# Trying to make cyclists more seen



## LucyBoots (13 Apr 2014)

Hey guys,

I'm on a bit of a mission to make the road a safer place for cyclists. My friend Ed and I have both been knocked off from behind, and it sucked. We developed a bike light and have now launched a kickstarter that tries to address the issue. I would love to know if you more serious road cyclists would be interested in something like this, and if not why not?

Briefly, we have developed a wearable, fibre optic rear bike light that helps drivers to judge the distance, width and speed of a cyclist. It consists of a central projective hub and 4 fibre optic arms that connect over your rucksack or back.

If you are intrigued at all, check it out here

Cheers,

Lucy


----------



## mickle (13 Apr 2014)

The bike in the video doesn't have a rear light fitted. Just sayin'.


----------



## matthat (13 Apr 2014)

Sort of like it but think it would work better sown into a rucksack cover (hump)!!


----------



## Roadrider48 (14 Apr 2014)

Not a bad idea. Like the fact you can wear it on your rucksack or on your back.


----------



## ufkacbln (14 Apr 2014)

Doesn't help with the main issues though which are motorists either not looking , or when they do look reacting appropriately


----------



## Easytigers (14 Apr 2014)

It looks really good although I also think it needs an additional product with it sewn into a bike cover. I often need a waterproof cover for my backpack and it would be a faff to fit the cover then fit the lights etc


----------



## summerdays (14 Apr 2014)

I don't wear a ruck sac, and wouldn't bother wearing something that would mean my jacket was held on tight to me, if I was hot and unzipped it or even wanted to take it off.


----------



## snorri (14 Apr 2014)

It's too high up, that's not where people expect to see a rear light.
What do you do with it when not cycling? It takes up a lot of space, awkward to store.
I'm happier with my rear light permanently mounted on the bike, always there when I need it, even if having to travel unexpectedly after nightfall.


----------



## theclaud (14 Apr 2014)

Not for me, thanks. I'm sure it's well meant, but for me it's just another unhelpful contribution to a lighting arms race that cyclists and pedestrians can only lose. As @Cunobelin points out - drivers hitting cyclists from behind is a driver-behaviour issue. The only way to stop it is to hold drivers responsible. More, uglier and more cumbersome lighting for cyclists is onerous and retrogressive. We've reached the zenith of bicycle lighting - we have small, cheap LED lights than clip easily on and off. If you want to make cyclists "more seen", talk to the people behind the wheel who need to do the seeing.


----------



## coffeejo (14 Apr 2014)

*cough* More visible. *cough*

But the answer is greater driver-awareness, coming from both education and more prosecutions and convictions - with more effective sentencing.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (14 Apr 2014)

theclaud said:


> Not for me, thanks. I'm sure it's well meant, but for me it's just another unhelpful contribution to a lighting arms race that cyclists and pedestrians can only lose. As @Cunobelin points out - drivers hitting cyclists from behind is a driver-behaviour issue. The only way to stop it is to hold drivers responsible. More, uglier and more cumbersome lighting for cyclists is onerous and retrogressive. We've reached the zenith of bicycle lighting - we have small, cheap LED lights than clip easily on and off. If you want to make cyclists "more seen", talk to the people behind the wheel who need to do the seeing.


Apart from the ''uglier'' bit - because I don't care about the aesthetics - I agree completely with this.

There's a slight potential issue with the legal lighting requirements. I believe current legislation stipulates a rear mounted light below 1 metre and a reflector. It doesn't seem to have been used much as a driver exoneration tactic in the courts and many tallish cyclists with lights attached to the seatpost are already in contravention. 

Also, a partly full rucksack, which will bulk towards the bottom and a forward-leaning cycling position, will both tend to point the light at the sky. Cyclist and air traffic collisions are not yet a major issue.


----------



## Dogtrousers (14 Apr 2014)

@Cunobelin and @theclaud 's "bigger picture" comments notwithstanding ...

I'm a fan of gadgets and gizmos, and another winky gizmo surely isn't going to do any harm, so I'd consider it ... but ...

My first take on this is that it doesn't look terribly comfortable. From a personal point of view, I rarely ride with a rucksack so I'd be wearing it. I can imagine it being a bit of a faff when I needed to take off/put on my jacket. I can imagine that the resulting pressure points could get a bit sweaty.

I like the side lighting, but I'm not sure whether it would necessarily make me _more_ visible. If my main lights haven't made me visible, then I'm not sure that this would tip the balance. I suppose that it may be sufficiently different/unusual to draw or maintain an inattentive driver's attention - but I could be wrong there, I'm just speculating.

I'd consider buying it, but only because I like new pretty things - I wouldn't do so with any degree of certainty that it would make me any safer/more visible than my existing lighting rear set up (and I'd only consider it as an add-on, not a replacement for, my existing lights). I'd be put off by the potential comfort/practicality issues, and as a result I'd probably decide against.

