PJay120

Besides this hypothetical about inducing a seizure, which seems to be a non-issue, there are two real problems with blinking lights:
First. As someone has noted, the human brain will detect the blinking light, but because of the blinking it cannot put a location on it. This is contrary to the idea that a driver would want to have the bike get noticed, and placed in the driver's mind at the right location in the local 3D space. I think of trying to track a firefly when I think of this point. It is hard to track a firefly through local 3D space. We would try ot catch them sa they appeared in the evening, but when things were pretty normally illuminated by the sun, so not in the dark. We would have to get close enough to see the black body as well as the blinking light in order to track, and then catch.

Someone noted that amber is for certain things. I once happened to drive for a few miles behind a road-construction LED sign that was being towed up the road, in the same direction. It was on, and blinking, as it was towed up the road. It was the weirdest experience. From a distance, maybe a quarter mile, it was like it was floating, and it was disorienting for the rest of my local 3D grasp of the world. Once I got close enough, the floating phenomenon ceased. Once I passed the road sign, of course things were back to normal.

Second: Years ago, in another biking discussion, someone posted a study that said that a drunk or exhausted driver can be drawn to a blinking light somehow - somehow by our psychology of vision, etc. This is like how we cyclists "pick a line," and that phenomenon of picking your line sustains you through some pretty dicey situations. As a new cyclist, I heard to NOT look at the pothole, or gravel wash, I was about to go through, but to imagine my Line, and follow my line, and allow reflexes and instinct to get me through. The blinking light draws attention to the blinking light, instead of just getting the object registered in 3D space, and allowing instinct or reflex to work as it does, and allowing the exhausted or drunk driver to fix the bike in local 3D space, and avoid it. Something about the attention being drawn to the light anew with each blink.

The study was a decent lab study where this attention issue was assessed for blinking and steady lights.

Overall, I believe that these risks of blinking lights to not overcome the possible advantage of being seen more than being seen with a steady light. I ride on the road in a really smooth fashion so drivers can see me as fairly predictable. I admonish my wife and my kids to make gently, steady paths, rather than to jerk abruptly around parked cars, etc. So that cars can work with our paths, I think this is the same idea.

I just want to add this food for thought. I hope everyone can consider it, and make teir own decision. I am not trying to dam anyone for their beliefs. Keep riding and let's all be as safe as we know how t be! Let's co-exist with other vehicles on the road!

veganbikes

Not that the flashers care about anyone else but please don't flash you a solid light ALWAYS! The fact that there are some cyclists and other world users like myself who have a tough time seeing with flashing lights in my eyes and even worse some people who can get seizures and have other ocular issues, should be enough to say maybe just use a good solid front light.

If you are intentionally making it less safe for other users than your argument for flashing lights goes out the window. If someone cannot see a good bright solid front light they are probably not paying attention to other lights you are using. If you are dead set on having something flash, wear a trench coat while riding and open it up every so often. That will get you noticed and you might even get flashing lights as well ; )

livedarklions

You're giving the flashers just a little too much credit. They're also doing a terrible job of calculating their own risk. They're so obsessed with improving their odds in the relatively rare situation where having the front of the bike being noticed peripherally will save you that they ignore the fact that these actually interfere with the driver's vision in the much more common situation where the diver directly ahead of you needs to know your position. That comes up every time you need to take a left turn on a trafficked street, for example.

Litespud

I think you’re giving a small blinker too much credit. If something so small that it’s “noticed peripherally” if going to dazzle or disorientate a driver to the point that he/she can’t see or localize the bike and rider to which it’s attached, then the driver needs to see a doctor.
this thread started with “blinkers“, which I interpret as small (say10-15 lumen) LEDs blinking at maybe 1-2 Hz, but at various points, it seemed to people were talking about retina-searing epilepsy-inducing high-output strobes. What specifically are we discussing here? I use a small (5-10 lumen) white blinker on the front of my bike. If a distracted notices this tiny blinking object out of the corner of there eye and registers that there’s something there, and hopefully puts down their phone long enough to steer around said blinking object and the clearly visible cyclist attached to it, wheres the downside?

