{Melb}So - who got a caution this morning?

cfsmtb said:

From BV's Lights surveys:
http://www.bv.com.au/inform.php?a=7&b=259&c=2123

"............. Shortest Day 2006: Police check riders on Canning St

Police cautioned 17 riders on Canning St before sunrise (7.35am) of the
shortest day (Wednesday 21 June 2006). 13 riders had no lights, 2 had
front only and 2 had rear only. 48 Riders had working lights front and
rear. Some working lights were not visible at the required distance of
200m and some working lights were obscured by clothing or backpack
flaps. These proportions are the same as the average of the six lead in
surveys to the shortest day reported below.

The police reminded riders that lights are necessary after sunrise in
conditions of poor visibility such as fog or rain. .............."

--
cfsmtb

Good to see, too many people think bike safety = wear a h*lm*t#

#(including dangling off the handlebars)

cfsmtb said:

From BV's Lights surveys:
http://www.bv.com.au/inform.php?a=7&b=259&c=2123

"............. Shortest Day 2006: Police check riders on Canning St

Police cautioned 17 riders on Canning St before sunrise (7.35am) of the
shortest day (Wednesday 21 June 2006). 13 riders had no lights, 2 had
front only and 2 had rear only. 48 Riders had working lights front and
rear. Some working lights were not visible at the required distance of
200m and some working lights were obscured by clothing or backpack
flaps. These proportions are the same as the average of the six lead in
surveys to the shortest day reported below.

The police reminded riders that lights are necessary after sunrise in
conditions of poor visibility such as fog or rain. ............

Meanwhile.. 10% of motorists drove past with illegal foglights
illuminated and another 10% with no lights on.

Duncan said:

Meanwhile.. 10% of motorists drove past with illegal foglights
illuminated and another 10% with no lights on.

Also was the % of unroadworthies that drove past? Or unlicensed...?

In aus.bicycle on 20 Jun 2006 19:02:36 -0700

PiledHigher said:

Good to see, too many people think bike safety = wear a h*lm*t#

#(including dangling off the handlebars)

If they can see, then everyone else can, right?

I do note that in low light conditions if I have my lights on so I can
see well, I can only see what the light shows. If I turn it off and
let the eyes adjust I can see a fair bit.

Zebee

Quoted message said:

Good to see, too many people think bike safety = wear a h*lm*t#

#(including dangling off the handlebars)

Exactly! And we all know that a helmet does SFA ;-)

cfsmtb said:

Police cautioned 17 riders on Canning St before sunrise (7.35am) of the shortest day (Wednesday 21 June 2006). 13 riders had no lights, 2 had front only and 2 had rear only. 48 Riders had working lights front and rear.

And in similar news, a cyclist has been terrorising pedestrians on the Eastern Freeway trail who are quietly enjoying their nightly "I'm a stealth ninja" walks - IN THE DARK.. The cyclist has been known to almost hit them without warning, then yell "LIGHTS"... and sometimes "LIGHTS - I HAVE THEM, WHAT ABOUT YOU!??"..

... though it does amuse me most of them will 'protect' their dogs by sticking a flasher on their collar... that at least gives me something to aim for..

Zebee Johnstone said:

I do note that in low light conditions if I have my lights on so I can
see well, I can only see what the light shows. If I turn it off and
let the eyes adjust I can see a fair bit.

I think it's fair to say that the point of lights is not about *you*
seeing -- it's about *others* seeing you.

Which means that, with all these SMIDSYs we see every day, they're
utterly useless.

--
My Usenet From: address now expires after two weeks. If you email me, and
the mail bounces, try changing the bit before the "@ to usenet".

gplama said:

.. though it does amuse me most of them will 'protect' their dogs by
sticking a flasher on their collar... that at least gives me something
to aim for..

Then you have to guess where the lead (if there is one) is. I like the
dog walkers who can't see a problem with them on one side of the path,
dog on other side, and lead stretched across the path. 🙁

DaveB

On 2006-06-21, gplama (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

.. though it does amuse me most of them will 'protect' their dogs by
sticking a flasher on their collar... that at least gives me something
to aim for..

I saw that for the first time lastnight, coming home from Tuesday
Torture along the path. A dog, off leash, just off the edge of the
path, with flasher. Hu-mans 20m up the path, completely not in
control of their mutt.

--
TimC
I am not afraid of heights, nor am I scared of falling. Height and
falling have never hurt anyone. Now the ground. The ground is a
different matter... --unknown

In aus.bicycle on Wed, 21 Jun 2006 04:33:35 GMT

Stuart Lamble said:

Zebee Johnstone said:

I do note that in low light conditions if I have my lights on so I can
see well, I can only see what the light shows. If I turn it off and
let the eyes adjust I can see a fair bit.

I think it's fair to say that the point of lights is not about *you*
seeing -- it's about *others* seeing you.

depends where you ride. There are places on my commute where I can't
see well enough without them.

But mostly I think the people who don't have them think they can see
you so why can't you see them? Not realising that those who have
lights have light-adjusted eyes.

