Lights - Legal requirement??

[Cyclox]

Now the darker mornings & nights are in I just wondered if having one light on the front and a flasher on the back is enough? I see guys out there on the road with 2 lights on front; flashers on back of head, legs and obviously back of bike + tons of reflective gear. Does anyone know the actual legal requirement?

 

[marafi]

Well even though i just cycle to the station by bike and back. I was told front light, back light and His vis jacket. Though, if your cycling in the night. I have wheel lights which are colourful in the night. Also the more lights the better anyone can see you. Even in the park to a quiet road.

 

[gaz]

The legal requirements only state that you need 1 light front and back but you are much better off with 2 front and 2 back. Not just because it provides extra light but also for back ip incase one of them dies

 

[Bobtoo]

The 80 degrees to the left visibility is interesting. There are a LOT of car lights that don't come near that, even those retina-burning HiD headlights are often invisible from the side.

 

[Red Light]

The legal requirements only state that you need 1 light front and back but you are much better off with 2 front and 2 back. Not just because it provides extra light but also for back ip incase one of them dies

+1

 

[david k]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/130578456...X:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_2574wt_1185

like these?

 

[Cyclox]

Thank you all for your replies. I feel better for knowing I'm legal. Love the LED's on e-Bay david k.

 

[Grizzly]

I remember reading that if you are using flashing lights there must also be a solid white/red light, and the solid and flashing lights must not be the same unit, don't know if this still stands. Car lights must meet their own set of regulations and there is no way a car leaving the factory wouldn't come up to the standard. If a car owner alters the lights so that they don't meet the regulations they are breaching Construction and Use Regulations and Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations and thats between the driver and the Police.

 

[Bobtoo]

Car lights must meet their own set of regulations and there is no way a car leaving the factory wouldn't come up to the standard.

The people who draw up the standards either don't understand what's required or don't care. There are some extremely badly designed car lights out there- OEM ones I mean.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

If we followed the lighting regulations to the letter how many modern lights would meet the BS 6102/3 standard? One disadvantage of fitting a centre-mounted rear light means it occupies the space where a reflector would be fitted. In the case of a rack being fitted the reflector may not be visible and its possible mounting point taken by a light. Surely a little common sense would make any red reflective material an acceptable substitute where lights are fitted?

You have discovered a non problem.

Lights don't have to comply with BS 6102/3 s if they comply with another EU standard

as for light where a reflector would be, it means you have bought the wrong light

http://road.cc/content/review/29507-rsp-tourlite-led-rear-light

http://www.amazon.co.uk/D-Toplight-Plus-Rear-Light-Reflector/dp/B001EOPWJK

http://www.awcycles.co.uk/accessories/lights/rear-lights/cateye-ld500-rear-light-and-reflector.html


light with reflectors are easily available.


No need for a common sense solution of using tape if common sense is used at the light purchase stage.

 

[xpc316e]

I remember reading that if you are using flashing lights there must also be a solid white/red light, and the solid and flashing lights must not be the same unit, don't know if this still stands. Car lights must meet their own set of regulations and there is no way a car leaving the factory wouldn't come up to the standard. If a car owner alters the lights so that they don't meet the regulations they are breaching Construction and Use Regulations and Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations and thats between the driver and the Police.

It used to be the case that flashing lights were not actually lights within the meaning of the law, so had to be augmented by a steady light. That's no longer the case, and they are sufficient. I undertsand that there has been some research that says that flashing lights are good for getting noticed, but not so good at allowing distance to be judged by other road users - perhaps that's why two lights, one flashing and one steady, are a good idea.

 

[Red Light]

If we followed the lighting regulations to the letter how many modern lights would meet the BS 6102/3 standard?

The standard and law do not ban additional lights of any specification so on the basis that I carry two lights front and rear for redundancy if one fails or its batteries go flat, I carry one compliant and one non-compliant light at each end.

 

[Emmanuel Obikwelu]

Presumably the legal requirement for lights applies during the hours that street lighting is on .

 

[chillyuk]

Presumably the legal requirement for lights applies during the hours that street lighting is on .

Possibly. However, I once cycled into a thick fog (or mist) where visibilty was down to a few yards and I had no lights on my bike as it was sunny when I left home. I couple of cyclists with lights on passed me and they were far more visible than I must have been. Fortunately I ran out of the mist after 3 or 4 miles.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

Presumably the legal requirement for lights applies during the hours that street lighting is on .

To be pedantic, and allowing for the growing no of LA that now turn street lights off in the early hours , no.

You need lights to fulfill the legal requirements when cycling on the road "during the hours of darkeness" which are between 1/2 after the sun sets and 1/2 before the sun rises in local time. This mayor may not coincide with when the street lights are on.