high vis on the roads

[nailsaslegs]

There is a push currently within Cycling Australia that all riders will need to wear a red light at the rear whilst out on the road training, commuting or racing. For cyclists that race, the weight difference is only minimal. It has already been put in place in other states and looks to go ahead in Tassie.

For one I think its a great idea with winter upon and 1 meter matters currently in the news, and with so many incidents on the road in the last few months involving cyclists and vehicles it is a great initiative.

If your riding to and from work or out on the bike track for a casual ride, or have a bunch ride I would encourage you to purchase and have a working rear light at all times.

[reefer]

Only 1 light....
I am a xmas tree

[queequeg]

I am looking to replace my ageing LumiSash with a Halo Belt X

http://www.halobelt.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ColinOldnCranky]

The whole alpha male "mine is bigger than yours" thing seems to have given a zillion super-intense front lights, rear lights with adequate brightness outside of a narrow rear-ward beam are hard to come by.

That makes it a lot more difficult than it should be to get a decent rear light.

A rider that chooses to ride the roads without rear flashing light is a fool.

[*Daisy*]

Really
Is that next on the radar? Cycling Australia asking/telling riders to wear a red light at the rear ... hmmm ...
Its not about weight its about dictating rules that suit some not all. In all these matters common sense is the key ... If and when its dark I fully support lights on but during the day ... I must ask ... Will a light matter?
There have been numerous articles written about visibility of cyclists, studies have been recorded of cyclists wearing reflective vests, lights on, lights off, dark clothing or light clothing ... At the end of the day its driver education that cyclists are about, and addressing driver attitude and attention.
I fully disagree with this proposal and believe we need to review many other issues well before we HIT THE CYCLIST !

[ColinOldnCranky]

Really
Is that next on the radar? Cycling Australia asking/telling riders to wear a red light at the rear ... hmmm ...
Its not about weight its about dictating rules that suit some not all. In all these matters common sense is the key ... If and when its dark I fully support lights on but during the day ... I must ask ... Will a light matter?
There have been numerous articles written about visibility of cyclists, studies have been recorded of cyclists wearing reflective vests, lights on, lights off, dark clothing or light clothing ... At the end of the day its driver education that cyclists are about, and addressing driver attitude and attention.
I fully disagree with this proposal and believe we need to review many other issues well before we HIT THE CYCLIST !

First - on hmmmm, first point - we comply with lots of other things that we at told to do and find it acceptable. Driving a car for example.

On your other point - education - It's not an either/or. On education Yes. On visibility Yes. Just as it is on sober when driving Yes. Stopping at red lights Yes. Turning our our headlights at night Yes. Having functioning brakes on the car Yes.

Dealing with one issue does not require us to, nor is it desirable to ignore all other issues. To pretend it is one or the other is a straw man. Clear?

[nailsaslegs]

Really
Is that next on the radar? Cycling Australia asking/telling riders to wear a red light at the rear ... hmmm

New policy being endorsed by Cycling Australia and Cycling Victoria and being looked at by other states is the required a solid red rear light to be used in all open road events. The safety of cyclists is paramount.

Sunday was a great example with how foggy it was North of the Tasman Bridge that a rear red light would be seen by a motorist, without a rear light a motorists would not have been able to see a cyclists until the last moment as visibility was down to around 25metres.

Being that we ride at dark, day, amber, mornings, fog, dusk and snow being able to be seen is paramount I would think. I support having a red rear light at all times as its about being seen at all times not just at night time. Using a read light draws attention to us as cyclists and therefore it may decrease the number of incidents with motorists vs cyclists out on the road. it wouldn't surprise me that the cycling increase companies, Velosure, etc make it mandatory as well.

[rangersac]

I agree that given it's winter, and particularly for us Taswegians it's pretty sensible to run a rear light given ambient conditions most of the time (which I do). However I intensely dislike the attitude that such a thing should be mandatory, as what is the need for a red light in the middle of a sunny day in summer for example? Somehow this will make cyclists immediately more visible to car drivers? Conservatively speaking a cyclist on the road takes up 1.5-2 cubic meters of space, which to put it bluntly is a damned large object for a driver to somehow not notice, yet I've had my share of SMIDSYS despite this fact, and I run three rear lights and two front! Yes, I agree with the argument that it's in your personal interest to do all you can to mitigate the unexpected, and I suspect that most regular cyclists already do this. However a mandatory ruling that one MUST run a red light is just another part of the drip feed of measures that turn jumping on your bike to run up to the shops for your average Joe, into a logistical exercise that prevents them for doing so and further reinforces the idea that cycling is a dangerous pastime. Result - society's loss, all for the net benefit of not having to properly educate drivers.

