Re: Blinking Lights good this time of the year! [Archive]

jim beam

01-03-1970, 06:04 PM

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Wayne Pein writes:
>
>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light in
>>> an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front of
>>> you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does not
>>> appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing object
>>> registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its position is
>>> deceptive.
>
>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
>
>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any deceptive
>> position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that such deception
>> results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further, one could argue
>> that ambiguity results in greater caution.
>
> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take this
> on faith.

analyze jobst, analyze!!! yes, there is a displacement issue, but it's
overshadowed by the fact that the flashing light draws attention and
thus makes presence known - /far/ more important than precise position.

besides, regarding position, if a cyclist is traveling at 25mph across
the road, the maximum angular displacement relative to an oncoming
vehicle, and the blinky is operating at only 2 flashes per second
[somewhat conservative given today's multi-led, multi-flash units], then
the maximum displacement between flashes is about 5.5 meters. make that
bike travel in the same direction as the vehicle, and suddenly you have
a horizontal displacement measured in millimeters. if a vehicle is
aiming to miss your bike with only that clearance, i don't think whether
your blinky is in flash mode is going to be uppermost in your survival
agenda.

Ryan Cousineau

01-03-1970, 06:04 PM

In article <4722949b$0$14129$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:

> Wayne Pein writes:
>
> >> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light in
> >> an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front of
> >> you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does not
> >> appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing object
> >> registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its position is
> >> deceptive.
>
> >> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
> >> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
> >> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
> >> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
>
> > I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any deceptive
> > position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that such deception
> > results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further, one could argue
> > that ambiguity results in greater caution.
>
> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take this
> on faith.
>
> Jobst Brandt

My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"

Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist noticed
at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most drivers have a hard
time locating the rider's position relative to their car. Personally, I
have no problem figuring out where a cyclist is once I've actually
spotted them, blinky light or no (or even no light at all, though that
can be tricky as the rider slips in and out of visibility).

Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move or
appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up motion,
or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid lights,
especially in urban environments with various types of extraneous
lights, sometimes look like just another small (and irrelevant) light.

All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object in
the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a blinky
and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I get noticed
at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously, can anyone here
report an accident they've even heard of where the rider was lit, the
crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't judge your location
properly?"

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

01-03-1970, 06:05 PM

Ryan Cousineau writes:

>>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light
>>>> in an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front
>>>> of you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does
>>>> not appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing
>>>> object registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its
>>>> position is deceptive.

>>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
>>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
>>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
>>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.

>>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any
>>> deceptive position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that
>>> such deception results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further,
>>> one could argue that ambiguity results in greater caution.

>> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take
>> this on faith.

> My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"

> Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist
> noticed at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most
> drivers have a hard time locating the rider's position relative to
> their car. Personally, I have no problem figuring out where a
> cyclist is once I've actually spotted them, blinky light or no (or
> even no light at all, though that can be tricky as the rider slips
> in and out of visibility).

Rear ending is one facet of visibility and as I said, a continuous
oscillating light as a pedal reflector is far more visible and
identifiable than a flashing light. For anything other than in-line
approach, a flashing light is disorienting and hard to place. Even
spoke reflectors are better than a flashing light for side perception.

> Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move
> or appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up
> motion, or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid
> lights, especially in urban environments with various types of
> extraneous lights, sometimes look like just another small (and
> irrelevant) light.

That may be your perception. Bicycles don't move in straight lines
and even the normal excursions give a steady light motion.

> All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object
> in the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a
> blinky and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I
> get noticed at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously,
> can anyone here report an accident they've even heard of where the
> rider was lit, the crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't
> judge your location properly?"

I think the fear of being rear-ended is like many other bicycle
hazards, not supported by the evidence but it makes a plausible story.

Jobst Brandt

jim beam

01-03-1970, 06:05 PM

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <4722949b$0$14129$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
>> Wayne Pein writes:
>>
>>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light in
>>>> an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front of
>>>> you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does not
>>>> appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing object
>>>> registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its position is
>>>> deceptive.
>>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
>>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
>>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
>>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
>>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any deceptive
>>> position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that such deception
>>> results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further, one could argue
>>> that ambiguity results in greater caution.
>> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take this
>> on faith.
>>
>> Jobst Brandt
>
> My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
>
> Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist noticed
> at night.

indeed. youdathunk jobst would recognize that blinking lights are so
effective as warnings, it's why turn signals blink, warning lights on
high towers blink, light houses blink, aircraft nav lights blink,
instrument alert lights blink, etc.

as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
"special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
the http://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.html is on, 3' extra. it's
awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.