Another point is - have you done any testing to verify that, as you say, it "helps drivers to judge distance, width and speed of cyclists"? Have you done any road tests to find out how much better distance/speed perception is for this over a baseline of, say, a single blinky red or a single solid red? Or do you know of any published tests in this area? I guess that the psychology of perception is quite a complex area, so how sure are you of your assertions?

There's also the legal aspect to consider. Are you proposing this as a sole light, or as a supplement to existing lights. And if the former, is it legal? (I suspect the answer is probably no).


----------



## Sara_H (14 Apr 2014)

I will admit that I keep a fabric reflective harness type thing in my pannier for use when I find myself in a black outfit at night and have often thought it would be an idea to fit a blinky to it.
But I wouldn't consider this product as its quite bulky to carry when not in use.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (14 Apr 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> There's a slight potential issue with the legal lighting requirements. I believe current legislation stipulates a rear mounted light below 1 metre and a reflector.


 
Close, it's between 350mm and 1500mm from the ground for the rear light and between 250mm and 900mm from the ground for the rear reflector.

GC


----------



## glasgowcyclist (14 Apr 2014)

LucyBoots said:


> I would love to know if you more serious road cyclists would be interested in something like this, and if not why not?


 
It's not for me, thanks. As others have already pointed out, the primary problem isn't that currently available lighting isn't adequate, it's that drivers are not looking properly or are failing to react properly to the presence of a cyclist.

The video shows a cyclist riding at night without an obligatory rear light fixed to the bike. You should avoid giving the impression that this light dispenses with the need for obligatory lighting; errant drivers will seize on any aspect of our failure to be compliant with vehicle lighting laws to transfer blame to the cyclist. (I know you refer to this in your text but it's way down at the bottom and the video is what people will pay attention to.)

Good luck with your venture though.


GC


----------



## shouldbeinbed (14 Apr 2014)

agree with GC, an insurance company & lawyer would have a field day with no lights on the bike.

agree on the into the sky angle too & restriction it places on you zipping/unzipping.

Another point is that I regularly see horse riders round here with exactly this shape and idea of hi-viz & LED's belt and braces 'harness,' this begs a couple of questions:

1. Have you checked you've not infringed someone else's intellectual property/patent idea?

2. In more rural areas this, lower down to the ground could be mistaken by a driver for a more distant horse & rider, leaving the closer cyclist potentially in more trouble as the driver has not processed a nearby bike and won't be expecting that until (hopefully not) too late.


----------



## HLaB (14 Apr 2014)

Whilst the product you have looks good unfortunately no matter how visible you make a cyclist an idiot will always fail to look properly


----------



## ComedyPilot (14 Apr 2014)

I've got a kickstarter campaign going too. 

It's a proximity sensor that detects a vulnerable road user in front. It then detects the vehicle's path and speed. If after a set period of time/distance the vehicles path and speed have not altered to take the vulnerable road user into account, then the vehicle's engine is automatically cut off. 

For 4 years.


----------



## ComedyPilot (14 Apr 2014)

Joking aside, there's nothing more to add than our very own @theclaud has already posted. 

End the thread now.

Light or dark, clear or foggy, there are ZERO excuses for RAMMING any road user from behind - PERIOD.

Make the ACTUAL PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE for RAMMING ANY OTHER road user from BEHIND actually RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for doing it, remove their license to do it, and we may see a marked decrease in the incidents.

Carry on blaming the vulnerable road users for the actions of MUCH BIGGER/HEAVIER/FASTER road users and the roads will NEVER be safe.


----------



## lukasran (14 Apr 2014)

some odd attitudes on here, Im a more serious road cyclist and would snap it up. for the motorists that do drive round with there eyes open, which im guessing is most of the buggers, this would help them see me.


----------



## YahudaMoon (14 Apr 2014)

summerdays said:


> I don't wear a ruck sac, and wouldn't bother wearing something that would mean my jacket was held on tight to me, if I was hot and unzipped it or even wanted to take it off.



Ive solved that problem here

With a strobe effect like a police car


----------



## theclaud (14 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> some odd attitudes on here, *Im a more serious road cyclist *and would snap it up. for the motorists that do drive round with there eyes open, which im guessing is most of the buggers, this would help them see me.



More serious than what?


----------



## ianrauk (14 Apr 2014)

theclaud said:


> More serious than what?




A Bonj?


----------



## theclaud (14 Apr 2014)

ianrauk said:


> A Bonj?


Impossible!


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (14 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> some odd attitudes on here, Im a more serious road cyclist and would snap it up. for the motorists that do drive round with there eyes open, which im guessing is most of the buggers, this would help them see me.


Which leads to an upping of the ante beyond taking reasonable steps to be visible as well as putting the onus on your own back when it should be on the driver's.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (14 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> some odd attitudes on here, ...



I know, it's crazy isn't it - expecting drivers to look where they're going. Pffft.


GC


----------



## lukasran (15 Apr 2014)

you guys keep on trying to change the driving culture of uk from a cycling forum. in the mean time i will go with people who have done something to improve my visibility now.


----------



## theclaud (15 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> *you guys keep on trying to change the driving culture of uk from a cycling forum*. in the mean time i will go with people who have done something to improve my visibility now.