Litespud

I think you’re giving a small blinker too much credit. If something so small that it’s “noticed peripherally” is going to dazzle or disorientate a driver to the point that he/she can’t see or localize the bike and rider to which it’s attached, then the driver needs to see a doctor.
Way back in the mists of time, this thread started with “blinkers“, which I interpret as small (say10-15 lumen) LEDs blinking at maybe 1-2 Hz, but at various points, it seemed like people were talking about retina-searing epilepsy-inducing high-output strobes. What specifically are we discussing here? I use a small (5-10 lumen) white blinker on the front of my bike. If a distracted driver (or pedestrian) notices this tiny blinking object out of the corner of their eye and registers that there’s something there, and hopefully puts down their phone long enough to steer around said blinking object and the clearly visible cyclist attached to it, wheres the downside?

livedarklions

I'm talking about much brighter lights than that (probably closer to the 750-1000 lumen range as I've actually seen some of these from a half mile away in broad daylight), blinking at a rate a bit too fast to count. Even at 3 Hz, those are going to mess up your eyes at close range. This isn't theoretical, I see those bright ones on streets all the time and for a while I was seeing them on MUPs until enough people got mad. The kind you're using doesn't matter to me in the least--I doubt they do any good, but they're definitely harmless. I've had those pointed at me on MUPs at very close range, and I really didn't even notice much. They were standard equipment on one of the local rideshare bikes, I had no complaints about that.

Honestly, I think you're probably fooling yourself if you think that makes people see you better peripherally, but there's really no downside to that gamble so it's none of my business. When you're running aircraft-equipment levels of brightness, though, then it becomes the business of everyone who can get exposed to it.

If you haven't encountered such bright lights, count yourself lucky. They used to be rare because they were so expensive, but now they're cheap and common as dirt.

I would never describe what you're using as a "flasher" as it it isn't "flashing". Flashing implies a lot of brightness. No one talks about a "blink of lightning."

njkayaker

That article is talking about "high powered' flashing front lights being used at night (not what the OP is talking about).

From what I can tell, the reason flashing lights are illegal in Germany is because they might be confused with emergency indicators.

In a place with lots of cyclists, flashing lights being common might be a particular problem.

This, certainly, has nothing to do with lights.

njkayaker

It's not an article. It's (a copy of) the Consumer Product Safety Commission laws. It's the law (at the federal level) but it's not enforced. The bike shops realize people buying expensive bikes don't want them. So, they don't install them.

The use of them is governed at the state level. The CPSC does what it can to make them present at the point-of-sale but it can't do everything.

It shouldn't be.

Pop N Wood

Think of the links as bonus material intended to help challenge people's thinking about what is safe and what isn't. Well within the spirit of the OP's opening statement

"However, I recognize that there are a lot of things I don't know so opening up this thread."

yeah, keep thinking flashing lights are illegal on moving vehicles because of population density.

On the trail just last night, nearing twilight, not really dark enough for a headlight but getting close, a guy and his girlfriend, line abreast, coming toward me with their headlights both full strobe, flashing asynchronously, blinding everyone they meet on this auto free trail. Who are they trying to warn? I try to look off to the side, but eventually hold my hand in front of my eyes to shield them. The dipwad thought I was saying hello. Bet he is still puzzled by the what he got called in reply.

njkayaker

What they are are irrelevant information to the thread topic.

That's not what I said.

Anyway, from my reasonably extensive experience, the Germans don't care about flashing rear lights during the day.

1- The OP was talking about day time. The issues are not going to be the same as for night time.

2- The issues with flashing front lights is going to be different than the issues with rear lights. The OP didn't distinguish the two (but people should).

Litespud

I don't disagree with you re unregulated and poorly-aimed super-bright lights - they're a menace. Whether I'm fooling myself re the benefits of a small blinker, who knows? I know I certainly see a blinker in the distance before I notice the bike/rider it's attached to, both as a driver and a cyclist, but I've seen no data addressing any benefit. My view is, for the sake of 20g on my handlebar, its a no-lose, and if - just once - it has caused a driver to pause before pulling out or cutting me off, then it's 100% worth it. I'll just have to take it on faith that such a thing has happened or will happen.

njkayaker

Keep using the flashing (rear) light.