> Having noticed a rider, I don't think most drivers have a hard
> time locating the rider's position relative to their car. Personally, I
> have no problem figuring out where a cyclist is once I've actually
> spotted them, blinky light or no (or even no light at all, though that
> can be tricky as the rider slips in and out of visibility).
>
> Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move or
> appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up motion,
> or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid lights,
> especially in urban environments with various types of extraneous
> lights, sometimes look like just another small (and irrelevant) light.
>
> All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object in
> the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a blinky
> and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I get noticed
> at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously, can anyone here
> report an accident they've even heard of where the rider was lit, the
> crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't judge your location
> properly?"
>

Sir Ridesalot

01-03-1970, 06:05 PM

On Oct 27, 2:24 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau writes:
> >>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light
> >>>> in an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front
> >>>> of you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does
> >>>> not appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing
> >>>> object registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its
> >>>> position is deceptive.
> >>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
> >>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
> >>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
> >>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
> >>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any
> >>> deceptive position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that
> >>> such deception results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further,
> >>> one could argue that ambiguity results in greater caution.
> >> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take
> >> this on faith.
> > My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> > didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
> > Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist
> > noticed at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most
> > drivers have a hard time locating the rider's position relative to
> > their car. Personally, I have no problem figuring out where a
> > cyclist is once I've actually spotted them, blinky light or no (or
> > even no light at all, though that can be tricky as the rider slips
> > in and out of visibility).
>
> Rear ending is one facet of visibility and as I said, a continuous
> oscillating light as a pedal reflector is far more visible and
> identifiable than a flashing light. For anything other than in-line
> approach, a flashing light is disorienting and hard to place. Even
> spoke reflectors are better than a flashing light for side perception.
>
> > Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move
> > or appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up
> > motion, or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid
> > lights, especially in urban environments with various types of
> > extraneous lights, sometimes look like just another small (and
> > irrelevant) light.
>
> That may be your perception. Bicycles don't move in straight lines
> and even the normal excursions give a steady light motion.
>
> > All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object
> > in the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a
> > blinky and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I
> > get noticed at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously,
> > can anyone here report an accident they've even heard of where the
> > rider was lit, the crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't
> > judge your location properly?"
>
> I think the fear of being rear-ended is like many other bicycle
> hazards, not supported by the evidence but it makes a plausible story.
>
> Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hi there Jobst.

I originally posted the suggestion of having at least a blinking rear
light when riding in the dark after I had read of yet another cyclist
being struck whilst riding in the dark. Since that post I have read
about two others who have been struck at night or very early in the
morning. My point is that the blinky is better than nothing especially
if one persists in riding in dark clothing. Remember these were in
unlit areas where many drivers do *NOT* expect to see a bicyclist.

BTW I prefer an amber blinky on the rear as well as the front since a
flashing amber light is a recognized caution device. Besides amber is
more visible than red.

I recently went for a drive in the country with my niece. We saw many
areas where an unlit cyclist would not be seen by an overtaking driver
due to the dips and rises in the roadway if the driver was travelling
at the speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour.

The suggestion to use at least a blinky was done, based on
observations of their effectivemess ( I talked with motorists who had
seen my bicycle with them) in an effort to make night riding safer
than it is when bicyclists ride at night with out lights or
reflectors. BTW reflectors are mandatory on bicycles here in Ontario,
Canad. However very, very few people want them on their bikes.

I guess it is like the H***** debate - those who will use them do and
those who do not will not.

May you never be rear-ended by a motor vehicle.

Peter

jim beam

01-03-1970, 06:05 PM

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau writes:
>
>>>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light
>>>>> in an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front
>>>>> of you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does
>>>>> not appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing
>>>>> object registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its
>>>>> position is deceptive.
>
>>>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
>>>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
>>>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
>>>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
>
>>>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any
>>>> deceptive position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that
>>>> such deception results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further,
>>>> one could argue that ambiguity results in greater caution.
>
>>> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take
>>> this on faith.
>
>> My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
>> didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
>
>> Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist
>> noticed at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most
>> drivers have a hard time locating the rider's position relative to
>> their car. Personally, I have no problem figuring out where a
>> cyclist is once I've actually spotted them, blinky light or no (or
>> even no light at all, though that can be tricky as the rider slips
>> in and out of visibility).
>
> Rear ending is one facet of visibility and as I said, a continuous
> oscillating light as a pedal reflector is far more visible and
> identifiable than a flashing light.

except at dusk, and for drivers with no lights [remarkably common] and
of course, from a distance. blinkies are visible from 1km or more.
reflectors aren't.

> For anything other than in-line
> approach, a flashing light is disorienting and hard to place.

no, it attracts the eye and alerts to danger.

> Even
> spoke reflectors are better than a flashing light for side perception.

no, they attract the eye and alert to danger.

>
>> Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move
>> or appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up
>> motion, or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid
>> lights, especially in urban environments with various types of
>> extraneous lights, sometimes look like just another small (and
>> irrelevant) light.
>
> That may be your perception. Bicycles don't move in straight lines

eh?

