winjim
Smash the cistern
What point exactly are you trying to make?
Visibility
- Thread starter Alex321
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
BoldonLad
Not part of the Elite
I am puzzled that a cyclist would appear to support drivers not obeying the Highway Code? I accept that many people (pedestrians, cyclists, driver) do not obey the Highway Code, but, that is not to say such behaviour is acceptable or desirable ?
boydj
Legendary Member
In dark or gloomy conditions good quality lights and plenty of reflectives are required for cyclists to stand out. When commuting in the dark I found reflective ankle bands to be particularly effective because the motion distinctively says 'cyclist'.
In daylight I think road positioning is more important than clothing. By taking a prominent position in the road you're in a place where the driver is actually looking, particularly when approaching junctions where drivers may be scanning for oncoming traffic and can easily miss a kerb-hugging cyclist.
In daylight I think road positioning is more important than clothing. By taking a prominent position in the road you're in a place where the driver is actually looking, particularly when approaching junctions where drivers may be scanning for oncoming traffic and can easily miss a kerb-hugging cyclist.
winjim
Smash the cistern
The context is me, as a cyclist, not necessarily obeying the parts of the HC which aren't legal requirements. Although to be fair, I just looked at the cyclist bit and a fair amount is just information and only a small amount guidance, most of which I do sort of follow although not deliberately, as it were.
BoldonLad
Not part of the Elite
OK, I thought your wording implied acceptance of drivers disregarding bits of the Highway Code, which they may personally think not relevant (ie, the rules don't apply to me approach). If that is not what you meant, fair enough.
Bike Tyson
Guest
Tell me more!
winjim
Smash the cistern
Only the bits which are pick and chooseable, eg for cyclists things like wearing a helmet or using a bike lane. I think for motorists a lot of it might fall under careless driving or similar though, if it came to that.
Can you give a link to that change, as I can't find it on the legislation site?
classic33
Leg End Member
I was given the wording by the CTC, in their "newsletter".
I'd like to know where they got it from, or whether that is just their interpretation of sunset and sunrise.
There is just no reference to horizon in any lighting regulations I can find. Most of the uses of that word are in air navigation acts & regulations, plus some fishery regulations, and a few which are things like "New Horizons ..."
Ok, from a page on their website, it appears to be their interpretation of Sunset.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/lighting-regulations
"
'Lighting-up time' and the 'Hours of Darkness'
These commonplace phrases have meant many different things in the past and continue to cause confusion. However, for a cyclist, the only thing that matters is the sun; the moment it dips below the horizon, our lights are required to be turned on, even though there may be plenty of light to see by for another half hour or so on a clear evening. It's the rules.
"
https://www.cyclinguk.org/lighting-regulations
"
'Lighting-up time' and the 'Hours of Darkness'
These commonplace phrases have meant many different things in the past and continue to cause confusion. However, for a cyclist, the only thing that matters is the sun; the moment it dips below the horizon, our lights are required to be turned on, even though there may be plenty of light to see by for another half hour or so on a clear evening. It's the rules.
"
wafter
I like steel bikes and I cannot lie..
Typically my attitude to visibility has been "minimalist" - usually a single rear light and a head torch of decent brightness; with no specifically-chosen bright or reflective clothing to improve my visibility.
That said my riding at night used to be nearly all within the city (where there's usually additional lighting / generally better visibility and the traffic is slower) or on very quiet roads in good conditions outside of rush hour.
Having recently begun to suffer my first winter in a long time as a car-based-commuter I'm frequently extremely concerned by the potential lack of visibility of cyclists on my route, and the very real danger of spotting a poorly-illuminated rider in less-than-favourable conditions - dark, narrow, potholed and poorly-sighted country roads with lots of vegetation that serves to break up / conceal shapes, the sensory overload of oncoming headlights / those in the rear view mirror (and how these dominate your attention and distract from less obvious hazards), the constant need to be aware of the poor conduct of other drivers for your own safety..
I can see so many opportunities for poorly-visible cyclists to be hit - from behind, when passing stationary / slow traffic at lights or attempting to filter in, being turned across at junctions.. and under the circumstances described above I can completely see the argument for going all-in to make yourself as visible as possible.
Ultimately as a driver, under these conditions I can't say that I'd be able to identify and avoid a poorly visible cyclist 100% of the time.. and (as much as I'm the first to put the boot in when a motorist is at fault) as others have said this shouldn't be about blame / "us and them"; it's about sensible, responsible precautions for everyones safety.
That said my riding at night used to be nearly all within the city (where there's usually additional lighting / generally better visibility and the traffic is slower) or on very quiet roads in good conditions outside of rush hour.
Having recently begun to suffer my first winter in a long time as a car-based-commuter I'm frequently extremely concerned by the potential lack of visibility of cyclists on my route, and the very real danger of spotting a poorly-illuminated rider in less-than-favourable conditions - dark, narrow, potholed and poorly-sighted country roads with lots of vegetation that serves to break up / conceal shapes, the sensory overload of oncoming headlights / those in the rear view mirror (and how these dominate your attention and distract from less obvious hazards), the constant need to be aware of the poor conduct of other drivers for your own safety..
I can see so many opportunities for poorly-visible cyclists to be hit - from behind, when passing stationary / slow traffic at lights or attempting to filter in, being turned across at junctions.. and under the circumstances described above I can completely see the argument for going all-in to make yourself as visible as possible.
Ultimately as a driver, under these conditions I can't say that I'd be able to identify and avoid a poorly visible cyclist 100% of the time.. and (as much as I'm the first to put the boot in when a motorist is at fault) as others have said this shouldn't be about blame / "us and them"; it's about sensible, responsible precautions for everyones safety.
cougie uk
Guru
A head torch ???
So not legal lighting on the bike. Good luck if you get hit. And having a light on so high gives the impression of a bike further away. Unless you move your head and then nobody would take you as a bike anyway.
Just get a standard bike on the bars please.
A head torch as the sole front light is not legal for riding after sunset or before sunrise.
You must legally have both font and rear lights attached to the bike when riding at that time.
You can use a head torch as an additional lamp, but not as your only one.
It also isn't sensible, for the reasons outlined by cougie uk above.
tyred
Legendary Member
80 lux dynamo headlamp and matching German standard taillamp all backed up with additional battery lights, high vis vest and new tyres with shiny new reflective sidewalls didn't stop someone pulling out from a junction and driving into the side of me and claiming he couldn't see me.
I believe it helps to make myself visible but only if someone is bothered to look in the first place.
I believe it helps to make myself visible but only if someone is bothered to look in the first place.