Front Lights in Daylight

[tim-b]

Hi
Chances are that you are perfectly visible but the drivers aren't looking properly. I don't use a front light in daylight but I would fit one in case of mist/fog which can sometimes catch you out in Autumn and Winter. If you feel safer using the light then go for it
Regards
tim-b

[Sweep]

I wouldn't bother, and in my experience cyclists with strong rear flashers in daylight are the most likely to give this cyclist a silent near pass. As it's all about them.

[cycle tramp]

Apologies for asking up when you cycle, how far are you away from the kerb?

irrelevant, modifying the victims/vulnerable's behaviour makes jack all difference at a population level and simply excuses the wrong doing. Police + gov have been doing this for best part of 100 years.
I came to my senses re DRLs in about 1994

The reason for raising this is through my own experiences- I found that if I took the same position on the roads as one would expect to see a moped or light motorcycle, I found that less people pulled out on me and I had a better line of sight to the occupants. If I cycled closer to the kerb I my line of sight was greatly diminished.
It has been noted that many drivers fail to look towards each roof pillar when assessing if a junction is clear - thus those who are cycling closer to the kerb may fail to be spotted.

[freeflow]

Drivers don't see you because of Seccades.

Saccades, not seccades.

Corrected

[freiston]

Apologies for asking up when you cycle, how far are you away from the kerb?

irrelevant, modifying the victims/vulnerable's behaviour makes jack all difference at a population level and simply excuses the wrong doing. Police + gov have been doing this for best part of 100 years.
I came to my senses re DRLs in about 1994

The reason for raising this is through my own experiences- I found that if I took the same position on the roads as one would expect to see a moped or light motorcycle, I found that less people pulled out on me and I had a better line of sight to the occupants. If I cycled closer to the kerb I my line of sight was greatly diminished.
It has been noted that many drivers fail to look towards each roof pillar when assessing if a junction is clear - thus those who are cycling closer to the kerb may fail to be spotted.

I agree that a cyclist in the secondary or primary position is a lot more likely to be seen than a cyclist hugging the kerb/riding in the gutter. I would say it is dangerous not to adopt the secondary or primary position when approaching/passing a side road. This is basic roadcraft/good practice; it is not the ineffective modifying of victim's/vulnerable's behaviour any more than it would be for a pedestrian to find a clear spot with good visibility (for them and other road users) before crossing a road. Rather than serving to excuse wrong doing on the part of the motorist, it enables and (therefore) promotes safer behaviour.

[hamster]

Using a strobe on an ordinary road vehicle would be a criminal offence (a breach of the Road Vehicle Lighting Regs). If someone hit you despite it, I would expect it to reduce the likelihood of them being prosecuted and hinder any compensation claim you made.

Flashing front lights are legal on bicycles and have been since 2009.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/lighting-regulations

[mjr]

Using a strobe on an ordinary road vehicle would be a criminal offence (a breach of the Road Vehicle Lighting Regs). If someone hit you despite it, I would expect it to reduce the likelihood of them being prosecuted and hinder any compensation claim you made.

Flashing front lights are legal on bicycles and have been since 2009.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/lighting-regulations

Flashing yes (1-4 times a second), strobe no and the opening post clearly said strobe.

[The utility cyclist]

irrelevant, modifying the victims/vulnerable's behaviour makes jack all difference at a population level and simply excuses the wrong doing. Police + gov have been doing this for best part of 100 years.
I came to my senses re DRLs in about 1994

The reason for raising this is through my own experiences- I found that if I took the same position on the roads as one would expect to see a moped or light motorcycle, I found that less people pulled out on me and I had a better line of sight to the occupants. If I cycled closer to the kerb I my line of sight was greatly diminished.
It has been noted that many drivers fail to look towards each roof pillar when assessing if a junction is clear - thus those who are cycling closer to the kerb may fail to be spotted.