> and even the normal excursions give a steady light motion.
>
>> All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object
>> in the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a
>> blinky and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I
>> get noticed at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously,
>> can anyone here report an accident they've even heard of where the
>> rider was lit, the crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't
>> judge your location properly?"
>
> I think the fear of being rear-ended is like many other bicycle
> hazards, not supported by the evidence but it makes a plausible story.

you don't ride at night or in the rain then.

unforgiven99@juno.com

01-03-1970, 06:05 PM

On Oct 27, 2:24 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau writes:
> >>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light
> >>>> in an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front
> >>>> of you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does
> >>>> not appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing
> >>>> object registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its
> >>>> position is deceptive.
> >>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
> >>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
> >>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
> >>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
> >>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any
> >>> deceptive position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that
> >>> such deception results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further,
> >>> one could argue that ambiguity results in greater caution.
> >> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take
> >> this on faith.
> > My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> > didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
> > Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist
> > noticed at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most
> > drivers have a hard time locating the rider's position relative to
> > their car. Personally, I have no problem figuring out where a
> > cyclist is once I've actually spotted them, blinky light or no (or
> > even no light at all, though that can be tricky as the rider slips
> > in and out of visibility).
>
> Rear ending is one facet of visibility and as I said, a continuous
> oscillating light as a pedal reflector is far more visible and
> identifiable than a flashing light. For anything other than in-line
> approach, a flashing light is disorienting and hard to place. Even
> spoke reflectors are better than a flashing light for side perception.
>
> > Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move
> > or appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up
> > motion, or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid
> > lights, especially in urban environments with various types of
> > extraneous lights, sometimes look like just another small (and
> > irrelevant) light.
>
> That may be your perception. Bicycles don't move in straight lines
> and even the normal excursions give a steady light motion.
>
> > All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object
> > in the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a
> > blinky and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I
> > get noticed at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously,
> > can anyone here report an accident they've even heard of where the
> > rider was lit, the crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't
> > judge your location properly?"
>
> I think the fear of being rear-ended is like many other bicycle
> hazards, not supported by the evidence but it makes a plausible story.
>
> Jobst Brandt

That's an interesting point, but my experience is that most drivers
can't judge the speed of a bicycle in broad daylight. If someone gets
confused about how far my bike has moved in the third of a second or
so that my Knog Frogs take to blink at least they perceive that
there's a moving object that they need to proceed around with
caution. It doesn't matter whether the car is coming from the side or
behind. Well before the driver's brain can make a decision about
whether there is enough room to cut you off, it needs to perceive that
you're there to cut off in the first place.

Crescentius Vespasianus

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

> Hi there Jobst.
>
> I originally posted the suggestion of having at least a blinking rear
> light when riding in the dark after I had read of yet another cyclist
> being struck whilst riding in the dark. Since that post I have read
> about two others who have been struck at night or very early in the
> morning. My point is that the blinky is better than nothing especially
> if one persists in riding in dark clothing. Remember these were in
> unlit areas where many drivers do *NOT* expect to see a bicyclist.
>
> BTW I prefer an amber blinky on the rear as well as the front since a
> flashing amber light is a recognized caution device. Besides amber is
> more visible than red.
>
> I recently went for a drive in the country with my niece. We saw many
> areas where an unlit cyclist would not be seen by an overtaking driver
> due to the dips and rises in the roadway if the driver was travelling
> at the speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour.
>
> The suggestion to use at least a blinky was done, based on
> observations of their effectivemess ( I talked with motorists who had
> seen my bicycle with them) in an effort to make night riding safer
> than it is when bicyclists ride at night with out lights or
> reflectors. BTW reflectors are mandatory on bicycles here in Ontario,
> Canad. However very, very few people want them on their bikes.
>
> I guess it is like the H***** debate - those who will use them do and
> those who do not will not.
>
> May you never be rear-ended by a motor vehicle.
>
> Peter
----------------
I ride about 4000 miles in the dark a
year, so I have a lot of experience in
this area. The most effective tool, is
to use reflective ankle stuff, and
reflective strips on your bike. You can
have two lights on the back, one
blinking, and one steady, but the
blinking light is for alerting drivers
from a distance that there is a hazard
ahead. Wearing white, and the reflecto
is the best when they are trying to
locate you when they get close. The
only bad thing about blinking lights is
with some drunk drivers. They seem to
fixate on the light, and drive towards
it, like a bug is attracted to a
bug-light. Not many times, but I've had
to do some evasive moves, as the drunk
drives into the shoulder and then
corrects. That's why you have to wear
white, and have the reflecto stuff, for
them to put 2 and 2 together. On the
open road, where speeds are higher, you
should get a powerful blinkie on the
back, because you want them to see you
as far away as possible, because of the
speed they are going >60 mph.

frkrygow@gmail.com

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

On Oct 27, 4:44 am, Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cycle_pat...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> I recently went for a drive in the country with my niece. We saw many
> areas where an unlit cyclist would not be seen by an overtaking driver
> due to the dips and rises in the roadway if the driver was travelling
> at the speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour.

I wonder about your drive in the country. There are roads where a
person in the passenger seat told me "You wouldn't see a bicyclist
riding here" (due to either curves or hill crests), but I felt there
would be no problem. Why? Because, regarding bends to the right, my
passenger was further to the right than I was. I could see further
around the curve. Regarding hill crests, she was worried that she
couldn't see the pavement over the hill - but a cyclist is about five
feet taller than the pavement and is seen even when the pavement
isn't. (Well, unless he's on a low-racer recumbent.)

