2011...all cars to have permanent lights on

Originally Posted by Daimo

Can't see the issue tbh??? Makes things safer, and in todays muppet society with ignorent drivers, everyone needs all the help they can get.

The issue is that bikes will be less noticeable around other traffic, especially when filtering, and that can't fail to lead to more accidents amongst bikers, who are already relatively vulnerable.

As someone who regularly filters on roads/motorways both in the daytime and the dark, I can clearly tell a diffeence in my visibility to car drivers when other vehicles also have their lights on.

oh and it already pees me off that Volvos and other cars have their lights on when unnecessary for this very reason...


Anyway I for one feel very strongly about this and would be prepared to demo about it...

*goes off to check MAG website*

Originally Posted by Fizzy Fish

*goes off to check MAG website*

There was a bloke from MAG talking about this on radio5 last night.

Originally Posted by tigersaw

So someone ought to do the maths on how much energy, cowfart gas or whatever measure they use its going to cost the planet

Light hearted comment perhaps, but someone probably will go to the effort of finding out this information.

Then they'll also find that the energy produced by the alternator is generally (for a good condition alternator) more than is required for the vehicle to function.

Assuming there is an extra energy requirement that's not fulfilled by the alternator, the only way to draw fuel to increase electrical output, would be to increase revs. I've not seen many that need to rev the engine to run the lights! Air conditioning perhaps, but not lights.

As for wanting cars to have daylight running lights, I can't see a problem with it. I ride in the assumption that I'm invisible, actually being invisible wouldn't make that big of a difference.

[21QUEST]

Originally Posted by Baph

...

As for wanting cars to have daylight running lights, I can't see a problem with it. I ride in the assumption that I'm invisible, actually being invisible wouldn't make that big of a difference.

Close to my thinking, that.

Perhaps any increased risk(perceived or otherwise) can reduced or removed by getting a luminous/reflective jacket



Cheers
Ben

Originally Posted by 21QUEST

Perhaps any increased risk(perceived or otherwise) can reduced or removed by getting a luminous/reflective jacket

I have one of them. Next on the list is a white Pan-euro

Cars - Sidelights.
Bikes - dipped beam.

Completly different lights, sorry i disagree completly. You can tell the difference quite easily, you just need to open your eyes and pay attention.

OR do as some bikes do have have full beam on during the day. No missing you then. Plus a hi vis vest.

I filter out of london every day, i filter past a good few thousand cars i'd say as most of the time its slow moving, 3 lanes of traffic for 19 miles, plus 7 miles of city commuting, most at a standstill. At dusk, many people have their lights on and i've not had an issue thus far. Prehapes its the riders riding the bike too fast that causes the danger? My lights are always on, and i wear a vest (which made a difference!!!), and not had issues other than the normal ignorent drivers, which you should always be prepared for anyway. Or, if in really bad conditions such as night and heavy rain, filter along with hazards on.

But then if your REALLY that worried about it, don't filter. Its a choice you make riding a bike.

I also ride defensively, but unless you trickle along at 10mph everywhere, losing the relative visibility advantage that we currently have is going to start affecting your safety. It's common sense really, plus didn't someone say that accidents amongst bikers had increased by 50% during the trial?!

I have cyclist friends who are equally concerned about this, as they will now be even less visible relative to motor vehicles. At junctions, people are bad enough at looking out for anything that isn't a car at the moment, but once all they feel they need to do is check quickly for a set of headlights, I would anticipate cycling casualties rising too.

What bothers me most about this is that instead of getting people to drive with more care, it's going to make them more complacent and less careful in looking out for things.

Originally Posted by Daimo

...
But then if your REALLY that worried about it, don't filter. Its a choice you make riding a bike.

I don't think the issue is solely about filtering, but your point about appropriate speed is valid. Positioning to be seen also counts for a lot.

For example, cars waiting to pull out of junctions. If there's a lot of cars around you, but you're not actually filtering, then it's easy to blend into the background.

Originally Posted by Daimo

OR do as some bikes do have have full beam on during the day. No missing you then.

Use of full beam is both annoying & distracting to other drivers, plus has also been shown to make it harder to judge your speed. Yes it has benefits, but it also has significant negatives.

Originally Posted by 21QUEST

Perhaps any increased risk(perceived or otherwise) can reduced or removed by getting a luminous/reflective jacket

Till the clowns make it law for cagers to have high vis strips on all over their cars as it makes them easier to see (and consequently supposedly safer).