CTC Forum - On the road

Syndicate content
Discussion boards hosted by CTC, the national cycling charity
Updated: 3 min 22 sec ago

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 9:10am
You will car that you dazzle others when they can't judge your speed and have you off.

As opposed to having me off because I can't be seen against the glare of dipped headlights.

My accumulated experience as a car driver and as a cyclist with increasingly bright lights is that if I am dazzled I slow down and maybe even stop. This also seems to apply to other car drivers.

A dazzled car driver is probably in less control and less able to see where you are. Dazzling car drivers will be counter productive when it comes to your own safety, dangerous to others, totally inconsiderate. Sort of behaviour that a few car drivers get so badly criticised for on forums like this. And you don't care when you do it to others.

No I don't because I consider car drivers, even with dipped headlights, to be constantly guilty of dazzling me. You may set you standards low to accommodate such behaviors, I don't and see no need to moderate my behavior when I have to deal with what I consider to be inconsiderate behaviour from every car I meet coming in the opposite direction.

If folks want to understand the dynamics of the lighting situation then I'd recommend reading up on 'The tradgedy of the commons' because night lighting is one such scenario.

Re: Navdy

13 October 2014 - 9:06am
Lance Dopestrong wrote:I really can't see the point. Even my creaky old Sat nav gives clear and timely voice commands, so why the need to have a screen whacked up in your line of sight? Unless you're deaf, where's the benefit?
But does your satnav show you incoming Twerps and the attached photos of their dog pulling a funny face or their child doing something weird ... And then having read that Twerp, does you satnav encourage you to completely take your eyes and concentration off the road whilst you type in some inane response ?

Ian

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 9:04am
When driving I find a flashing rear light on a bike far less noticeable than a solid rear light. The most noticeable I've seen are actually what might be described as a "pulsing" rear light (constant on with extra brightness pulses). However, these seem the exception.

However, I do find flashing front lights more noticeable than the constant on ones.

But talking about open roads with an occasional cyclist, not a busy city centre with lots of cyclists.

Ian

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 9:01am
freeflow wrote:... and I don' t really care if I dazzle others.
A dazzled car driver is probably in less control and less able to see where you are. Dazzling car drivers will be counter productive when it comes to your own safety, dangerous to others, totally inconsiderate. Sort of behaviour that a few car drivers get so badly criticised for on forums like this. And you don't care when you do it to others.

Ian

Re: Navdy

13 October 2014 - 8:57am
I really can't see the point. Even my creaky old Sat nav gives clear and timely voice commands, so why the need to have a screen whacked up in your line of sight? Unless you're deaf, where's the benefit?

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 8:54am
You will care that you dazzle others when they can't judge your speed and have you off.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 6:37am
I am frequently amused by the discussion about bike lights. Having commuted by bike for many years and migrating from the old ever ready lights, through 20w lead acid battery systems to led lights (I was at the front of the queue for the first exposure lights) I am firmly of the opinion that car headlights, even when dimmed are the problem. Therefore I use and advocate as much light as possible on my bike with as much flashing as I can usefully manage. I want to be able to see where I'm going despite oncoming dazzle from car headlights and I don' t really care if I dazzle others.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

13 October 2014 - 1:38am
At risk of sounding like a broken record, I do find that many lights sold to cyclists shine too much light into the eyes of other road users. Unfortunately too many cyclists believe that the more light they can shine at people the safer they will be. The nuisance of such lights is exacerbated significantly when they are put into a flashing mode.

Personally I am not a fan of the "moving" multiple LED lights you mention; aside from their illegality (as sole lights) I think they offer all the distance perception problems of flashing light without the obvious "it's a bike" recognition of a flasher. Having said that both of those are issues in true darkness rather than city environments.

I do share your concern to an extent. I would find a bright flashing front light simply too annoying to use and would not willingly subject someone else to it. I do use a flashing rear light as well as a constant one but I took particular care with the flasher to find one with good all round visibility but not so bright as to be terribly uncomfortable to ride behind

As for pedal reflectors, I agree that we should not remove the requirement for them to be fitted to bikes at point of sale. However, I think that CJ's suggestion that cyclists riding at night should be able to choose alternate means of making themselves visible (IIRC his suggestion was a second rear light which is perfectly sensible). We have to remember that many cyclists use clipless pedals, large panniers, tricycles or recumbent cycles which currently prevent them from riding legally at night. The law does need to be changed to correct this.