BTW #1: If one rode on choppy steep hills at night, I suppose a light
up high would be more beneficial than one down low. Maybe clip a
blinkie to a hat or helmet.

BTW #2: Faster cyclists have less problem with those situations (and
many others) than slower cyclists, because closing speed is lower.

> The suggestion to use at least a blinky was done, based on
> observations of their effectivemess ( I talked with motorists who had
> seen my bicycle with them) ...

And as I keep saying, this is how to test your lights. Have a friend
evaluate them. Or trade places, and you drive by and evaluate them.
It's not hard to do, and you'll learn a lot.

- Frank Krygowski

Ryan Cousineau

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

In article <1193474697.153694.16760@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.c om>,
Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> On Oct 27, 2:24 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> > Ryan Cousineau writes:
> > >>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light
> > >>>> in an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front
> > >>>> of you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does
> > >>>> not appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing
> > >>>> object registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its
> > >>>> position is deceptive.
> > >>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
> > >>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
> > >>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
> > >>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
> > >>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any
> > >>> deceptive position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that
> > >>> such deception results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further,
> > >>> one could argue that ambiguity results in greater caution.
> > >> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take
> > >> this on faith.
> > > My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> > > didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
> > > Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist
> > > noticed at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most
> > > drivers have a hard time locating the rider's position relative to
> > > their car. Personally, I have no problem figuring out where a
> > > cyclist is once I've actually spotted them, blinky light or no (or
> > > even no light at all, though that can be tricky as the rider slips
> > > in and out of visibility).
> >
> > Rear ending is one facet of visibility and as I said, a continuous
> > oscillating light as a pedal reflector is far more visible and
> > identifiable than a flashing light. For anything other than in-line
> > approach, a flashing light is disorienting and hard to place. Even
> > spoke reflectors are better than a flashing light for side perception.
> >
> > > Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move
> > > or appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up
> > > motion, or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid
> > > lights, especially in urban environments with various types of
> > > extraneous lights, sometimes look like just another small (and
> > > irrelevant) light.
> >
> > That may be your perception. Bicycles don't move in straight lines
> > and even the normal excursions give a steady light motion.
> >
> > > All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object
> > > in the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a
> > > blinky and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I
> > > get noticed at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously,
> > > can anyone here report an accident they've even heard of where the
> > > rider was lit, the crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't
> > > judge your location properly?"
> >
> > I think the fear of being rear-ended is like many other bicycle
> > hazards, not supported by the evidence but it makes a plausible story.
> >
> > Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> Hi there Jobst.
>
> I originally posted the suggestion of having at least a blinking rear
> light when riding in the dark after I had read of yet another cyclist
> being struck whilst riding in the dark. Since that post I have read
> about two others who have been struck at night or very early in the
> morning. My point is that the blinky is better than nothing especially
> if one persists in riding in dark clothing. Remember these were in
> unlit areas where many drivers do *NOT* expect to see a bicyclist.

Jobst is talking about the question of a blinking rear light versus a
solid (continuously-on) light. We're in certain agreement that some sort
of lighting (front and rear) is generally necessary for safe
night-riding.

Any light is better than no light at night,

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

joseph.santaniello@gmail.com

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

On Oct 27, 3:53 am, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> > Hi there Jobst.
>
> > I originally posted the suggestion of having at least a blinking rear
> > light when riding in the dark after I had read of yet another cyclist
> > being struck whilst riding in the dark. Since that post I have read
> > about two others who have been struck at night or very early in the
> > morning. My point is that the blinky is better than nothing especially
> > if one persists in riding in dark clothing. Remember these were in
> > unlit areas where many drivers do *NOT* expect to see a bicyclist.
>
> > BTW I prefer an amber blinky on the rear as well as the front since a
> > flashing amber light is a recognized caution device. Besides amber is
> > more visible than red.
>
> > I recently went for a drive in the country with my niece. We saw many
> > areas where an unlit cyclist would not be seen by an overtaking driver
> > due to the dips and rises in the roadway if the driver was travelling
> > at the speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour.
>
> > The suggestion to use at least a blinky was done, based on
> > observations of their effectivemess ( I talked with motorists who had
> > seen my bicycle with them) in an effort to make night riding safer
> > than it is when bicyclists ride at night with out lights or
> > reflectors. BTW reflectors are mandatory on bicycles here in Ontario,
> > Canad. However very, very few people want them on their bikes.
>
> > I guess it is like the H***** debate - those who will use them do and
> > those who do not will not.
>
> > May you never be rear-ended by a motor vehicle.
>
> > Peter
>
> ----------------
> I ride about 4000 miles in the dark a
> year, so I have a lot of experience in
> this area. The most effective tool, is
> to use reflective ankle stuff, and
> reflective strips on your bike. You can
> have two lights on the back, one
> blinking, and one steady, but the
> blinking light is for alerting drivers
> from a distance that there is a hazard
> ahead. Wearing white, and the reflecto
> is the best when they are trying to
> locate you when they get close. The
> only bad thing about blinking lights is
> with some drunk drivers. They seem to
> fixate on the light, and drive towards
> it, like a bug is attracted to a
> bug-light. Not many times, but I've had
> to do some evasive moves, as the drunk
> drives into the shoulder and then
> corrects. That's why you have to wear
> white, and have the reflecto stuff, for
> them to put 2 and 2 together. On the
> open road, where speeds are higher, you
> should get a powerful blinkie on the
> back, because you want them to see you
> as far away as possible, because of the
> speed they are going >60 mph.

