Pedal Reflectors - let's allow some alternatives

[Cyclenut]

I've just used the yourfreedom website to ask the government to amend the Lighting Regulations so that we are do not become unwilling criminals whenever we ride a bike with modern pedals in the dark. Specifically I'm asking that reflective ankle bands or an extra rear light or reflector be allowed as an alternative to the reflectors that so many of us cannot possibly fit.

If you'd like to support my idea - and I hope you do - please visit here.

This website may well be just another of those nicely padded walls set up by our rulers for a troublesome populace to bash their heads against, but you've got to try everything and at least this doesn't hurt to have a go!

[thirdcrank]

My usual feeling about these govt., sites is that they are something of a waste of time but I've added my own 2d worth in the hope that they may be shamed into action. I'll not hold my breath

[Guy951]

I've just used the yourfreedom website to ask the government to amend the Lighting Regulations so that we are do not become unwilling criminals whenever we ride a bike with modern pedals in the dark. Specifically I'm asking that reflective ankle bands or an extra rear light or reflector be allowed as an alternative to the reflectors that so many of us cannot possibly fit.

While I support your idea, I don't see the need. I have never heard of anyone being "done" for not having pedal reflectors. IMO, if you're otherwise adequately lit the police will ignore this minor transgression, having far better things to do with their time. If you're not adequately lit then they should pull you regardless.

[thirdcrank]

Around here at least, the police would certainly take an interest following a 'potential' fatal or fatal collision. For example, the clothing of pedestrian casualties is routinely photographed in case there's an inquest.

[Cyclenut]

While I support your idea, I don't see the need. I have never heard of anyone being "done" for not having pedal reflectors. IMO, if you're otherwise adequately lit the police will ignore this minor transgression.

Removing stupid little offences nobody can be bothered to enforce is precisely what the yourfreedom website is for.

And this technicality CAN be a problem. When a motorist runs into you in the dark, the remains of the bike will be very carefully examined and the lack of a reflector required by law will make the motorist's claim that he could not have seen you all the more believable. Thus you will be blamed for his carelessness and you (or your dependants) will get less justice and less compensation.

If we can't be bothered to at least try to change stuff that makes good cyclists, doing their best to be safe and legal, into unwitting criminals, I don't know who will.

[Cyclenut]

My usual feeling about these govt., sites is that they are something of a waste of time but I've added my own 2d worth in the hope that they may be shamed into action. I'll not hold my breath

Thanks for your comment Mick.

[thirdcrank]

I think it's also well worth bearing in mind that there is an awful lot of pressure on the police to act against pedal cyclists. (I remember a couple of years ago an "accident prevention officer" - from Devon and Cornwall, I believe, who was actually interviewed on the BBC R4 Today programme because he had a crackdown running on cycling without lights. Do a quick google and you will see that there are now loads of police websites publicising enforcement of dog fouling, cycling on the footpath etc. If you were to speak to a senior police officer they would frankly say that they had more important priorities, but the length and breadth of the land there are now 'community' policing units under the direction of sergeants and in some cases constables. They attend community consultation meetings, listen to local concerns and then act - the preferred method being the quantifiable project or so-called 'crackdown.' Here's one plucked at random:

http://www.gloucestershire.police.uk/Ne ... m4939.html

from which this is one extract:

Operations Dazzle and Dismount
Here at Gloucester South INA we know that many residents are concerned about the number of cyclists that ride without lights. They are a hazard to motorists as well as putting their own lives at risk.

In response to these concerns, last winter the Gloucester South Safer Community Team ran Operation Dazzle throughout the Quedgeley/Hardwicke, Tuffley and Podsmead areas to combat this problem. PC’s and PCSO’s stopped cyclists without lights and issued them with Dazzle Packs. Offending cyclists were asked to present themselves within seven days to Quedgeley Police Station with their bikes fitted with the correct lights and also a receipt as proof of purchase.

A total of 52 cyclists were stopped and issued with Dazzle Packs. Of these 33 presented themselves to the station with correct lights fitted and produced their receipts. 6 have appeared in court or have been found guilty in absence and have received fines ranging from £30 to £50 and costs of between £15 and £85. 8 others are still to be dealt with by the court, 1 youth has received a reprimand. 2 cyclists gave excuses of having cycles stolen or sold and 2, sadly, gave false names and addresses.

We will continue to patrol the streets, targeting offending cyclists.

