Gorgeous video shows last weekend's Dunwich Dynamo - from the air

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

problem with modern/latest flashing rear lights is that they flash too quickly and are quickly irritating/distracting due to the amount of retina scorching lumens some of them unecessarily put out.

One of the best rear lights I've ever owned was a Knightlight, was maybe rated at .25 watt but it had a big arse and well constructed lens plus a built in reflector directly below it as part of the same lens. It had fast flash, steady and slow flash. the slow flash I thought was more than acceptable and yet you could easily see the light from a mile away on a straight road.

Far too many lights are overkill, particularly in urban enviroments, those using lighthouses whether on the street or on segregated/tow paths etc seriously need to be told to dim them down and put them on steady beam, it's almost worse than no light at all IMHO.

As for long lasting front lights, if one bothers to do some research one can find more than adequate front lights that will light your way in complete darkness for 8 hours on the back of 4xAA batteries and don't cost the earth.

personally I use a Sigma Pava, low lasts for an age and is good up to 17/18mph in the dicky dark, full beam works (for me at least) to 30+mph on downhill stretches that are really bumpy but where I know the lane. i don't find taking 4xAA batteries with me a chore and swapping them out takes but a few seconds.

Agree. There should be a lumen limit. It's getting idiotic. I'm often blinded by people who think they're being safe but are actually causing more of an issue.

pl6125 wrote:

Agree. There should be a lumen limit. It's getting idiotic. I'm often blinded by people who think they're being safe but are actually causing more of an issue.

I find it's more about the angle of the light, beam distribution and pattern.

Learning all of the above - that you can't just stick any strong light on your bike - takes some time. Which means, maybe we should be looking at the point of sales rather than expecting all cyclists to learn and know this stuff? Or education?

dottigirl wrote:

pl6125 wrote:

Agree. There should be a lumen limit. It's getting idiotic. I'm often blinded by people who think they're being safe but are actually causing more of an issue.

I find it's more about the angle of the light, beam distribution and pattern.

Learning all of the above - that you can't just stick any strong light on your bike - takes some time. Which means, maybe we should be looking at the point of sales rather than expecting all cyclists to learn and know this stuff? Or education?

Isn't it just plain common sense? But probably your suggestions are better in the absence of that.

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

I guess the emergency services have been getting it wrong all this time .....

mike the bike wrote:

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

 

I guess the emergency services have been getting it wrong all this time .....

Do they claim that it makes them more visible or is it that the flashing lights were (before cyclists started using them) an unambiguous symbol that there was an emergency?

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

Lighthouses ?

Awavey wrote:

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

Lighthouses ?

The flashing pattern is to encode some basic information about which lighthouse it is.

Ush wrote:

Awavey wrote:

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

Lighthouses ?

The flashing pattern is to encode some basic information about which lighthouse it is.

Car indicators?  

To be honest I think you are just being obtuse, I'm not sure what your point is.  I ride with flashing lights, day and night.   If you can stop drivers texting or checking facebook while driving I might consider stopping using them.  

Awavey wrote:

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

Lighthouses ?

Aircraft.

pl6125 wrote:

Awavey wrote:

Ush wrote:

dottigirl wrote:

Flashing front lights are to be seen. They're usually more noticeable than steady lights.

I often see this asserted but haven't seen much evidence for it.

Lighthouses ?

Aircraft.

Aircraft have both static and flashing lights. It is not clear at all that the flashing makes them more visible. This answer[1] suggests that, similar to lighthouses, identification information may be part of the reason. This, poorly-sourced, wikipedia article on the detection of structures from aircraft[2] asserts that white flashing lights are not good because they blend with urban background "noise".

1. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/9728
2. " However, it has been recommended that flashing white strobes should not be used in densely populated areas; the lights usually merge with background lighting at nighttime, making it difficult for pilots to spot them and thereby aggravating the hazard" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_warning_lights

Ush wrote:

Aircraft have both static and flashing lights. It is not clear at all that the flashing makes them more visible.

I've been a pilot for just over 30 years, and am now an instructor. I can assure you, it's entirely clear.

guyrwood wrote:

Nice video but I do find flashing front lights pointless and extremely irritating.

Its rediculous isnt it, your in a huge group of riders why do you need a flashing light.  You can even see the rider on the front with the slow flashing light is way less visible than any of the riders behind.