A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More About Lights



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old March 19th 17, 12:52 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,395
Default More About Lights

On 3/18/2017 3:51 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:12:02 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/18/2017 2:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Thing is, nobody's demonstrated any need for so much stationary "be
seen" light, beyond the usual "well, it _could_ happen" safety inflation
mentality.

True, but you're thinking like engineering, not marketing.


I do have too strong of a tendency to do that.

See http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-12-18

That has a place of honor on our refrigerator door.

--
- Frank Krygowski


Many many years ago I read an article and also books on bicycling that stated thatthe two most dangerous p;aces to ride a bicycle was #1 a parking lot and #2 an intersection.


That may be true. Parking lots are chaotic, but that has little to do
with standlights. Intersections are more dangerous than
non-intersection stretches of road, but the danger doesn't come from
being stationary. For legal cyclists, the sources of crashes are 1)
Right hooks 2) Left crosses, and 3) Pull-outs. In all those cases, the
cyclists are moving. Illegal cyclists can add other intersection
hazards, but again, those occur while the cyclist is moving.

You might try describing the specific traffic situation where a motorist
would be likely to hit a stationary cyclist because he has no headlight.

So, you guys are saying that having a bright standlight right where a lot of bicycling accidents happen (at an intersection) is a bad thing?


Nobody is saying it's a bad thing to have a standlight. However, I'm
saying it's not a critical thing. And it's certainly not true (as Joerg
implied) that there's a big risk in having a standlight that's dimmer
than a headlight, or one whose duration is only a couple minutes.

In Ohio, the law specifically states that dynamo lights that go out when
stationary are legal. I was not involved with getting that law passed,
but IIRC the Ohio Bicycle Federation was. They did so in part because
they judged there was no significant hazard.

I don't know about you but I like to know that a driver coming towards me at night whilst I'm stopped at an intersection can at least see my bicycle light.


Your personal preference is fine. But if the risk of crash due to lack
of standlight was really great, that source of crashes would have been
listed in the studies that examined car-bike crash sources. Those
studies have no such entries.

YMMV Why not paint your bike flat black and wear flat black clothing or camouflage clothing if being visible to other road users is of so little consequence even when you're stopped and they are moving?


sigh First, the color of a bike is completely negligible.

Second, I reject the idea that a cyclist is at fault if he chooses to
wear ordinary clothing, no matter its color.

IIRC, all but two U.S. states require no taillight, and allow mere rear
reflectors. I think if the resulting danger were great, there wouldn't
be 48 states disagreeing.

I do advocate taillights, but I think anything except the tiniest
coin-cell taillights are adequate. And back when I did night lighting
workshops with my bike club (where we observed lights on bikes to test
them) everyone else agreed.

And BTW, I think reflectors on pedals or cranks are extremely
conspicuous. I'd be more in favor of mandating them than mandating
taillights.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #202  
Old March 19th 17, 01:04 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,997
Default More About Lights

On 3/18/2017 2:50 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

snip

LOL, the world does not revolve around what YOU have noticed personally.

In the Odense study, cyclists with daytime bicycle lights had 32% fewer
accidents than the control group. The effect was particularly noticeable
during the summer season when the reduction is up to 40%. So it's when
the sun is brighter that there is even more of an advantage to DRLs.

You can see the same thing in your own town. It's especially noticeable
when cyclists are in a bicycle lane, closer to the curb than in a
traffic lane. They tend to blend in with the other stuff on the right
side of the road, such as parked cars.


BUNK!


LOL, that's a well-researched response.

  #203  
Old March 19th 17, 01:05 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,395
Default More About Lights

On 3/18/2017 5:35 PM, sms wrote:


In the Odense study, cyclists with daytime bicycle lights had 32% fewer
accidents than the control group. The effect was particularly noticeable
during the summer season when the reduction is up to 40%. So it's when
the sun is brighter that there is even more of an advantage to DRLs.


Let's talk about the origin and the details of that study.

First, it was initiated by Reelight, the company selling the lights. For
most scientifically competent people, that would at least indicate that
the details need critical examination.

Second, the group who got the lights was self-selected. Self-selection
is always regarded with high suspicion, because those choosing the
measure under study are almost guaranteed to be different than those who
do not make that choice.

In this case, the company offered free lights to those who would
participate. It's very likely that those choosing to get the lights
were the most fearful and careful cyclists - those who would have the
lowest crash rate in any case. IOW, the difference in crash rates
between self-selected and control groups would probably be as great if
the offer was for magic key fobs.

You can see the same thing in your own town. It's especially noticeable
when cyclists are in a bicycle lane, closer to the curb than in a
traffic lane. They tend to blend in with the other stuff on the right
side of the road, such as parked cars.


Don't ride in the gutter, Stephen.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #204  
Old March 19th 17, 01:16 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,395
Default More About Lights

On 3/18/2017 3:54 PM, sms wrote:
On 3/18/2017 11:46 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

snip

While the vests are unlikely to solve the problem, they do help and
are cheap enough.