There are too many people posting here that are having trouble reading what the OP posted.

==========================================

* There's enough evidence that shows that flashing lights are more noticeable (from farther distances) than steady lights.

* Ideally, things should be noticeable (conspicuous) and identifiable (e,g., as a cyclist). The farther something can be noticed, the better. Small flashing lights are mostly used by cyclists (so, they help with being noticed and identification).

* The lights on bicycles tend to be very small "point sources". Flashing makes these sorts of lights more noticeable).

* Flashing uses less energy. This means the lights can run longer or be brighter.

* At night, flashing headlights have other issues (it's annoying to other traffic, at least). It seems nearly universally illegal. Headlights tend to be much more powerful than rear lights, which means flashing is more of a problem.

* At night, the "tracking" issue with flashing rear lights is, as far as I can tell, very overrated. These lights are mostly visible to vehicles behind the light. There's no real "tracking" issue because the light isn't moving across the field of view. Anyway, the point of the light is to first be conspicuous. By the time "tracking" is important, the cyclist should covered by the vehicle's headlights.

* At night (especially), flashing rear lights can be irritating to following riders.

* During the day, the lights have to compete (generally) with much a more powerful light source (the sun). There's also the related issue of being in shade while the vehicle is in in the sunlight. Flashing is a big help to being more noticeable.

* The main point of a front "be seen" light is not for traffic in the opposing lane but for traffic that might cross your path. A "headlight" is also a "be seen" light but its primary purpose is to enable you to see.

* Examples of "it didn't work" aren't necessarily useful because nothing is going to be perfect.

* Talking about lights that are aimed poorly is a separate issue from whether or not they should or shouldn't be flashing.

* It's not clear that these small lights are really a risk for epileptics (not talking about powerful flashing headlights at night, which have other issues too).

Unca_Sam

Keep fighting the good fight. There are far too many logical fallacies from the same actors in every lighting thread. Helmets get similar pushback. I wonder how much pushback these actors give for mask wearing...
I use a low intensity 'be seen' light for all bikes I don't intend to ride on streets and roads after twilight. If I'm potentially riding in anything but crepuscular light on a bike, I've equipped it with a mount for my Busch and Muller headlight designed to work like modern LED car headlamps. Even, bright illumination, carefully aimed to illuminate my path and provide a much softer point for other road users. I've long disagreed with the American method of "brighter is better," as I've long held contempt for careless high beam users as a driver. A clueless recreational cyclist is not going to find their way to this forum first, and is unlikely to properly aim their overclocked cheapo Chinese LED headlamp better suited as a nighttime MTB trail flood.

njkayaker

I'm not trying to address the "same actors" (they are probably hopeless). I'm addressing other people.

I think part of the problem is that the lights "question" is trying to optimize a relatively small part of the risk. For the most part, people survive without lights (even at night!).

veganbikes

If it is 10-15 lumens what is the point then? They are barely visible and rarely noticed by drivers unless it is pitch black and that is it in which case I would much rather have it solid like any other car headlight. However a flashing light at the front of the bike is rarely helpful anyway. If you are going with traffic and not being a salmon you won't have issues.

Litespud

But they are visible, that's the thing - You can see one in daylight from a hundred yards anyway. Clearly not bright enough for use as a headlight, but all they have to do is catch someone's eye. And I disagree that a front blinker isn't useful - where I live, most of my routes start with a trip through town, a busyish university town where half the cars going down the main drag are looking for parking spaces, not where they're going. A driver coming in the opposite direction is quite likely to cut across my path if they see a spot. Cars pulling out of lots are liable to pull out in front of me. All that little blinker has to do is get me noticed. Does it work? Who knows? I've never been hit, so I'm not about to not have that light on the front. Someone else can do the "no-light" experiment.

njkayaker

This isn’t correct.

Lights, in general, are rarely needed during the day (what the OP was talking about).

