CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Cycling in the dark: fluorescents and/or reflectives?

(21 posts)

  1. Arellcat
    Moderator

    With various mini-debates about bicycle lighting efficacy, from Dave's Death Star superlasers to the supermarkets' finest glow-worm LEDs, to commuting safety and riding position, I wasn't sure where to post this.

    Via another forum's linking to b3ta about Banksy's (splendidly creepy, possibly ironic) intro for the eponymous yellow-skinned cartoon family, and to Treehugger for related commentary, and a sideways link to Planet Green and then Baltimore Spokes about cyclist visibility at night...I dug up this interesting paper in the Journal of Australasian College of Road Safety, Aug 2010, about clothing choices for riding in the dark:

    Cyclist visibility at night: Perceptions of visibility do not necessarily match reality (pp56-60).

    "Drivers recognised more cyclists wearing the reflective vest plus reflectors (90%) than the reflective vest alone (50%), fluorescent vest (15%) or black clothing (2%). Older drivers recognised the cyclists less often than younger drivers (51% vs 27%). The findings suggest that reflective ankle and knee markings are particularly valuable at night, while
    fluorescent clothing is not. Cyclists wearing fluorescent clothing may be at particular risk if they incorrectly believe themselves to be conspicuous to drivers at night."

    I've always said that being visible amongst light clutter is about perspicuity as much as conspicuity, which is why reflective ankle bands and wrist bands, reflective headbands and/or headtorchs are helpful at picking out the motions peculiar to cycling. I think it's about time "someone" started making cycle clothing in which the entire fabric is interwoven with reflective thread, instead of continuing with rinky-dink logos and little sprinkes of geometric rectangles and zip tags.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  2. gembo
    Member

    The Altura Night Vision stuff is very visible at night. They have brought out a fluorescent version which is still visible at night with the massive amount of reflective piping (albeit still stuck on rather than interwoven) but on a fluorescent backdrop which presumably means it is easier to see during the day [I know we have debated visibility/invisibility on various fora and also the Gorilla].

    They also have a red one which seems most vibrant - the one the celebs wore with the daft LED tail.

    The variables make my brain hurt - waterproof, breathable, visible, aesthetic, longevity, cost

    Posted 13 years ago #

  3. Min
    Member

    I like to have an ankle strap ever since a motorist friend saw me wearing them in the dark once and told me they were brilliant. And they do shout "cyclist" louder than any other type of reflecter IMO. Plus something reflective round the hand area too to make signals more clear.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  4. wee folding bike
    Member

    You should have pedal reflectors anyway (OK my Campag/Look pedals don't) and a lot of shoes have reflectors on the back.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  5. Min
    Member

    I seriously doubt pedal reflectors are actually visible from the back and certainly won't be from the front. Unless the rider pedals very flat footed.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  6. druidh
    Member

    No pedal reflectors on any of my (clip-in) style pedals. As wfb says though - most shoes have something on the heel.

    Polaris actually had a set of tights which were interwoven with reflective fabric, but I'be not seem them for a few years. A (French) friend of mine had a jacket which was completely made of reflective fabric, but I've never seen one for sale in this country.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  7. Smudge
    Member

    None of my pedals (spd clip in half and halfs) came with reflectors or are particularly practical to fit reflectors to.
    They now have orange retro-reflective tape stuck on*, I've had several (sensible) driver friends comment that orange pedal reflectors are great and have caused them to notice bicycles they otherwise had missed.
    I also (as some of you know) wear an Altura NV jacket, grey not yellow though as commuting gear gets grubby too fast and I'm not convinced daytime in/visibility is due to difficulty seeing as much as difficulty looking/registering what is seen.

    *if anyone would like some, remind me before the next meet up and I'll donate some in the name of safety :-)

    Posted 13 years ago #

  8. wingpig
    Member

    Fluoro seems most noticeable at dawn/dusk when it's still yellow when everything else has a blue cast. Otherwise, reflecting moving parts always seem most "Behold! A cyclist!" to me. The reflectors that came with my pedals fell straight out but I fished out an old pseudo-Scotchlite Sam Browne yesterday which I shall cut up and mount to pedals, crank arms and rims.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  9. Dave
    Member

    One thing I always wonder about with such research is, are they asking people how quickly they could identify an obstacle ahead, or how quickly they could definitively say it was a cyclist.

    To understand why this is important, you could imagine a recumbent which had a genuine car rear lamp fitted. It would be visible from just as far away as an actual car, assuming it was fitted properly, but of course there can be no pedal reflectors. Now suppose the normal bike rider alongside the recumbent has no lights at all, but does have pedal reflectors.

    It would hardly surprise anyone that drivers were able to spot "a cyclist" from further away in the case of the unlit rider than the lit one. Yet, nobody really would argue that the unlit rider is better off - the drivers coming up behind (what they assume is) a motorbike or even a car with one light broken are not more likely to ram it because they think it's bigger and harder than a squishy cyclist.

    In fact the whole assertion that drivers will be more careful, give you more room and margin of safety if they immediately know you are "merely" a cyclist seems like quite a big assumption to me, and one which flies in the face of drivers' behaviour during the day. Could you even argue that it's better *not* to be identified as "merely" a cyclist (provided that you are well lit)?