Will they 100% solve the problem? Of course not. Will they help?
Definitely. We've had fatalities in Silicon Valley of pedestrians
walking at night on roads with drivers that have not been charged
because they legitimately claimed that they just did not see the
pedestrians.

There's this false narrative out there of "if there's not been a
double-blind study done, then we should ignore common sense, because no
one has conclusively proven XYZ."


There's also the false narrative saying if something may help to any
degree, it's foolish to not use it. However, the main proponent of that
"logic" still has not explained why he and his family don't use the
six-foot-tall bicycle flags of the 1970s.

https://americansafetyvest.com/wp-co...4/BikeFlag.jpg

There's no study that proves that making yourself more conspicuous at
night (or in the daytime for that matter) makes it less likely that
someone will inadvertently run you over, though in this case you might
want to accept the empirical evidence, extrapolate data from related
relevant studies, and use some common sense. Or not--if you have an
agenda that you're pushing.

In fact there has been at least one study on DRLs for bicycles,
https://www.bikelight.ca/pages/safety-first-study.


I've commented on that "study" in another post. It's right up there
with "Gleem toothpaste makes you 35% sexier."


If someone is expecting a graph of lumens or lux versus bicycle crashes,
then they will be waiting a long time.

The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to
Bike with a Light, Day or Night."
https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night.


Take a look at the photo in that article. It appeared in an
advertisement in some bike magazines. What do you see? I saw a car and
a bike.

https://www.outsideonline.com/sites/...?itok=1zHaOkga

The photo was on the back cover of the magazine, lying face up for
several days before I even noticed what they were advertising. I
thought "Wait, what's this ad about?" Then I saw it was for the
taillight. Then I realized that the cyclist in the photo actually has a
taillight. Just as in real life, the cyclist - even in black clothing
against a dark background - is far more visible than the light.

I would advise him to get at least into the right tire track, though.
He's inviting close passes and adding to his risk of goat head or debris
punctures.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #205  
Old March 19th 17, 03:23 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,569
Default More About Lights

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:52:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
And BTW, I think reflectors on pedals or cranks are extremely
conspicuous. I'd be more in favor of mandating them than mandating
taillights.


Reflectors are already required in California:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum= 21201

21201(d)

(1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in
motion, illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of the
bicyclist and is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from
the sides of the bicycle.

(2) A red reflector or a solid or flashing red light with a built-in
reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a distance of 500
feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of
headlamps on a motor vehicle.

(3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle visible
from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet.

(4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the center of
the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to the rear of
the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that are equipped with
reflectorized tires on the front and the rear need not be equipped
with these side reflectors.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #206  
Old March 19th 17, 03:47 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,569
Default More About Lights

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 15:11:56 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 3/18/2017 2:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Thing is, nobody's demonstrated any need for so much stationary "be
seen" light, beyond the usual "well, it _could_ happen" safety inflation
mentality.


True, but you're thinking like engineering, not marketing.


I do have too strong of a tendency to do that.
See http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-12-18
That has a place of honor on our refrigerator door.


I can see that this discussion is going to be all uphill. I'll be
merciful and uncharacteristically brief.

I worked for a company run by engineers that dug a hole for itself and
then jump in by doing very little market research and ignoring their
own marketing people. Designing a working product is only part of the
puzzle. Packaging, merchandising, and selling it in a manner that
customers will want to buy it is far more difficult because it's NOT
an exact science like engineering. This is one reason that engineers
fail to appreciate marketeers. It works the other way, where
engineers are pathological incapable of letting go of their design and
will continue to "improve" the design long after the customer has left
and gone elsewhere.

Incidentally, having one foot in each swamp, I had the dubious honor
of being called a traitor by both sides. I really didn't appreciate
the problem until that happened. Also, I tend to identify with
Dilbert's PHB (pointy hair boss), partly because I've lost enough hair
to look like him, but also because I can see myself in similar
situations. Being in the middle between engineering, marketing,
sales, and production is not my idea of fun job. I did it for a while
running my father's company and hated it.


Drivel:
https://trackmaven.com/blog/national-days-calendar/
Hmmm... Today (Mar 18) is "National Supreme Sacrifice Day".
I wonder if they mean human sacrifice?



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #207  
Old March 19th 17, 05:34 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,395
Default More About Lights

On 3/18/2017 10:23 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:52:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
And BTW, I think reflectors on pedals or cranks are extremely
conspicuous. I'd be more in favor of mandating them than mandating
taillights.


Reflectors are already required in California:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum= 21201

21201(d)

(1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in
motion, illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of the
bicyclist and is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from
the sides of the bicycle.

(2) A red reflector or a solid or flashing red light with a built-in
reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a distance of 500
feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of
headlamps on a motor vehicle.

(3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle visible
from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet.

(4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the center of
the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to the rear of
the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that are equipped with
reflectorized tires on the front and the rear need not be equipped
with these side reflectors.


I think most states are similar. But note the phrase "while the bicycle
is in motion."


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #208  
Old March 19th 17, 10:06 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,582
Default More About Lights

On Sunday, March 19, 2017 at 12:34:21 AM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/18/2017 10:23 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:52:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
And BTW, I think reflectors on pedals or cranks are extremely
conspicuous. I'd be more in favor of mandating them than mandating
taillights.


