Commuting - Should signals be required on bikes

I would like to see signals manadatory on bikes, it wouldn't take much room to install them, and then you wouldn't have to remove your hands from the bars to signal:beer:

In order for the signals to be effective, they would have to be rather large and stick out or it would confuse a car coming from behind who might consider it a blinky. What if the batteries ran out or was damaged during the ride leaving it ineffective?

People will become over confident with these lights and NOT look over the shoulder thinking the light is working and the cars are paying attention. What if they're not? What if the rear light stopped working and your not aware of it?

You can find these lights on the net but I won't use them since I'm not confident they'll work 100% of the time or that the motorist will even care to look.

Steve.

Originally posted by Dahon.Steve
You can find these lights on the net but I won't use them since I'm not confident they'll work 100% of the time or that the motorist will even car to look.


These are issues, I will also add that most motorists who have them simply don't bother to use them, meaning that they're pretty ineffective. I find many drivers simply ignore my hand signals, so I don't think they'd pay any attention to any other signals which, in the Queensland sun, can be pretty hard for some of them to see.

I think I'll stick to utilising the existing advantages of bikes over cars in traffic - one of which is that it is much easier to pay attention to what is going on around you, and dealing with situations as they arise. I really think that is a safer option than being lulled into a false sense of security by assuming anyone really pays attention to these signals.

They'll just think it's another blinkie light and won't pay attention to the fact that it's a blinking directional. I'll stick to hand-signals. But as Chris L points out, it's sometimes a wonder if many motorists pay attention to car turn signals much less to the ones exhibited by cyclists.

1) Bicycles are too narrow; following vehicles would have to be much too close before they could tell which direction you were signalling;

2) Safety lights are even more important than turn signals. If you used a blinking turn signal, you'd have to switch to constant-on safety lights and their higher battery drain.

3) Law enforcement already ignores existing laws about bike lights and reflectors. We don't need more laws; we need better education of both drivers and cyclists about their rights and responsibilities.

RichC

Originally posted by Crazy Cyclist
I would like to see signals manadatory on bikes, it wouldn't take much room to install them, and then you wouldn't have to remove your hands from the bars to signal:beer:

I would say 'why bother?', since so few cyclists use the free signals they already have: their hands/arms.

(Before you blast me, note that I think motorists are just bad about using their signals.)

Originally posted by jatkins679
I would say 'why bother?', since so few cyclists use the free signals they already have: their hands/arms. Well said. Lets get cyclists using what they have before pushing for more methods that will be ignored.

I see my position on the matter is well covered.

I'm actually going to take my original position one step further. Not only should signals not be required on bikes, they should also be banned from cars. It's only my total contempt for others that allowed me to escape Southport with my life today after they were being irresponsibly used (i.e. used by people who were not turning). This is just ridiculous.

Rant over. I feel much better now. :)

I think I will stick to hand signals. Adding turn signals would probably not make any difference anyway. Most drivers have tunnel vison and would ignore them.
I personally don't want the extra weight of a battery year round. It is finally light enough when i leave work that I don't need my head light.

Originally posted by serpico317
I Most drivers have tunnel vison and would ignore them.


I'll say they don't even see me half the time and I have 2 flashing reds in the rear, red tire flies on both wheels, a front blinker as well as a 2.5 watt halogen I am also 6'3" sit tall in the saddle and am usually wearing a bright yellow coat. They will only be confused by the addition of turn signals, heck they are confused then I use the correct hand signals I have taken to just pointing in the direction I am going.

16 Bright Red Flashing LEDs in the back, and 12W of flashing white light in the front. I wear a bright yellow flourecent jacket. I am often overlooked. A little amber light won't do much but confuse people. Big gestures, eye contact. It's the only way to go.

well, my opinion is already pretty well represented here, but...

* there are much bigger problems to worry about on bikes than signals - rider education and predictable behavior and use of hand signals would do the job
* we don't need any more regulations
* many racing or off-road bikes would be "in the grey"
* batteries or whatever would be heavy and a nuisance - often not worth the benefit
* as others said, bikes are narrow and blinkers more importatn "to be seen" lighting would interfer with blinkers and might have to be reduced to be effective - not a good thing

how often is the problem in a bike accident that the cyclist makes a hand signal, turns in a predictable manner, is SEEN in general but the hand signal not recognized? i would guess VERY infrequent as more commonly
a) the auto driver doesn't see the bike and if lights of whatever are used, blinkers won't help
b) the cyclist doesn't signal at all - here having blinkers on the bike won't help
c) the cyclist turns eratically or unpredictably - here blinkers won't help much either as they signal a PREDICTABLE action

Bike turn signals. Yup that went over like a lead balloon. Sorry Crazy, she just won't fly.

Next thing someone will post will be out-riggers so that motorists will have to give us three feet in order to pass. (News Flash) They'd just hit it, knock you down, and it would be your fault for creating an obstruction. Man I severely dislike cagers! (I don't hate but I have INTENSE dislike)

Rain, we have those outriggers already, plastic sticks with an orange reflective circle which fits onto the rear rack. They do work, and traffic tends to pass a bit wider, but they are literally a drag, and you have to flip them in when going for the gap. I find that using an offside pannier also encourages more space.

On signalling, I find that arm signals are less than effective. I prefer to use road positioning and eye to eye negotiation as well, to secure a turn. I never use signals for nearside turns, since drivers take this as a queue to overtake you, just as you need to swing out.

Geez I was just kidding. Leave it to the Brits to come up with something like that. They sure as heck wouldn't work here I'll say that much.

The outriggers I have seen are only about 12-18" in length, so wouldn't go much further than a set of panniers. Their benefit comes in the dark and the reflective disc. A motorist my think it is 2 bikes side by side and therefore push wider.

actually, i've never seen these "outriggers" before, but i've considered designing something of my own - basically a pole with a flag or reflector/blinker which you can fix in 2 positions, either straight up for small spaces or out to the left to provide more width, visibility and force more space.

after some long touring on roads where vehicles often passed a few inches away at 55mph+, it seems like it might be a good idea.

but i never actually worked on making it - maybe the ones you can buy would be the way to go if i could find them.

At times when passed very close I have often considered an outrigger with a car key attached to the end. Not that I would ever do it, but it is an entertaining thought at times! Of course I would make it very reflective so if they scratched their paint it would be their fault. Just a crazy idea brought on by fear huh?

I used to use one of those outriggers with a da-glo/reflective pennant on it. While it seemed to be effective in forcing drivers to give me more space, it was just more trouble than it was worth. Getting passed to close on the left is just not one of my major problems.

It also increased the number of timid drivers who were unwilling to pass me at all, and that was too much.

RichC

I wonder what response you would get by having a sign on the end of outrigger that stated "WET PAINT"!

Originally posted by Dahon.Steve
I wonder what response you would get by having a sign on the end of outrigger that stated "WET PAINT"!

Heh. Or "Smile! Live Webcam Pointing at You!"

RichC

Originally posted by Rich Clark
It also increased the number of timid drivers who were unwilling to pass me at all, and that was too much.

I find that to be a common problem: drivers too scared to pass even though there is enough room to pass. And inevitably the drivers stuck behind this deer-driving-a-car honk at ME, the cyclist, for holding up traffic. What bs, huh?

Originally posted by jatkins679
I find that to be a common problem: drivers too scared to pass even though there is enough room to pass. And inevitably the drivers stuck behind this deer-driving-a-car honk at ME, the cyclist, for holding up traffic. What bs, huh?

For some odd reason I put myself into that category of driver. Unless I can give the cyclist a good 3 foot I don't overtake. I suppose I'm afraid of him/her having a wobble as I go past.