Bike Ninjas!

Plastik

I see bike ninjas

Jawgap

07Lapierre wrote: »

I passed a cyclist this evening. No lights, dark coloured bike, dark coloured trousers and black backpack.
He did have reflectors on his pedals and an orange (dark) jacket.

No idea if he made it home alive!

My own favourite was the guy (I think it was a guy) cycling the wrong way along Parnell Square South, in the accepted ninja cyclist uniform with no lights etc......

.....Bike Ninja Score 9/10 - mark deducted for staring at his phone while cycling as the illuminated screen broke his camouflage!! No bonus for the headphones as they did nothing to decrease his visibility, or for operating in 'Salmon' mode

Wishbone Ash

Several times I've assumed I'm behind a cyclist with no rear light only to discover, at the lights, that they've hidden it under a long coat. Mentioned it to a girl while alongside her at the Black Church one night but she wasn't particularly interested.

Red light fitted to rear stay but then obscured by a pannier is another preferred method of some.

Roadhawk

Im buying another bike just so i can get this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfUsXckGJpQ

So cool!!!

what_traffic

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Several times I've assumed I'm behind a cyclist with no rear light only to discover, at the lights, that they've hidden it under a long coat. Mentioned it to a girl while alongside her at the Black Church one night but she wasn't particularly interested.

Its why on old High Nelly Bikes the lights were pretty much always placed lower down on the right side of the bike. Long coats were more common back then in them old days. (Also the Gardai back them actually enforced implementation of lights on bikes, but thats for another thread)

The best Bike Ninja story I heard is from 40 years back when two old boys crashed into each other, head on collision, when on the bike.
It was a moonless night, pitch black, rural West of Ireland road and when they had figured out what had actually happened the first thing that one of them said to the other.
"At least one of us should get a light for the bike"

tomasrojo

For quite a long time the only requirement at the rear was that part of the mudguard be painted white, and then a reflector requirement was added. You still see roadsters around with the tip of the rear mudguard painted white. Not sure when they finally added the requirement of a tail light.

There was a thread recently about an old road safety public information film, and the emphasis in it is on having a head light and rear reflector, mounted on the mudguard.

tomasrojo

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Several times I've assumed I'm behind a cyclist with no rear light only to discover, at the lights, that they've hidden it under a long coat. Mentioned it to a girl while alongside her at the Black Church one night but she wasn't particularly interested.

Red light fitted to rear stay but then obscured by a pannier is another preferred method of some.

And there are some people on road bikes whose only rear light is on the helmet, and that light disappears behind their back pack when they go for the drops.

irlirishkev

I'm a big wuss so opted for the car yesterday and today (something I regret every time I drive home), but saw a girl cycling last night with her hi-vis, that was at one point clearly draped over her backpack, now dangling down over her rear wheel. I intended to inform her at the lights but she didn't stop at the lights so I couldn't. No lights on her bike either.
I genuinely feared for what could have happened.

railer201

tomasrojo wrote: »

For quite a long time the only requirement at the rear was that part of the mudguard be painted white, and then a reflector requirement was added. You still see roadsters around with the tip of the rear mudguard painted white. Not sure when they finally added the requirement of a tail light.

There was a thread recently about an old road safety public information film, and the emphasis in it is on having a head light and rear reflector, mounted on the mudguard.

Early sixties as I recall, the following link appears to confirm that.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1963/si/189/made/en/print

Wishbone Ash

railer201 wrote: »

Early sixties as I recall, the following link appears to confirm that.

I think it was in long before that.

The 1933 Road Traffic Act (Section 161):

(2) There shall be carried in the prescribed position and manner on every mechanically propelled bicycle used without any vehicle or attachment in the nature of a vehicle attached to the side thereof, while it is on any road during lighting-up hours, the following lamps duly lit and in efficient condition, that is to say:—

(a) one lamp showing to the front of such bicycle a white light visible from a reasonable distance; and

(b) one other lamp showing to the rear of such bicycle a red light visible from a reasonable distance.

It may have also been a requirement before 1933 but I haven't seen it or have time to check it out.

railer201

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I think it was in long before that.

The 1933 Road Traffic Act (Section 161):



It may have also been a requirement before 1933 but I haven't seen it or have time to check it out.

That refers to mechanically propelled bicycles such as the 'Cyclemaster' famous in the fifties and possibly before.

The only requirement for a 'pedal' cycle was a reflector (at the rear).

