Cycling with Lights

[Ange]

Sometimes a cyclist can be wearing hi viz and have all the required flashing and non flashing lights and still get knocked off their bike by motorists.

 

Ask my mum - she's still suffering the consequences of one driver's inattention several years ago.

[John Holden]

Sometimes a cyclist can be wearing hi viz and have all the required flashing and non flashing lights and still get knocked off their bike by motorists.

 

Ask my mum - she's still suffering the consequences of one driver's inattention several years ago.

 

Yes, sometimes I think the lack of all those things gives you an advantage - it makes you less of a target!

[Timleech]

But an increasing number of motorists seem to believe that an amber light means 'hurry, before it changes'.

This from the point of view of a motorist who often gets overtaken when stopped at a red light, and witnesses the frantic braking action of traffic crossing the other way who with revving engine drive off as fast as the can when thier amber light comes on. But for the grace of God the twain rarely meet.

 

As for cycling without lights In my experience it has been an offence for a very long time. When I was 12 (58 years ago) I was stopped by the police and made to walk my bike home. They visited my mother the next day and advised her there would be a fine if I offended again. A similar thing happened to me for cycling on the pavement. All this at a time when there were only four car owners in our street!

Things are so different now. Traffic is so much heavier. I think in an after dark accident between cyclist and motor vehicle that if the bike had no lights the law would be very much more biased in favour of the motorist than otherwise.

 

My father was summonsed for riding without lights during or just after WWII.

 

Tim

[ditchcrawler]

That surprises me! My experience is more in line with Radiomariner's where drivers see an amber light as an instruction to go faster and generally have a total disregard for stop lines. The occasional cyclist who does jump a red light tends to do so slowly and carefully.

I was referring to the ones who ignore the red light, not jump it. Think two rows of traffic stopped for pedestrian crossing and bike just passes everything and goes straight through, or at the cross roads just comes along the left hand side and turns right, sod anyone trying to cross.

I agree lots of cars jump lights, crossing on amber etc. but not completely ignoring reds as if they didn't exist.

[grahoom]

I was referring to the ones who ignore the red light, not jump it. Think two rows of traffic stopped for pedestrian crossing and bike just passes everything and goes straight through, or at the cross roads just comes along the left hand side and turns right, sod anyone trying to cross.

I agree lots of cars jump lights, crossing on amber etc. but not completely ignoring reds as if they didn't exist.

 

read this article recently - (this morning actually) -

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/may/14/cycling-red-light-jumping-iam-survey

 

interesting quote from sustran

 

Of pedestrians injured in London in a collision caused by red light jumping only 4% involve cyclists, whereas 71% occur when a car driver jumps a red light and 13% when a motorcyclist does. As an organisation representing those two road user groups, CTC suggests IAM ought to call for more road traffic policing to enforce traffic laws, rather than highlighting red light jumping by cyclists.

 

An idiot is an idiot doesn't matter if they travel on 1,2,three or four wheels, they still remain an idiot.

Edited February 12, 2013 by grahoom

[Mac of Cygnet]

My father was summonsed for riding without lights during or just after WWII.

 

Tim

 

And mine was ditto about 1932! He was fined three shillings and sixpence. What would that be now?

[Higgs]

And mine was ditto about 1932! He was fined three shillings and sixpence. What would that be now?

 

I think about seventeen and a half pence.

 

20 shillings to the old pound. 1s = 5% or 5p today.

 

But, relative value - poss 100 of pounds. ??

Edited February 12, 2013 by Higgs

[Jerra]

And mine was ditto about 1932! He was fined three shillings and sixpence. What would that be now?

 

17 1/2p (seventeen and a half pence)

 

I think about seventeen and a half pence.

 

20 shillings to the old pound. 1s = 5% or 5p today.

 

But, relative value - poss 100 of pounds. ??

