Brightside - Side Lights For Cyclists

[Afasoas]

https://brightside.bike/product/brightside-bike-light-sale/

Are these a good idea? Or a solution to a non-existent problem?

Bicycles aren't really long enough to warrant side lights. Would amber lights on a bicycle confuse other road users? Also, not sure they are legal.
I'm not sure there's really a sensible position to place on an upright. Placing it on the head tube as pictured I'd suspect is too far forward?

That said, there is a school of thought that you can never have enough lights.

[Jaded]

If only they flashed in the direction you intend to turn.

[citoyen]

If only they flashed in the direction you intend to turn.

Surprised no one has thought of that

[Lightning Phil]

It’s a chocolate teapot idea

[mzjo]

I am reminded of what my late friend Tonton Paul said about cycle visibility aids on bikes in London "Being more visible makes you a better target!" Side on would appear to be looking for trouble (even though in a different situation, country etc I was impressed with how well wheel reflectors worked to make a bike visible side on!)

[Peter]

If only they flashed in the direction you intend to turn.

Surprised no one has thought of that

Actually, there have been cycle handlebar turn indicators for some time.  I tried them when they came out.  The ones I had fitted in the bar ends, so were well-positioned on a straight bar bike.  But they had the drawback that they came on when you leaned the bar against a wall, unless you were very careful.  I never could get to the stage where I trusted motorists to heed them as much as a hand signal, so in the end I didn't persist with them.  I remain to this day the only cyclist I've seen with them attached.

[Kim]

I assume that was tongue-in-cheek, as bicycle indicators are one of the design student staples^[1] that get invented every year or two.


A bit of light to the side isn't a terrible idea, but the usual solution of front and rear lights with either a very wide beam or some deliberate leakage to the side seems perfectly adequate.  Obviously they're still not going to see you if they're paying more attention to their phone, or if your light is lost in a clutter of headlights from adjacent lanes or whatever.


_{[1] See also:  Hubless wheels.  Bluetooth-enabled helmets.}

[Jaded]

I assume that was tongue-in-cheek

 

[quixoticgeek]

Oh yay, the cycle equivalent of a disability dongle...

Are these needed? No.

Why aren't they needed?

Well if people actually ran their bikes in a road legal state, then they would have wheel reflectors (or reflective side walls), which provide MOVING visibility to the sides.

If people actually used standards compliant lights (BS 6102/3, or STVZO), then it provides that the light should have some side visibility. Like wise if people legally ran the required white front, and red rear reflectors...

At least they got the colour right for sideways visibility.

J

[LittleWheelsandBig]

I take the approach that side visibility for bikes is kind of pointless. If a driver sees a bike soon enough to stop or swerve around it, the bike will have moved out of the car’s way by the time the car driver reacts anyway.

[citoyen]

I assume that was tongue-in-cheek…

Yes, there may have been a trace of sarcasm in the comment.

_{[1] See also:  Hubless wheels.  Bluetooth-enabled helmets.}

Quite. People should stop to ponder the possibility that they’re not the first person to have had the idea and consider why there is still this apparent gap in the market.

[quixoticgeek]

I take the approach that wheel reflectors are cheap and light. And that standards compliant (STVZO) lights are actually good.

J

[citoyen]

I take the approach that side visibility for bikes is kind of pointless. If a driver sees a bike soon enough to stop or swerve around it, the bike will have moved out of the car’s way by the time the car driver reacts anyway.

Plus: if you’re in conditions where lights are beneficial then a car’s headlights will be providing far more illumination already.

If the driver doesn’t see you, it’s not because you weren’t using these sideways lights.

[sam]

I am reminded of what my late friend Tonton Paul said about cycle visibility aids on bikes in London "Being more visible makes you a better target!"

I'm of the Tonton Paul school of thought. Which would make me a real hit on my community Facebook page.

Tune association:
https://youtu.be/rCDZzf4ragg

[Afasoas]

Searching any of the on-line market places for bike lights yields lots of flavours with integral indicators 

What has dawned on me, is that the town bike doesn't have any reflectors^[1].
Well, it does have pedal reflectors now as those are integrated into the flat pedals I just fitted.

I've always thought good active light sources are better than reflectors, for fore and aft visibility. I'm probably going to buy a rear rack mount light with an integral reflector. Maybe I'll grab some wheel reflectors whilst I'm there. Wheel reflectors actually make a lot more sense because they in effect have much larger surface area when the bike is in motion^[2]. Same with pedal reflectors, if they aren't over half obscured rearwards by panniers. The fore and aft reflectors most new bikes come equipped with never made much sense to me. Too small?