Re: Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

12 October 2014 - 10:23pm
Pedal reflectors fail in so many cases they're a joke.

Ignoring most modern pedals, they don't work with luggage, or a trike, or a recumbemt, or....

Lights: flashing, bright: article in Cycle

12 October 2014 - 8:55pm
The recent article in Cycle on lights was interesting. I see a lot of posts about lights. Here is a perspective from a town where cycles outnumber cars, and it is common to be riding or waiting in a queue at traffic lights with other bikes - Cambridge. I ride and drive round Cambridge on a daily basis, and here are my observations. It would be interesting to hear from others.

Flashing lights are OK where there is one lone bike trying to be visible to cars in the distance, and quite good as "daylight running" lights in the country. However when you are cycling behind other cyclists with bright flashing rear lights it is very unpleasant and distracting. Bright oncoming front flashing lights are awful because they are usually pointing upwards and shine into your eyes to dazzle you. In my view they are just not fit for purpose in a city like Cambridge.

Many cyclists in Cambridge attach lights to their backpacks, helmets or other parts of their clothing. This tends to lift the lights up high and reduces their effectiveness, they often merge into other lights and are not at the height that says "cycle". They also are at the right height often to dazzle. I'm not sure of the legal position here but I think lights at the more traditional level (between about axle and handlebar levels) are more effective.

I suggest that instead of "on-off" flashers, the industry should be encouraged towards the sort that have multiple LEDs and switch from one to another, giving a moving effect but crucially NOT the bright-dark effect which is so unpleasant. Many lights have this feature - how about making that the only flashing mode allowed? I'm not suggesting outlawing flashers completely, though if I'm riding with someone using them I ask them to switch to steady mode.

In an environment with a high density of cyclists, good, steady lights and reflectors work well for visibility - to be seen by other cyclists and drivers - and are more pleasant for everyone. If everyone had a hub dynamo with modern lights and standlights, this would work just fine in a city like Cambridge. But they don't, and I don't expect they ever will round here.

On the subject of pedal reflectors - please let's keep them. Sometimes these are the only visible cue to spot the cyclist with no lights, no front or rear reflectors, and dark clothing. In the light cast by a cycle dynamo or car headlight, they show up a treat, and they are moving which also helps. There are plenty of such cyclists in Cambridge -maybe there shouldn't be, but there are, and the occasional police campaign doesn't change that. Actually, the standard-issue reflectors are better for seeing bikes than some of the low quality lights with almost flat batteries I see on a daily basis!

Peter H

Re: Navdy

12 October 2014 - 8:13pm
Tonyf33 wrote:There's an article here about it.. http://www.informationweek.com/mobile/m ... id/1297802
These need to be illegal in this country..another disgusting implement that will make driving stds worse and cause more incidents..

+1
Society gets dafter by the minute it seems.

Re: Clipping and running

12 October 2014 - 7:41pm
Phil Fouracre wrote:Interesting comments! Think it must show the differing expectations between 'serious' cyclists and 'leisure' ones. People jumped in and blamed the front cyclist, which might be expected if you ride in a group. In 'normal' one to one interaction on the road, surely the 'vehicle' behind has to give way, and anticipate the actions of those in front?

If I'm in lane three and half alongside a vehicle in lane 2 of a motorway I don't expect it to slam the brakes on when I start to indicate - it's my job to ensure a gap is present before I move.

It's not a question of ahead and behind - only one cyclist made a move on the road.

Re: Navdy

12 October 2014 - 7:40pm
Bloody mad!

Re: Clipping and running

12 October 2014 - 7:38pm
Interesting comments! Think it must show the differing expectations between 'serious' cyclists and 'leisure' ones. People jumped in and blamed the front cyclist, which might be expected if you ride in a group. In 'normal' one to one interaction on the road, surely the 'vehicle' behind has to give way, and anticipate the actions of those in front?