 

More like £25.50

 

Average yearly wage 1932 (actually that might be salary so perhaps a little on the high side)

A weeks wage would be roughly £3.61 (approx £3 12/6 in old money)

So the fine was about 1/20 of the wage

Current average yearly earnings in the region of £26500

Weekly will be in the region of £510

So 1/20 would be about £25.50

[Higgs]

So 1/20 would be about £25.50

 

Close enough.

[KevMc]

read this article recently - (this morning actually) -

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/may/14/cycling-red-light-jumping-iam-survey

 

interesting quote from sustran

 

 

 

An idiot is an idiot doesn't matter if they travel on 1,2,three or four wheels, they still remain an idiot.

Sorry don't know how to embed the quote from sustrans... but since the Guardian article was about lies damned lies etc, I just wonder what percentage of road users are cyclists, motorists and motorcyclists as that would help to put their statistics into perspective, does anyone have figures to hand?

[Higgs]

Sorry don't know how to embed the quote from sustrans... but since the Guardian article was about lies damned lies etc, I just wonder what percentage of road users are cyclists, motorists and motorcyclists as that would help to put their statistics into perspective, does anyone have figures to hand?

 

It probably all adds up to the fact that you'd expect more overall hit percentage by the largest group of road users and fewer by the lowest number of road users .

 

The hit rate by each road user group as a percentage of their group numbers is probably equal. Or, it may be really high for cycles. ??

[furnessvale]

I was referring to the ones who ignore the red light, not jump it. Think two rows of traffic stopped for pedestrian crossing and bike just passes everything and goes straight through, or at the cross roads just comes along the left hand side and turns right, sod anyone trying to cross.

 

 

About a month ago a lycra lout nearly cleared up me and the dog while we were on a pedestrian crossing with a clear green man showing. He swerved round me calling me a prat!

 

I invited him to stop and discuss the situation but he declined.

 

When I go out in the car I invariably see at least one cyclist jumping a red light. To see a car doing the same thing is a noteworthy occurrence and I see far more cars on the road than cycles.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Higgs]

About a month ago a lycra lout nearly cleared up me and the dog while we were on a pedestrian crossing with a clear green man showing. He swerved round me calling me a prat!

 

I invited him to stop and discuss the situation but he declined.

 

When I go out in the car I invariably see at least one cyclist jumping a red light. To see a car doing the same thing is a noteworthy occurrence and I see far more cars on the road than cycles.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Give um an inch and they'll take a mile. Happens with cyclists and bankers.

 

It would be nice to think that people could live without the police and laws. But, time and time again, relaxation of moderating forces give rise to chaotic and disruptive activities.

 

Little better than anarchy.

[mayalld]

Flashing front lights are more likely to been seen through wing mirrors. Cars are pretty rubbish at leaving space for cyclists near the curb.

 

Interesting pair of comments there.

 

It seems to be a particular hobby horse of the lycra clad hordes to claim that not only must drivers give them a wide berth when passing (which they should), but fondly imagine that there is a permanent cycle lane that exists along the nearside of every road, which should be kept clear so that they can whiz up the inside of standing traffic.

[twbm]

It's been an offence not to have lights on a bike after dark for donkeys years. This looks like an extension of the Vehicle Defect Rectification Scheme that has been in use for some time for things like bald tyres. Few police officers will have thought it good use of their time to put together a thick prosecution file for such an offence, but might be minded to issue a ticket. Note to those without a mention in a voters register: police will want an address to follow up with should the stamped ticket not appear back in their in tray.

[Higgs]

Interesting pair of comments there.

 

It seems to be a particular hobby horse of the lycra clad hordes to claim that not only must drivers give them a wide berth when passing (which they should), but fondly imagine that there is a permanent cycle lane that exists along the nearside of every road, which should be kept clear so that they can whiz up the inside of standing traffic.

 

It is really dodgy riding in the centre, between two lines of traffic; more so at night. With the best will in the world, the gutter is no place for most cycling either. Cyclists have to keep far enough away from the curb, but not so far out that traffic cannot pass.

 

Logic would tell me a space is required for cycling, and that place I find is 18" to 2' away from the curb for most riding. I do not whizz or wear lycra. I will not try and ride between the curb and a car pulling away, will stay behind, but will take right over the car behind me.