There's notorious double mini roundabout that is a feature on most after dusk trips which is where I feel most vulnerable on my broadside.

[1]: In fact, none of the bikes do.
[2]: Sorry, stating the obvious

[Kim]

My general experience of observing other people's bikes (both when cycling and when driving) suggests that pedal reflectors are brilliant for identifying otherwise unlit (inevitably) BSOs, but become an irrelevance on the bikes of more serious cyclists who have them, on account of vaguely decent lights being much brighter - to say nothing of panniers.

Side-facing reflectors (be that a strip on the tyres, spoke reflectors or those awkward plastic things that come fitted to BSOs) seem to work extremely well, albeit in a limited set of circumstances.  Seems silly not to have some.  Blinkenlights on the valve caps are much the same, but prettier.

[Polar Bear]

Schwalbe tyres with reflective strips on the sidewalls are simply brilliant.

[Kim]

Schwalbe tyres with reflective strips on the sidewalls are simply brilliant.

It's astounding how well they work, even when caked in road grime and brake dust.

[vorsprung]

Schwalbe tyres with reflective strips on the sidewalls are simply brilliant.

I have the doohickeys that clip on the spokes



I think they are good for sideways visibility

I think the semi blind motorist is more likely to see my vispro 360 though

[Afasoas]

Oh yay, the cycle equivalent of a disability dongle...

Whilst I understand the sentiment, I think this could be considered offensive toward people who may be reliant upon mobility vehicles.

[Kim]

Oh yay, the cycle equivalent of a disability dongle...

Whilst I understand the sentiment, I think this could be considered offensive toward people who may be reliant upon mobility vehicles.

I suspect that you may not understand the sentiment.  "Disability dongle" is the disabled community's term for assistive technology developed by well-meaning non-disabled design/engineering types without bothering to do any research, and therefore tends to be obvious, over-complicated, expensive and neatly oblivious to the underlying cause of the problem it aims to solve (which may not even be an actual problem).  Think stair-climbing wheelchairs, robotic exoskeletons, machine-vision glasses and the like.

Assistive technology that's actually appropriate isn't a disability dongle.  Though obviously this is going to vary from person to person.  Similarly, there are a subset of cyclists who find indicators or solid tyres or whatever genuinely useful.


(I find the term irksome, because it changes the meaning of 'dongle' for the sake of alliteration, but I'm not disabled so I don't get to complain.)

[quixoticgeek]

Kim explained it way better than I could.

J

[citoyen]

Kim explained it way better than I could.

I wasn't familiar with the term but this:

stair-climbing wheelchairs

...captured the idea perfectly.

Helps that I've been learning a bit about the social model of disability recently - and with this context, I can see how the "disability dongle" idea relates to the supposed problem the side lights are trying to solve: making it the responsibility of the cyclist to protect themselves rather than changing the behaviour of motorists.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Well if people actually ran their bikes in a road legal state, then they would have wheel reflectors (or reflective side walls), which provide MOVING visibility to the sides.

This side of the Channel Curtain, wheel reflectors are a PoS (both senses!) requirement only. Not required for road legality.

Blinkenlights on the valve caps are much the same, but prettier.

But they don't work in Kim-compliant negative-photon colourway!

[Afasoas]

Oh yay, the cycle equivalent of a disability dongle...

Whilst I understand the sentiment, I think this could be considered offensive toward people who may be reliant upon mobility vehicles.

I suspect that you may not understand the sentiment.  "Disability dongle" is the disabled community's term for assistive technology developed by well-meaning non-disabled design/engineering types without bothering to do any research, and therefore tends to be obvious, over-complicated, expensive and neatly oblivious to the underlying cause of the problem it aims to solve (which may not even be an actual problem).  Think stair-climbing wheelchairs, robotic exoskeletons, machine-vision glasses and the like.

Assistive technology that's actually appropriate isn't a disability dongle.  Though obviously this is going to vary from person to person.  Similarly, there are a subset of cyclists who find indicators or solid tyres or whatever genuinely useful.


(I find the term irksome, because it changes the meaning of 'dongle' for the sake of alliteration, but I'm not disabled so I don't get to complain.)

Thanks for the explanation, Kim.