[AndyRevill]

Having also been cleaned up from behind on a bright sunny day (with no rear light) and fortunately coming away with very little damage despite trashing the windscreen, the first thing I did when I got the new bike was to purchase a set of very bright Dinottes (front and rear). I now have both these on flash mode whenever I ride and I've definitely noticed fewer "incidents" and it seems to me I get given much more room when cars pass me from behind. All subjective I know but I'm convinced it's well worth the expense (i might not be quite so lucky if there was a next time).
The thing is, if you're going to run a rear light in the day it has to be bright - I see a lot of people with lights which might be OK at night but they don't really become apparent during the day until you're quite close.

Andy

[InTheWoods]

Having also been cleaned up from behind on a bright sunny day (with no rear light) and fortunately coming away with very little damage despite trashing the windscreen, the first thing I did when I got the new bike was to purchase a set of very bright Dinottes (front and rear). I now have both these on flash mode whenever I ride and I've definitely noticed fewer "incidents" and it seems to me I get given much more room when cars pass me from behind. All subjective I know but I'm convinced it's well worth the expense (i might not be quite so lucky if there was a next time).
The thing is, if you're going to run a rear light in the day it has to be bright - I see a lot of people with lights which might be OK at night but they don't really become apparent during the day until you're quite close.

Andy

Agree that daytime lights are good, but have to be powerful. A rear light that has more than an hour or three's battery life is in general going to be way too dull.

Short of the dinoittes, this has to be one of the best rear red daytime lights: http://www.zebralight.com/H502r-Red-AA- ... p_124.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

About 2 hours battery life in blinking mode. At night time it is best used in solid Medium2 mode (in combination with a rear blinky), which is 12 hours battery life, to give you an idea of the different requirements between night and day.

[nailsaslegs]

Open Racing in Vic now requires you to race with a red light. Having raced in Vic in the highlands I can understand why.

The Cycling Victoria Board and Technical Commission have endorsed a new policy which will require a solid red rear light to be used in all open road events sanctioned by Cycling Victoria.

To make it law for all cyclists it would need to go through the Govt and enforced by the Police. I'm not opposed to this at all. As I see it as cyclists we need to mitigate any potential issues that may arise from legal circumstances as the Courts throughout Australia are rarely backing cyclists. its in our own bests interests for all cyclists, groups, and Clubs to be uniform so that we can be as safe as possible whilst out on the road, training racing or in a group ride.

[rangersac]

As I see it as cyclists we need to mitigate any potential issues that may arise from legal circumstances as the Courts throughout Australia are rarely backing cyclists. its in our own bests interests for all cyclists, groups, and Clubs to be uniform so that we can be as safe as possible whilst out on the road, training racing or in a group ride.

Tasmanian Road Rules:

259. Riding at night
The rider of a bicycle must not ride at night, or in hazardous weather conditions causing reduced visibility, unless the bicycle, or the rider, displays –

(a) a flashing or steady white light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the front of the bicycle; and

(b) a flashing or steady red light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from the rear of the bicycle; and

(c) a red reflector that is clearly visible for at least 50 metres from the rear of the bicycle when light is projected onto it by a vehicle’s headlight on low-beam.

If it isn't night or the weather conditions aren't hazardous, there is no legal excuse for a driver to claim that they couldn't see a cyclist in a hit from behind scenario. Furthermore I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it's in the best interest of all cyclists to be uniform in their approach to riding. What is good practice for racing in the Vic highlands is light years away from a ten minute ride to the shops on the old beater MTB. Far too much of the onus on bicycle safety is placed on the cyclist, keep laying down the must have requirements for riders and it becomes a further alienation exercise for all but the enthusiasts, and reinforces the perception that only the serious lycra warriors take to the road.