 

The time when I appreciate the gap most, is when traffic is at a standstill. Get over, you clots, I can use the road and you can't.

Edited February 12, 2013 by Higgs

[twbm]

That surprises me! My experience is more in line with Radiomariner's where drivers see an amber light as an instruction to go faster and generally have a total disregard for stop lines. The occasional cyclist who does jump a red light tends to do so slowly and carefully.

 

Slowly and carefully doesn't make it legal, and my experience in London is the complete opposite.

[KevMc]

The time when I appreciate the gap most, is when traffic is at a standstill. Get over, you clots, I can use the road and you can't.

If there isn't a cycle lane then surely cyclists are ruled by the same rules as everyone else and you should pass on the right

[Dekazer]

I am a cyclist, motorcyclist, driver, boater and pedestrian.

 

Whichever mode of transport I use, I see examples of good and bad behaviour in others. I try to behave in a way that others would like to see, and I try to model the behaviour I would like to see in others. That's all I can do.

 

To make my regular cycle ride commute (8 miles each way, suburban London) more pleasant I try to thank people who show me consideration. People who give me good clearance, people who move over so I can pass, people who give way to me etc. Much nicer than getting hung up on the behaviour of pillocks.

 

The online vitriol posted about bad road users worries me, as I think it makes a testing situation worse, and I can't help but worry that people who are bad tempered online take that bad temper onto the road and are more likely to behave angrily. Chill people

 

If there isn't a cycle lane then surely cyclists are ruled by the same rules as everyone else and you should pass on the right

 

I don't have my Highway Code to hand, and a quick Google doesn't show up much, but this article suggests that cyclists can pass on either side: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2011/apr/04/cyclists-pass-traffic

[Higgs]

If there isn't a cycle lane then surely cyclists are ruled by the same rules as everyone else and you should pass on the right

 

That's fine in principle. In practice you would be riding between two lanes of traffic, moving at different speeds in different directions, wing mirrors and all.

 

The curb provides the cyclist with an escape if needed.

Edited February 12, 2013 by Higgs

[bizzard]

Spring loaded 2ft long outriggers sticking out on either side of your bike with illuminated carved human hands on the ends clutching a coin will make most cars give you a wide berth.

[Dekazer]

Wow, get a load of this complete numpty: http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/?news_id=30514

 

"A High Court judge accused of racing through a red light at more than double the speed limit has told magistrates they should drop the charge against him.

 

Kuldip Singh QC is said to have sped through the central London junction at 64mph in his 3.2 litre C-Class Mercedes-Benz - a full 1.4 seconds after the lights changed."

 

cntd

[KevMc]

 

I don't have my Highway Code to hand, and a quick Google doesn't show up much, but this article suggests that cyclists can pass on either side: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2011/apr/04/cyclists-pass-traffic

Just peeked at the Highway COde and it is a little ambiguous. Cyclists must comply with the same rules as other road users, but they do allow passing on the left if the queue of traffic on your right is moving slower than you are. IMHO its poorly written and needs to be specific

[Higgs]

but they do allow passing on the left if the queue of traffic on your right is moving slower than you are. IMHO its poorly written and needs to be specific

 

Specifically - 'please bear in mind that sometimes cars are the slowest form of transport and there's someone on your left that will be held up if you insist on hugging the curb'. 'Now, don't be a spoil sport and leave a little space.......thanks awfully'.

[Dekazer]

Just peeked at the Highway COde and it is a little ambiguous. Cyclists must comply with the same rules as other road users, but they do allow passing on the left if the queue of traffic on your right is moving slower than you are. IMHO its poorly written and needs to be specific

 

That's true across a fair few sections IIRC. 1st time I read it was as a child cyclist. I next pored over it as a learner driver. When I learned to ride a motorbike I re-learnt it, and then as a returning cyclist I've revisited it yet again. Every time I learn something new, and every time I'm confused by something else