the driver of the car may indeed 'risk compensate' by driving faster than normal (and indeed faster than they ought to bearing in mind how far they can really see).

BTW the prospect of fancy headlights etc is all very well, but even if they 'work';

a) the bleeping motorist will still have to be looking where they are going (and not lulled into a false sense of security or distracted in various ways as seems the intent of most car designers... :roll: ) and
b) there will still be numerous cars without such technology in use for decades to come.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by old_windbag »

The advantage of having head up display style information projected onto the windscreen is that the driver can also have catch_up tv to watch on the commute home :D.

Technology will take time to creep in but just as with abs, seatbelts, airbags etc one day we'll all have better safety systems and would not want to have a car without. Sometimes it's said that without safety systems we'd drive more carefully but perhaps its better for us to have them for the innocent people the perpetrators crash into. Perhaps having car systems with artificial intelligence deciding to turn systems on or off if it decides you are to blame for the iminent impact. A car judge and jury with a decision in milliseconds :D.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Brucey wrote:I quite like cat's eyes (of the conventional sort) and -at risk of pointing out the b-obvious perhaps- if you can see a retroreflective cat's eye, then you ought to be able to see anything else that is similarly reflective at the same kind of distance. This effectively includes most cyclists, if not most small (or large) furry animals....

By contrast cat's eyes with LEDs bear no such comparison; they may illuminate (very brightly) beyond the useful range of headlights. This will likely have two effects;

1) the contrast ratio between another object (pedestrian or cyclist) may be considerably reduced (i.e. you won't so easily be 'seen'), and
2) the driver of the car may indeed 'risk compensate' by driving faster than normal (and indeed faster than they ought to bearing in mind how far they can really see).

BTW the prospect of fancy headlights etc is all very well, but even if they 'work';

a) the bleeping motorist will still have to be looking where they are going (and not lulled into a false sense of security or distracted in various ways as seems the intent of most car designers... :roll: ) and
b) there will still be numerous cars without such technology in use for decades to come.

cheers

Yes - this ought to be the case, although cyclists reflectors are obviously somewhat higher, but the distance should still be adequate...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Cats eyes...

Post by 661-Pete »

Time for a bump.

Cycling along a busy road this afternoon I noticed that many of the centre line (old type) cats eyes were missing altogether. In some cases the entire thing, iron bezel and all, had gone; in other cases just the rubber insert with the glass 'eyes'.

I also noticed a few cats eyes lying on the verge. Evidently they'd been flung there by passing vehicles.

There is no sign of any maintenance work being done recently.

I reckon this poses a hazard to all road users, but cyclists and other vulnerable users especially. Who wants to be hit on the head by a heavy steel missile? Worth reporting?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
Post Reply