Moving flashing lights and reflective clothing

[Punkawallah]

From time to time I see setups similar to that described, a more common one is 4 or 5 rear lights. Another I see quite regularly are huge, badly adjusted front lights.

As a driver I find these sort of setups have one thing in common, they create a distraction. I see that something is there but I'm not quite sure what, at a guess it's a cyclist but I'm not certain. It takes longer to decide what the hazard is. I'm not sure this is a good thing.

I find similar with car lights, drivers who adorn the front of their vehicle with additional lights create a distraction as I tend to look at them.

The purpose of lights and highly visible clothing is to send a quick clear message. I'm here, I'm a cyclist. That's all that is required.

Mobile phone use is banned while driving. Why? It's distracting. Anything which distracts drivers potentially creates a hazard rather than preventing one.

Overall I'm unsure about just what cyclists who light themselves up like Blackpool illuminations think they're achieving. I don't understand the thought process or what stimulates it.

I’m going to go with ‘fear of being hit by another vehicle’, Bob.

 

[JonBuoy]

I've never been keen on having something attached to a helmet as fall off and if that hard thing attached lands between road and head the feeble polystyrene will not stop it puncturing into your head. Never happened to me so theoretical and these days academic (I haven't worn a helmet for a few years).

When I used to fly gliders, club rule (unsure about other clubs) had a rule "no baseball hats" as get flung about a bit and/or straps a bit lose or some acrobatics and baseball hats have a button top middle which risks being driven into your skull. No idea if some official being OTT or if a potential risk but it was an enforced rule.

I think you will find that they were more worried about the button damaging the glider's canopy than your skull. The other problem with baseball caps is that the peak restricts your upwards peripheral vision unless you wear them backwards.

 

[Dogtrousers]

At the rear there's also redundancy. You're not going to notice if a single rear light fails/falls off. Running two or three reduces this risk to a very low level

 

[PaulSB]

At the rear there's also redundancy. You're not going to notice if a single rear light fails/falls off. Running two or three reduces this risk to a very low level

Which is why I run a "day bright" rear light with a 12 hour run time.

 

[Sea of vapours]

Which is why I run a "day bright" rear light with a 12 hour run time.

As probably mentioned before, some lights, notably Varia radars, will produce an alert on a head unit if they run low on battery or lose connection completely due to failing in some non-battery manner or dropping off. Not as good as the full redundancy of having two rear lights, but a great deal better than simply not knowing.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Which is why I run a "day bright" rear light with a 12 hour run time.

But if the bracket fails and it drops off, or if it dies for some other reason, you still won't notice.

My solution to this is multiple redundant cheapo cateye omnis.

 

[Oldhippy]

Without wishing to sound awkward, why only extra things on a bike but not on a car? If someone drives an old car with no sensors or all the other myriad of extras the driver doesn't seem to crash or be hit more often. The onus is being put entirely on cycle riders and ignoring the car is king mentality. More and bigger cars multiply absurdly and barely pay lip service to environment concerns.

 

[PaulSB]

But if the bracket fails and it drops off, or if it dies for some other reason, you still won't notice.

My solution to this is multiple redundant cheapo cateye omnis.

On my Kinesis I use a Raceware bracket screwed into a standard frame fixing at the top of the offside seat stay and a solid clamp on seat post for carbon bikes.

Then I also have my Varia attached to the seat post with a solid clamped mount.

I know s**t happens but two failed lights and brackets on one ride is very bad luck.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Without wishing to sound awkward, why only extra things on a bike but not on a car? If someone drives an old car with no sensors or all the other myriad of extras the driver doesn't seem to crash or be hit more often. The onus is being put entirely on cycle riders and ignoring the car is king mentality. More and bigger cars multiply absurdly and barely pay lip service to environment concerns.