Reading further on in the 1933 Act -

(4) There shall be carried in the prescribed position and manner on every vehicle which is neither a mechanically propelled vehicle nor a vehicle drawn by a mechanically propelled vehicle, while it is on any road during lighting-up hours—

(a) one lamp duly lit and in efficient condition showing to the front of such vehicle a white light visible from a reasonable distance, and

(b) a red reflector in efficient condition and so fitted that when a light is impinging on such vehicle from the rear thereof such reflector is visible to a person in the rear of such vehicle and within a reasonable distance thereof, and

(c) if and when such vehicle is carrying a load projecting more than six feet to the rear of such vehicle, one other lamp showing to the rear of such vehicle a red light visible from a reasonable distance.

Wishbone Ash

railer201 wrote: »

That refers to mechanically propelled bicycles such as the 'Cyclemaster' famous in the fifties and possibly before.

The only requirement for a 'pedal' cycle was a reflector (at the rear).

Reading further on in the 1933 Act -

I was just about to retract what I had said. It appears that a mechanical propelled bicycle is what we refer to as a motorcycle!

Apologies.

railer201

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I was just about to retract what I had said. It appears that a mechanical propelled bicycle is what we refer to as a motorcycle!

Apologies.

There is no need to apologise at all. Yes, they do define it as motorcycle, but there were lots of auto-cycles in the fifties too which were a cross between pedal cycle and motorbike. The CycleMaster was a work of genius, a radial engine incorporated integrally in the rear wheel.

Chuchote

The trouble with the ninjas and the Real Live Jeniuses is not so much that they're endangering their own silly lives, which they're quite entitled to do if they so wish, but they're making it more dangerous for other people using the road.

Driver is mooching along watching out for everyone and a ninja appears like a black flash on the left; the driver reflexively jerks the wheel to the right and goes into another car, or a cyclist that's passing, or a pedestrian.

Real Live Jenius continues blindly through the lights (and I except here lights where it's clearly absolutely safe to do so). J crosses through the pedestrians, including one dragging a trolley, who jumps back, trips and is hurt; or J is just avoided by a car which, like the ninja's car, swerves and hits something else.

Even if they don't immediately cause a crash or an injury, both N and RLJ are as narcissistic as the drivers texting while in (non)-control of a vehicle.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've noticed an increase in the number of cars with one headlight gone. maybe it's just the fact that lighting up time starts so much earlier at the moment.

And the number of newish cars (14, 15, 16 regs) with their fancy daylight front lights on and no rear lights. I see one of those most evenings going home.

I had a few of the RSA giveaway packs of the tiny pinpoint lights hanging around here, so I decided they could do some good elsewhere. The young non-Irish ninja that I gave a pack to in Rathmines was so gushingly grateful ('God Bless You, Kind Sir') that I didn't have the heart to proceed with my planned lecture on the importance of getting proper, decent sized lights.

Wishbone Ash

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And the number of newish cars (14, 15, 16 regs) with their fancy daylight front lights on and no rear lights. I see one of those most evenings going home...

Those drivers would otherwise not have any lights on as the DRL's come on automatically when the engine is started. It would be better if it also applied to rear lights.

Stepping Stone

I was driving in rural Co Kerry at about 9pm on a wet, dark night. As I was going around a bend, I though that I saw something ahead, so I slowed down and kept looking out for something.

Genius on a bike, head to toe in dark lycra without lights. I had seen the reflectors on the peddles. He couldn't possibly have been able to see where he was going. I stopped and offered him a lift and was told that he didn't realise that he would ve out so late and no, he would prefer to cycle on. I gave the Gardai a call. I do the same for idiots walking in the dark with no lights. A family friend knocked one down and killed him years ago and has never gotten over it.

AndrewJRenko

Stepping Stone wrote: »

I was driving in rural Co Kerry at about 9pm on a wet, dark night. As I was going around a bend, I though that I saw something ahead, so I slowed down and kept looking out for something.

Genius on a bike, head to toe in dark lycra without lights. I had seen the reflectors on the peddles. He couldn't possibly have been able to see where he was going. I stopped and offered him a lift and was told that he didn't realise that he would ve out so late and no, he would prefer to cycle on. I gave the Gardai a call. I do the same for idiots walking in the dark with no lights. A family friend knocked one down and killed him years ago and has never gotten over it.

