Cycling in the dark.

[niggle]

So the pros and cons about flashing versus steady lights seem to be that:

*flashing lights are annoying, especially in close proximity
*it is easier to locate the position of a steady light
*a flashing light is not very good for seeing where you are going
*a flashing light is more noticeable against a background of other vehicle and street lights
*a flashing red light identifies the vehicle as a bicycle to other road users (a pro for making motorists aware of the presence of a vulnerable and slower moving road user, but a con if that means motorists then go into 'must get past cyclist' mode or 'its only a bicycle I can pull out on it, pass close, etc.')

Last winter I used a steady front light and both flashing and steady rear lights and I did not feel that driver behaviour towards me was significantly different to that encountered in daylight, but that is not particularly good science, I wonder if are there any proper studies out there?

[GeoffL]

So the pros and cons about flashing versus steady lights seem to be that:

*flashing lights are annoying, especially in close proximity
* [...]

On this subject, I've nothing against flashing marker lights provided that they are actually white for front and red for rear. What I do object to are the blue flashing lights that I've seen a few cyclists use near where I live. I've heard the "blue is legally white" argument, but the lights to which I object are more than just tinged with blue and have been mistaken for blue lights of emergency vehicles.

[Mick F]

I think I read somewhere that you must have white at the front and red at the rear, but other than those you can have what you want.

Also you must not have white at the back.

[gentlegreen]

Last winter I repeatedly encountered at least one rider with green and / or amber flashing lights.

Bizarrely I'm pretty sure I've seen them being sold with "RAC" branding ...

[niggle]

Not seen these other coloured lights in use but have seen them for sale, and some cheap flashers sold as front lights, e.g. from Tesco, are actually yellow or green, which reminds me of the dynamo set my parents brought back from France as a gift in the 1970s: the front light had a yellow bulb which I kept until it blew, after which putting a white bulb in did improve its performance a tad. I have seen a cyclist or two riding around with a white flasher at the rear, or red at the front

[Abu Milhem]

I thought 'cycling in the dark'. A splendid idea, I do it all the time - whenever there is a clear night and a full moon. Winter is a fantastic time as the trees are leaveless. Naturally, it is completely illegal and not without risk but then so are many very enjoyable things. I use my judgement on location and time - between 3 and 4 am is good and the Dunwich Dynamo is an excellent opportunity - but only when there isn't anyone else about. Moonlight shadows and the shape of the landscape without a bike light are wonderful. There is also a completely different consciousness that steals over you when cycling with limited perception. Fear is part of it, I suppose...

[thirdcrank]

There's a blue light connoisseur's guide here

http://www.ukemergency.co.uk/informatio ... de_in_2005

I'm not sure it's all correct (eg I don't think that the emergency vehicle exemptions in some legislation such as speed limits are directly dependent on having a blue light flashing, but that need not worry the cyclist in the street.)

Interesting to see that somebody got up a petition to allow pensioned-off police cars etc to keep their blue lights. It's like something off cbeebies.

Be careful about going "Nee naw"

[[XAP]Bob]

I was fairly reliably informed that blues and twos don't exempt you from speed limits etc., but that it is deemed certainly not in the public interest to prosecute.
When involved in a collision whilst the blue flashys are on it is basically automatically the polices (or whoever) fault.

Additionally the police don't carry insurance (well technically they self insure)

[thirdcrank]

I was fairly reliably informed that blues and twos don't exempt you from speed limits etc., ...

The point I was making is that the speed limit exemption for emergency vehicles is in s 87 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 which is the primary legislation establishing the national speed limits and enabling others to be made in traffic regulation orders.

87. Exemption of fire brigade, ambulance and police vehicles from speed limits.

No statutory provision imposing a speed limit on motor vehicles shall apply to any vehicle on an occasion when it is being used for fire and rescue authority, ambulance or police purposes, if the observance of that provision would be likely to hinder the use of the vehicle for the purpose for which it is being used on that occasion.

No mention there of blue lights (on or off) or nee-naws. An unmarked vehicle is exempt so long as it is being used for those purposes and complying with the limit would hinder it. One of the decided cases on speeding involved a police officer driving his own car, prosecuted for speeding when he would otherwise have been late to give evidence at court. His appeal was upheld on the basis that the vehicle was being used for police purposes. That case was something like 25 years ago IIRC and the authorities have never changed the wording to change the law.