'Ha ha,' I hear the cry that's people riding without lights. Very true, except the ticket will be for failing to comply with the pedal cycle lighting regs. I've no idea how South Gloucester Safer Community Team operates, but in my more local experience when the aim is to boost the figures, pretty much anything will do. Under Blunkett's regime there was talk of giving the police a power to confiscate bikes ridden without lights at night (or more accurately, 'failing to comply with the lighting regs.') I've no idea if that ever came in. Here's the script:-

Angry constable: "You should not be cycling in the middle of the road like that - you should be on the cycle path"
Indignant cyclist. "I am riding in the primary polition, and there's nothing which says I should be on the cycle path."
Even angrier constable "I say you should."
Even more indignant cyclist. "I am a member of the CTC and I have the Cyclists' Defence Fund on my side. Have you never heard of Telford?"
Eec (changing the subject) "You appear have no pedal reflectors on your cycle."
Back-pedalling cyclist. "I have these beautiful reflecting bits on my clipless cycling shoes. Surely you can see they are more than adequate?"
By now impassive (and inwardly smug) constable. "The CTC you say? I am confiscating your bicycle for not complying with regulations intended for your own safety. (Muttered aside) Have you considered joining the Pedestrians Association, or the Ramblers?"
Mortified cyclist, impersonating a duck (clip, clop. Clip clop.)

[eltonioni]

Before I support the plea is there any evidence that pedal reflectors / dayglo ankle bands / miners lamps strapped to ankles have any effect on safety?

[Guy951]

Before I support the plea is there any evidence that pedal reflectors / dayglo ankle bands / miners lamps strapped to ankles have any effect on safety?

They only work if the driver behind you is paying attention. If the driver is paying attention he'll see you without them, as my 30-odd years of night-cycling has shown. (I'm still here).

If the driver behind isn't paying attention then even having the Eddystone lighthouse strapped to your carrier won't make a blind bit of difference.

[eltonioni]

So following that line of thought* if they are paying attention they will see you without the miners lamp ankle attachment?


* obviously that isn't evidence

[EdinburghFixed]

Even if you do fit legal reflectors, you're violating the lighting regs if you have a pannier (since the reflectors must not be obscured from the rear) and of course, when it comes to recumbents all bets are off.

[crossroads]

Yes it is an odd one this. I use SPD's and therfore have no reflectors (I did try to get a set of the clip in platforms with reflectors for them but I could not find anywhere that sold them- I was going to just have them underneath so at least I was 'legal' ), but it seems from what is being said, as I use a pannier for my commute I would be illegal still, though only on one side I presume!

From what I can make out if anyone uses panniers at night they are breaking the law, regardless of the fact they may have pedal reflectors?
That alone makes it an absurd law really!
I think I will go the the link and say my bit......

[Guy951]

[quote="crossroads"]From what I can make out if anyone uses panniers at night they are breaking the law, regardless of the fact they may have pedal reflectors? [quote]

Yes, but only if the bike they're on is a 1985 model or newer.

Being lucky enough to have inherited a 1930's tourer, which I use for most of my commuting/utility cycling, I can tell them to take their stupid law and stick it where the light don't reflect!

[thirdcrank]

Before I support the plea is there any evidence that pedal reflectors / dayglo ankle bands / miners lamps strapped to ankles have any effect on safety?

That's a clear 'don't know' from me. I think I've read somewhere that the whole extra reflector thing (ie everything except the standard red rear reflector) originated in America where cyclists are treated as honorary pedestrians and depending on local legislation are often able to ride without lights. I'd be surprised if any real research has been done - I'll bet somebody in the ministry of transport saw them and thought that's a good idea. It's almost certainly the case that they identify a cyclist as such to a driver - whether that increases safety is open to question.

I'm prepared to bet that at the speeds and distances involved with cycling on the open road, the visible area of pedal reflectors means their value is doubtful. The reflective bands on BS safety togs are a couple of inches wide and that's for a reason. For motorway use they are half as wide again. It's not a matter of what shows up in your sitting room when you shine a torch. It's several hundred yards in car headlights that matters.

(On the subject of panniers, some are now fitted with a white rear reflector which is also illegal at night, in my interpretation of the regs.)

[Cyclenut]

Before I support the plea is there any evidence that pedal reflectors / dayglo ankle bands / miners lamps strapped to ankles have any effect on safety?

There is. I have a (very) old TRRL report in the files at work where they researched the relative effectiveness of a number of conspicuity aids then available, in terms of the average distance at which a following driver firstly noticed that there was something ahead and secondly identified that the something was a pedal cycle.

A rear lamp scored the greatest notification distance, but pedal reflectors gave the greatest identification distance.

Identification is important because until the driver knows you are on a bike he might assume a motorbike that's going more like the same speed as him, with obviously unfortunate results.

Without the unique movement signature of the pedalling, you ideally want need something else to uniquely identify your vehicle as a pedal cycle. I suggest a flashing red light, since no other vehicle is allowed to have such a thing. Back in whenever of course, there were no flashing lights allowed or even available for bikes. But if the experiment were to be repeated nowadays I think such a light might score an even better identification distance than pedal reflectors.