Interesting research article, even if the experiments were somewhat simplified.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457523004657
In conclusion, flashing rear cycle lights, regardless of reactive technology, enhanced drivers’ perception of a cyclist ahead, notably in terms of their judgements of distance to that cyclist.
If you think German pedestrian crossings are good, wait until you see them in Barcelona!
Funny you should mention Germany. I was there last week and even though most of the pedestrian crossings don't have a button, I rarely had to wait more than a minute for the green man, even crossing busy 6-lane roads. Usually I was waiting 20-30 seconds. Frequently the pedestrian crossing was green even when there were no pedestrians around. Unlike here, the pedestrian lights will go green when it's not possible for vehicles to come through.
If Germans had to put up with the crappy pedestrian crossings that we have, they might be a little less law-abiding.
EDIT: btw, flashing lights on your person are permitted when cycling in Germany.
Trek Ion 200 RT / Flare RT Light Set - Mantel
The dog's.
Agree they draw attention sooner.
The distance question is based on frequency of flashing, the higher the more difficult, hence strobe speed is a no no. For divilment I wondered whether there was regulation for frequency of an indicator light on a car. Indeed there is, 60 -120 flashes per minute, so the same setting for a bike light shouldn't bother anyone nor affect their distance judgement.
Apart from that, we're comparing apples and oranges in terms of attitude and let's face it standards of road use by both drivers and cyclists between us and the continent.
The Germans banning flashing lights really doesn't bear comparison with the situation here, to begin with no German would dare cross a road with a red man.
Yeah, who knows. I just know that lighting standards are an absolute mess on the roads. But I don't agree with the previous poster who suggested that there's general non-compliance by cyclists (I've actually noticed an improvement in the number cycling with lights now). Aside from no-lights (which is sometimes just down to lack of care and battery dying), my bugbears are (a) lights that barely function (in the past typically ones where the batter was almost dead), (b) lights obscured by backpacks, luggage and (c) lights that blind me - these IMHO are mostly the high powered front lights… the rear strobe lights don't so much blind me as bring on a headache!
I suppose, as a cyclist, it comes down to how you would like to see cyclists illuminated on a dark night in an ideal world. Just spit balling really.
Welcome to the cycling form Norrie.
Oh no. Lights are king. Everyone should have to have a minimum light level (don't want them stolen? Clip them off). There is no excuse for it anymore in the days of white/red LED units
High Viz has to be in addition to lighting, not in place of it. I personally like it as an extra as you get to see the outline of the person too
it may not be the case that there's research underpinning it. germans often like rules for the sake of rules.
i was just reading that in germany, it's mandatory for children under 8 to ride on the footpath - they're not legally allowed cycle on the road.
Inevitably the Gardai who are massively under resourced won't enforce it effectively in the same way that they don't enforce mandatory tyre treat depth requirements etc. on cars effectively. But I don't think that's something that should torpedo the idea of looking at regularising road bike lighting. I'd have to check with Germans as to how effective their legislation is - obviously there's nothing to stop German's buying non-compliant lights from online marketplaces, but I think if it becomes an accepted norm, the number of people actively looking to bypass it diminishes with time.
enforceable specific legislation around lights? for the gardai to ignore?
how would you police the sale of the lights as well as the use?
I don't want to go down that road of talking about reflective clothing (I appreciate the point you were making, just don't want to drag things off topic)… but for me it still all comes back to a lack of enforceable legislation around lights. I'm not saying it's easy to achieve (anyone can say they had lights, but they were stolen when they locked their bike up… pretty hard to steal a car's light bulbs!), but if there were clear, unequivocal guidelines around minimum (Lux/ Lumen) during certain times of day, a German style law regarding beams, and clarification around use of flashing lights, at least then things would be universal. We'd all get used to a certain type of light & light out put and I think we'd adapt pretty quickly to being able to judge distance and whether it's a cyclist or not.
I've often been tempted to stop on the N11 and flag down a cyclist just to ask them about their rear lights/ front lights because they've been so good. I can pick them out from about a kilometre away and despite their strength, they don't blind me. Plenty of times I'll assume they're a motorcyclist, the lights are that good. Like you, I've no idea what I look like on the bike in the dark… I'd need to give my bike to someone and ask them to spin down the road and back in the dark.
If we had solid guidelines (and I'm not talking about an article, however informative and well researched, on a cycling website) around lighting, I think it would resolve a lot of issues around hi-viz. As long as you were following the lighting guidelines then it would just be a personal choice as to whether you wanted to double up on lights, wear hi viz etc.
Until then I'll probably continue with low output ancillary front & rear flashing lights on the urban/ suburban sections of my commutes.