That is similar to the approach I use. Red reflective tape on the
seatpost and rear stays, white on the headtube and forks. A white
reflective ankle band, a white reflective arm-band near the shoulder.
As for lights a red blinking rear, and a white blinking front.

I have a neon-yellow vest with wide white reflective bands that I use
too if I'm going to ride in a dusk type light, but as I have a
reasonably aggresive position on the bike, I don't think this is very
effective. If I sat more upright it would be.

Joseph

mike.a.schwab@gmail.com

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

On Oct 27, 7:08 am, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
<joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 27, 3:53 am, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Hi there Jobst.
>
> > > I originally posted the suggestion of having at least a blinking rear
> > > light when riding in the dark after I had read of yet another cyclist
> > > being struck whilst riding in the dark. Since that post I have read
> > > about two others who have been struck at night or very early in the
> > > morning. My point is that the blinky is better than nothing especially
> > > if one persists in riding in dark clothing. Remember these were in
> > > unlit areas where many drivers do *NOT* expect to see a bicyclist.
>
> > > BTW I prefer an amber blinky on the rear as well as the front since a
> > > flashing amber light is a recognized caution device. Besides amber is
> > > more visible than red.
>
> > > I recently went for a drive in the country with my niece. We saw many
> > > areas where an unlit cyclist would not be seen by an overtaking driver
> > > due to the dips and rises in the roadway if the driver was travelling
> > > at the speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour.
>
> > > The suggestion to use at least a blinky was done, based on
> > > observations of their effectivemess ( I talked with motorists who had
> > > seen my bicycle with them) in an effort to make night riding safer
> > > than it is when bicyclists ride at night with out lights or
> > > reflectors. BTW reflectors are mandatory on bicycles here in Ontario,
> > > Canad. However very, very few people want them on their bikes.
>
> > > I guess it is like the H***** debate - those who will use them do and
> > > those who do not will not.
>
> > > May you never be rear-ended by a motor vehicle.
>
> > > Peter
>
> > ----------------
> > I ride about 4000 miles in the dark a
> > year, so I have a lot of experience in
> > this area. The most effective tool, is
> > to use reflective ankle stuff, and
> > reflective strips on your bike. You can
> > have two lights on the back, one
> > blinking, and one steady, but the
> > blinking light is for alerting drivers
> > from a distance that there is a hazard
> > ahead. Wearing white, and the reflecto
> > is the best when they are trying to
> > locate you when they get close. The
> > only bad thing about blinking lights is
> > with some drunk drivers. They seem to
> > fixate on the light, and drive towards
> > it, like a bug is attracted to a
> > bug-light. Not many times, but I've had
> > to do some evasive moves, as the drunk
> > drives into the shoulder and then
> > corrects. That's why you have to wear
> > white, and have the reflecto stuff, for
> > them to put 2 and 2 together. On the
> > open road, where speeds are higher, you
> > should get a powerful blinkie on the
> > back, because you want them to see you
> > as far away as possible, because of the
> > speed they are going >60 mph.
>
> That is similar to the approach I use. Red reflective tape on the
> seatpost and rear stays, white on the headtube and forks. A white
> reflective ankle band, a white reflective arm-band near the shoulder.
> As for lights a red blinking rear, and a white blinking front.
>
> I have a neon-yellow vest with wide white reflective bands that I use
> too if I'm going to ride in a dusk type light, but as I have a
> reasonably aggresive position on the bike, I don't think this is very
> effective. If I sat more upright it would be.
>
> Joseph

I like a mix of blinking and steady lights.
http://picasaweb.google.com/mike.a.schwab/NewBike

nmp

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

mike.a.schwab@gmail.com wrote:

> I like a mix of blinking and steady lights.
> http://picasaweb.google.com/mike.a.schwab/NewBike

Fantastic bicycle you have!

DennisTheBald

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

I'm a big fan of the single D-cell rescue strobe, mixed in with other
stuff. These little zenon bulbs have caused motorists to lean out
their windows and yell at me that my light was too bright. I figure
it has to be as they ain't.

I also like Christmas lights, festive and functional.

Aeek

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

On 27 Oct 2007 12:55:20 GMT, nmp <address@is.invalid> wrote:

>mike.a.schwab@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I like a mix of blinking and steady lights.
>> http://picasaweb.google.com/mike.a.schwab/NewBike
>
>Fantastic bicycle you have!

A bent Xtracycle? What's weird is I can't see the pedals!