From the roads, actually. There can't be a driving culture unless motor vehicles are allowed to dominate the roads. May I ask where you ride? If it's in London, have you noticed anything?


----------



## shouldbeinbed (15 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> you guys keep on trying to change the driving culture of uk from a cycling forum. in the mean time i will go with people who have done something to improve my visibility now.


what a very judgemental and small minded attitude. How many people on here do you think are cycling campaigners or advocates in their local areas, if not nationally, engaging with policy makers and authorities & seeking to make a positive change on the roads for everyone and not for financial gain by simply adding to the over visibility arms race that only helps to perpetuate the widely held myth that cyclists are the only people with a responsibility for their own safety.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (15 Apr 2014)

Some new European HGV legislation just came in. Along with the statistic that 4000 cyclists are killed every year by HGVs in Europe. Now, why would so many lives have been wasted? Would it be because of cyclists not being visible? Or would it be because HGVs are unable to see well? The fact that there is new legislation, - albeit too little, too slow - coming in suggests that all the evidence suggested that the problem wasn't cyclists, it was HGVs. And, yes, I'm sure many of us signed the petition to our EMPs to support the legislation.

And the legislation didn't get passed by the people lying in their I'm all right Jacuzzis while others drowned.

EDIT: according to the ECF, the fatalities were at 7000 in 2008:
''HGVs make up 3% of the European vehicle fleet and 7% of driven kilometres, yet they are involved in 18% of fatal accidents, costing over 7000 lives across the EU in 2008. This figure rose to 22% for average figures between the years 2008-2010 (i). HGV fatalities involving cyclist are more likely to result in serious injury or death than collisions with other vehicles. Cyclists are often caught in the blind spot of HGVs leading to many right-turn (left in Cyprus, Ireland, Malta and the UK) blind spot crashes. - See more at: http://www.ecf.com/press_release/15...s-be-safer-for-cyclists/#sthash.YbCIMkwb.dpuf''


----------



## shouldbeinbed (15 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> some odd attitudes on here, Im a more serious road cyclist and would snap it up. for the motorists that do drive round with there eyes open, which im guessing is most of the buggers, this would help them see me.


 help them more than what?

bike mounted lights far more likely to be angled correctly than a light on your back when you're being a more serious road cyclist?
bright clothing?
hi-viz strips where it can be clearly seen on your body e.g. Legs regardless of upper body angle and moving in such a way that DOES say cyclist to other users, rather than an inert vest that could be horse rider, jogger on pavement, hi-viz pedestrian or dog walker
Sam browns belt?
reflectors?
appropriate road positioning?


----------



## lukasran (15 Apr 2014)

the op asked for views of "more serious road cyclists", there is no exact requirements for that so cant spell it out for you but i consider myself in it. if that is too much of a leap for you too bad. op wanted feedback on a new light and got a load of cycling safety gurus harping on about the real problems and asking for the thread to be shut? you are not going to convince me that wearing lighting is a bad idea. if you drive you know bikes are not easy to spot, even when driving with them in mind. bad drivers are out there and i would prefer them to see me sooner rather than later and if they mistake me for a horse/ped what do i care so long as they see me.


----------



## coffeejo (15 Apr 2014)

If you're sitting upright, it'll be seen so long as you like wearing something on your back (I don't - never wear a rucksack, never even put anything in rear pockets) but if you ride with a more aerodynamic position (on hoods or drops) then anything on your back will simply beam up into the sky. 

IMHO, all the money being poured into the design, manufacturing and purchase of visibility aides for cyclists would be better spent on a public awareness campaign for all road users to respect other road users and recognise vulnerabilities and what we can all do to look after the safety of others.


----------



## theclaud (15 Apr 2014)

lukasran said:


> the op asked for views of "more serious road cyclists", there is no exact requirements for that so cant spell it out for you but i consider myself in it. if that is too much of a leap for you too bad. op wanted feedback on a new light and got a load of cycling safety gurus harping on about the real problems *and asking for the thread to be shut*? you are not going to convince me that wearing lighting is a bad idea. if you drive you know bikes are not easy to spot, even when driving with them in mind. bad drivers are out there and i would prefer them to see me sooner rather than later and if they mistake me for a horse/ped what do i care so long as they see me.



Who did? No one is trying to convince you not to wear lights. The OP expresses a wish to "make the roads safer for cycling", and asks for opinions on a product. The product certainly won't "make the roads safer for cycling". I'm not convinced it will make the individuals who wear it safer either, but I think it's a very bad thing to train motorists, who already fail to take responsibility for the danger they present to others, to expect cyclists to sport more and more ludicrously conspicuous gear. It can only result in their feeling entitled not to see those who aren't wearing it, despite the fact that they are not, and have never been, invisible. It's a shame your self-proclaimed seriousness doesn't seem to extend to thinking outside of your own over-illuminated bubble.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (15 Apr 2014)

theclaud said:


> ...your own over-illuminated bubble.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (15 Apr 2014)

It would be nice if the OP returned to give her views on the responses so far. I hope she's not just another post and run advertiser.