I agree that a cyclist in the secondary or primary position is a lot more likely to be seen than a cyclist hugging the kerb/riding in the gutter. I would say it is dangerous not to adopt the secondary or primary position when approaching/passing a side road. This is basic roadcraft/good practice; it is not the ineffective modifying of victim's/vulnerable's behaviour any more than it would be for a pedestrian to find a clear spot with good visibility (for them and other road users) before crossing a road. Rather than serving to excuse wrong doing on the part of the motorist, it enables and (therefore) promotes safer behaviour.

Precisely the thinking that has gotten us into this poophole in the first place, CTC was right nearly 90 years ago regards rear lights, thin end of the wedge indeed. https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/the-wedge/ A person on a bike should never have to ride in a particular position simply to get a safe overtake, I get why we are told to do it, indeed I do it myself but like many on here with many decades of riding under their belts it's still not always as easy to do. And it's the modification to do this that irks me, why should I have to ride in such a manner that by not doing so could cost me my life when what I'm actually doing presents no actual harm to others, frankly it's perverse.

Ask your average non enthusiast or non cyclist if that's where they would ride, the answer would be no, I see many people with all the gear and some that I know have ridden for a long time still riding in the gutter, we see it all the time.
Forcing people to do precisely what their heads are telling them not to do is really difficult, you're asking them to put themselves closer to that which might harm then, and that fear in itself is enough to stop people from riding bikes in the first instance. Riding primary/secondary doesn't ever change that and it doesn't stop people from getting killed or injured.

[bgnukem]

Rather than dogmatically riding in primary or secondary I vary my position according to the circumstances, but nearly always take the primary position when passing a side road, unless there's something passing close from behind, just because it gives me more space and time to react if someone pulls out without looking.

It's definitely saved me being knocked off countless times over the years. I still don't expect the driver to bother looking - after all, most of them couldn't give a toss about me - but having the extra space to react has made the difference between a hit and a miss.

I prefer flashing lights in urban areas as to me they are more likely to contrast with the sea of daytime running lights on cars and therefore to attract attention. Again though I am not expecting to be seen and am always prepared to take evasive action if not.

[hamster]

Using a strobe on an ordinary road vehicle would be a criminal offence (a breach of the Road Vehicle Lighting Regs). If someone hit you despite it, I would expect it to reduce the likelihood of them being prosecuted and hinder any compensation claim you made.

Flashing front lights are legal on bicycles and have been since 2009.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/lighting-regulations

Flashing yes (1-4 times a second), strobe no and the opening post clearly said strobe.

You will have to explain when a flash becomes a strobe.

[freeflow]

Using a strobe on an ordinary road vehicle would be a criminal offence (a breach of the Road Vehicle Lighting Regs). If someone hit you despite it, I would expect it to reduce the likelihood of them being prosecuted and hinder any compensation claim you made.

Flashing front lights are legal on bicycles and have been since 2009.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/lighting-regulations

Flashing yes (1-4 times a second), strobe no and the opening post clearly said strobe.

No it didn't, the OP said 'strobe style'.

[thirdcrank]

... You will have to explain when a flash becomes a strobe.

When it's flashing more than 240 times a minute.

[hamster]

... You will have to explain when a flash becomes a strobe.

When it's flashing more than 240 times a minute.

At which time the flash is invisible!

[fausto99]

Drivers don't see you because of Saccades. Having a flashing light will make no difference.

https://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pil ... -cyclists/

Good article. Explains a lot. I had my collarbone broken by someone driving who "didn't see you mate". I don't have flashing lights on all my bikes but I do think drivers notice me sooner when I do. It's a shame as I think it could turn into a bit of an arms race; light's oneupmanship!
One thing that should be stopped immediately IMO is cyclists with black bikes dressed all in black. It's a nightmare when I'm in my car. Rant over.
'

[tim-b]

Hi

... You will have to explain when a flash becomes a strobe.

When it's flashing more than 240 times a minute.

At which time the flash is invisible!

The human brain can process an image in only 13 milliseconds (link) Shirley four flashes of light per second is easier EDIT where does the 240/minute come from?
Regards
tim-b