Compulsory Lights & Hi-viz.

[MontyVeda]

I agree 100%with your point but I cannot influence a court nor an insurance company. We just have to go along with whatever criteria they apply.

surely by introducing some logic... one can influence a court. Otherwise we'd still be conducting witch style trials.

 

[Punkawallah]

Yes. There are very few clipless pedals which even have the facility to ad reflectors, never mind having them as standard.

Based n what else has been said in this thread, I think I'll be getting myself some reflective ankle bands.

I think there are VERY few bikes on the road at the moment which are technically legal after dark, given that so few have pedal reflectors, and hardly any of the bike lights on sale meet the relevant British Standard.

My Galaxy was made before ‘84, so does not have a legal requirement for pedal reflectors. The Renown was ‘86, so has them. I wasn’t aware there was a British Standard for bike lights?

 

[classic33]

I agree 100%with your point but I cannot influence a court nor an insurance company. We just have to go along with whatever criteria they apply.

When I were hit, I had the owners insurance company saying I should have been wearing Hi-Vis, as required by the Highway Code. There is no such requirement in the Highway Code to wear Hi-Vis. It has always read "you should" not "you must", no requirement under UK law either. Both of which were pointed out to them, along with the question of produce the relevant section of law they were quoting.

 

[Alex321]

My Galaxy was made before ‘84, so does not have a legal requirement for pedal reflectors. The Renown was ‘86, so has them. I wasn’t aware there was a British Standard for bike lights?

Yes. They fall under BS6102/3, and the road vehicle lighting regulations Schedule 2 part 1 says that the compulsory front light on a bicycle must carry that marking and schedule 10 part 1 says that the rear light must also do so.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/2/part/I
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/10/part/I

But hardly any of the bicycle lights on the market actually have that BS marking (it is possible some may be compliant with the standard but have never been submitted for approval).

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Yes. They fall under BS6102/3, and the road vehicle lighting regulations Schedule 2 part 1 says that the compulsory front light on a bicycle must carry that marking and schedule 10 part 1 says that the rear light must also do so.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/2/part/I
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/10/part/I

But hardly any of the bicycle lights on the market actually have that BS marking (it is possible some may be compliant with the standard but have never been submitted for approval).

Can be compliant with equivalent EU marking, for example the German standards marked with a k…

 

[Alex321]

Can be compliant with equivalent EU marking, for example the German standards marked with a k…

True, but the light still has to carry the approval marking, and hardly any do.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

True, but the light still has to carry the approval marking, and hardly any do.

It does but not the Bs6…. marking

 

[roley poley]

hello me again with a small story of life...postie me would get up at 3.00 am to go to work at 4.00 and open the delivery office ..i was the key holder that started the days work ...I was stopped by two bobbies and pointed to the side of the road as they passed me by in their "panda car.".no problem ...i was uniformed ..high viz ..lights..a delivery postmans bag strapped to the rear rack ... mr bobby was very picky ...and found nowt wrong apart from no pedal reflectors... he quoted rule 60 of the high way code...no pedal reflectors ...a bit of finger wagging at me while the female officer in the background rose her eyebrows and smiled at me shaking her head..and off i went ...x x x funny old world innit ?

 

[classic33]

hello me again with a small story of life...postie me would get up at 3.00 am to go to work at 4.00 and open the delivery office ..i was the key holder that started the days work ...I was stopped by two bobbies and pointed to the side of the road as they passed me by in their "panda car.".no problem ...i was uniformed ..high viz ..lights..a delivery postmans bag strapped to the rear rack ... mr bobby was very picky ...and found nowt wrong apart from no pedal reflectors... he quoted rule 60 of the high way code...no pedal reflectors ...a bit of finger wagging at me while the female officer in the background rose her eyebrows and smiled at me shaking her head..and off i went ...x x x funny old world innit ?

And there's as much chance you were stopped for being out at that hour. I've been pulled myself in similar circumstances, early hours coming home from/going to work.

Very little traffic on the roads in the early hours, and there's always the chance that something else has happened nearby. Shed break in and a bike(s) stolen maybe. We, as cyclists, stand out more than a car on quiet roads, in the early hours.

 

[roley poley]

And there's as much chance you were stopped for being out at that hour. I've been pulled myself in similar circumstances, early hours coming home from/going to work.

Very little traffic on the roads in the early hours, and there's always the chance that something else has happened nearby. Shed break in and a bike(s) stolen maybe. We, as cyclists, stand out more than a car on quiet roads, in the early hours.

yes i understand that... on my day off from work my autopilot of waking up at that hour also applied and would find myself out on the roads at an un -godly hour but with a good excuse being well lit and legal (ok still havent put full reflectors on my posh bike's pedals)..found it best to use the tow-path..much nicer on your way to Leeds and at my leisure to see the world awakening at my pace.

 

[Punkawallah]

Yes. They fall under BS6102/3, and the road vehicle lighting regulations Schedule 2 part 1 says that the compulsory front light on a bicycle must carry that marking and schedule 10 part 1 says that the rear light must also do so.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/2/part/I
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/schedule/10/part/I

But hardly any of the bicycle lights on the market actually have that BS marking (it is possible some may be compliant with the standard but have never been submitted for approval).

My thanks for that. It seems the cut off date for the BS mark is for bicycles made from 1990, so doesn’t apply to both of mine. Good to know, though.

 

[Schneil]

I've bolded the key part of your story.

@Jameshow I think you should rethink your hi-viz strategy.

On the face of it, hi-viz might seem like a step in the right direction, but once you remove the baseless "it's obvious/common sense ,init?" you are left with reality which doesn't seem to back it up.

Above are suggestions that the stats don't support hi-viz usage.

I too have faced this conundrum, as I commute in a busy urban environment and wish to avoid being squished by other road users.
I've tried the hi-viz option and found it useless with no apparent difference between wearing normal, dark cycle gear Vs hi-viz.
I've also done my own experimentation when I again wanted to revisit the hi-viz solution. I ordered a few of the popular (and not cheap) hi-viz cycle jackets available at the time. Wearing each of these jackets I sat my wife in her modern saloon car on our street lit, but quite dark, street with the headlights on while I moved around in front of the vehicle with either driving lights or full beam on.

She wasn't very impressed. This wasn't much help to me so we swapped places and suddenly I could see why she wasn't impressed, and you can easily repeat this result yourself if you have access to a car, an assistant and a quiet street to experiment on.

Hi-viz usually consists of two elements. First is the dayglo material, the bright punchy colours that catch your eye as the shades really pop in bright daylight. The clue is in the name, dayglo, they appear to glow in daylight. The second element is the retro-reflective strips/patches/decals that are no big thing in daylight, but in the dark their ability to reflect light directly back towards the light source can make them light up like a headlight.
Unfortunately, reality plays a cruel trick on both these systems.
Firstly, dayglo at night is just a pale colour like any other pale colour. Without the UV of good daylight it just fades into the washed out greyness of the background that results from Street lighting, billboards, shop window lighting, car headlights etc
Retro-reflectives are good though, they return direct light back towards the source, so provided the driver is close to the source they can be as dazzlingly bright as the light shining on them because the driver is usually sat almost directly behind the headlights. They don't need daylight to work (In fact, they don't work in daylight). However, there is a huge flaw! In an urban situation most cars are only using the dipped driving lights, quite correctly, to avoid blinding oncoming drivers. This dipped beam light pattern, if correctly set, will focus the light beam below approx knee hight and towards the ground. This doesn't hit the reflectives on a jacket and in practice don't become highlighted to the driver. Headlights on non-dipped full beam are much better, but if you wander to either side of the beam you soon lose the effect and again fade into the general tapestry of the view. Reflectives really only work if low down (ankle strips) and directly in front of a vehicles lights.

So, dayglo is good during the day. Reflectives are good at night in one direction, provided the light source and driver are in line with the reflective.

What happens at night in an urban environ is that your dayglo just washes out to pale grey, the same as all the street furniture, tarmac, pavements, fences, bushes, cars. Your reflectives are also rendered useless unless directly in the light beam, so actually work as you want them to for a tiny fraction of the time and in limited circumstances.

Sorry for the long winded post but it takes some explaining. Try it for yourself if you don't believe me.

I realise I'm jumping on this thread very late. But in short I'm agreeing with I like skol with an example video.

Fluorescent colours work because the fluorescent dye absorbs short wavelength light (usually UV from the sun) and emits it back as longer wavelength light. There's no sun at night, and streetlights don't produce enough light for fluorescence. So fluorecsents won't do much at night.

Streetlighting is designed to illuminate the road surface to a uniform grey background. Objects such as pedestrians are seen as dark silhouettes against this. This is why vehicles (when in use) have lights front and rear, so you can identify the dark shape(s) and what direction it's travelling in.

Anyway here's a video from last night. I'm waiting to turn right out of a junction. At what point do you see the cyclist?
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/glym...myth.mp4?rlkey=yqbav2wci9gfahxyjqiaion5d&dl=0

 

[Slick]

I realise I'm jumping on this thread very late. But in short I'm agreeing with I like skol with an example video.

Fluorescent colours work because the fluorescent dye absorbs short wavelength light (usually UV from the sun) and emits it back as longer wavelength light. There's no sun at night, and streetlights don't produce enough light for fluorescence. So fluorecsents won't do much at night.

Streetlighting is designed to illuminate the road surface to a uniform grey background. Objects such as pedestrians are seen as dark silhouettes against this. This is why vehicles (when in use) have lights front and rear, so you can identify the dark shape(s) and what direction it's travelling in.

Anyway here's a video from last night. I'm waiting to turn right out of a junction. At what point do you see the cyclist?
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/glym...myth.mp4?rlkey=yqbav2wci9gfahxyjqiaion5d&dl=0

That video seems to back up the assertion that high vis is useless as the cyclist is visible for a long time because of his light long before its obvious he is wearing high vis.

 

[BoldonLad]

That video seems to back up the assertion that high vis is useless as the cyclist is visible for a long time because of his light long before its obvious he is wearing high vis.

At. best, it suggests that under those particular lighting conditions, it is not very effective, I would have thought.

 

[Bristolian]

I agree that fluorescent clothing doesn't work at night but retro-reflective hi-vis clothing is a different matter.