The blinding light of the low sun

[classic33]

Can I suggest setting oneself on fire as disproof?

You could always prove your argument, rather than asking someone else to do it.

 

[Rickshaw Phil]

Folks, a few posts have been getting unnecessarily antagonistic. Please keep it civil.

Thanks

 

[presta]

I was cycling along here on Christmas day.

https://goo.gl/maps/gJG86HjMa8oAKAyq5

When I got to the apex of the bend just past where that cone & telegraph pole are, a car came the other way taking the 'racing line', cutting the corner across to the wrong side of the road. He didn't swerve until the last moment because he couldn't see me with the sun in his eyes, so he missed me by about a foot.

 

[confusedcyclist]

I have no idea what that rant means. I see why you are called Confused.

Sorry please accept my apology, it came off a bit harsher than I intended. I was merely suggesting that the belief that lights are keeping you safe in cases of very low sun is a superstition, akin to tossing salt over one's shoulder for good luck, or suspecting witches practicing evil magic etc). Don't believe me? Refer to all cases of cyclists killed or seriously injured by motorist with the excuse of 'low sun', their 'visibility' did nothing to protect them, no man-made portable lights can outshine the sun as it rises over a relatively low horizon. There's absolutely zilch you can do to keep yourself safe from people who do not drive according to the conditions of the road. Just because YOU haven't had the misfortune does not prove 3 lights, plus one on your helmet have saved you from such risks. You've just not had the displeasure of running into such a reckless motorist... yet. In propagating such superstitions, you may actually be inadvertently putting others in harm's way, by instilling false confidence in portable lighting, whereas what is needed is awareness that riding in low light with a high speed differential is risky, and to be avoided where possible, but ideally we need to argue for complete modal separation, and where not practical or politically achievable, proven and effective disincentives and/or deterrents to continuing apace in the face of impaired visibility. Many motorists still act that cyclists ought not to be in their way, it's those that hold this attitude and fail to slow in dangerous situations that put us at great risk. Lights will do diddly squat in these situations.

 

[Mike_P]

Low sun also has the effect of increasing shadows. I was driving on A road when for no reason all the cars in front in turn braked, it was only when the need to brake arose for me that I discovered the cause was a dark clothed cyclist completely hidden in the shaded side of the road while the rest of the road was in the glare of the low sun. Clearly emphasised to me the need for bright clothing and lights even in daytime in such conditions.

 

[confusedcyclist]

Low sun also has the effect of increasing shadows. I was driving on A road when for no reason all the cars in front in turn braked, it was only when the need to brake arose for me that I discovered the cause was a dark clothed cyclist completely hidden in the shaded side of the road while the rest of the road was in the glare of the low sun. Clearly emphasised to me the need for bright clothing and lights even in daytime in such conditions.

I think this is a reasonable example of when a good light might be of some use, but clothing issue is still a red herring.

 

[classic33]

I think this is a reasonable example of when a good light might be of some use, but clothing issue is still a red herring.

Contrast over colour.