All bikes should be fitted with lights!

[chap]

I think a lot of people have missed the point.

The German rules are as close to sense as anyone will ever get.
The vast majority of bikes are for transport or general recreation. They have to have lighting, and it has to come from a dynamo.

those bkes which are specialist can have lightweight battery lights.

When racing the ligts can come off.

So: 99.999% of bikes will have dynamo lighting helping their riders avoid being killed or injured because they havent been seen.

0.00089% same applies but it's battery lights

0.0001% are racing

0.00001% are flattened - they forgot to put new batteries in.

This is pretty much my line of thought. I would prefer if peddle-powered (magnetic or dynamo driven) lights were used, this is why I mentioned the extra premium if battery lights were to be used (or some agreement if one was to use their own.) However, I don't personally mind if people buy battery lights - I use them myself, however many people would not take care to ensure that the batteries are replaced, unlike the fine fellows of this board and myself, which is why I have a preference for alternatives.

There are interesting exceptions, such as the racing cyclists, although as many have said if you don't like the lights on you can take them off. I do not envisage many trying to rip off customers, especially with market forces allowing for a complete set of reasonable lights to be bought for under £10.

Most of the cyclists I see around London (unlit) tend to be riding various mountain bikes - presumably bought from Halfords (which is good since they could be used to benchmark the progress). They have the bike and just want something to get them from A to B. Therefore why not have the stores fit them with no-fuss 'inconspicuous' lights which will mean that they can go around the place all the same without any issue, yet safer.

I like the Vélib scheme bikes (and the soon to arrive London Cycle Scheme ones) they have 'always-on' lights and people soon get used to them. The same can be said if these were to be introduced on new bikes. If there was proper legislation passed, and the minimal requirements for these lights were made out, then there would be no problem.

Currently you can buy a set of 'always-on' magnetic lights for about £20. If demand was increased substantially (e.g. law) then then this already cheap price would be knocked down substantially. Furthermore, when people get used to having such positive features, they are rather reluctant to have them removed. It is just a case of breaking through the inertia.

 

[Panter]

I don't want a dynamo as it is inadequate.... I now have to spend another wadge of cash on a new wheel for my brand new bike.

As for frame fitting - where?
Can I still use a bar bag as it obscures the front light or a saddlebag as it obscures the rear?
Are the panniers excluded if it is rear frame mounted?

I don't have any actual answers, just ideas

I just think that in this modern era of carbon monocoque frames and tiny, but insanely powerful LED's, it shouldn't be that difficult to either make something that either looks really good, or, is completely invisible until swithched on.

 

[MadoneRider1991]

I don't have any actual answers, just ideas

I just think that in this modern era of carbon monocoque frames and tiny, but insanely powerful LED's, it shouldn't be that difficult to either make something that either looks really good, or, is completely invisible until swithched on.

i guess you could put them on the rear forks

 

[Panter]

i guess you could put them on the rear forks

There you are you see, we're brainstorming
Let's just hope the manufacturers are reading this

 

[MadoneRider1991]

There you are you see, we're brainstorming
Let's just hope the manufacturers are reading this

haha we best get royalties

 

[thomas]

I suppose I should also have some lights embedded into my body too? For those times I'm walking home drunk.

The bell rule is stupid, when the law says that being able to yell is good enough. Why would I want a new bike to be fitted with some lights that cost a couple quid, when I already have £100+ worth of lights on my bike/helmet?

If someone else is too stupid to have lights, I'm sorry, but why should I be penalised for that?

 

[Davidc]

I suppose I should also have some lights embedded into my body too? For those times I'm walking home drunk.

The bell rule is stupid, when the law says that being able to yell is good enough. Why would I want a new bike to be fitted with some lights that cost a couple quid, when I already have £100+ worth of lights on my bike/helmet?

If someone else is too stupid to have lights, I'm sorry, but why should I be penalised for that?

The whole point of the post is that compulsory always-on lights would help the majority (many of whom are demonstrably stupid).

Your requirement (as with a number of others above) is specialised, and you don't appear to be stupid - certainly not at the level of night riding without lights.

You'd just end up like me, with a few spare wheels around. You'd have your bike with battery lights and you'd claim to be a racer.

I have 2 front wheels in the garage - one from each bike, a 26" and a 700c, which don't have dynamos and don't get used. Any offers?

 

[snorri]

Most of the cyclists I see around London .

I like the Vélib scheme bikes (and the soon to arrive London Cycle Scheme ones) they have 'always-on' lights and people soon get used to them. The same can be said if these were to be introduced on new bikes. If there was proper legislation passed, and the minimal requirements for these lights were made out, then there would be no problem.

Most of the cyclists seen around London need to have their collars felt as far as lights are concerned, but they are not typical of the country at large.
I don't think we should be encouraging any 'always on' lights, it's just another thing to make cycling more problematical. Do they illuminate the road sufficiently anyway?

 

[MadoneRider1991]

The whole point of the post is that compulsory always-on lights would help the majority (many of whom are demonstrably stupid).

Your requirement (as with a number of others above) is specialised, and you don't appear to be stupid - certainly not at the level of night riding without lights.

You'd just end up like me, with a few spare wheels around. You'd have your bike with battery lights and you'd claim to be a racer.

I have 2 front wheels in the garage - one from each bike, a 26" and a 700c, which don't have dynamos and don't get used. Any offers?

i think you will find that a MAJORITY of people have bikes that dont ever see that dark so it would be a waste of time fitting them with lights wouldnt it or are you trying to tell me that even if you never ride your nice light racing bike at night you need lights on it

 

[chap]

I suppose I should also have some lights embedded into my body too? For those times I'm walking home drunk.

The bell rule is stupid, when the law says that being able to yell is good enough. Why would I want a new bike to be fitted with some lights that cost a couple quid, when I already have £100+ worth of lights on my bike/helmet?

If someone else is too stupid to have lights, I'm sorry, but why should I be penalised for that?

Generally, pedestrians do not walk along the road.

Not everyone has the same vocal strength, the bell is more or less to a standard pitch, and almost universally distinguishable and recognised, therefore it is perfect for pedestrian (and cyclist) moments. If one is dealing with cars regularly then the air horn is probably your best bet. Admittedly, I think that lights are a more pertinent bicycle accessory than bells.

So the crux of your argument is that this hypothetical law is superfluous due to its potential implementation? This is exactly why certain opt-out clauses would be reasonable. The idea is to fit them as standard and those who do not require them (day-time racers) can pursue alternatives. If this was the case then we could tackle the problem of cycling without lights more effectively. It may push up the cost of the bike, but to get back to your concluding sentence you would be bringing down the national costs that, at present, could be attributed to other peoples stupidity.

 

[Davidc]

Always on lights aren't there to illuminate the road, theyre to improve visibility (ie makle the motons see us in time).

I always have lights on in daytime unless I forget to turn them on! A flashing Smart 1/2 watt one at the back and a 5 LED electron flasher at the front. The dynamo lights are on as well if the sun isn't out. It occasionally gets a comment (Oi, your lights are on mate) but appears to keep cars at a better distance than they would otherwise be at.

Most bikes may only be used in daytime. Daytime lights are an excellent idea and reduce accidents, so why not make always-on lights compulsory? (See German, Danish, French, Netherlands, etc. research)

Riding withot lights after dark should qualify for an automatic Darwin award, but forcing bikes to be sold with a minimum level of always-on lights would make a lot more sense than pedal or wheel reflectors do. (IM not at all HO)

 

[MadoneRider1991]

Always on lights aren't there to illuminate the road, theyre to improve visibility (ie makle the motons see us in time).

I always have lights on in daytime unless I forget to turn them on! A flashing Smart 1/2 watt one at the back and a 5 LED electron flasher at the front. The dynamo lights are on as well if the sun isn't out. It occasionally gets a comment (Oi, your lights are on mate) but appears to keep cars at a better distance than they would otherwise be at.

ermmmmmm you have your lights on in daytime how many batterys do you go through in a week

 

[snorri]

Generally, pedestrians do not walk along the road.

Oh! Where do they walk then? There are not footpaths and pavements everywhere.

The idea of 'always on' lights on bikes is just as wrong as that of day lighting on cars.

 

[Gareth]

Daylight Running Lights; DLRs are being introduce on all new motor vehicles sold in Britain from 2011/12, so why not on all new Bicycles sold from then as well?

 

[chap]

Most of the cyclists seen around London need to have their collars felt as far as lights are concerned, but they are not typical of the country at large.
I don't think we should be encouraging any 'always on' lights, it's just another thing to make cycling more problematical. Do they illuminate the road sufficiently anyway?

I would agree that London is not typical of the country at large, chiefly because cycle usage is noticeably increasing rather dramatically (just wait until May.) Although, my initial observation also holds water in many other places I have been to around the UK.

I have noticed in London (and many other cities and towns) that I only need enough light to be seen. In the country-side, on a New Moon, one definitely requires a little more 'muscle'. However, I would imagine that those that cycle in the country-side at night would (out of necessity) already opt for very bright, or more lights. It is the people in developed area which are the problem since they can see just fine without lights at night and cannot be bothered to either buy a set or keep the batteries charged, these are the people for whom such legislation would benefit most (if not those who could otherwise be the unfortunate ones to be involved in an accident with such people.)