GC


----------



## theclaud (15 Apr 2014)

User said:


> Are you serious enough to have a valid opinion?


Might the occasional lapse into frivolity count against me, do you think?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (15 Apr 2014)

The meek shall inherit the mirth.


----------



## Dogtrousers (15 Apr 2014)

theclaud said:


> ... more and more ludicrously conspicuous gear...


 
Just out of interest, TC, where do you draw the line between normal lighting and ludicrous lighting? I've got some fibre flares, which I bought primarily because I thought they looked cool, and only secondarily because I thought they may be functional. 

I'm worried now that they may be ludicrous.  I feel such a fool.


----------



## Crackle (15 Apr 2014)

Trouser clips, flat cap, Ever Ready light and a raincoat. Anything beyond that is frivolous foolery selling out your fellow cyclists.


----------



## ianrauk (15 Apr 2014)

Dogtrousers said:


> Just out of interest, TC, where do you draw the line between normal lighting and ludicrous lighting? I've got some fibre flares, which I bought primarily because I thought they looked cool, and only secondarily because I thought they may be functional.
> 
> I'm worried now that they may be ludicrous.  I feel such a fool.




Now you see... I was the first to use 2 of them on the FNRttC's a few years back... then everybody started to buy the bloody things...ludicrous 

They are great lights. (If you guard them against water ingress) as they are not retina burning..OF WHICH I HATE on the FNR's.


----------



## theclaud (15 Apr 2014)

Dogtrousers said:


> Just out of interest, TC, where do you draw the line between normal lighting and ludicrous lighting? I've got some fibre flares, which I bought primarily because I thought they looked cool, and only secondarily because I thought they may be functional.
> 
> I'm worried now that they may be ludicrous.  I feel such a fool.



 They score low on my ludicrometer - I like their benign glow and the way their line follows and flatters that of the seatpost or stays. I dislike eyeball-searing rear lights on group rides, flashing front lights, and anything that blinds oncoming pedestrians, but I'm relaxed about adornment. I like @User10571's vertical Knight Rider setup, and @Aperitif's fairy lights!


----------



## theclaud (15 Apr 2014)

[QUOTE 3029190, member: 9609"]*the trouble is everyone is upping their game in the being-seen stakes*, day time running lights, high intensity discharge bulbs, vehicles are becoming bigger and full of distracting toys for their drivers to play with, then there is the mobile phone plague/obsession, And on top of all that half of *our fellow cyclists are also brightening up with high-viz and lots of flashing lights*. I agree it's a crap situation but it's the one we have, if we don't join in *some twat will kill us and the whole world will say it served us right.*[/QUOTE]

Stop joining in and perpetuating it then. How do you imagine we will win if you choose to accept those terms?


----------



## theclaud (15 Apr 2014)

[QUOTE 3029823, member: 9609"]will anyone take any notice us not being noticed ?[/QUOTE]
Ride with minimal or non-existent lighting, and you will discover something curious. Drivers see you, and move to avoid you as if you were a real person. Our supposed invisibility is a fiction. All you are doing by making an issue of lighting is reinforcing it.


----------



## Shaun (15 Apr 2014)

As interesting as the "lighting vs. driver education" debate is, this isn't really the place for it.

Can we please stick to giving feedback to @LucyBoots on the product she's linked to and if you want to continue the debate, start a new thread and link back to it from here. 

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## Ern1e (16 Apr 2014)

Hi @LucyBoots that would be a +1 from me on @User9609 's quote on the horse riders need for such an item I think it would be well suited to there needs,and for what it is worth I would use one if i commuted in heavy traffic ! also it may be me that just missed it but have you got a cost for this ?


----------



## 400bhp (16 Apr 2014)

It looks a good idea, but there's an issue.

I don't like carrying solid objects on my back. If you have a fall that could do some serious damage to you.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (16 Apr 2014)

Shaun said:


> As interesting as the "lighting vs. driver education" debate is, this isn't really the place for it.
> 
> Can we please stick to giving feedback to @LucyBoots on the product she's linked to and if you want to continue the debate, start a new thread and link back to it from here.
> 
> ...


@Shaun, she made a post on Friday, had a look-see on Sunday and has been gone since then. It's (potential) product placement.


----------



## jack smith (16 Apr 2014)

it needs to be abit brighter me thinks


----------



## stuee147 (26 Jun 2014)

i cant really see how this is a new product just a quick search on you ebay brings up loads of different types of shirts straps and wearable light up clothing type things


----------



## nahtanoJ (19 Aug 2014)

Hi Lucy, I think anything that highlights the whole rider has to be a good idea. There's nothing to say improving bike safety has to be an "us or them" approach, educating and prosecuting drivers can happen as well as improving our presence on the road. Just ride around at dusk to see the number of cyclists with no lights or reflectors at all! I'm not sure how many of the posters here tow a bike trailer but for those that do this seems like it would solve the problem of a wearable light "pointing at the heavens"; http://www.prefundia.com/projects/view/street-halo/2167. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to exist yet! Anyone else got any examples of bike trailer lights that do exist? I've posted in the Family Cycling section. Thanks!