[nailsaslegs]

[Far too much of the onus on bicycle safety is placed on the cyclist, .

Here I think your wrong, it is upon you for be as safe as possible. Cars are made of metal. Car wins every time. Whatever the circumstances the driver is always going to come off better than a cyclist so its up to us to be as safe as possible. As a member of CA, if CA or CT decided to make it mandatory I wouldn't have an issue from a safety perspective, and insurance perspective.

[rangersac]

Here I think your wrong, it is upon you for be as safe as possible.

So you don't think legislation, driver education and enforcement have any role in making cycling safer? I would regard all of these as being critical to cycle safety, and beyond the control of the individual rider. Sure, a car wins when it hits you, but show me the study where having a rear light operating in the middle of the day reduces the number of collisions before you decide that one is mandatory. It's the MHL all over again.

As a member of CA, if CA or CT decided to make it mandatory I wouldn't have an issue from a safety perspective, and insurance perspective.

CA and CT are the principal federal/state cycling bodies for competitive cycling. Competitive cycling events are widely acknowledged as being riskier than day to day riding, e.g. frame warranties are void, most general insurance policies won't cover you etc. It's drawing a long bow to say the least to say that what CA/CT decide is necessary in terms of safety is applicable to the world outside competitive cycling.

[toofat]

[quote="ColinOldnCranky"

A rider that chooses to ride the roads without rear flashing light is a fool.[/quote]

not always,
a flashing red light immediately says to motorist behind,
bicycle, you can squeeze past,you wont come off second best if it goes wrong,

a non flashing bright red light on an unlit road says,
could be with car or truck with right rear bulb broken, could be motorbike, not moving fast could even be stopped
change lanes or slow right down and pass carefully

just my impressions from going up the unlit Welshpool road with both types of rear light

[nailsaslegs]

So you don't think legislation, driver education and enforcement have any role in making cycling safer? .

cyclist and driver education is paramount however we as cyclists need to reinforce good and safe behaviors on the roads. We need to make ourselves as visible to traffic as possible.

[ColinOldnCranky]

[quote="ColinOldnCranky"

A rider that chooses to ride the roads without rear flashing light is a fool.

not always,
a flashing red light immediately says to motorist behind,
bicycle, you can squeeze past,you wont come off second best if it goes wrong,

a non flashing bright red light on an unlit road says,
could be with car or truck with right rear bulb broken, could be motorbike, not moving fast could even be stopped
change lanes or slow right down and pass carefully

just my impressions from going up the unlit Welshpool road with both types of rear light[/quote]
I think we can take it a bit further. Taking a lead from that ad where a cyclist hits a roled down picture of a tunnel, perhaps we can develop the technology to project an image behind us of a grat big pan-technicon 22 wheeler, complete with hazardous chemicals signage.

[rangersac]

cyclist and driver education is paramount however we as cyclists need to reinforce good and safe behaviors on the roads. We need to make ourselves as visible to traffic as possible.

I totally agree with you in terms of cyclists reinforcing good behaviour. However what I dislike is the notion that the onus is entirely on the cyclist to make themselves outstandingly visible to drivers, and if they don't it becomes an acceptable excuse for a hit from the rear situation. If a driver can't see a cyclist on a road, in broad daylight without the aid of a rear light then frankly I have zero faith in their ability to drive competently.

[nailsaslegs]

The issue is, drivers have hit cyclists from behind and they haven't been prosecuted/found guilty of negligent or culpable driving. If we had a rear light on, it then puts more pressure on the defense of the driver.

[master6]

The thread topic "high viz on the roads" has scope for including wearing apparel.

Many cyclists wear gear that is dark, or contains so many areas of small varying colours (often advertising) that it verges on camoflage.

Jerseys of one plain colour are more easily seen.

Knicks are often presenting a greater visual area than a jersey, when viewed from behind. Is black the best colour for knicks from a safety perspective? I think not.

I'm not detracting from comments in favour of tail lights; I use a bright flasher in daylight, however I think that we need to go beyond lights, as you need everything going for you out on the roads.

[master6]

http://bikinginla.com/2013/03/24/guest- ... -or-night/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


An interesting light comparison