    Interesting questions!

    Posted 13 years ago #

  10. gembo
    Member

    It has been six months so I have probably forgotten but I think I get more trouble from motor vehicles during daylight. Obvioulsy the rush hour in darkness can be hairy but everyone is probably going a little bit more slowly? Later on at night, the roads are quieter, I am mostly talking well lit areas. Only one real instance of crazy driving that nearly removed me. When pubs come out might be dicey but I am in my bed.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  11. druidh
    Member

    Hmm - I was just thinking this past week that drivers overtaking me seem to be leaving less room now that it's dark. I cycle with a Cherry Bomb on the helmet and a fairly bright Cateye on the rack, reflective patches and piping on clothing, so it's not that they aren't seeing me.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  12. chdot
    Admin

    When flashing LEDs first came out, I perceived that drivers came closer.

    I imagined that they were mesmerised and 'drawn in'.

    perceived, imagined

    Does anyone 'know'???

    Posted 13 years ago #

  13. Dave
    Member

    When I first fitted lights to my lowracer for last winter, I got a rude shock because people suddenly started passing a lot closer.

    My assumption is that it's because rather than seeing me, they just see "a bike" and so pass with the usual lack of care. Willing to entertain a better explanation though? I did have better luck with steady, rather than flashing.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  14. wingpig
    Member

    We should write to that guy who did the wig experiment to do the same car-passing-margin assay but with various blinking/steady searing/dim fluoro/reflective during the winter, also taking into account his distance from the left of the lane and the reasons for it being so (drains, doors etc.) to see if distance-from-kerb is another factor.

    If drivers know how wide something is do they then leave the smallest possible margin? If they know they're definitely seeing a bike, and seeing all of it, would they automatically go into "don't leave it anywhere near as much room as a car. What? What's the highway code?"-mode rather than leaving a bit of margin for error if they can't quite tell what it is they're about to steam past? Is it something to do with being more confident about the absence of things coming in the other direction when everything is illuminated?

    Posted 13 years ago #

  15. Smudge
    Member

    I sometimes throw in a deliberate bit of wobbling to worry them about their paintwork ;-))
    Seems to help :-D

    Posted 13 years ago #

  16. gembo
    Member

    @wingpig - as I always like to remind wig experimenters - it is not the ones that see you that you have to worry about.

    Over-filled panniers on both sides does seem to help cars judge how wide I am

    Posted 13 years ago #

  17. Dave
    Member

    @gembo - what proportion of crashes happen because people didn't see you though, as opposed to because they made a bad choice anyway?

    On the open road, I ride the bike such that it's impossible for anyone to get past without using the oncoming lane (i.e. usually in the left tyre track). Since I have not yet been smeared, the proportion of drivers who *aren't looking* must be very small - the first one would kill me after all.

    No, the main problem there is more things like, "the HGV has gone onto the oncoming lane to get past but has forgotten how long his trailer is" or "the car has gone over into the oncoming lane, but not enough for comfort".

    In both cases you have been seen quite clearly. However, the reaction to the being seen is not all that it could have been. This is why things which get you more or less room are so significant, because the number of "genuinely couldn't see you"'s is so tiny, but every driver who you interact with has the option of not doing so properly.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  18. Min
    Member

    I wonder if the apparent increase in buzzing at night is to do with the fact that, to avoid costly repairs, drivers have to miss you. At night perhaps they think they only have to miss the light. And since there is a fair portion of you sticking out to the right of that light that means they drive even closer.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  19. gembo
    Member

    @Dave - take your point about bad choices leading to cyclists being squashed. This must form a proportion of accidents, hence the Cyclists Beware, This Lorry Turns Left stickers etc. But there is another proportion linked to the Gorilla string where cyclists are not seen, nor motorbikers as the driver is not expecting to see them.

    I think you are also an argument for your own counter argument, as it were. You ride where you have to be seen - no one has smeared you. You are not invisible at all, indeed you are more noticeable to cycle blind drivers as you are where a car should be - they have to see you. I am thinking about switching to pannier on the right, or double panniers to get more width, so that I am seen by all and sundry.

    People could be lying when they say Sorry MAte I Didnae See Ye. SMIDSY being more palatable than Sorry Mate I Did See You BUt Deciced to Take You Out Anyway (SMIDSYBTDYOA - also this is harder to say as an acronym).

    My main bone of contention is with the Wig Experiment - it is set up so that everyone has seen the cyclist then makes a judgement about how close they will pass them.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  20. Smudge
    Member

    Maybe long blonde wigs are just more visible... has anyone conducted any back to back tests against conventional conspicuity aids??

    ;-))

    Posted 13 years ago #

  21. druidh
    Member

    @Min
    I wonder if the apparent increase in buzzing at night is to do with the fact that, to avoid costly repairs, drivers have to miss you. At night perhaps they think they only have to miss the light. And since there is a fair portion of you sticking out to the right of that light that means they drive even closer.

    Ah but I also follow the offside (pannier) rule....

    Posted 13 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin