Cyclists with extremely bright white lights flashing

magicbastarder

Macy0161 wrote: »

It seems like the cyclist is complying with that recommendation.

there is also the provision for using the road with due care and attention, which can be a catch all for idiocy not explicitly covered in law, which is what i suspect a garda would threaten him with, were this followed up by the gardai.

ratracer

I’m with the OP on this one. White lights shouldn’t be facing rearward and I’d like to see it checked. I live rurally, and constantly get this from tractors, whose drivers insist on leaving the vehicle work lights switched on while driving at night.

As suggested, if the cyclist passes on a regular basis, report him, and hopefully AGS will look into it ( not directly into in, as that would dazzle them )

Fann Linn

It wasn't me but I might do it. I went out for a spin on Sunday midday. Flashing r&w lamps, hiviz vest, yes I know, orange bike and still a motorist pulled up along side me and said, ' you shouldn't be on the road, I couldn't see you with the low sun! '

For some people they just shouldn't be driving. And yes I am a motorist also, I drive for my living.

cletus

He could have 20 lights on the back of his bike if he wanted, but they should all be red

dave_o_brien

Deleted User wrote: »

'Does be'?

Perfectly acceptable Hiberno-English. It's a hangover from the separation of the continuous present tense and the present tense in Gaeilge. "He does be" means that this is something he does regularly as opposed to the Queen's English version "He is often/frequently/always". EDIT: To expand on the need for it, consider the difference between "He is cycling" and "He does be cycling". In the Queen's English, the difference would be "He is always cycling/ He is cycling all the time".

I mean, sure it's irrelevant to the conversation, but strictly speaking, the OP was completely accurate in his usage of Hiberno-English.

Also, white rear facing lights are idiotic.

Wishbone Ash

Macy0161 wrote: »

Not quite sure on the legalities, given he has a red rear light able to be seen, despite the "blinding" white light...

No, it doesn't work like that.

Rough lay man's translation of the regulations:

While cycling during lighting up hours, your bike must be fitted with a rear light.
The rear light must be red in colour and visible for a reasonable distance.

(I totally accept that the lighting of bicycle regulations are way out of date. My rear lights would be deemed illegal going by the 1963 regulations as they are not at least 2 square inches. A helmet light would also be illegal as no light may be more that 3 feet from the ground.)

Wishbone Ash

dave_o_brien wrote: »

...I mean, sure it's irrelevant to the conversation, but strictly speaking, the OP was completely accurate in his usage of Hiberno-English....

It's kinda quaint all the same and distracts from the message. A bit like when some people say 'yee' instead of 'you'.

Macy0161

I'm not arguing that they're right to have a rear facing white light. But they have a visible red rear, so I guess I was questioning whether they were acting illegally (definitely acting dumb). Probably doesn't comply with the lenses being 2 inch diameter as per the legislation though :rolleyes:

I stand by that vulnerable road users are on the receiving end, and then feel brighter is better, because of the "Be Safe Be Seen" messaging the RSA/ Gardai predominantly peddle (pedal?).

Wishbone Ash

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

It's kinda quaint all the same and distracts from the message. A bit like when some people say 'yee' instead of 'you'.

I use ye as plural of you quiet a lot. Was surprised it was considered archaic. I do be continuing to use it though.


Oh, yeah, them cyclists!

cletus

Macy0161 wrote: »

I'm not arguing that they're right to have a rear facing white light. But they have a visible red rear, so I guess I was questioning whether they were acting illegally (definitely acting dumb). Probably doesn't comply with the lenses being 2 inch diameter as per the legislation though :rolleyes:

I stand by that vulnerable road users are on the receiving end, and then feel brighter is better, because of the "Be Safe Be Seen" messaging the RSA/ Gardai predominantly peddle (pedal?).

Yes, but convention tells in that red lights are at the back, white lights are at the front. Why not just put a flashing red light back there instead of a white one.

magicbastarder

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

A bit like when some people say 'yee' instead of 'you'.

'ye' is acceptable. 'yee' is weird.

dave_o_brien

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

It's kinda quaint all the same and distracts from the message. A bit like when some people say 'yee' instead of 'you'.

You are entitled to think so. I think your second example is one that emphasises how Hiberno-English can in many instances (or "does be") more accurate than the Queen's English. The fact that the plural "you" is the same as the singular "you" in contemporary English is potentially confusing, while the pluralised Hiberno-English versions (yiz, ye, youse, etc.) are all clearer.

There is, of course, massive snobbery around Hiberno-English. But one must ask oneself why they think a linguistic mechanism is bothersome if it is useful - the move to quash Hiberno-English is a class based and linguistic form of discrimination.

Anyway, bike lights... What do we think?!

Wishbone Ash

Macy0161 wrote: »

.. so I guess I was questioning whether they were acting illegally (definitely acting dumb)...