I'm not going to dig it all out now, but the wording of the legislation permitting the fitting of blue lamps and sirens etc to emergency vehicles says something along the lines of "to warn other road users of the presence or position of the vehicle on a road OR to warn other road users of the urgency of the purposes for which a vehicle is being used."

[CREPELLO]

An unmarked vehicle is exempt so long as it is being used for those purposes and complying with the limit would hinder it. One of the decided cases on speeding involved a police officer driving his own car, prosecuted for speeding when he would otherwise have been late to give evidence at court. His appeal was upheld on the basis that the vehicle was being used for police purposes. That case was something like 25 years ago IIRC and the authorities have never changed the wording to change the law.

I'm not going to dig it all out now, but the wording of the legislation permitting the fitting of blue lamps and sirens etc to emergency vehicles says something along the lines of "to warn other road users of the presence or position of the vehicle on a road OR to warn other road users of the urgency of the purposes for which a vehicle is being used."

Slightly of topic (but the whole topic has almost done screeching u-turn!), but the above wording isn't specific as to whether the emergency vehicle is on a call (blue lights) or just getting back to base etc. I've seen many emergency vehicles "speeding", without the blue lights, so I'm intrigued as to whether they are immune to speed limits, if not on emergency call out.

[GeoffL]

Slightly of topic (but the whole topic has almost done screeching u-turn!), but the above wording isn't specific as to whether the emergency vehicle is on a call (blue lights) or just getting back to base etc. I've seen many emergency vehicles "speeding", without the blue lights, so I'm intrigued as to whether they are immune to speed limits, if not on emergency call out.

They are not immune to speed limits (or any other rules of the road for that) unless the police, ambulance, fire service, etc. purpose for which the vehicle was being used at the time would be compromised by obeying that limit or rule. That is, they can break speed limits, jump red lights, etc. only when time is of the essence (e.g. police officers attending a burglary where the perpetrator might escape, attending the scene of an accident, fire service en route to a fire). Returning from a "shout" isn't usually time-critical and so the driver must then obey speed limits etc.

It's the purpose for which the vehicle is being used (and not the use of "blues and twos") that permits exceeding the speed limit etc. Even when use of "blues and twos" is permitted, whether to use them or not is at the discretion of the driver, who may not choose to use them - especially when their use might compromise the purpose that warrants exceeding the speed limit (e.g. they might warn a burglar or the driver of a speeding car they're following of their presence).

[7_lives_left]

Slightly of topic (but the whole topic has almost done screeching u-turn!), but the above wording isn't specific as to whether the emergency vehicle is on a call (blue lights) or just getting back to base etc. I've seen many emergency vehicles "speeding", without the blue lights, so I'm intrigued as to whether they are immune to speed limits, if not on emergency call out.

A colleague in work is a retained (part-time) fireman. He says that if he gets snapped by a speed camera (back in the days when they had them) on a call out, then the photo gets thrown away. If he is returning from a fire, it is three points on his license. They keep records of when fire appliances arrive and leave jobs, so they can check against the time on the photo even months later.

He also says that the fire engine is 6 inches narrower on the outward journey than it is coming back. And that if there are parked vehicles on narrow roads blocking access to a fire, their wing mirrors and side panels are fair game.

On the other hand, if he has an accident while disobeying a traffic signal or sign, that's his responsibility.

[reohn2]

Can someone explain whats wrong with flashing rear lights?
I always have one on flashing and one on steady after dark,on dull grey days or rain I have one on flashing.The only time I don't have a flashing one on is when riding in a group.

[squeaker]

Can someone explain whats wrong with flashing rear lights?

I read somewhere that it's more difficult to judge distance if a light is flashing.
Mind you, the main problem with using red 'to be seen' is that your eyes are less sensitive to red than blue. Bit late to change that standard now though

[gentlegreen]

Can someone explain whats wrong with flashing rear lights?

I read somewhere that it's more difficult to judge distance if a light is flashing.
Mind you, the main problem with using red 'to be seen' is that your eyes are less sensitive to red than blue. Bit late to change that standard now though

At least static red isn't too jarring on the nerves. Blue tail lights would be a nightmare.

You just need more power, and with LEDs and modern rechargeables it really isn't a problem. I have 3 watts or so at the back - equivalent to a 21 watt brake light, but that's probably just paranoia. Nasty old dynamo rear lights were about 1 1/2 watts, and half to 1 watts of LEDs would trounce that and match a motorcycle tail light.