Should lights be mandtory

I know that the government is getting excited about high viz and safety, but as elecric bikes already include a battery, wouldn't it be more sensible to mandate front and rear lights.

WIth modern sealed LED's these are unlikely to ever need servicing and probably don't cost the earth too.

What do you think?

I thought lights were mandatory during lighting up times or are you advocating day running lights for bicycles.

 

wheeler

I've always thought it bonkers that a bike has to be sold with a bell but not lights.

There is also a very strong argument that riding whilst expecting to be seen causes more problems than riding whilst not expecting to be seen.

 

But yes:

 

"It is illegal to cycle on a public road after dark without lights and reflectors. Exactly which lights and reflectors, where to fit them and when to light up, is defined by the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations."

 

https://www.cyclinguk.org/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations

Compulsory helmets yes, but all other safety gear should be optional.

 

In saying that if you have built lights, there is no harm in leaving them on during day.

If you run a modern Dyno hub, as I do, I run my lights in all conditions, it takes very little effort, so why not!

 

Even less effort if you run LED lights off the battery.

If you ride with lights on during the day (if you have a dynamo this is common) everyone tells you you’ve got your lights on. A bit annoying.

I thought lights were mandatory during lighting up times or are you advocating day running lights for bicycles.

 

Already a confusion as the period seems now to be called Hours of Darkness! For me, today, that seems to be before 06:02 and after 18:56. I'd never have known without positively looking them up. No way would I have ridden without lights that early or late.

Compulsory? absolutely not !, imagine being held responsible/ sued for damages for an accident because your light wasn't bright enough, or didn't comply with CE markings.

What next ?

Just popping to the shop might involve donning a helmet, high viz vest, ankle protection, CE marked gloves, checking your wheel, pedal reflectors and lights are secure and functioning correctly.

Use your daytime lights if you want to, that's your choice.

Already a confusion as the period seems now to be called Hours of Darkness! For me, today, that seems to be before 06:02 and after 18:56. I'd never have known without positively looking them up. No way would I have ridden without lights that early or late.

If street lights are on your bike or car lights should be on.

If street lights are on your bike or car lights should be on.

 

There are far too many reasons for lights to be on when not really needed, or off when they should be on, for that to be a reliable guide.

 

My view is that I might as well always switch front and rear lights on, then they'll always be on if needed! It is so easy to fail to correctly anticipate when those lights are going to help.

If drivers can't see you in day light then they shouldn't even be driving.

If drivers can't see you in day light then they shouldn't even be driving.

Most drivers are looking for cars not cyclists. High viz and lights mean they are more likely to see you at a glance.

If drivers can't see you in day light then they shouldn't even be driving.

 

I used to drive on a road which went under a dual carriageway. In the summer, with bright sunlight outside, it was like driving into complete blackness. Had there been a bicycle already in the underpass, a car driver could very easily have found it difficult to see it.

 

That was an extreme. (I imagine it was only just too short to have had permanent lighting installed.) But similar situations exist all over the place. And many, many drivers have less than perfect eyesight - even within the legal requirements.

 

I'd argue that using lights simply increases the likelihood of being seen. At the same time, I'd not want not using lights to be seen as any form of mitigation for drivers' behaviour. Nor would I wish to see cyclists legally required to use lights in daylight.

Edited March 17, 20188 yr by oyster

If you ride with lights on during the day (if you have a dynamo this is common) everyone tells you you’ve got your lights on. A bit annoying.

 

To which I reply "I know". That shuts them up.

 

Daytime running lights are already mandatory on s-pedelecs in Germany. I use them on the upright, it helps a lot at intersections. I don't use them on the trike (yet) because people are already saying "What the hell is that thing?" and for the most respecting my right of way. When it gets a motor and will be moving at over 25 km/h everywhere it will get a front light.

Compulsory helmets yes, but all other safety gear should be optional.

 

In saying that if you have built lights, there is no harm in leaving them on during day.

 

Otherwise the world nude bicycle rides would become illegal.

I've always thought it bonkers that a bike has to be sold with a bell but not lights.

What I meant is that it should be compulsory for lights to be fitted when supplier sells the bike. Whether the rider uses them or not is a judgement call.

As far as I understand it, bicycles should have lights from dusk to dawn. Whereas for cars it's sunset to sunrise, slightly different.

What I meant is that it should be compulsory for lights to be fitted when supplier sells the bike. Whether the rider uses them or not is a judgement call.

As far as I understand it, bicycles should have lights from dusk to dawn. Whereas for cars it's sunset to sunrise, slightly different.

 

They are sold with a bike in France. Buy your Decathlon bike and you get their crappy little USB chargeable rubbery things in a plastic bag attached to the handlebar.

 

I have almost crashed into bikes with no lights in the pitch black on cycle paths. fortunately each time there was still a reflector or two still on their bike and I managed to miss them. For me it is criminel to ride without lights...

They are sold with a bike in France. Buy your Decathlon bike and you get their crappy little USB chargeable rubbery things in a plastic bag attached to the handlebar.

 

I have almost crashed into bikes with no lights in the pitch black on cycle paths. fortunately each time there was still a reflector or two still on their bike and I managed to miss them. For me it is criminel to ride without lights...

 

Luckily, my experience has almost always been me riding on the road, with lights on, or driving my car - with DRL, and seeing (just about) an unlit bicycle on the pavement (not shared use). Sometimes it has been so dark I simply would not have ridden without lights because I might not have seen the potholes, aside from every other factor.

Does anyone remember when only Volvos had automatic daytime lights and how conversations about it went similar to those on this thread? Personally I always have lights fitted and on in daylight, and if asked "do you know your lights are on?" I have a look and say something like "Are they? Wow!" or "yes they are nuclear powered and wont turn off!" or variations on the theme. My bike now has automatic lights that are on in daylight and get brighter as it gets darker, the front is powered by the bike and the rear is rechargeable.

Dont like the word compulsory...

If drivers can't see you in day light then they shouldn't even be driving.

 

Cycist's future could get even more dangerous without drivers.

 

Nissan had to abort a public road demonstration of one of its robotic control cars when it skimmed a cyclist dangerously close.

 

I've since heard an industry man say that cyclists are giving them a big problem for robotic recognition. I can understand that, given the skinny profile of the lower half of a bike and the up and down movements of pedals etc.

.

Cycist's future could get even more dangerous without drivers.

 

Nissan had to abort a public road demonstration of one of its robotic control cars when it skimmed a cyclist dangerously close.

 

I've since heard an industry man say that cyclists are giving them a big problem for robotic recognition. I can understand that, given the skinny profile of the lower half of a bike and the up and down movements of pedals etc.

.

So much for making eye contact with driver.

No. Everyone should have them but they shouldn't be mandatory. Cyclists must not let themselves be out on the defensive here. We're the ones being maimed and killed by motor vehicles. We're not the ones who should bear the police scrutiny.

Cycist's future could get even more dangerous without drivers.

 

Nissan had to abort a public road demonstration of one of its robotic control cars when it skimmed a cyclist dangerously close.

 

I've since heard an industry man say that cyclists are giving them a big problem for robotic recognition. I can understand that, given the skinny profile of the lower half of a bike and the up and down movements of pedals etc.

.

ill control them things like sheep ill just ride in the middle of the road going 5 mph with a email address on my back £1 to give way and over take send as paypal gift.

ill control them things like sheep ill just ride in the middle of the road going 5 mph with a email address on my back £1 to give way and over take send as paypal gift.

will you be waving the sword as well?