Cycling UK Forum

AndyA wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote:

AndyA wrote:
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

mjr wrote:

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: .........Those people that don't act with responsibility, don't care to look, are too selfish to think for a split second other than head down, don't give a flying one except if it's going to effect me will continue behaving in the same manner no matter what lights/garments you have. By bowing to this group, by trying to adjust the behaviour and where the responsibility lies actually does more harm than good because as I said it will continue to absolve those doing the harm and push the onus onto the vulnerable to change despite that change never making an iota of difference for the safety of the vulnerable. If you change and that change doesn't work, where then?

Maybe you think women should dress differently, have certain adornments on their person when going out at night, just so they lessen the chance of getting raped? No, so why is your and others thinking in exactly that way for cycling and how we need to change what we do to remain safe?

KM2 wrote:Because a normal rear light doesn't give much indication of what you are, would a forward facing front light mounted on the back of whatever rear bag you have, give a better chance of survival whilst commuting? Especially it pointing at the reflective bits of a good commuter jacket.

KM2 wrote:Front light mounted on a carrier etc facing forward to light up the body giving a shape from a long way off. To run with legal lights.
By shape, I mean it is likely to show as a person, not just a small red light.

It shouldn't need a statement that you must comply with the law.

I hope this helps.....

KM2 wrote:Just thought it might help in the right hand bend dipped headlight scenario.

Ivor Tingting wrote:I read the first page of comments but no mention of the legalities of the OP's proposition, so I gave up reading the rest as can't be bothered by this type of moronic behaviour as I see enough idiot cyclist with lights that don't comply with legislation or are just a plain menace to all who are blinded by them, flashing lights and head torches in particular.

Ivor Tingting wrote:Then there are the ninja cyclists with no lights dressed in black.

Ivor Tingting wrote:[...] But afaiaa a reflective jacket or clothing is not mandatory just advisable.[...]

mjr wrote:

Ivor Tingting wrote:I read the first page of comments but no mention of the legalities of the OP's proposition, so I gave up reading the rest as can't be bothered by this type of moronic behaviour as I see enough idiot cyclist with lights that don't comply with legislation or are just a plain menace to all who are blinded by them, flashing lights and head torches in particular.

Lights on the head are technically legal (the law regulates lights on the vehicle, not the rider), even if we agree that showing red to the front or white to the rear is unhelpful.

Ivor Tingting wrote:Then there are the ninja cyclists with no lights dressed in black.

Oh they seem to be very safe. It seems like every motorist on the road sees them, from the comments on news stories.

Ivor Tingting wrote:[...] But afaiaa a reflective jacket or clothing is not mandatory just advisable.[...]

Not advisable. Useless. Turns you from looking like a human being into an invisible gorilla.

Ivor Tingting wrote:I don't wish to get into a pedantic waste of time disagreement with you. My reply was directed at the OP who I feel after their clarification is after some genuine advice and reassurance regarding lights and being seen on their bicycle. Your comment does not contribute to this in slightest.

The utility cyclist wrote:

AndyA wrote:

The utility cyclist wrote: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

The majority are already looking, seeing and taking appropriate action, it doesn't matter what light you have or what you are wearing because they are taking the responsibility to act within the law. The number of times people say 'I saw a cyclist without lights the other night' and go on about how cyclists who ride without lights are the devils spawn is numerous, and yet they saw them, why?

Those people that don't act with responsibility, don't care to look, are too selfish to think for a split second other than head down, don't give a flying one except if it's going to effect me will continue behaving in the same manner no matter what lights/garments you have. By bowing to this group, by trying to adjust the behaviour and where the responsibility lies actually does more harm than good because as I said it will continue to absolve those doing the harm and push the onus onto the vulnerable to change despite that change never making an iota of difference for the safety of the vulnerable. If you change and that change doesn't work, where then?

Maybe you think women should dress differently, have certain adornments on their person when going out at night, just so they lessen the chance of getting raped? No, so why is your and others thinking in exactly that way for cycling and how we need to change what we do to remain safe?