Re: Cafe & coffee

12 October 2014 - 4:50pm
julianm wrote:Thats very good going for 1. An airport 2. Italy.....

We've never found Italy(Tuscany) expensive,good coffee is usually around a 1.50 euro max and usually comes with a little cake on the side.Unless you're in a prime spot,say the Piazza del Campo in Siena then it can double or treble in price.
A decent meal for two in a nice little restaurant in a smaller town we've never paid more than 35 euros.
It's about three years since we've been though,so prices may have gone up a little.

Re: Sick people

12 October 2014 - 4:22pm
Dave W wrote::lol:

Stuck for words Dave?

Re: Clipping and running

12 October 2014 - 3:13pm
Tonyf33 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:He did start to slow, as you say he stopped pedalling.

The person in front then made a ferociously abrupt move
He didn't 'slow' he stopped pedalling instead of moving and dabbing the brakes to give the guy room. The guy in front clearly indicated AND made an audible warning so the guy behind had plenty of time to slow and/or move to the inside line to give him space. So.. why didn't he do that on seeing that the cyclist in front was intending to move left? At what point was he going to move/slow down to allow the cyclist in front to make his manouvre..ever/never?? Or was he going to force him to hold his line in which case the incident would have happened no matter how fast he went across as going across slowly would still have had the same end result.
Again I'll repeat myself..what IF the cyclist/s in front had to move suddenly to avoid a pothole, then what? The cyclist behind has not acted accordingly IMO, yes the cyclist in front should have shoulder checked but if the cyclist behind won't give you the space how the heck is the guy in front meant to get across??
..ferocious..really?

If you stop pedalling then you slow down. That's fine - that's appropriate, start to make a gap.
I wouldn't expect anyone to hit their brakes to make a gap for me (although I have done so when it's clear that they wouldn't be able to avoid me if I had taken the corner we were all going for).

The guy then swiped across - that was a very sudden and wide move, and not at all expected.

Re: Sick people

12 October 2014 - 2:36pm

Re: Sick people

12 October 2014 - 2:23pm
Dave W wrote:You're a bundle of laughs aren't you?
Unlike some

I have done a sportive but don't do them any more because the cost is rather extortionate these days. I used to do the Bath to London for charity too but that's got too dear. I've nothing against anyone who enters one - it's quite an achievement for many and a bit of lighthearted competition for some, at the end of the day it's cycling so can't be bad.
I've nothing at all against anyone riding sportives,as I've nothing against people who drive 4x4's(check my history on that).
I have however something against people who scatter the roads with litter in the form of gel wrappers and inner tubes.Not exclusive to sportive riders by any means but as I posted above my experience is that when I/we've ended up on the same road as a sportive there's a predominance of gel wrappers and innertubes and a preponderance of bad and dangerous riding.
It is the pack mentality/wannabie culture that exists that spoils cycling IMHO.
It's also like the fact that we've just got back from three weeks caravaning and cycling in France where I find the driving of a much higher standard than here,and without some much as a trace of litter(well perhaps the odd bit here and there)or fly tipping,to be met by the hedgrows strewn with litter and cans of all description,and no less than three separate fly tip dollops in a 10 mile drive when we came off the motorway .
And some silly bint in a Focus intent on killing herself by a truly atrocious overtaking manoeuvre on the 100mile m/way drive from Hull to Manchester.
I saw no such behaviour in 1,400miles on French roads.

It's a social problem pertaining to the UK.
And it's my experience YMV,have you got that?

Re: Clipping and running

12 October 2014 - 10:54am
So let's put it another way, you're in front of a car in the same lane with you holding central position, you want to turn left as per this vid (presume this is a US vid as they're on the right lane). You signal, you move across and the car hasn't given you enough space and you come into contact with it, who is in the wrong?

Archive

  • Patron: Her Majesty The Queen
  • President: Jon Snow
  • Chief Executive: Paul Tuohy
  • Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC): A company limited by guarantee, registered in England no.25185. Registered as a charity in England and Wales No 1147607 and in Scotland No SC042541

 

Terms and Conditions