Just curious - how did you manage to work out that it was lycra and not perhaps skinny jeans or tracksuit given that it was so dark?

Stepping Stone

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just curious - how did you manage to work out that it was lycra and not perhaps skinny jeans or tracksuit given that it was so dark?

I got out of the car to talk to him. I offered him a lift and it was pouring. He referred to his lycra and said that he was lucky that the moisture wicked off.

Chuchote

Stepping Stone wrote: »

I was driving in rural Co Kerry at about 9pm on a wet, dark night. As I was going around a bend, I though that I saw something ahead, so I slowed down and kept looking out for something.

Genius on a bike, head to toe in dark lycra without lights. I had seen the reflectors on the peddles. He couldn't possibly have been able to see where he was going. I stopped and offered him a lift and was told that he didn't realise that he would ve out so late and no, he would prefer to cycle on. I gave the Gardai a call. I do the same for idiots walking in the dark with no lights. A family friend knocked one down and killed him years ago and has never gotten over it.

That was really kind.

Kaisr Sose

Heard an interesting stat last week on cycling fines this year. About 90 (?) fixed penalty notices issued for having no lights versus 5/600 for breaking red lights. I am trying on recall exact figures but these are ball park. Surely these regulars with no lights (ninjas) get spotted regularally by AGS? Fining them should be like taking candy from a baby...but I would guess most are not even stopped and questioned.
When I worked in Stitzerland, I seen the police take a bike off someone with lights that were below there lux limits. They had to make their way home on public transport /call for a lift. Here, if you are stopped at all, you are let on your way with fine in pocket...job done! Crazy in my opinion. Some motorist could have their life destroyed if unlucky to hit someone that values their own life at less than €20 for decent lights.

magicbastarder

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Surely these regulars with no lights (ninjas) get spotted regularally by AGS?

there is a flaw in your premise.

morana

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Heard an interesting stat last week on cycling fines this year. About 90 (?) fixed penalty notices issued for having no lights versus 5/600 for breaking red lights. I am trying on recall exact figures but these are ball park. Surely these regulars with no lights (ninjas) get spotted regularally by AGS? Fining them should be like taking candy from a baby...but I would guess most are not even stopped and questioned.
When I worked in Stitzerland, I seen the police take a bike off someone with lights that were below there lux limits. They had to make their way home on public transport /call for a lift. Here, if you are stopped at all, you are let on your way with fine in pocket...job done! Crazy in my opinion. Some motorist could have their life destroyed if unlucky to hit someone that values their own life at less than €20 for decent lights.

have a number of front and rear lights in the peelers car. make them buy them on the spot or take the bike.

CramCycle

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Those drivers would otherwise not have any lights on as the DRL's come on automatically when the engine is started. It would be better if it also applied to rear lights.

The only drawback of DRLS is that alot of drivers think their lights are on properly. Maybe without DRLs they would have turned on their lights.

This said the DRLs iny old SAAB turned on your rear lights as well so I am surprised more modern cars only turn on the front ones.

punisher5112

CramCycle wrote: »

The only drawback of DRLS is that alot of drivers think their lights are on properly. Maybe without DRLs they would have turned on their lights.

This said the DRLs iny old SAAB turned on your rear lights as well so I am surprised more modern cars only turn on the front ones.

Saab and Volvo weren't DRLs they were the set up for the other countries where lights on all time applies.

Much better set up but anything with DRL should have auto lights.

Chuchote

All these arguments about when it became the law to have a white light in front and a red light on the back - when I was a kid in the 1950s gardaí used to stop you regularly and check that you had

a) a red back light
b) a white front light
c) a loud bell
d) a back reflector

and that all were in working order. They also regularly asked suspicious-looking types like me to turn the bike up so they could check the frame number. I have a vague idea that I knew it by heart, but this may be a false memory. My heart was already taken up with things like Horatio on the Bridge and Barbara Fretchie and probably didn't have room.

CramCycle

punisher5112 wrote: »

Saab and Volvo weren't DRLs they were the set up for the other countries where lights on all time applies.

Much better set up but anything with DRL should have auto lights.

If a bulb blew on my SAAB it would not start. Always had a pack of bulbs for every light in the boot. I always think it should be a legal requirement to have a set of bulbs for your car in the boot.

Rokta

CramCycle wrote: »

If a bulb blew on my SAAB it would not start. Always had a pack of bulbs for every light in the boot. I always think it should be a legal requirement to have a set of bulbs for your car in the boot.