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 Aug 2014)

nahtanoJ said:


> Hi Lucy, I think anything that highlights the whole rider has to be a good idea. There's nothing to say improving bike safety has to be an "us or them" approach, educating and prosecuting drivers can happen as well as improving our presence on the road. Just ride around at dusk to see the number of cyclists with no lights or reflectors at all! I'm not sure how many of the posters here tow a bike trailer but for those that do this seems like it would solve the problem of a wearable light "pointing at the heavens"; http://www.prefundia.com/projects/view/street-halo/2167. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to exist yet! Anyone else got any examples of bike trailer lights that do exist? I've posted in the Family Cycling section. Thanks!


 
You're wasting your keystrokes, Lucy hasn't been around these parts since 13 April. She appears to have been more interested in driving hits to her kickstarter page than hearing any feedback from cyclists.


GC


----------



## nahtanoJ (19 Aug 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> You're wasting your keystrokes, Lucy hasn't been around these parts since 13 April. She appears to have been more interested in driving hits to her kickstarter page than hearing any feedback from cyclists.
> 
> 
> GC



Hmmmm. Well, I've always been a bit of a late-comer I guess! Ah well, just clicked on their link and seen they got their funding so fair play to them.


----------



## LauraTC79 (9 Sep 2014)

Great idea, but possibly too high. Also, what about people who don't use rucksacks? How would that work?


----------



## thecube (17 Sep 2014)

Well done with your product placement Lucy, if you were interested in feedback you could have replied or at least aknowledged some of the more useful comments people took their time to post. Still not sure what difference that is to my already existing reflective strap and LED lights. I do agree that the long term solution for cylists is probably not to go down the Christmas tree route. I've been told the best thing is to just cycle like you've had a skinful and all road users give you a wide berth.


----------



## Rob3rt (18 Sep 2014)

The fact stuff like this gets funded repeatedly on kickstarter is bewildering...


----------



## brand (22 Sep 2014)

The aim is not to be seen but to be noticed. How can a car driver not have seen you? This is different, so it will get you noticed as did brightly coloured clothing but eventually you don't stand out anymore your just another.. bang where the hell did that cyclist come from! 
So unless lots of people buy it ie it becomes the norm then it should work in the city. I live rural and I am afraid the problem is car drivers going to fast on narrow roads. I am afraid I am sticking with brighter rear lights and a rear facing lance.


----------



## brand (22 Sep 2014)

thecube said:


> the long term solution for cylists is probably not to go down the Christmas tree route. I've been told the best thing is to just cycle like you've had a skinful and all road users give you a wide berth.


A/ I think looking like a Christmas tree would most certainly get you noticed.
B/ may work can't say for certain other than I haven't been run over on the way back from the pub. Then I have cycled 12 miles at night and not seen a car, so can't really be certain.


----------



## brand (22 Sep 2014)

I am afraid people might not like this but I am inclined to think it will make little difference how hard you punish offenders. I suspect it is likely that all drivers lose concentration and there is nothing you can do about it. Obviously the idiots who drive badly will get A message after they have hit you and get punished for it but I suspect that a lot of accident are caused by a lack of concentration. The answer probably will come with new technology where the car basically drives itself. If a car can park itself then technology will eventually not allow a driver to get to close from behind or from the side. Hurry up!​


----------



## Dan B (22 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> I am afraid people might not like this but I am inclined to think it will make little difference how hard you punish offenders.​


Perhaps someone will be along shortly with actual citations and stuff, but iir the research here says that the severity of punishment is not really a serious deterrent but the likelihood of the law actually being enforced _is_. So, even if the penalty for carelesss/dangerous driving is a mere three weeks inside, the incidence of drivers hitting cyclists they "just didn't see" would go way down if only they knew it was a certainty they'd actually receive the said punishment instead of walking away after clueless plod/cps says "his word against yours, no point pursuing this" or "it was only a pushbike"


----------



## brand (22 Sep 2014)

Dan B said:


> Perhaps someone will be along shortly with actual citations and stuff, but iir the research here says that the severity of punishment is not really a serious deterrent but the likelihood of the law actually being enforced _is_. So, even if the penalty for carelesss/dangerous driving is a mere three weeks inside, the incidence of drivers hitting cyclists they "just didn't see" would go way down if only they knew it was a certainty they'd actually receive the said punishment instead of walking away after clueless plod/cps says "his word against yours, no point pursuing this" or "it was only a pushbike"


I am afraid people loose concentration or to be more precise humans are not up to the job of driving cars safely. Bring on the automated car!
By the way one persons word against another Is never pursued unless there is other evidence.


----------



## Dan B (23 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> I am afraid people loose concentration or to be more precise humans are not up to the job of driving cars safely. Bring on the automated car!
> By the way one persons word against another Is never pursued unless there is other evidence.