To be fair having functioning lights on a bike is actually required at night etc

it is the other stuff that is extra

I read an article some time ago about whether cycle helmet should be compulsory
It included an interview with a brain surgeon who worked closely with the A&E in the hospital
and so had seen a lot of head injuries from road accidents

His comment was that cycle helmet would help in a large percentage of the bicycle crashes he sees
but that he only sees the ones with brain injuries - so a lot of cycle crashes WITH helmets never come to his attention

AND - he reckoned that if you want to make helmet compulsory for any road users
he would do it for car driver
He sees a lot of car drivers were a side impact has caused their skull to impact the side of the car and they end up with him


but I reckon a government would fall if they tried to make a helpmet compulsory when driving a car!!!

 

[Oldhippy]

Imagine the fallout if it was announced that at least one practical thoroughfare was to be closed to cater purely for ease of cycling in every part of the country. There would be uproar. This is the mentality that needs changing. It is done in many other countries but as always the UK is so far behind the curve. 20 mph was the end of the world to make it safer for some.

 

[Oldhippy]

If cycling advocacy groups combined were as loud as driving equivalents it would maybe move the needle somewhat.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I know s**t happens but two failed lights and brackets on one ride is very bad luck.

I think we're in agreement. As that famous cyclist Oscar Wilde put it: To lose one rear light may be judged as misfortune. To lose two begins to look like carelessness.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Imagine the fallout if it was announced that at least one practical thoroughfare was to be closed to cater purely for ease of cycling in every part of the country. There would be uproar. This is the mentality that needs changing. It is done in many other countries but as always the UK is so far behind the curve. 20 mph was the end of the world to make it safer for some.

I agree

I have seen to of those things where they try to stop cars using a residential road as a cut through by putting big planers across it
Hence bikes and walkers - and mobilirt scooters - can get through but not cars etc

and the "local community groups" go beserk because the cyclist are being given a nice quiet route through the town at the expense fo the cars

no mention of mobility scooters or pushchairs
but bikes are allowed and not cars!!!

 

[presta]

I agree

I have seen to of those things where they try to stop cars using a residential road as a cut through by putting big planers across it
Hence bikes and walkers - and mobilirt scooters - can get through but not cars etc

and the "local community groups" go beserk because the cyclist are being given a nice quiet route through the town at the expense fo the cars

no mention of mobility scooters or pushchairs
but bikes are allowed and not cars!!!

There's a set of three roads near here that were used as a rat run so they closed them with bollards, but that was about 30 odd years ago when you could do it without anyone moaning. I don't know of any complaints when they started building all the new estates as cul-de-sacs, either. If living in cul-de-sacs is so undesirable it makes you wonder why people pay more for it.

The streets where I live are through roads, but there's nowt much to be gained from rat running anyway. When they expanded the estate ~1970, they built cul-de-sacs off a main arterial road which loops off and back onto the main road, and that's a bit of a race track. When they expanded again ~2000, it was all done on a dendritic pattern, with no through routes at all.

 

[tyred]

To be fair having functioning lights on a bike is actually required at night etc

it is the other stuff that is extra

I read an article some time ago about whether cycle helmet should be compulsory
It included an interview with a brain surgeon who worked closely with the A&E in the hospital
and so had seen a lot of head injuries from road accidents

His comment was that cycle helmet would help in a large percentage of the bicycle crashes he sees
but that he only sees the ones with brain injuries - so a lot of cycle crashes WITH helmets never come to his attention

AND - he reckoned that if you want to make helmet compulsory for any road users
he would do it for car driver
He sees a lot of car drivers were a side impact has caused their skull to impact the side of the car and they end up with him


but I reckon a government would fall if they tried to make a helpmet compulsory when driving a car!!!

The findings of a (localish to me) fatal single vehicle RTA which cost a young couple their lives a while back was published during the week. They both died from head injuries according to the medical findings.

If it had been two cyclists who died from head injuries, there would be calls to make helmets mandatory. Yet it is never even mentioned when two car occupants die from head injury. You have to wonder why?

Although I wouldn't want to wear a helmet when driving either!