Definitely illegal - a light fitted to the rear must be red. I would interpret that as meaning any light fitted to the rear must be red.

Deleted User wrote: »

I use ye as plural of you quiet a lot. Was surprised it was considered archaic. I do be continuing to use it though!...

I say 'yous' for plural which drives my wife nuts.

Fighting Tao

If a driver is driving responsibly and carefully around cyclists, how and why is there any confrontation between the two?


Btw, I do get annoyed when lights are not white on front and red on rear as it plays tricks with perception and expectation of the direction of travel, but it doesn’t cause confrontation.

Wishbone Ash

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Definitely illegal - a light fitted to the rear must be red. I would interpret that as meaning any light fitted to the rear must be red.

I say 'yous' for plural which drives my wife nuts.

It had been mentioned to me in a professional context re emails. If I used yous I think a melt down would have ensued. Still use it, but do pause now before thinking... ye simply makes more sense.


White lights on back of bikes - down with this kind of thing.

Hurrache

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

It's kinda quaint all the same and distracts from the message. A bit like when some people say 'yee' instead of 'you'.

I always use 'ye' or 'youse' for plurality reasons, citing Professor Terry Dolan when someone claims it's slang.

Thelonious Monk

magicbastarder wrote: »

'ye' is acceptable. 'yee' is weird.

It's yous.

Anyway, lol @ people saying report this to the Garda. You can have video footage of cars trying to kill you and they don't care, as if they're going to care about some cyclist with lights that are a mild annoyance.

punisher5112

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

Why are motorists putting those super bright lights on new cars?

Am I doing this right?

Perhaps this individual is fed up of being driven too close to.
Perhaps his lights are perfectly fine but angled wrongly.
Is there a legal limit on how bright his lights can be?

Dunno because I cannot speak for other cyclists.

Threads like this are always hilarious.

Ever see a cyclist starting a new thread in the motor forums demanding to know why one specific motorist doesn't indicate?

(Maybe they do, I wouldn't put it past one or two, but I've never, seen it)

Please read my post again.....

He has lights correctly on the bike no issues whatsoever there, I actually said to myself wow he does want to be seen so that's good.

My biggest issue is the light fitted on the right lower down which is a fast flashing strobe which is white, this is a white light flashing back at cyclists and motorists, this is then made much worse with the fact the roads are wet in the dark.

I don't lose sleep over the abuse I get or the near death experiences that they do put themselves very close to and I mean it when I say I stay well back, well clear and don't pass unless plenty of space and can clearly see the road is safe and clear.
We have CCTC throughout the bus as the outside does also.

I've been brought up for all sorts of bizarre complaints and footage looked at to see, never anything further as they could see 1 it was me or 2 it was nothing like what was said.

Fighting Tao

punisher5112 wrote: »

Please read my post again.....

He has lights correctly on the bike no issues whatsoever there, I actually said to myself wow he does want to be seen so that's good.

My biggest issue is the light fitted on the right lower down which is a fast flashing strobe which is white, this is a white light flashing back at cyclists and motorists, this is then made much worse with the fact the roads are wet in the dark.

I don't lose sleep over the abuse I get or the near death experiences that they do put themselves very close to and I mean it when I say I stay well back, well clear and don't pass unless plenty of space and can clearly see the road is safe and clear.
We have CCTC throughout the bus as the outside does also.

I've been brought up for all sorts of bizarre complaints and footage looked at to see, never anything further as they could see 1 it was me or 2 it was nothing like what was said.

I am still confused. If you are so far back and you are driving carefully and responsibility what is the cyclist doing to endanger themselves? Is it filtering?

punisher5112

Smee_Again wrote: »

You have an inordinate amount of incidents with cyclists and other motorists, maybe it’s time you looked at your own behaviour?

As a wise man once said;

“If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.”

You my manager?

On a serious note though I have had numerous over 20 years on the road.

I can't stop others stupidity but trained very well to see it before it happens but saying that driving a bus its size plays a big part in say like where can I go if someone drives head on into it or the same up the rear....

It's actually quite bizarre as the size you would think people would see it easier but no it doesn't work that way and it seems they only see why they want to see.


By the way this isn't a cyclist bashing thread and far from it.

I do cycle believe it or not and like to see others making that effort to be seen that bit better as in my mind it's a win win as chances of getting hurt is much less.

punisher5112

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I am still confused. If you are so far back and you are driving carefully and responsibility what is the cyclist doing to endanger themselves? Is it filtering?

Right so you know when you are driving along minding your own business in a bus lane, in a bus and a cyclist decides it's a brilliant option to pass up the inside when there is no safe space, remember the bus is moving.....