Quite often there could be other evidence if the police could be bothered to call for witnesses, or chase statements from witnesses who've already given their details, or ask for cctv footage from cameras overlooking the incident, or forensically examine the vehicles involved, or even forbear to dismiss the evidence of perfectly good witnesses on the grounds that "they're not independent" because they're using the same mode of transport as one of the people involved in the incident. But any of these actions would all be more work that doesn't contribute to this month's performance targets so is unlikely ever to get done.


----------



## brand (23 Sep 2014)

Dan B said:


> Quite often there could be other evidence if the police could be bothered to call for witnesses, or chase statements from witnesses who've already given their details, or ask for cctv footage from cameras overlooking the incident, or forensically examine the vehicles involved, or even forbear to dismiss the evidence of perfectly good witnesses on the grounds that "they're not independent" because they're using the same mode of transport as one of the people involved in the incident. But any of these actions would all be more work that doesn't contribute to this month's performance targets so is unlikely ever to get done.


Wakey wakey I am saying that humans are not up to the job of driving. We will someday, and it is not that far away have cars which will not allow accidents. Have you grasped that?
The police cannot be bothered to do lots of things, it is not specifically cyclist. THE POLICE ARE BONE IDOL. There are 3 police cars outside one cafe everyday. This is Lincolnshire how far have they travelled to meet up for their 2 hours dinner break?


----------



## mickle (23 Sep 2014)

Bone idol.


----------



## Dan B (23 Sep 2014)

mickle said:


> Bone idol.


I think it's one of those tv talent show things where the prize is to become singer with U2


----------



## ComedyPilot (23 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> Wakey wakey I am saying that humans are not up to the job of driving. We will someday, and it is not that far away have cars which not allow accidents. Have you grasped that?
> The police cannot be bothered to do lots of things, it is not specifically cyclist. *THE POLICE ARE BONE IDOL*. There are 3 police cars outside one cafe everyday. This is Lincolnshire how far have they travelled to meet up for their 2 hours dinner break?


Yeah, and so are English teechers....


----------



## brand (23 Sep 2014)

ComedyPilot said:


> Yeah, and so are English teechers....


Do you think so? Well I know they have long holidays but they do have to deal with all those brats. So I think you are being a little harsh there.
Now maths teachers!


----------



## djb1971 (23 Sep 2014)

mickle said:


> Bone idol.




I loved that White Wedding song he did.


----------



## winjim (23 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> Bring on the automated car!


Apparently Google’s Self-Driving Cars Are The Harbinger Of The Bicyclist Revolution, And I For One Cannot Let That Stand



(Contains swears)


----------



## Dan B (24 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> Wakey wakey I am saying that humans are not up to the job of driving. We will someday, and it is not that far away have cars which not allow accidents. Have you grasped that?


I am reasonably sure that humans could by and large be up to the task of driving if they were actually aware of their limitations (blind spots, target fixation, invisible gorillas etc) and approached the task with the care and attention it deserves rather than as a trdious chore their limbic system can deal with while their forebrains are engaged with posting to facebook . But this will not be the case as long as the penalty for farking it up is a slap on the wrist and probably not even that. 

Unless there's legislative change or serious economic pressure (tax changes, insurance, petrol costs) brought to bear on drivers I give it ten years plus until the majority of new cars are self-driving (and I mean the basic models in each range not just the high-end models) and another ten years until the majority of cars on the road are self-driving, and I don't know how long until a manually driven car is an unusual sight. And even then I expect the last few holdouts to include the ABD/SafeSpeed numpties who think their superior driving skills mean it's OK for them to be tailgating while "making progress" around a blind bend with a tractor coming the other way.


----------



## brand (24 Sep 2014)

"can deal with while their forebrains are engaged with posting to facebook"
So aren't up to then. Everyone is thinking about other things rather than driving. There mind is always somewhere else...always. Reactions to emergency are just reactions no thinking involved. If there were they wouldn't react in time. Humans, including women cannot multitask. My head is always somewhere else when cycling. Enjoying the view, thinking about buying a working dog, wondering if the pub has XXXB on. Looking in the hedge for forageble food....where did that tree come from. Need I go on?


----------



## Dan B (24 Sep 2014)

You seem unable or unwilling to distinguish betweeen "can't" and "won't"


----------



## theclaud (24 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> Need I go on?



No.


----------



## brand (24 Sep 2014)

Dan B said:


> You seem unable or unwilling to distinguish betweeen "can't" and "won't"


No I am not can't is exactly what I mean.


