Cycling UK Forum

Scunnered wrote:I made some lights which fit into the end of the 'bars

Hang on, isn't that the monster from a 1983 episode of Doctor Who?

AndyA wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:

AndyA wrote:
This is one of the reasons why one of my rear lights is always set to flashing. Flashing red light = cyclist or emergency vehicle

Does it, how do you know that?

What other road users display a flashing red light?

Cars - various of them have elected to have flashing brake lights in particular (and I don't mean people pulsing the brake - I've seen various cars with brake lights (particularly the high level one) that flash when the brakes are applied...

Wanlock Dod wrote:When I started riding I was commuting from near Crowle down the A18 to Scunny. I would regularly be riding back from the pub (is the Bent Brief still in existence?) I worked in after we had finished for the night and it would take probably an hour mostly on unlit roads. I did at least have my trusty Neverready's, those massive white ones, but I had to navigate by the feel of whether I was riding on tarmac, a white line, or grass (there were some serious dykes to fall into further out too). Approaching cars would illuminate the road, although once this revealed that I was completely on the wrong side of the road. I regularly used to stop and check that my back light was visible, and it did seem to glow a little bit from near by but it didn't seem to cast much light and it was a bit of a cause for concern. I was discussing my concern about this once and a friend of my Dad's mentioned that he had passed me a few times on the way back from work and my back light was working just fine, so I stopped worrying.

Those were properly rubbish lights, but back in those days they were perfectly visible from a long way off in the dark.

I had similar experiences. I used to commute from just south of Nottingham to Leicester in the late 80s with Ever Ready Nightriders. I could just about make out the side of the road, about 4 feet in front of my wheel on the dark country lanes. You were almost riding on extra-sensory perception in those days. Rear lights were not so much of a problem as you only needed to be seen and not to see to the rear. There were powerful lights available back then (Night Sun) but they were hellishly expensive.

AndyA wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:

AndyA wrote:
This is one of the reasons why one of my rear lights is always set to flashing. Flashing red light = cyclist or emergency vehicle

Does it, how do you know that?

What other road users display a flashing red light?

not always and it also relies on a motorist actually seeing it, then acknowledging it and then acting on it, as we already know this doesn't work. Despite a huge increase in brightness, pulsing/flashing modes, multiple lights fitted, increase in hi-vis and reflective gear cyclists are still being close passed even during day with lights on, at night it's not improved matters has it? Cyclists are still being struck at night and police are still blaming cyclists with legal lights on when they are struck and killed.
I tried the two light thing, it's made jack all difference, I tried the day time light thing with my car 25 years ago (by just switching the parking lights on) when I heard about the reasoning (but without thinking it through properly) it didn't work, DRLs have not worked to improve safety since they were forced upon motors in the EU.

We keep dumbing down the responsibility, the attentiveness and attitude falls with it, yes a brighter light and indeed a blinking light could be seen as a cyclist and from further away but it takes an actual response from a human to avoid an incident. As yet the 'improvements' and focus on the vulnerable to armour up has failed and yet more blame is pushed upon the vulnerable and the if it isn't lit up then you're just asking for it mantra pushed out by government and police as well as those in motoring and cycling circles

Ergo this discussion as I said earlier is pointless, it will not work no matter what light you put on, even my obviously overtly silly suggestion to project wording to the rear onto the road and for all outer garments to bear same wording, it won't make jack all difference. people will either look, see and act correctly or they won't, if you are looking and driving within the beams of your lights then an object need not be lit as you'll be able to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear right, as both a cyclist and a motorist? Forever weakening that rule is why we are in this situation today and why the president of the CTC in the 20s/30s was 100% bang on when he objected to compulsory rear lights!

The utility cyclist wrote:.......and why the president of the CTC in the 20s/30s was 100% bang on when he objected to compulsory rear lights!

That maybe true, but the fact is, despite his objection, all vehicles now have rear lights and that's reality.

MikeF wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:.......and why the president of the CTC in the 20s/30s was 100% bang on when he objected to compulsory rear lights!

That maybe true, but the fact is, despite his objection, all vehicles now have rear lights and that's reality.

Fact is those rules are now killing/hurting us and no amount of light can save you with certain motorists, the rules are also being ignored by police demanding ever greater visibility of the vulnerable and thus less responsibility on those doing the harm.
Working out great for us, and as I said makes the discussion on light type utterly pointless.

[XAP]Bob wrote:

AndyA wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:
Does it, how do you know that?

What other road users display a flashing red light?

Cars - various of them have elected to have flashing brake lights in particular (and I don't mean people pulsing the brake - I've seen various cars with brake lights (particularly the high level one) that flash when the brakes are applied...

They are triggered when emergency stopping (for want of a better term), the better to attract attention from drivers behind.

The utility cyclist wrote:

MikeF wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:.......and why the president of the CTC in the 20s/30s was 100% bang on when he objected to compulsory rear lights!

That maybe true, but the fact is, despite his objection, all vehicles now have rear lights and that's reality.

