Cycling Time Trials - Red Lights are now compulsory

[Spinners]

A new regulation has just come in for all Cycling Time Trials (effective from 02/01/2010);

“No competitor shall be permitted to start either a Type A or Type B event unless such competitor has affixed to the rear of their machine a working rear red light, either flashing or constant, that is illuminated and in a position that is clearly visible to other road users.”

I'm just posting this for awareness in case it catches you unawares in the 2020 season.

[tatanab]

Certain CTT regions have pushed this to the national committee for a few years now. I thought they would never get this through because they would need to specify a standard for the light to meet. Perhaps cycle lighting has become so unregulated that they feel it is ok to do so. I am sorely tempted to turn up with my 1950s machine sporting a period correct Ever Ready "torpedo" rear light. They could not refuse me a ride because I comply with the letter, if not the spirit, of their rule.

[sizbut]

They could easily turn you away. The wording is "clearly visible", something that is down to the opinion of the person enforcing the rule. They are the word and the spirit.

[mjr]

They could easily turn you away. The wording is "clearly visible", something that is down to the opinion of the person enforcing the rule. They are the word and the spirit.

How? A torpedo light is clearly visible. It ain't invisible!

[cycleruk]

As rear LED lights are now so cheap then it's certainly not a cost problem. The problem I see is making sure they last long enough for the longer races. 10, 25 miles easy but the 12/24 hour then some thought will have to given to battery life.
My experience of TT competitors having "accidents" have all been from the side or front and not the rear.
Perhaps a front light light would be more appropriate. ?

[mjr]

My experience of TT competitors having "accidents" have all been from the side or front and not the rear.
Perhaps a front light light would be more appropriate. ?

Most TT frontal accidents I've known have been the triallist riding into a stationary vehicle. Short of banning some riding positions so that eyes must look forwards not down, it's difficult to think of effective measures. Start-line in-position sign reading test?

[mattsccm]

To be honest my main worry in a TT is from the front/side. People pulling out on you not being aware that, for better or worse, you are more likely to be sticking to your right of way etc.

[Syd]

My experience of TT competitors having "accidents" have all been from the side or front and not the rear.
Perhaps a front light light would be more appropriate. ?

Most TT frontal accidents I've known have been the triallist riding into a stationary vehicle. Short of banning some riding positions so that eyes must look forwards not down, it's difficult to think of effective measures. Start-line in-position sign reading test?

Some riding positions have been banned (thought some were to prevent a comptitive advantage) and a general rule exists where “The riding position shall be set so that the competitor has good forward vision when in a competitive position.”.

These was discussions some time ago on riders travelling with their head down and the difficulties around policing it. Some examples where given where a rider appears to be travelling with their head down but it was only for a very brief moment as was shown by photos taken either side of it.

Stopping distances aren’t helped by the time required to move hands from the TT bars to the break levers, an action that is not typical on most other bikes.

[Syd]

As rear LED lights are now so cheap then it's certainly not a cost problem. The problem I see is making sure they last long enough for the longer races. 10, 25 miles easy but the 12/24 hour then some thought will have to given to battery life.
My experience of TT competitors having "accidents" have all been from the side or front and not the rear.
Perhaps a front light light would be more appropriate. ?

I know some who didn’t use rear lights as they believed it affected their aerodynamics! They were also the same individuals who tended to push beyond the limits of the rules [emoji57]

[fastpedaller]

I don't know what a 'type A' or 'type B' event are, but surely this is taking away some responsibility from vehicles whose 'drivers' just don't look ahead 9or far enough ahead)? If a TT cyclist is doing 20 MPH, and a motorist drives into them, them what hope had a dog walker or other pedestrian have at 2MPH? If type A and B events are dual carriageway (or other, faster road) events then I can see there may be some merit (for rider safety) but the same principal applies...… the approaching vehicle's driver is the responsible party.

[tatanab]

I don't know what a 'type A' or 'type B' event are,

Type A are what are generally known as "open" events that have to be entered 10 days in advance, use a village hall as HQ, are marshalled, are often on faster courses and offer prizes for winners. Type B are the "club" events that you see in the evening run by your local club. Turn up and ride with probably no HQ facilities or marshals or prizes, usually on smaller roads, and with a lower standard required of the timekeeper.

If the judgement of clearly visible (on that bright afternoon) is at the whim of somebody running the event (since there is no lighting standard in the CTT rule), then they might exclude people for no good reason.

My beef is that by encouraging rear lighting on a bright summer's afternoon could lead to the motoring public's expectation of lights at all times for all riders. Which does not bode well for the future of cycling of any form.

[Spinners]

I don't know what a 'type A' or 'type B' event are,

Type A are what are generally known as "open" events that have to be entered 10 days in advance, use a village hall as HQ, are marshalled, are often on faster courses and offer prizes for winners. Type B are the "club" events that you see in the evening run by your local club. Turn up and ride with probably no HQ facilities or marshals or prizes, usually on smaller roads, and with a lower standard required of the timekeeper.

If the judgement of clearly visible (on that bright afternoon) is at the whim of somebody running the event (since there is no lighting standard in the CTT rule), then they might exclude people for no good reason.

My beef is that by encouraging rear lighting on a bright summer's afternoon could lead to the motoring public's expectation of lights at all times for all riders. Which does not bode well for the future of cycling of any form.

Agree 100% but the National AGM pushed it through after a good few years of rejecting similar propositions.

Democracy eh?

[sizbut]

They could easily turn you away. The wording is "clearly visible", something that is down to the opinion of the person enforcing the rule. They are the word and the spirit.

How? A torpedo light is clearly visible. It ain't invisible!

Maybe I wasn't, in your opinion, clear enough (so basically making my point for me).

The original posters was making the point that since no light standard was stated, they could turn up with any light they liked. And I was pointing out that the scrutineer could decided it wasn't good enough. Simple, no need for the sniping.

An original 1950s rear lamp would not meet many peoples' modern day expectations for a daylight visible rear lamp. That said however, the Eroica market has lead to there being a market for replicas that use brighter LEDs. https://amzn.to/2EuZ1Qs

[mjr]

Are scrutineers allowed to toughen the rules as they wish then? The fact that maybe a third of cyclists use dazzling lights now (and maybe a third are unlit) doesn't stop an old torpedo with a modern bulb (even halogen) being visible enough.

[Spinners]

My interpretation would be that 'clearly visible' refers to the position of the light and that nothing is obscuring it, so as long as a working red rear light is there I would allow a rider to start. The start timekeeper has enough to do without measuring the brightness of the light.