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> Wakey wakey I am saying that humans are not up to the job of driving. We will someday, and it is not that far away have cars which will not allow accidents. Have you grasped that?
> The police cannot be bothered to do lots of things, it is not specifically cyclist. THE POLICE ARE BONE IDOL. There are 3 police cars outside one cafe everyday. This is Lincolnshire how far have they travelled to meet up for their 2 hours dinner break?


i have a history with lincs police 
6 years ago just outside sleaford on the a15 (iirc) me and the wife were sleeping in the car, long story she was 5 months pregnant id just been made redundant decided to drive round britain as you do. any way a lay by just after a sharp bend about 11 pm we hear an almighty crash three cars full of kids coming one way overtaking a slower car two get past on the blind bend third gets hit head on by an oncoming rover 75 it was a micra. the driver a young girl pregnant is in a bad way foud out she was taken to nottingham hospital. anyway the two cars that went past come back all the lads are out shouting screaming etc, ive got the girl wrapped in blankets from our car just to try and kep her warm as she is stuck in the car. eventually the ploice fire service and ambulance turn up so im releived from sitting there and almost free to head back to the wife. only i head over to a group of police and point out the lads in the other cars are all well and truly pissed 
copper looks at me and asks
what do you want me to do
this is no joke or anything other than the fact it sticks with me i found it that scary


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2014)

Is that Lincs Police, or one particular idiot that happens to work for them? Next we'll be judging all cyclists by the actions of RLJ ers.


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> No I am not can't is exactly what I mean.


bit harsh there are a few that can
damon hill had a good point about being scared silly on a motorway by a driver in something sitting on his rear doing 70 ...

now certain drivers are capable of doing that but the thing is you normally find them on tracks


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> Is that Lincs Police, or one particular idiot that happens to work for them? Next we'll be judging all cyclists by the actions of RLJ ers.



two cars six officers stood in a group


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2014)

What, all 6 said exactly the same thing to you? Was that simultaneously, or one after the other?


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> What, all 6 said exactly the same thing to you? Was that simultaneously, or one after the other?



no. one answered the others looked on and didnt take any action and let two cars containing young male drivers drinking stella leave


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2014)

I see. So what did you do about this craven piece of Police sloppiness?


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> I see. So what did you do about this craven piece of Police sloppiness?


left lincs at the first opportunity


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2014)

But did you not grass them up or something?


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

0nope having in the past had dealings with two police forces and getting nowhere with complaints....
and ive lost more faith since but im not sure a forum is the place to post information they choose to ignore over quite serious crimes most recently inside the last month or two over something that happened nearby
or an incident involving a car crash they were in a position to prevent (having arrested (not qute sorry i was given the option of being arrested if i didnt provide a breath test )me 40 minutes before and breathalysed me after loosing control on a tight bend i passed btw and the next car span in almost exactly the same manner and missed my car by a meter while they watched. later that night a car going in the opposite direction wasnt so lucky
or being surrounded by several cars with officers holding mp5's i think they are what the guns are pointing at you and it takes hours to get out of the cells and if i hadnt been a victim of gun crime earlier in the day in manchester it would have been far harder to prove i wasnt where they claimed (really not a good day)


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2014)

I'm still trying to work out how you figured what the three different cars were doing when you were yourself asleep at the time of the smack.

Yes, it can take a while to escape custody because the dibble aren't clairvoyant, not everyone they arrest is guilty. They work on the principle of 'reasonable suspicion', so to get you to a cell the arresting officers have to convince a custody sergeant - who are impartial - that they had reasonable suspicion. Just cos you nicked does Indeed not mean you are guilty - it means that there's a reasonable suspicion, is all.


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> I'm still *trying to work out how you figured what the three different cars were doing when you were yourself asleep at the time of the smack*.
> 
> Yes, it can take a while to escape custody because the dibble aren't clairvoyant, not everyone they arrest is guilty. They work on the principle of 'reasonable suspicion', so to get you to a cell the arresting officers have to convince a custody sergeant - who are impartial - that they had reasonable suspicion. Just cos you nicked does Indeed not mean you are guilty - it means that there's a reasonable suspicion, is all.



really? there are clues in my statement on how that information came to me

to be fair the statement is a little wrong it should read we were there to sleep wife was i wasnt my car was facing away from the incident and about 100 m away from where the micra came to a stop 
the passengers in the rover were unhurt but treated for shock while the driver of the slower car ordered me about a bit trying to help the girl in the micra. the bossy one thankfully was a student nurse


----------



## Drago (24 Sep 2014)

You gave a statement about something you.saw while asleep?

And you gave a statement, but cleared off.out the county the moment you didn't like the look of the coppers, so didn't have an opportunity to give a.statement?

It doesn't take a detective like me to figure out you're either fibbing, or withholding information of sufficient importance that it makes your account very inconsistent.

It's witnesses like you that get otherwise dead cert cases thrown out of court. Probably a good thing you didnt give a statement. Or did.


----------



## noodle (24 Sep 2014)

nope i gave them my details if they choose not to follow it up or act on such information who then is responsible?

if it was a one off id think long day they had no means of controlling the situation better than they did
but sorry far too often for it to be anything other than what you have to consider normal

tbh if id known i wouldnt even have bothered talking to you about it as the defensive stance is more or less all you get when you do try reason


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

If you want to see Lincolnshire police doing what there best at go to JJ cafe on the A158. There are 3 police cars there everyday at the same time. Linc's is rural they must have traveled some distance to all meet up at the same time. Leaving a huge area unpoliced. Of course if you want to do some serious crime just put a look out there he will tell you what time to start.
Let's hear Drago's support for the police...no matter what.
PS Drago
Plebgate
Hillsborough
The police protection of Jimmy Savile, I wonder in what form they were paid.
Friday morning club (see above)
Etc
etc
etc

Why bother noodle Drago will behave in the normal police way. Attack the victim.