Then say bus stops at stop, go up the road and pass said cyclists, some take this as an insult as it seems many driving cars do.... Ever noticed you go to overtake slow car on motorway only for them to speed up or pull out....
Now imagine the cyclist without warning does the same, I'm also talking about a 4 lane and even 6 lane road here....
I would be in lane 2 passing and they would move out and weave.

Corners or bends is another where some race to pass just as you are making this turn and as it's a large vehicle what do you think happens the back end or wheels, they get closer to the kerb....


So much more just stating this guy has serious issues, of course not anywhere near all, most potter along with no issues, one even been thanked, some come up in traffic to say they find us very safe etc etc.

PhilOssophy

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's yous.

Anyway, lol @ people saying report this to the Garda. You can have video footage of cars trying to kill you and they don't care, as if they're going to care about some cyclist with lights that are a mild annoyance.

Its better than just moaning about it, no? The OP has given them to the very minute where this numpty is cycling. It isn't going to involve a mass operation to send a Garda out at that very time some morning.

Even if nothing happens, it is still better than just complaining about it.

punisher5112

dave_o_brien wrote: »

Perfectly acceptable Hiberno-English. It's a hangover from the separation of the continuous present tense and the present tense in Gaeilge. "He does be" means that this is something he does regularly as opposed to the Queen's English version "He is often/frequently/always". EDIT: To expand on the need for it, consider the difference between "He is cycling" and "He does be cycling". In the Queen's English, the difference would be "He is always cycling/ He is cycling all the time".

I mean, sure it's irrelevant to the conversation, but strictly speaking, the OP was completely accurate in his usage of Hiberno-English.

Also, white rear facing lights are idiotic.

I laughed ;-)

punisher5112

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Its better than just moaning about it, no? The OP has given them to the very minute where this numpty is cycling. It isn't going to involve a mass operation to send a Garda out at that very time some morning.

Even if nothing happens, it is still better than just complaining about it.

We are allowed to vent, just thought I'd put it in here, it's got a discussion going which is good and if more go around like him then isn't it good to get feedback so hopefully they will not do it or stop.....

It's brilliant he has white front and a good red rear but the white at the rear is a real real danger....

punisher5112

Fighting Tao wrote: »

If a driver is driving responsibly and carefully around cyclists, how and why is there any confrontation between the two?


Btw, I do get annoyed when lights are not white on front and red on rear as it plays tricks with perception and expectation of the direction of travel, but it doesn’t cause confrontation.

I have been abused for been in bus lanes that have the broken line cycle lane also, regularly enough happens at Fairview where there are a few that bang the windows and sides of the bus and do be screaming it's a fcuking cycle lane, name calling etc... I ignore...

Oh by the way I'm not moving as I'd be stuck in traffic as the bus lane is never enforced either....

punisher5112

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's yous.

Anyway, lol @ people saying report this to the Garda. You can have video footage of cars trying to kill you and they don't care, as if they're going to care about some cyclist with lights that are a mild annoyance.

Have to say a lot of the time they will take you seriously but use traffic watch.

It's the boys and girls in roads policing you need, the ones on the desk tend to not be too bothered but it really just depends.

PhilOssophy

punisher5112 wrote: »

We are allowed to vent, just thought I'd put it in here, it's got a discussion going which is good and if more go around like him then isn't it good to get feedback so hopefully they will not do it or stop.....

It's brilliant he has white front and a good red rear but the white at the rear is a real real danger....

I agree, don't get me wrong. But it is still best to report it given the specific detail you have on this matter. Its not like you are telling the Gardai to stand there for 3 hours. What is the worst that can happen by reporting it?

punisher5112

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I agree, don't get me wrong. But it is still best to report it given the specific detail you have on this matter. Its not like you are telling the Gardai to stand there for 3 hours. What is the worst that can happen by reporting it?

I'm surprised he has never been seen to be honest by them.

Thelonious Monk

punisher5112 wrote: »

I have been abused for been in bus lanes that have the broken line cycle lane also, regularly enough happens at Fairview where there are a few that bang the windows and sides of the bus and do be screaming it's a fcuking cycle lane, name calling etc... I ignore...

Oh by the way I'm not moving as I'd be stuck in traffic as the bus lane is never enforced either....

Yeah I've gone nuts at bus drivers along where the Fairview Grill is. Just because there's a broken white cycle lane doesn't mean you can pass me with milimeters to spare, I have to duck the wing mirror sometimes. Doesn't help that there's a row of parked cars there too with people coming and going.
If buses could just pull out a bit and overtake properly that'd be great thanks.

punisher5112

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Yeah I've gone nuts at bus drivers along where the Fairview Grill is. Just because there's a broken white cycle lane doesn't mean you can pass me with milimeters to spare, I have to duck the wing mirror sometimes. Doesn't help that there's a row of parked cars there too with people coming and going.
If buses could just pull out a bit and overtake properly that'd be great thanks.

Read my post