Obviously anecdotal and can't see what I'm like when cycling but I always find that flashing lights draw attention better than static BUT they're useless for judging distance with.
Reflecting clothing is better, for me, at giving something to judge distance and motion but it's the light which gives an independent indicator of a cyclist.
We should take the same approach with drivers presumably? The one or two cars I see on every winter commute with no back lights because the idiot behind the wheel doesn't know how their DRLs work should be seized and crushed. The many drivers driving with one or two broken brake lights, one dodgy headlight, one rear cluster not working should all have their cars seized and crushed too?
To @GreeBo's valid points, you would think though that there must be a very good, peer reviewed/ evidence based reason why strobe lighting is no permitted in Germany. The less distractions the better, in many ways. I know when driving in traffic and want to take a left turn at a junction, into a slip road for example, your brain needs to process a lot of information quickly while still controlling a moving car. Sometimes when I look in my wing mirrors I find that flashing lights make the process a lot more difficult.
If the RSA and Govt. actually took road safety seriously they'd be commissioning proper studies to come up with a universal set of laws that would actually make navigating the roads safer for both cyclists, drivers and pedestrians, and ones which could be and would be enforced.
a flashing/strobe front light when approaching from behind can be very blinding to drivers, especially when viewed through mirrors.
Its also harder to determine how far away the bike is, since the brightness of such lights can vary hugely. Add in some rain and wet mirrors and you end up with a mess.
I have often thought that bikes should have different colours than cars, to immediately distinguish them from vehicles. Bikes dont act like vehicles, so the sooner you can make other drivers aware that the thing they see is not another vehicle the better. Spotting a blue light (for example) in your mirrors would immediately tell a driver that its a bike, that it will not be in the driving lane but in the cycle lane and that they need to be aware when turning left.
Its probably less important for the rear light, but I wouldnt have an issue with having a distinct rear colour also
I run solid white on the front and rear has one solid red and one flashing red a foot or so above it under the saddle.
I actually almost stop when I see one single light coming towards me anyway so dont worry. In the country you need to drive carefully. I always give cyclist space and overtake into the opposite lane when clear (on bigger roads). I am cyclist myself.
To be honest, as a cyclist, I'd prefer the space that you are giving the car, rather than whatever space it is you think a cyclist needs.
as a motorist (& occasional cyclist) I would far prefer to see a flashing light. I am mostly in rural areas so if I see one bright steady light coming towards me I don't know whether its a car with one defective light (therefore needing to create more space in good time to pass each other) or a cyclist. Likewise when I am coming up behind a light on my side of the road, it could be a cyclist, a car or a trailor being pulled by a car/tractor.
Rural roads are narrow, often have very poor demarcation and bad verges with deep ditches. Flashing lighting is the best. It almost always means a cyclist.
Agree with many here on cyclists in black clothing with absolutely no lights at all. Its terrifying when you come right up behind one at the last minute on an unlit road.
I’m only affected at night/ low light. During daylight your eye might notice the flash but doesn’t seem to fix on it. It’s diffused by all the other light / sights etc. (can you tell I’m not ‘sciencey’!?).
As an aside, I’ve noticed a lot more cars on recent years with dodgy lights/ beams… they look like they’ve full headlights on and it’s very distracting, again especially on country roads. Not sure if it’s to do with the new led style bulbs or just badly aligned beams. But it’s struck me as odd given that it seems to affect newish cars as much as those tha would have been through an NCT. I know I failed my last NCT due to a misaligned beam - it’d had its bulb changed in Halfords.
I think that also used to be one of the arguments against flashing rear lights was that it was harder to judge distance (not sure if there was any science behind it).
Would two rear lights be more effective: one flashing and one steady? The relative change in distance between the two lights as the driver approaches would help them gauge their distance to the bike.
What is your opinion on flashing Vs steady? Because that is what the thread is about and your post has started to derail a thread which to this point has been an interesting discussion.
Or in short, let's drop the 'cyclists don't use lights' talk (and that's with my mod hat on)
where's Here?
Again, where did you get the statistic that 75% of cyclists don't use lights?
Perhaps Dublin is better because that simply isn't the case here. And I don't understand why any cyclist wouldn't have lights by the way - I cycle occasionally myself and I'm more than conscious that if a car hits me when I'm on a bike, there is only going to be one winner and one loser.
On my regular commute routes in Dublin, most people cycling have some sort of lighting system, I think. Though probably not a majority of people going to secondary school.
99% of the cyclists i see on a daily basis have lights, wear hi-viz and helmets.
Where did you get your stats from?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/196803dfa0698243a1e4321ab9efd141.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