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

User said:


> But can you stop yourself?


----------



## ufkacbln (25 Sep 2014)

brand said:


> If you want to see Lincolnshire police doing what there best at go to JJ cafe on the A158. There are 3 police cars there everyday at the same time. Linc's is rural they must have traveled some distance to all meet up at the same time. Leaving a huge area unpoliced. Of course if you want to do some serious crime just put a look out there he will tell you what time to start.
> Let's hear Drago's support for the police...no matter what.
> PS Drago
> Plebgate
> ...


At least your agenda here has now been made clear......


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

Cunobelin said:


> At least your agenda here has now been made clear......


I have an agenda?...... that's singular.


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> But did you not grass them up or something?


But then they would know where he lives. Never do that noodles if you cannot grass them up anonymously don't do it they will get you back. Look at plebgate. The police federation is paying the court cost of an officer who was called a liar by the MP. The Mets Chief of Police have said the officers in plebgate are innocent before the end of the investigation.


----------



## Drago (25 Sep 2014)

Plebgate is interesting in itself. Amid all the furore of what has happened ancillary to the incident, the officer allegedly involved in the incident itself has still not been charged with any wrong doing, and is themselves still pursuing the chap through court for libelling the officer.

Look at it from the opposite perspective. Most of those I deal with from society fairly are lying, thieving often violent cheats. If I judged society on the basis of their actions, the same way you would asked me to judge the dibble by the actions of a similar sample of twots, then we'll both end up with an utterly skewed, unrealistic view of each group.

It's like judging all cyclists by RLJ ers.


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

Drago said:


> Plebgate is interesting in itself. Amid all the furore of what has happened ancillary to the incident, the officer allegedly involved in the incident itself has still not been charged with any wrong doing, and is themselves still pursuing the chap through court for libelling the officer.
> 
> Look at it from the opposite perspective. Most of those I deal with from society fairly are lying, thieving often violent cheats. If I judged society on the basis of their actions, the same way you would asked me to judge the dibble by the actions of a similar sample of twots, then we'll both end up with an utterly skewed, unrealistic view of each group.
> 
> It's like judging all cyclists by RLJ ers.


A/ The Chief Commissioner has briefed the press that he is innocent. Happy with that?
B/ Does the police federation normally pay for litigation fees for every officers who is called a liar? 
By the way isn't Hillsborough and Jimmy Savile of any interest to you or are you struggling for an excuse?


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

Ex police officer I used to drink with buying stolen goods. All sat round the table in Manchester pub in comes a scrout asking people what DVDs they wanted him to steal. Out of 5 only the ex-police officer was interested and gave him a shopping list!
Same bloke stopped while using a mobile phone when driving, showed them a Greater Manchester key fob. Told not to do it again. Bragged gets me off with lots of things


----------



## glasgowcyclist (25 Sep 2014)

What's all this crap got to do with 'trying to make cyclists more seen'?

GC


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

It starts with an aside on page 5 near the top...no it might be my fault further back when I mentioned how useless they (police) are in general. In agreement in part with someone else who blamed cycling accidents on the failure of the police to do there job....but that was an attack on me as I said people are not up to driving cars as they cannot concentrate well enough (thinking of something else all the time). So I was welcoming the time of the driverless car......I think that's how it happened!
PS in Finland nearly all cars have cameras in them recording at all times....just an option.


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> What's all this crap got to do with 'trying to make cyclists more seen'?
> 
> GC


PS I don't know how many times I have to tell you lot NOTICED NOT SEEN


----------



## brand (25 Sep 2014)

User said:


> Goodness, I don't think anyone has ever thought that before.


Exactly!


----------



## ufkacbln (26 Sep 2014)

This afternoon near Warsash......

Approaching Junction with white Volvo estate at junction, I have "priority, but not trusting Volvos have the brakes covered

Coming the other way at some speed is a big red thing, with HiViz banding, blue flashing lights and a very loud siren

We call them Fire Engines, and the custom is to recognise that they are emergency vehicles and allow them to pass, especially in this case when they also have "priority" under normal circumstances

I therefore clearly signal my intention to mve into teh kerb and wait

NOT this Volvo however.... 

They decide to wait until this highly visible and audible Leviathan is about 30 feet away

.. and then pull out of the junction in front of it.

Fire Engine does emergency sop, sounds an even more audible horn, and the Volvo pooters along as if nothing has happened, With Fire Engine now behind it blasting both horn and sirens for it to get out of the way.

No amount of HiViz, audible or visual signal is going to deal with muppets like this


----------



## noodle (26 Sep 2014)

Cunobelin said:


> This afternoon near Warsash......
> 
> Approaching Junction with white Volvo estate at junction, I have "priority, but not trusting Volvos have the brakes covered
> 
> ...




true you cant educate stoopid. sadly its not uncommon


----------