Mike A Schwab

01-03-1970, 06:06 PM

On Oct 27, 8:14 am, Aeek <aeeee...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> On 27 Oct 2007 12:55:20 GMT, nmp <addr...@is.invalid> wrote:
>
> >mike.a.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> I like a mix of blinking and steady lights.
> >>http://picasaweb.google.com/mike.a.schwab/NewBike
>
> >Fantastic bicycle you have!
>
> A bent Xtracycle? What's weird is I can't see the pedals!

It is a Rans V2 Formulae 26 HD with xtracycle.
Someone posted a link to http://www.angletechcycles.com/bikes/freighter/index.htm
on http://www.bikejournal.com , I printed out the page and had my LBS
order the bike, http://www.xtracycles.com , and build it for me. Only
a few Recumbents will work with an xtracycle due to the change in
chainline.

The pedals are just back of the head tube, and hard to see.

Jay Beattie

01-03-1970, 06:07 PM

On Oct 27, 6:56 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <4722949b$0$14129$742ec...@news.sonic.net>,
> > jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
> >> Wayne Pein writes:
>
> >>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light in
> >>>> an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front of
> >>>> you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does not
> >>>> appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing object
> >>>> registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its position is
> >>>> deceptive.
> >>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
> >>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
> >>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
> >>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
> >>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any deceptive
> >>> position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that such deception
> >>> results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further, one could argue
> >>> that ambiguity results in greater caution.
> >> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take this
> >> on faith.
>
> >> Jobst Brandt
>
> > My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> > didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
>
> > Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist noticed
> > at night.
>
> indeed. youdathunk jobst would recognize that blinking lights are so
> effective as warnings, it's why turn signals blink, warning lights on
> high towers blink, light houses blink, aircraft nav lights blink,
> instrument alert lights blink, etc.
>
> as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
> one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
> average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
> working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
> "special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
> thehttp://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.htmlis on, 3' extra. it's
> awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.
>
>
>
> > Having noticed a rider, I don't think most drivers have a hard
> > time locating the rider's position relative to their car. Personally, I
> > have no problem figuring out where a cyclist is once I've actually
> > spotted them, blinky light or no (or even no light at all, though that
> > can be tricky as the rider slips in and out of visibility).
>
> > Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move or
> > appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up motion,
> > or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid lights,
> > especially in urban environments with various types of extraneous
> > lights, sometimes look like just another small (and irrelevant) light.
>
> > All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object in
> > the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a blinky
> > and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I get noticed
> > at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously, can anyone here
> > report an accident they've even heard of where the rider was lit, the
> > crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't judge your location
> > properly?"- Hide quoted text -

Also, the disorientation caused by a blinking light only occurs, in my
experience, in a pitch black environment -- like a fun house. That is
not a road. There is usually enough ambient light from houses,
buildings, street lights, the moon, reflectors, to locate a bicycle on
a road once it is noticed. Also, I agree that a blinker
differentiates a bicycle from other red light sources like car tail
lights. This is an issue for me because I am often passed by cars in
the rain at night, and a fixed red light might get swamped in all of
the other fixed red lights. I think a blinker with reflectors that
move (on shoe heels, legs, etc) works well.

I have never been rear ended on a bike. My mishaps at night have
involved hitting obstacles -- pot holes, debris, etc. -- or having a
car pull out or pull-in in front of me. Basically, these are the same
problems I have during the day, but the drivers have more of an excuse
at night. -- Jay Beattie.

Hank Wirtz

01-03-1970, 06:07 PM

On Oct 27, 6:56 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:

> as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
> one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
> average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
> working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
> "special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
> thehttp://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.htmlis on, 3' extra. it's
> awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.
>

I've got those on a couple of my bikes, and they are indeed awesome.
That top one with the big reflector is _astonishingly_ bright. "You
could take an eye out with that thing!" I've never forgotten to turn
it off when I get to work, because it so completely illuminates a wall
in the parking garage. That wall is at least 40 feet away from the
bike racks.

And if I'm not mistaken, its flashing pattern is such that it's never
completely off. The two smaller LEDs alternate so that one is always
on, while the big one flashes every second or so, so drivers' eyes
should be able to track your location accurately.

Paul Kopit

01-03-1970, 06:07 PM

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:56:47 -0700, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

>as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
>one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
>average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
>working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
>"special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
>the http://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.html is on, 3' extra. it's
>awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.

I use the same blinking light. It is so bright, that I've been asked
to put put it into my jersey while riding an early morning, training
ride where we ride in a line. I believe it seems so bright because
the center circle is clear/white.

Tom Sherman

01-03-1970, 06:07 PM

Mike A Schwab wrote:
> On Oct 27, 8:14 am, Aeek <aeeee...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>> On 27 Oct 2007 12:55:20 GMT, nmp <addr...@is.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> mike.a.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> I like a mix of blinking and steady lights.
>>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/mike.a.schwab/NewBike
>>> Fantastic bicycle you have!
>> A bent Xtracycle? What's weird is I can't see the pedals!
>
> It is a Rans V2 Formulae 26 HD with xtracycle....

