Safe Speed Forums

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

of those who've bothered to think about it there tend to be two camps:

always on unless there is a reason not to or always off unless there is a need. Practically the same results I'd suggest?

the point and sixy is making it is we've now lost the choice

The difference is the hysteresis, which may be quite highly significant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis

contains:

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

There again though, I'd suggest that the more well-informed and interested in both camps would probably be somewhere around the middle. I was told when I did my DAS course that I should always have my lights on. Trouble is, when questioned the instructor couldn't actually well me why. I don't know about anybody else, but I have great difficulty accepting things just because.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

one reason would be the impact to any personal injury claim that you might attempt to make in the event that you were not riding with your lights on.

the HWC advises it and there have been contributory neglegence cases of motorcyclists and cyclists who have failed to take the conspicuity advice given in the HWC.

its not fair I know, but the police will go to great lengths to identify (using the broken bulbs) if you lights were on. the 3rd party insurers may then look to use this

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

Actually I think I got that from an article T.C wrote about lazy Accident investigation (I paraphrase) - couldn't find it on his site though.

I know last time we did it on VD I found loads of stuff on cyclists but little on cars or bikes. my access to the law db has expired, so I can't see any examples...

however, the cycling loby are up in arms about the HWC advice on helmets and conspicuity becuase it has lead to successful contributory neglegence claims

http://www.cyclenetwork.org.uk/latest/d ... aycode.pdf
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 9h0065.htm

If TC is here it would be good to get his view as he is certainly more of an authority on the subject than me

I have a chinese import 125, which was new but doesn't have the light switched on permanently. However, for the time being I decided to leave it effectively permanent running.
If you have a bike that allows you to turn off the light, have you tried riding with it on permanently, and not? The first 25 miles I did when commuting in London, I had the headlight off, and then I decided to try turning it on, and I noticed a difference. Not long enough or objective enough to draw conclusions, but I'll put a vote forwards that for me they seemed to improve my visibility to other road users.

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

It *certainly* isn't that simple, though, is it? I also don't believe that misunderstood 'apparent' headlight flashes are a significant cause of crashes.

On the other hand we do know that SMIDSY (Sorry mate I didn't see you) is a common effect. Many believe - for various reasons, of which some are good - that showing a headlight is helpful for bikers in daylight conditions.

Now I'm no fan at all of permanent daylight running lights for any vehicle, but it is definitely the individual driver's (and rider's) right to assess conditions and choose. Some choices will be tragically wrong on both sides.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

Don't go off on one of your rants at me. I'm definitely not in the mood for it.

Whatever you may think, there is no 'one clear answer' to the question of motorcyclists choosing to use daytime headlights. It's a complex issue with good arguments on both sides.

Every biker has to make an individual decision and the wise ones will probably vary that decision depending on circumstances. Where mirror visibility is the most important aspect, showing a headlight increases practical visibility substantially.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

SMIDSY doesn't really exist, it's actually SMIDFL but that doesn't trip off the tongue so easily.

I don't think any biker would assume that they're any safer because they wear hi-viz and have headlights on rather than not. I wear a spacka-jacket (as the RAF would call it) in London, and I do have my headlight on in all but the sunniest conditions because I believe it can help, but I won't ever assume it has. From my own experience whilst driving and riding, if a car driver by some miracle does look, however quickly, and then looks away, a light, especially in a mirror or a driver's peripheral vision, can draw attention where an unlit headlamp might not. Of course, if he/she doesn't it makes no odds either way. I never assume I've been seen, even after making eye contact with the driver I've had cars pull out on me so go by the old maxim, "Always assume that every car, truck, bus and van is trying to kill you, because they are."

I'd still want the option to switch off if I feel conditions or situation dictate, so if I ever get a more modern bike I'd get a switch wired in.

_________________
Fatshoutybloke

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

1. No.

2. Sorry, genuinely don't know what you mean by that.

3. Of course they're not, and I know they're not, but ride as if they are. "In cases of defence 'tis best to weigh The enemy more mighty than he seems."

_________________
Fatshoutybloke

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

SMIDSY's are complex things and reflect the human nature to avoid blame.

by claiming 'he came from nowhere' or 'I didn't see him' it lessons the blame for the motorist who now has a badly injured rider lodged in the side of his car. The real SMIDSYs are more likely:

I didn't look or I didn't look properly
I need my eyes checked as I couldn't see properly
I misjudeged his speed or the gap.
I thought he'd seen me and was going to brake or slow down
I was concentrating on something else
Someone had let me out and I didn't bother checking
He was in my blind spot
Its his problem to avoid me

From the riders perspective there are a lot of far more useful things to do than simply improving your conspicuity. However (and this is where FJSRider and I disagree - cos we've done this one before), I see no problem with exploring all things that will help.

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

I'm absolutely convinced that there are large numbers of genuine 'looked but failed to see' crashes. I believe that windscreen A pillars and retinal blind spots are at least 'significant'. I'm less convinced by looming and motion camouflage effects. I'm not terribly convinced by the 'what you expect to see' arguments. It's also possible to 'look in the wrong place' - perhaps looking for traffic that is further away and missing traffic that is closer.

I'm quite sure all these effects and more are present, and do cause crashes.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety