“virtually indistinguishable” in the dark

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Some road works were going on near me.
Guy wondering around drunk in road ..........IIRC several car drivers reported this at the time.
Two car drivers managed to hit and drive over the guy in road, one hit guy and smashed screen citing he thought he was being mugged so did not stop.......Second guy actually blamed his wife for driving over an animal.......................
Neither reported it, until it was made public.


Both in court but got off........................Guy dead.................you couldn't make it up.............

[irc]

Looks pretty visible to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... vZpUjEfU74

[reohn2]

Driver's parting comment was rather poignant, in hindsight. He did, another didn't exercise similar care

But as Bovlomov has taken pains to explain the driver was exonorated of all blaim by a biased and Kangaroo(sorry)court in a country that couldn't give a toss for the life of cyclists.
Despicable doesn't begin to describe the Australian legal system.

[fastpedaller]

Someone who bothered to 'look' then and do what they are lawfully bound? Funny but I get overtakes like that all the time when I'm wearing black and no light, so explain how these drivers can easily see me when I'm wearing black during the day or at night when I just have my bog std single rear light and no reflectives?
Dumbing down the responsibility and indeed you've made a driver think that any other cyclist not doing what you do is in the wrong and he will likely be looking less because you and people like you are training him to think that's what 'we' should wear DOES NOT WORK, it never has and yet it's you and others that are making our roads more dangerous and pushing the onus away from those that kill and harm onto the victims/innocent parties.
Well done to you for 'being safe' just saying like ...

Indeed. The one and only quote (that made sense) from a motoring 'expert' many years ago was "the most dangerous thing ever added to cars is rear fog lights" (that may not be exactly his words, but close enough).......... The logic (and I for one am in full agreement) is that high-intensity rear light is put on in fog, following driver can now more easily 'see further' so drives faster than he would (if only standard rear lights are lit) and when the inevitable happens, his car and others are going much faster and the resultant carnage is far worse. I'm not sure the same applies to a motorist approaching a cyclist - If motorist are 'expecting only a small glimmer' from a cycle light, would it make them drive slower? I suspect not, as many wouldn't 'expect' a cyclist to be there anyway, same as a deer crossing their path isn't 'expected' (despite signs warning of such). We need the law to be enforced rigorously, but unfortunately this doesn't appear to be happening.

[bovlomov]

The one and only quote (that made sense) from a motoring 'expert' many years ago was "the most dangerous thing ever added to cars is rear fog lights" (that may not be exactly his words, but close enough).......... The logic (and I for one am in full agreement) is that high-intensity rear light is put on in fog, following driver can now more easily 'see further' so drives faster than he would (if only standard rear lights are lit) and when the inevitable happens, his car and others are going much faster and the resultant carnage is far worse. I'm not sure the same applies to a motorist approaching a cyclist...

This gives the Australian authorities a novel way to blame Hall. His lights were too bright, at the same time as not being bright enough. It's doubly his fault.

The driver saw the light when he was far away, and was thus tricked into driving too fast to see the bike. If only the rear light had been dimmer from a distance and brighter close up, this wouldn't have happened.

[mjr]

If only the rear light had been dimmer from a distance and brighter close up, this wouldn't have happened.

Maybe the judge has shares in Garmin? That's pretty much what their Varia Radar rear light does, isn't it? But it's a bit strange because I think Garmin's bar-mounted computers have probably caused a few crashes from cyclists looking at them instead of the road ahead for too long.

On the fog lights thing: am I the only cyclist to switch lights *off* when using a roadside cycleway in fog because I don't want a following motorist to think I am a distant car fog light and drive onto the cycleway in error?

[bovlomov]

That's pretty much what their Varia Radar rear light does, isn't it? But it's a bit strange because I think Garmin's bar-mounted computers have probably caused a few crashes from cyclists looking at them instead of the road ahead for too long.

Blimey! You're right.

I just saw the advert. Although the voice is British, the filming was done abroad (the US?). On most UK roads the alert would be permanently triggered. Aside from the general distraction, as you mentioned, It can't be good for the nerves or blood pressure, being constantly warned that "IT'S RIGHT BEHIND YOU!".

Garmin Varia: PTSD in a box!

What a miserable existence. The day I feel I need that is the day I stop cycling.

[mjr]

That's pretty much what their Varia Radar rear light does, isn't it? But it's a bit strange because I think Garmin's bar-mounted computers have probably caused a few crashes from cyclists looking at them instead of the road ahead for too long.

Blimey! You're right.

Any cycling safety idea, no matter ludicrous, has probably been sold somewhere at some time.

Garmin Varia: PTSD in a box!

What a miserable existence. The day I feel I need that is the day I stop cycling.

It's helpful for those unable to look behind, but I'll keep looking back as long as I'm able.

[Tangled Metal]

Doesn't the HC require you to be look behind? I don't know fit sure but I thought somewhere it mentions looking round on a manoeuvre. If you can't look back then should you be cycling / driving?

[Cugel]

Doesn't the HC require you to be look behind? I don't know fit sure but I thought somewhere it mentions looking round on a manoeuvre. If you can't look back then should you be cycling / driving?

I know no one, these days, who looks over their shoulder when in a car. They have mirrors now - well, mine does. It also has a reversing beeper, which is good for avoiding prang on low bollard in car parks. The thing about looking backwards is ... you're not then looking forwards. This can be dangerous when going forwards.

I have a convex mirror on my handlebar end which tells me long before the rest of the club crocodile what's coming up behind. It's much better than a look over the shoulder, not least because it doesn't cause the wobble into the verge, middle of the road or the wheel in front, as I've seen many a time in the past.

A right turn whilst looking over your shoulder is perhaps one of the most dangerous manoeuvres there is on a bike, especially on those country lanes with a blind bend in front. A momentary failure to look fo'rrard whilst looking backwards during the critical moment whilst performing such a right turn can mean you miss the emergence from the blind bend ahead of the speeding Toad-loon.

Cugel

[meic]

A right turn whilst looking over your shoulder is perhaps one of the most dangerous manoeuvres there is on a bike, especially on those country lanes with a blind bend in front. A momentary failure to look fo'rrard whilst looking backwards during the critical moment whilst performing such a right turn can mean you miss the emergence from the blind bend ahead of the speeding Toad-loon.

Which is one reason why you look backwards before making your turn.
Of course the main reason that you look before making your turn is that it would be too late to make use of your look if you look during the turn. You are looking to see if it is safe to turn or not.

[Steady rider]

look behind, signal, turn, preferable turning with both hands on the bars

[meic]

As a very long served motorcyclist, I will not, can not, make any turn with out doing a "lifesaver" rear observation at the very last instant when I can abort making the turn.
For sure look behind before signalling as well but I would always do the "lifesaver".

I still do it in the car in very limited circumstances, where you have a blind spot that other vehicles could have slipped into. Most road situations are too narrow for this to happen but on multilanes it is still worth it.

[Tangled Metal]

Actually I still look over my shoulder despite having mirrors. It is still very good practise when driving.

I have a mirror on my bike but I still look around.

[bovlomov]

I have mirrors and I look around - and I'm not sure how this Garmin thing would help. For one thing, it won't tell me the nature of the beast behind me.

It might be at its best on long straight roads with little traffic - where looking behind all the time would cause neck ache. Even so, I can't see how it would convey the necessary information faster than a glance in the mirror would.

The variable lighting? I don't know what to make of it.