Quoted message said:

Which means that, with all these SMIDSYs we see every day, they're
utterly useless.

Well yes, in the day. Now the SMIDSYs you see (or don't...) every
night, that might be different.

Zebee

PiledHigher said:

Good to see, too many people think bike safety = wear a h*lm*t#

#(including dangling off the handlebars)

That's always puzzled me. Surely the easiest place to carry a helmet is -- on yer noggin? I reckon having it rattling around on the handlebars would just be a hassle.

Duncan said:

Meanwhile.. 10% of motorists drove past with illegal foglights
illuminated and another 10% with no lights on.

is that what those really bloody bright blue/white things are? Crikey!!

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Wed, 21 Jun 2006 04:33:35 GMT

Stuart Lamble said:

I think it's fair to say that the point of lights is not about *you*
seeing -- it's about *others* seeing you.

depends where you ride. There are places on my commute where I can't
see well enough without them.

But mostly I think the people who don't have them think they can see
you so why can't you see them? Not realising that those who have
lights have light-adjusted eyes.

Agreed - it's both. Especially on the trails and even in some side-streets you need lights just to see where you're going. On the other hand I don't care if others have got owl-vision, I can't bloody well see them if they haven't got lights.

I have too many very scary near-head-on encounters with lightless riders.

In aus.bicycle on Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:27:59 +1000

treadly&amp me said:

I have too many very scary near-head-on encounters with lightless
riders.

The Harbour Bridge is horrible for it. Always one or two. I am
sometimes tempted to turn my lights off so the first time they realise
there isn't enough light is when there is buzzsaw/leg contact....

Zebee

On 2006-06-21, 531Aussie (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

Duncan said:

Meanwhile.. 10% of motorists drove past with illegal foglights
illuminated and another 10% with no lights on.

is that what those really bloody bright blue/white things are? Crikey!!

The bright ones on top are just HID lamps.

The ones low down to the ground, are nominally fog lamps, but are
usually very much the wrong colour to be actually useful during fog,
and probably far too bright from same (real fog lamps are yellow,
IIRC; and *ONLY* used during fog).

I'm guessing the legislations for lighting is horribly outdated.

I know that the legislation sets limits for how blue a light can be --
in some cases, "blue" lights are merely HIDs which are really white,
but because your colour balance is off in the dark, appear blue. But
some blue lights truly are blue -- they are cheap imported halogen
bulbs from Taiwan with glass that is dyed blue to make them look
expensive. They actually cut the performance of the bulb, because you
remove useful light from the spectrum (and convert it to heat, yay!).

And I believe the regs set limits for how bright (as well as how dim),
headlights can be.

But HIDs, as we all know, are about 3 or 4 times brighter than
halogens for a given input power. I'm not sure whether the
legislation deals with input power to the light, or with output
luminence.

--
TimC
"Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc
informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common
Lisp." -- Greenspun's Tenth Rule of Programming

TimC said:

lights

i see. Thanks. I bet 80% of drivers don't know they can't adjust their headlights up, down, etc

Also, has anyone noticed a lot of the new cars have a part of the left headlight that points right into the gutter? So, when they come up behind me when I'm riding, it looks as if they're right up my [censored]!!. It's a bit frightening 🙂

531Aussie said:

Also, has anyone noticed a lot of the new cars have a part of the left headlight that points right into the gutter? So, when they come up behind me when I'm riding, it looks as if they're right up my [censored]!!. It's a bit frightening 🙂

Might be frightening for them too - especially if you've got threadbare knicks. 😄

Actually this maybe a positive unintended side effect - motorists will give you more space...

cfsmtb said:

Might be frightening for them too - especially if you've got threadbare knicks. 😄

Actually this maybe a positive unintended side effect - motorists will give you more space...

So in the name of safety, I should "prepare" my knicks with 240 grit before using them. Good tip.

Stuart Lamble said:

Zebee Johnstone said:

I do note that in low light conditions if I have my lights on so I can
see well, I can only see what the light shows. If I turn it off and
let the eyes adjust I can see a fair bit.

I think it's fair to say that the point of lights is not about *you*
seeing -- it's about *others* seeing you.

Which means that, with all these SMIDSYs we see every day, they're
utterly useless.

Case in point fifteen minutes ago, went to cash point to get folding
stuff and was riding through the car park as any other vehicle would
when a car starts revering out in to me.

My rather loud remonstration caused a cessation of movement from the
aforementioned vehicle. I pulled forward and gestured around me.

Three rear lights, one on the rack, one on the saddlebag and one on the
helmet. Batteries fresh as of yesterday.

One ten watt Halogen, one five LED flasher on the handlebars and one
front flasher on the helmet. Pretty loud cycling top too.

Window rolls down, ``I'm sorry mate, I didn't see you.''

Suggestion that she should try using her eyes results in a ``Get
f&^ked'' response, maybe it's the volume with which I made the
suggestion that caused that.

My theory, a lot of ambient light which makes flashers pretty much
useless. I far prefer riding on roads with no lights than roads with
for that reason.
--
Cheers
Euan