Fact is those rules are now killing/hurting us and no amount of light can save you with certain motorists, the rules are also being ignored by police demanding ever greater visibility of the vulnerable and this less responsibility on those doing the harm.
Working out great for us, and as I said makes the discussion on light type utterly pointless.

No it doesn't. However if you want to, you're perfectly free to cycle around unlit roads without lights/reflectors wearing dark clothing. No-one is stopping you. However it's not something I do.

Surely the point here is that the need for a rear light has shifted the onus of responsibility to the cyclist for making themselves sufficiently visible, rather than to the driver for looking where they are going. So far it doesn't seem to be working out all that well for cyclists.

Wanlock Dod wrote:Surely the point here is that the need for a rear light has shifted the onus of responsibility to the cyclist for making themselves sufficiently visible, rather than to the driver for looking where they are going. So far it doesn't seem to be working out all that well for cyclists.

That's the reality whether we agree or not. The problem with cycles is that they are inherently narrow so I think any effort to increase the apparent width at night is an advantage. The other problem is that cycle rear lights are generally very small in area which reduces visibility especially compared with cars, so possibly 2 lights eg on each rear stay or spaced on the carrier are better than one centrally. None of us knows how we appear when cycling at night and that's the problem and some think they are more visible than they are.

MikeF wrote:No it doesn't. However if you want to, you're perfectly free to cycle around unlit roads without lights/reflectors wearing dark clothing. No-one is stopping you. However it's not something I do.

Why not? If you ride around at night with no lights on, every motorist will definitely see you, it seems from local media call-ins, so it may be the best tactic!

MikeF wrote:None of us knows how we appear when cycling at night and that's the problem and some think they are more visible than they are.

I've a pretty good idea because my wife has the same lights and reflectors. One good light front and back, large surface area and bright enough to see but shaped beam so not dazzling.

The utility cyclist wrote:

AndyA wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:
Does it, how do you know that?

What other road users display a flashing red light?

not always and it also relies on a motorist actually seeing it, then acknowledging it and then acting on it, as we already know this doesn't work. Despite a huge increase in brightness, pulsing/flashing modes, multiple lights fitted, increase in hi-vis and reflective gear cyclists are still being close passed even during day with lights on, at night it's not improved matters has it? Cyclists are still being struck at night and police are still blaming cyclists with legal lights on when they are struck and killed.
I tried the two light thing, it's made jack all difference, I tried the day time light thing with my car 25 years ago (by just switching the parking lights on) when I heard about the reasoning (but without thinking it through properly) it didn't work, DRLs have not worked to improve safety since they were forced upon motors in the EU.

We keep dumbing down the responsibility, the attentiveness and attitude falls with it, yes a brighter light and indeed a blinking light could be seen as a cyclist and from further away but it takes an actual response from a human to avoid an incident. As yet the 'improvements' and focus on the vulnerable to armour up has failed and yet more blame is pushed upon the vulnerable and the if it isn't lit up then you're just asking for it mantra pushed out by government and police as well as those in motoring and cycling circles

Ergo this discussion as I said earlier is pointless, it will not work no matter what light you put on, even my obviously overtly silly suggestion to project wording to the rear onto the road and for all outer garments to bear same wording, it won't make jack all difference. people will either look, see and act correctly or they won't, if you are looking and driving within the beams of your lights then an object need not be lit as you'll be able to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear right, as both a cyclist and a motorist? Forever weakening that rule is why we are in this situation today and why the president of the CTC in the 20s/30s was 100% bang on when he objected to compulsory rear lights!

Obviously there always is going to be a minority of users (of anything) that will not behave appropriately. A very small minority of road users in my experience are dangerous through stupidity/ignorance and there is absolutely nothing that I can do to change their behavior. By using multiple lights, reflectors etc I am reducing the chances of someone genuinely accidentally not seeing me and taking appropriate action. I am not eliminating those chances, merely reducing, and to choose not to improve my chances seems pointlessly reckless

Bonefishblues wrote:

[XAP]Bob wrote:

AndyA wrote:
What other road users display a flashing red light?

Cars - various of them have elected to have flashing brake lights in particular (and I don't mean people pulsing the brake - I've seen various cars with brake lights (particularly the high level one) that flash when the brakes are applied...

They are triggered when emergency stopping (for want of a better term), the better to attract attention from drivers behind.

Oh yeah! I have seen those go off on a car, hard braking to take a late exit on the motorway. I was rather confused, I wasn't sure if the driver was pulsing their brakes or if the lights were broken

AndyA wrote:By using multiple lights, reflectors etc I am reducing the chances of someone genuinely accidentally not seeing me and taking appropriate action. I am not eliminating those chances, merely reducing, and to choose not to improve my chances seems pointlessly reckless

Experiments have failed to find any beneficial effect of overlighting. The main thing you do is increase the power consumption.

I don't have any robust experimental evidence for my belief in single 120x45mm steady rear lights (bigger than some motorbike tail lights) being better than multiple obviously-cyclist ones, but I'm not calling people pointlessly reckless if they don't use them.