Mike should know better.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?

Sir Ridesalot

01-03-1970, 06:09 PM

On Oct 27, 5:47 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> In article <1193474697.153694.16...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.c om>,
> Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cycle_pat...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 27, 2:24 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> > > Ryan Cousineau writes:
> > > >>>> Visible is not the only criterion. Take that blinking red light
> > > >>>> in an unlighted place and wave it slowly back and forth in front
> > > >>>> of you at arms length. I think you'll notice that the light does
> > > >>>> not appear where you know your hand to be. A moving flashing
> > > >>>> object registers slowly enough in a dark environment that its
> > > >>>> position is deceptive.
> > > >>>> For this reason, people who have studied the phenomenon advise
> > > >>>> using a steady light or better yet one that moves like pedal
> > > >>>> reflectors. The rising and falling light of pedal reflectors is
> > > >>>> unambiguous in position and what it mean to any observer.
> > > >>> I don't believe that a rapidly flashing blinky suffers any
> > > >>> deceptive position detection. And even if it does, I doubt that
> > > >>> such deception results in greater hazard to bicyclists. Further,
> > > >>> one could argue that ambiguity results in greater caution.
> > > >> This is not a belief matter. Try it. I don't expect you to take
> > > >> this on faith.
> > > > My observation is that in most cases, the problem at night is not "I
> > > > didn't realize how close the cyclist was," it is "I didn't see him!"
> > > > Blinky lights do one thing, and one thing well: make the cyclist
> > > > noticed at night. Having noticed a rider, I don't think most
> > > > drivers have a hard time locating the rider's position relative to
> > > > their car. Personally, I have no problem figuring out where a
> > > > cyclist is once I've actually spotted them, blinky light or no (or
> > > > even no light at all, though that can be tricky as the rider slips
> > > > in and out of visibility).
>
> > > Rear ending is one facet of visibility and as I said, a continuous
> > > oscillating light as a pedal reflector is far more visible and
> > > identifiable than a flashing light. For anything other than in-line
> > > approach, a flashing light is disorienting and hard to place. Even
> > > spoke reflectors are better than a flashing light for side perception.
>
> > > > Conversely, the problem with non-blinking lights is they don't move
> > > > or appear to move very quickly. Human vision is good at picking up
> > > > motion, or apparent motion. Blinking lights are conspicuous. Solid
> > > > lights, especially in urban environments with various types of
> > > > extraneous lights, sometimes look like just another small (and
> > > > irrelevant) light.
>
> > > That may be your perception. Bicycles don't move in straight lines
> > > and even the normal excursions give a steady light motion.
>
> > > > All any light can promise is to make the rider register as an object
> > > > in the environment. If you're into a belt and suspenders, maybe a
> > > > blinky and a solid light is a nice choice. But I figure that if I
> > > > get noticed at all, the chances of being hit are low. Seriously,
> > > > can anyone here report an accident they've even heard of where the
> > > > rider was lit, the crash was at night, and the excuse was "I didn't
> > > > judge your location properly?"
>
> > > I think the fear of being rear-ended is like many other bicycle
> > > hazards, not supported by the evidence but it makes a plausible story.
>
> > > Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Hi there Jobst.
>
> > I originally posted the suggestion of having at least a blinking rear
> > light when riding in the dark after I had read of yet another cyclist
> > being struck whilst riding in the dark. Since that post I have read
> > about two others who have been struck at night or very early in the
> > morning. My point is that the blinky is better than nothing especially
> > if one persists in riding in dark clothing. Remember these were in
> > unlit areas where many drivers do *NOT* expect to see a bicyclist.
>
> Jobst is talking about the question of a blinking rear light versus a
> solid (continuously-on) light. We're in certain agreement that some sort
> of lighting (front and rear) is generally necessary for safe
> night-riding.
>
> Any light is better than no light at night,
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@sfu.cahttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
> Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks for clarifying that Ryan.

>From my observations I feel that for the rear a blinking light is
better than a solid one as the blinking does catch the eye better than
a solid light does. I have both an amber blinky (for better visibilty
and it's recognized warning as a warning device by all) and a red
blinky for legal puposes on the rear. On the front of my Mtb/Cyclo-
cross/Touring bike I have an amber blinky mounted on each of the front
rigid fork legs just below the cantilever mounting studs.