Reflectors are already required in California:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum= 21201

21201(d)

(1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in
motion, illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of the
bicyclist and is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from
the sides of the bicycle.

(2) A red reflector or a solid or flashing red light with a built-in
reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a distance of 500
feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of
headlamps on a motor vehicle.

(3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle visible
from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet.

(4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the center of
the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to the rear of
the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that are equipped with
reflectorized tires on the front and the rear need not be equipped
with these side reflectors.


I think most states are similar. But note the phrase "while the bicycle
is in motion."


--
- Frank Krygowski


I don't know about you people butt... When I'm stopped at an intersection at night I like to have a light shining forward as well as a rear red light so that vehicles approaching me and turning can see there is something in front of them. Ditto for when just staarting from a stop and not yet up to soeed. that seems to be a time when there are a lot of cars that will turn infront of a bicyclist because the driver didn't see the bicyclist. A bicyclist can also be hidden from an approaching and or approaching and turning driver, by the headlights of a car or truck behind the bicyclist. You guys can go ahead and play Russian Roulette with cars at intersections at night because you have no working light giving forthlight from your bicycle there. I'll keep my light ON at those intersections so that other road users can see a bicycle is there.

Cheers
  #209  
Old March 19th 17, 04:19 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 53
Default More About Lights

On Sunday, March 19, 2017 at 2:06:24 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

I don't know about you people butt... When I'm stopped at an intersection at night I like to have a light shining forward as well as a rear red light so that vehicles approaching me and turning can see there is something in front of them. Ditto for when just staarting from a stop and not yet up to soeed. that seems to be a time when there are a lot of cars that will turn infront of a bicyclist because the driver didn't see the bicyclist. A bicyclist can also be hidden from an approaching and or approaching and turning driver, by the headlights of a car or truck behind the bicyclist. You guys can go ahead and play Russian Roulette with cars at intersections at night because you have no working light giving forthlight from your bicycle there. I'll keep my light ON at those intersections so that other road users can see a bicycle is there.

Cheers


Yes, that's extremely important.

One intersection I go through several times a week https://goo.gl/maps/uUrDJjyYMeM2 has most of the opposing traffic turning left. Without a good light, invariably they will turn directly in front of a bicycle going straight across, but if the cyclist has a light they will invariably yield the right of way.

The cross street is six lanes, plus two left turn lanes, plus two bicycle lanes, plus a median. So a poor light is unlikely to get the vehicles' on the other side's attention. It's especially necessary to have a good light if you plan your approach as the light is turning green so you don't have to stop pr slow down.

Those that rail against proper bicycle lighting have the mindset that it's not necessary because the cyclists can instead take evasive action, and constantly be yielding to vehicles that can't see them even when the cyclist has the right-of-way.

If we are going to advocate for "transportational cycling" then we should be exerting our rights to the road, but if vehicles aren't aware of our presence that's hard to do, and it's getting harder with so much distracted driving.

I'm glad that the Odense study proved the value of daytime flashing lights. It's a good step forward in convincing those that oppose cyclists making themselves visible that in fact conspicuousness is a good idea. Of course those that oppose conspicuousness will try to find ways to attack the study, just as they try to attack helmet studies.

Too bad the bank isn't open today. I have a stack of checks from the manufacturers of good bicycle lights that I have to deposit.
  #210  
Old March 19th 17, 04:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,032
Default More About Lights

On 3/18/2017 2:51 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:12:02 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/18/2017 2:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Thing is, nobody's demonstrated any need for so much stationary "be
seen" light, beyond the usual "well, it _could_ happen" safety inflation
mentality.

True, but you're thinking like engineering, not marketing.


I do have too strong of a tendency to do that.

See http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-12-18

That has a place of honor on our refrigerator door.

--
- Frank Krygowski


Many many years ago I read an article and also books on bicycling that stated thatthe two most dangerous p;aces to ride a bicycle was #1 a parking lot and #2 an intersection. So, you guys are saying that having a bright standlight right where a lot of bicycling accidents happen (at an intersection) is a bad thing? I don't know about you but I like to know that a driver coming towards me at night whilst I'm stopped at an intersection can at least see my bicycle light.
YMMV Why not paint your bike flat black and wear flat black clothing or camouflage clothing if being visible to other road users is of so little consequence even when you're stopped and they are moving?

Cheers


*ahem* I wear mostly black on both of my black bicycles. So
far so good...

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dynamo Lights viz Battery Lights in snow qand slush? Sir Ridesalot Techniques 6 March 4th 15 11:36 PM
No lights, dark clothing, no reflectives, no street lights. Mrcheerful UK 153 November 4th 14 10:19 AM
Maybe it's safer to run red lights than to wait for green lights. SMS General 16 September 24th 08 09:51 PM
Light Theft (solutions — small pocket lights, or heavy duty well secured lights?) David Johnson UK 24 August 29th 07 02:32 PM
Break lights turn lights and handle bar lights Truepurple Techniques 30 November 17th 03 05:02 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.