Bicycle lighting

[Bill_56]

With the incredible advances in efficiency of LED torches recently, it is good to see the obvious benefit for cyclists who can, at last, see where they are going as opposed to just being 'visible'.

Recently however, I have been quite seriously dazzled by what I took to be the undipped lights of an oncoming vehicle. Having braked and shielded my eyes, and braced for rear-end impact, it has transpired to be a bicycle. Some even have lights that flash on and off, causing even greater detriment to the night vision of other road users, motorists and pedestrians alike. I gather bicycles are not subject to any testing for roadworthy lighting, and I gather flashing lights are tolerated in law.

If a pedestrian were to shine a high power LED torch into the eyes of oncoming drivers, I feel sure he would be committing an offence. Same for a car or motorcycle with dazzling headlamps. But what about irresponsible cyclists? They appear to be beyond the law, but are they also beyond criticism as regards lighting?

Interested in opinions

[stephend]

Bicycle lighting is a bit of a minefield... As far as I understand it, the law still requires steady (i.e. non-flashing) lights, white to the front, red to the rear, attached rigidly to the bike. Flashing lights are only supposed to be fixed to your panniers or clothing or similar. That's certainly what I have: steady white and red on the bike, and flashing red clipped to the loop provided for the purpose on the back of my hi-vis jacket.

At a pragmatic level, the police seem to take the line that any working lights are better than none (true!), and don't seem too fussed by the detail.

Regarding the extra-bright lamps, it sounds like it's a problem of adjustment - much the same as with a car. I must say I'd quite like to have a brighter front light than I've got (which was the brightest I could find when I bought it) - but the purpose would be to illuminate the ground, not to dazzle people.

[rippedoffagain]

Now you've done it. Rant alert.

First off, I should get it right out from the off, I am not in any way against cyclists.

But, some of them have lights that are totally inappropriate, dangerous to others (because of dazzling), and absolutely no benefit whatsoever to themselves. None, zilch, zero.

I suspect this all stems from some cyclists not considering what other road users actually see.

Some examples:

* I saw a cyclist literally vanish from view before my eyes once. It was an impressive but potentially dangerous illusion. He didn't have a light on the front of his bike, he was wearing it on his helmet. Great, so the light shines where he points his head so he can see better. The light is higher up so more likely to be seen above cars. Or in this case, the light aligns perfectly with the lights coming out of the front window of the bus behind him, and because his light was high up, there was no such light to break the silhouette of him being aligned perfectly in between the headlights of said bus. So with his headlamp being of comparable brightness to the light from the bus window behind him and then just two bus headlights lower down, he was actually totally invisible. I'd seen him before this unfortunately alignment of lights, and that's the only reason I knew he was there.

* Only flashing lights: There's a fairly well know but not widely know fact about human vision. It is rubbish. We only think it is good because our brains piece together all the vague info coming in and patch it all together to create the illusion of detail (illusionists and special effects engineers exploit this fact all the time in their jobs). With a steady light, you lose it for a second but you know which way it was going and how fast relative to you, so you immediately pick it up again. If its flashing, you're moving and he's moving, and there are lots of other things going on at the same time (eg other cars with lights on), then you're brain can only get a lock on his approximate location. Try it. Go to a nightclub and take a swig of your drink right when the laser strobe is scanning over your way. It takes a lot of concentration to avoid it going down your front.

* Tiny little lights: These seem to be growing in popularity, presumably because of their light weight and the fact they are not bulky. Put them in the flow of traffic on a rainy night when there's lots of other lights about, and they just sort of vanish, but the cyclist still rides out among the traffic, ie still takes the same risks, because as far as he's concerned he is properly illuminated.

The coppers do actually have the power to do cyclists for breaking the rules, but they don't seem to enforce those rules. Personally I think they should, but not out of nastiness, but I just think people should be made to do at least a basic test before they are allowed to ride among other traffic, and as part of the compulsory training for such a test, they should be shown video footage of what other road users see in different scenarios, just so that they stand a chance of actually staying visible. Not just for their own sake, but for everyone. If I was to hit a cyclist with my car at night, on a rainy day, and he didn't have lights and was doing everything wrong, I wouldn't think "oh well, its not my fault, I can sleep ok tonight", I'd be emotionally destroyed.

[stephend]

Everyone has to make their own decisions, I guess - but when I'm cycling, I want to be as visible as I possibly can, so that if there's an accident, nobody can use the "I didn't see you" excuse. So I always wear hi-vis, day or night, have reflectors fitted to the bike, and when it's dark I use good lights, correctly mounted. And I wish all cyclists would do the same...