Try changing them on some new cars, it is impossible to do it yourself unless you enjoy disassembling half the the stuff around the light assembly and putting it back and pray it works.

Wishbone Ash

CramCycle wrote: »

If a bulb blew on my SAAB it would not start. Always had a pack of bulbs for every light in the boot. I always think it should be a legal requirement to have a set of bulbs for your car in the boot.

That's ok if they are reasonably easy to change but some modern cars are ridiculous. Mrs WA had an Audi and changing a front bulb was a tortuous excercise involving removing half the engine components!

Hard to beat the system in use in some heavy trucks. The whole front corner opens up on hinges making bulb changing very handy.

robyntmorton

I am all for having a full set of spares in the car (and in some places on the continent it is mandatory), but as has been said, some modern cars are nightmares for getting them changed, requiring anything up to and including the entire lighting module to be changed.

I do honestly believe that it should be EU law that all new cars are required to have user changeable bulbs, that take no more than 5 minutes to change at the roadside. Unfortunately, that requires the EU to do some work.

(We may be getting a little sidetracked though.)

magicbastarder

Buy yourself an octavia if you hate changing bulbs. They're a doddle. A friend has a 05 megane and I'd say a vet has an easier job with a difficult calf birth than you would have changing the bulbs on it.

CramCycle

Going to meet alot of opposing voices but my opinion would be that is the car you chose. It should be law.
I have changed lights in far more awkward cars thany SAAB. If it's my car, I learned how to do it.
This said, a legal requirement to make bulb changes user friendly is a great Idea.

I carry spare lights and batteries for my bike too before it is asked. I am that person. No excuses. I have lost a few of my spares by lending to mates over the years.

CramCycle

magicbastarder wrote: »

Buy yourself an octavia if you hate changing bulbs. They're a doddle. A friend has a 05 megane and I'd say a vet has an easier job with a difficult calf birth than you would have changing the bulbs on it.

I remember the first time I went arm deep into a cows vagina with a rope. Simpler than some light systems but I know which I would choose on a cold night in the pissing rain.

RayCun

CramCycle wrote: »

I remember the first time I went arm deep into a cows vagina with a rope. Simpler than some light systems but I know which I would choose on a cold night in the pissing rain.

Well, sure, the cow would keep your arm warm at least

magicbastarder

CramCycle wrote: »

I remember the first time I went arm deep into a cows vagina with a rope.

don't we all.

magicbastarder

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXCZ2v-nIF4

tomasrojo

Chuchote wrote: »

All these arguments about when it became the law to have a white light in front and a red light on the back - when I was a kid in the 1950s gardaí used to stop you regularly and check that you had

a) a red back light
b) a white front light
c) a loud bell
d) a back reflector

and that all were in working order.

Interesting. So the requirement for a taillight might have been in place by the 50s.

However, given that I've seen a Garda tell a (non-Irish) cyclist that he by law had to wear a helmet and hi-viz jacket, I wouldn't be that surprised if there was a bit of overreach in the 50s too.

Funnily enough, my father was talking recently about how the police in the 50s were far more zealous in policing cyclists having working front lights than speeding by motorists.

Chuchote

CramCycle wrote: »

I remember the first time I went arm deep into a cows vagina with a rope.

…as you do

magicbastarder

tomasrojo wrote: »

Funnily enough, my father was talking recently about how the police in the 50s were far more zealous in policing cyclists having working front lights than speeding by motorists.

to be fair, what was the ratio of bikes to cars in ireland in the 50s?
and car headlights were probably weaker than some modern bike lights.

tomasrojo

magicbastarder wrote: »

to be fair, what was the ratio of bikes to cars in ireland in the 50s?
and car headlights were probably weaker than some modern bike lights.

My father's point (if I recall correctly and understood him) was that cars at the time were almost exclusively owned by well-heeled people, who are the type of people who get soft treatment from the police generally.

(The ratio of bike-users to car-users was way higher than now, I imagine. Certainly higher anyway.)

magicbastarder

reminds me of what my mother has always commented on - her mother was the first woman with a car in her hometown back in the late 50s, and it became a massive badge of pride for her, such that she could not be seen walking anywhere; with the result that she could not walk anywhere long before she hit her 70th birthday. my mother - about half a year off the same milestone - walks at least a few miles a day and gets antsy if she doesn't get out for it.