A flashing front light is useful in intersections. Cars see you sooner and are less likely to turn in front of you.

GamblerGORD53

Blinkers SUCK, all day, everyday. Even worse is only a helmet light at night. Impossible to track the bike direction. Trucks see me and react from likely 200 yards back. I see this in my bar mirror.
Mine are always on and always solid.

njkayaker

bs.

livedarklions

I don't do it but I think it's possible that you might get some benefit if you're riding in the shade and maybe some stuff I haven't thought of. The main thing, though, is it doesn't really have a downside risk like the flashers you and I were talking about do and they're not an optical assault on other people. If something on a person's bike does no harm and makes the rider feel safer, it's officially none of my business to argue it with them.

genec

First, this thread is about blinking lights during the daytime... do the studies address that?

Second, consider more than one light... a flasher to attract attention, and a steady "see me light." In my case, on the back of my bike I use 3 lights. A low bright steady red, mounted on a rack, a seat mounted blinker, and then another steady red on the back of my helmet... but all this, only at night.

During the day, I just use a PB super flash on the back.

Phoenix800

Consider:

It’s been two and a half years since the driver of a car coming from the opposite direction turned left into you as you were riding through an intersection.

You have $400K in medical bills, you missed a year of work, you have $35K in other expenses, and you live in constant pain from two fused vertebrae in your neck. You will never ride a bicycle again.

At the trial, the driver’s attorney is trying to convince the jury that the driver is not at fault because she didn’t see you. “It’s hard to see a bicycle,” he argues. Two members of the jury despise bicyclists.

Scenario 1:

Your attorney argues that you had the right of way and that the driver had the legal duty to yield to you on your bicycle.

Scenario 2:

Your attorney argues that you had the right of way and that the driver had the legal duty to yield to you on your bicycle.

Your attorney turns on your 650 lumen flashing headlight, slowly pans it across the jury, points it at the defendant and asks, “You didn’t see this?”

njkayaker

??? A cyclist isn't a firefly. We are talking about rearward facing lights.

These rear lights are being seen, pretty much, as a stationary light source (the light isn't moving across the field of view). Being noticed from farther away increases the perception of it being a stationary light source. That is, tracking isn't a problem because it isn't tracking.

If the item is understood by the driver to be a cyclist, they have some idea how the cyclist is going to move.

In any case, by the time tracking becomes an issue (when the car is close enough to pass), the headlights should be covering the cyclist Having reflective or bright gear should help with this too. When the car is close, the rear light may not even be visible.

Drunk drivers run into all sorts of things without flashing lights too.

It's not clear whether this is a real (substantial) risk or whether it's a risk greater than not using flashing lights.

And the flashing lights might work for some drunk drivers even if it doesn't work for all of them.

There should be many more non-drunk drivers than drunk ones.

livedarklions

Uhh, no, the defense then points out that you just demonstrated to the jury how bad it is to have a light like that shined into your eyes and says you blinded and disoriented the driver. The defense is going to be aware of the light as a piece of evidence as it would have had to have been disclosed in pre-trial discovery, so that's going to be their version of the story. It might actually have the virtue of being true.

Also, the judge might not allow the whole thing because the demonstration is so clearly flawed as the ability to see a flashing light in a courtroom bears absolutely no relationship to how that light would be perceived on the street. The demonstration then is unduly prejudicial.

Also, keep in mind, most U.S. states are contributory negligence states where the award is based on a proportion of the blame. All you might be accomplishing is that while the driver will be found liable for negligently failing to yield (probably a no-brainer even without a light in daylight), your award may be reduced by some amount if the jury finds that your unreasonably bright flashing light was one of the causes of the crash.

Stupid argument--hypothetical trial tactics based on a hypothetical situation. And trust me,even if the judge allows it, the jury isn't going to appreciate having the plaintiff's attorney shining a flashing light in their eyes. Think they were ill-disposed to bicyclists when they entered that courtroom? You just made that 100 times worse.

Iride01 

He said this and someone else says that. And we still have people talking about flashing lights at night as if that is what this topic is about. But it's not. Read the OP's title:Too much confusion and elevated hormones.