[Bill_56]

Originally Posted by stephend

Everyone has to make their own decisions, I guess - but when I'm cycling, I want to be as visible as I possibly can, so that if there's an accident, nobody can use the "I didn't see you" excuse. So I always wear hi-vis, day or night, have reflectors fitted to the bike, and when it's dark I use good lights, correctly mounted. And I wish all cyclists would do the same...

I understand the temptation to use 'good lights', just as motorists with the temptation to use full beam. The question is, when do the interests, and safety, of other road users begin to overide one's own interests and safety?

Of further interest, can any of the cycling community advise... are bicycle lights generally capable of being dipped at all? A car or motorcycle (I assume, never having driven one) has a 'dip' button or lever. A pedestrian, or even a horse rider, can just point the torch downwards. But assuming a cylist will - quite reasonably - have the lamp pointed forwards to best illuminate the road ahead for his own safety, what can he actually do to avoid dazzle of other road users when he meets somebody coming the other way?

[stephend]

By good, I simply meant in full working order, with fully-charged batteries. My front one is angled so that the pool of light falls about 2 m in front of the bike.

I'd say that's much more like the dipped beam of a car than like the main beam: dip mostly illuminates the tarmac in front of the car whereas main picks out hedges, signs etc. I don't know about the latest bike lights (I bought mine about ten years ago) but I guess there isn't a dip facility.

But let me turn the question back round: cyclists are legally obliged to use lights, and you can only use what you can buy. What exactly do you expect a cyclist to do? It sometimes feels like we're castigated if the lights are too dim, castigated if the lights are too bright: it seems you can't win...

Also, I would gently point out that a lot of cars have badly adjusted headlamps, despite the annual MoT test - and I personally find xenon lights dazzling.

Incidentally, I used to have dynamo lights, and the front light was designed to be mounted on the front forks. That gave a good light for illuminating the road, set low - when you were moving. When you stopped, of course: nothing. And with it set low, I don't think it was especially easy for oncoming traffic to see. Also, they didn't work too well when the tyres were wet and slippy... and then they packed up altogether!

[volvoid]

Why do so many motorists get such a big kick out of criticising cyclists ?
Have they never ridden a bike ?
Are they fault- and blame- free at all times ?

[Bill_56]

Just found this Sunday Times article, where seem to claim to have investigated this very issue and found that 80% of 'popular' LED bike lamps exceed the legal brightness limits for car headlamps, even when angled towards the road.

I know, it's a 'media report' designed to sell newspapers, and I'm as cynical as anyboby else about these so-called 'investigations'. Careful use may have been made of the selection of 'popular' lights for example, if it made a good story. All the same, it does fit my own observations of late. So take with a pinch of salt, but let's not ignore either.

Here's the link... you'd need to subscribe to read all of it, I don't and won't. But the intro' does make interesting reading, if you can see it...

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/...cle1238554.ece

[Prufrock]

Originally Posted by volvoid

Why do so many motorists get such a big kick out of criticising cyclists ?
Have they never ridden a bike ?
Are they fault- and blame- free at all times ?

Agreed, thread begins with a question about bicycle lights and ends up with negative comments about cyclists.

As someone who regularly rides a bicycle and motorcycle for pleasure (club member) for many years, I think it's the vast majority of car drivers who are to blame (young and old) for incidents with two-wheelers - all too impatient, distracted by kids or dogs in the car, texting while driving...the list goes on.

Just remember when you overtake a cyclist young or old, and fail to give them enough room, just think it could be your kid...your Dad on the bike. Ok some cyclists aren't perfect with their road positioning (like car drivers, and no doubt Volvo drivers), but how about just a little consideration?

One issue I do have is with tractors per se, they have lights, and at night often dazzle; and because the lights generally are paired together near the centre line of the tractor it is hard to judge width.

I'm well insured when on the bicycle too - certainly better than you are in your cage (biker talk for car).

J.

[Bill_56]

Originally Posted by volvoid

Why do so many motorists get such a big kick out of criticising cyclists ?
Have they never ridden a bike ?
Are they fault- and blame- free at all times ?

I'd actually hoped this thread could maybe discuss a specific road hazard for drivers, rather than just descend into another 'for or against' cyclists series of rants. Maybe I was hoping for too much.

I know there are other road hazards aplenty, many other non bike hazards have been discussed over the years, many others will be in future, and very few of them may be bicyle-related.

It just occured to me, after a recent specific encounter with a flashing bike LED 'headlamp', this particular hazard merited an airing as it seems to be a relatively new, and worsening phenomenon. According to the Sunday Times it is serious enough for Government action to be threatened.

See again the Sunday Times intro that I posted earlier, which probably manages a more neutral (if sensational) stance than I presented. Or let's just drop it if it causes too much offence to cyclists whenever these things are discussed. Sorry for any such offence.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/...cle1238554.ece