Peter

Mike

01-03-1970, 06:10 PM

In article <1193559308.677961.300990@k35g2000prh.googlegroups. com>, hank@wirtznet.net says...
> On Oct 27, 6:56 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
> > one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
> > average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
> > working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
> > "special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
> > thehttp://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.htmlis on, 3' extra. it's
> > awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.
> >
>
> I've got those on a couple of my bikes, and they are indeed awesome.
> That top one with the big reflector is _astonishingly_ bright. "You
> could take an eye out with that thing!" I've never forgotten to turn
> it off when I get to work, because it so completely illuminates a wall
> in the parking garage. That wall is at least 40 feet away from the
> bike racks.
>
> And if I'm not mistaken, its flashing pattern is such that it's never
> completely off. The two smaller LEDs alternate so that one is always
> on, while the big one flashes every second or so, so drivers' eyes
> should be able to track your location accurately.
>
Further support for this light. The first night I used it I was followed home by a motorcyclist who wanted to know what
it was - she was most impressed by the brightness. In addition, at the rear of my bike AI have two smaller frame-
mounted blinkys, a helmet-mounted blinky and a glowing ankle-band. The combination makes me look a bit like a Christmas
tree but at least it gets the attention of any driver who is actually conscious. At the front I have two small frame-
mounted white/amber blinkys, a 6 Watt halogen rechargable and a home-made white flasher with 22 LEDs generating a total
of around 1 W. The combination is similarly attention-seeking. I still get cut-off occasionally at intersections, but
no driver has the excuse that they couldn't see me if they actually looked up from their cell-phone, stereo-control, or
whatever.

Mike

jim beam

01-03-1970, 06:14 PM

Mike wrote:
> In article <1193559308.677961.300990@k35g2000prh.googlegroups. com>, hank@wirtznet.net says...
>> On Oct 27, 6:56 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
>>> one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
>>> average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
>>> working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
>>> "special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
>>> thehttp://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.htmlis on, 3' extra. it's
>>> awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.
>>>
>> I've got those on a couple of my bikes, and they are indeed awesome.
>> That top one with the big reflector is _astonishingly_ bright. "You
>> could take an eye out with that thing!" I've never forgotten to turn
>> it off when I get to work, because it so completely illuminates a wall
>> in the parking garage. That wall is at least 40 feet away from the
>> bike racks.
>>
>> And if I'm not mistaken, its flashing pattern is such that it's never
>> completely off. The two smaller LEDs alternate so that one is always
>> on, while the big one flashes every second or so, so drivers' eyes
>> should be able to track your location accurately.
>>
> Further support for this light. The first night I used it I was followed home by a motorcyclist who wanted to know what
> it was - she was most impressed by the brightness.

that was how i discovered it too. /intensely/ irritating to follow,
even in daylight.

i'm surprised the brightness is legal frankly. but hey, all i selfishly
care about is that motorists stay the heck away. and they sure do!

> In addition, at the rear of my bike AI have two smaller frame-
> mounted blinkys, a helmet-mounted blinky and a glowing ankle-band. The combination makes me look a bit like a Christmas
> tree but at least it gets the attention of any driver who is actually conscious. At the front I have two small frame-
> mounted white/amber blinkys, a 6 Watt halogen rechargable and a home-made white flasher with 22 LEDs generating a total
> of around 1 W. The combination is similarly attention-seeking. I still get cut-off occasionally at intersections, but
> no driver has the excuse that they couldn't see me if they actually looked up from their cell-phone, stereo-control, or
> whatever.
>
> Mike

Hank Wirtz

01-03-1970, 06:14 PM

On Oct 28, 6:23 pm, Mike <m.fee@iirrll..ccrrii..nnzz> wrote:
> In article <1193559308.677961.300...@k35g2000prh.googlegroups. com>, h...@wirtznet.net says...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 27, 6:56 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > > as for bikes, i've experimented with a number of different blinkies, and
> > > one i have currently is by far the most effective i've ever used. on
> > > average, passing cars give at least 3' extra clearance when it's
> > > working. [i know this because i have two, one "standard" and the new
> > > "special" one. if just the standard cateye is on, normal clearance. if
> > > thehttp://ecom1.planetbike.com/3034.htmlison, 3' extra. it's
> > > awesome.] it's /extremely/ bright.
>
> > I've got those on a couple of my bikes, and they are indeed awesome.
> > That top one with the big reflector is _astonishingly_ bright. "You
> > could take an eye out with that thing!" I've never forgotten to turn
> > it off when I get to work, because it so completely illuminates a wall
> > in the parking garage. That wall is at least 40 feet away from the
> > bike racks.
>
> > And if I'm not mistaken, its flashing pattern is such that it's never
> > completely off. The two smaller LEDs alternate so that one is always
> > on, while the big one flashes every second or so, so drivers' eyes
> > should be able to track your location accurately.
>
> Further support for this light. The first night I used it I was followed home by a motorcyclist who wanted to know what
> it was - she was most impressed by the brightness. In addition, at the rear of my bike AI have two smaller frame-
> mounted blinkys, a helmet-mounted blinky and a glowing ankle-band. The combination makes me look a bit like a Christmas
> tree but at least it gets the attention of any driver who is actually conscious. At the front I have two small frame-
> mounted white/amber blinkys, a 6 Watt halogen rechargable and a home-made white flasher with 22 LEDs generating a total
> of around 1 W. The combination is similarly attention-seeking. I still get cut-off occasionally at intersections, but
> no driver has the excuse that they couldn't see me if they actually looked up from their cell-phone, stereo-control, or
> whatever.
>
> Mike- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh, I also use bar-end mounted blinkies. Like you seem to have
discovered, multiple redundancies are good!