We watch a lot of bike-related videos here at road.cc as you may imagine, and try to share the best with you – and this one, shot from a drone above last weekend’s Dunwich Dynamo, is one of the best we’ve seen.
Now a firmly established and much-loved part of the UK’s cycling year, the event celebrated its 25th edition this year.
Urban myth has it that it the Dunwich Dynamo was founded by bike couriers who decided on a whim to ride east, towards the moon, after an evening down the pub.
But as cycling writer Jack Thurston pointed out to us, the founding fathers of the overnight midsummer ride from east London to the Suffolk coast were Patrick Field and Jez Hastings.
Numbers have steadily grown year on year and now run well into four figures.
Nowadays it leaves London Fields on the Saturday evening closest to full moon in July – meaning not only is it a short and (assuming a clear sky) relatively well-lit night, but one that sees particpants heading towards the rising sun, too.
This article by James Walsh on The Guardian Bike Blog gives a real flavour of what it’s like to ride the ‘Dun Run’ and the sense of togetherness it brings to the cyclists who take part, and some of the communities they ride through.
Once you’re past Woodford and Epping, that is …
> Video: Teens push bike into path of Dunwich Dynamo riders, causing crash
53 thoughts on “Gorgeous video shows last weekend’s Dunwich Dynamo – from the air”
Nice video but I do find
Nice video but I do find flashing front lights pointless and extremely irritating.
guyrwood wrote:
Its rediculous isnt it, your in a huge group of riders why do you need a flashing light. You can even see the rider on the front with the slow flashing light is way less visible than any of the riders behind.
Totally agree, a front light
Totally agree, a front light should show you where you’re going and thus be a constant light. I regularly see a guy commuting in the dark in the dead of winter with only a flashing front light. Now he can see where he’s going, now he can’t, now he can, now he can’t, now he can etc. etc.
.
Flashing rear lights are a no
Flashing rear lights are a no-no on a group night ride; extremely irritating for the rider behind.
Lovely video though, I’m doing it next year
Shameless plug* for the Ride
Shameless plug* for the Ride to the Sun which is a similar event for those of us living in the top half of the country. This year’s ride has already happened but well worth taking a look if you’re interested for next year. It’s a similar idea with a ride through the night from Carlisle to Cramond Beach in Edinburgh with stops at Moffat for chips and at the abandoned Crook Inn at Tweedsmuir for a cyclorave (you have to see it to understand).
http://www.ridetothesun.co.uk/
* Not sure whether it can be a plug if I’m not responsible for organising…?
It’s a lovely video, with a
It’s a lovely video, with a different perspective of it, but to me it doesn’t capture the atmosphere down on the road.
It’s more a lesson in drone photography and not the best way to represent what’s happening down on the road.
Lovely video and, as others
Lovely video and, as others have said, the best advertisment for not setting your lamps to flashing on a group ride!
Damn…I really fancy doing
Damn…I really fancy doing one of these rides, but missed it (again). Does anyone know of any similar rides coming up – ideally from London.
There’s the Exmouth Exodus
There’s the Exmouth Exodus from Bath to Exmouth (who’d’ve guessed?) coming up on 5/6th August:
http://www.exmouthexodus.co.uk/
I’ve always fancied it but it generally clashes with holidays. I might give it a go this year if I am not too knackered from RideLondon the weekend before.
Flashing lights mean the
Flashing lights mean the battery lasts longer. I’m assuming everyone didn’t have the time or funds to go out and buy decent lights that would last through eight hours of darkness. Or pick up a portable battery to charge them which isn’t certain to last either. The year I did it, several people’s lights didn’t last the night.
I don’t have a problem with flashing rear lights on a group ride, as long as the setting isn’t eyeball-burning and doesn’t irritate. I’d rather they have lights than none at all.
Flashing front lights are to be seen. They’re usually more noticeable than steady lights. Probably not a good idea for most parts of the DD though as you really need to see the road. But, as mentioned above, he could’ve been running out of battery, or wanting to conserve it.
dottigirl wrote:
I often see this asserted but haven’t seen much evidence for it.
Ush wrote:
I guess the emergency services have been getting it wrong all this time …..
mike the bike wrote:
I guess the emergency services have been getting it wrong all this time …..— dottigirl
Do they claim that it makes them more visible or is it that the flashing lights were (before cyclists started using them) an unambiguous symbol that there was an emergency?
Ush wrote:
Lighthouses ?
Awavey wrote:
Lighthouses ?— dottigirl
The flashing pattern is to encode some basic information about which lighthouse it is.
Ush wrote:
Car indicators?
To be honest I think you are just being obtuse, I’m not sure what your point is. I ride with flashing lights, day and night. If you can stop drivers texting or checking facebook while driving I might consider stopping using them.
Awavey wrote:
Aircraft.
pl6125 wrote:
Aircraft have both static and flashing lights. It is not clear at all that the flashing makes them more visible. This answer[1] suggests that, similar to lighthouses, identification information may be part of the reason. This, poorly-sourced, wikipedia article on the detection of structures from aircraft[2] asserts that white flashing lights are not good because they blend with urban background “noise”.
1. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/9728
2. ” However, it has been recommended that flashing white strobes should not be used in densely populated areas; the lights usually merge with background lighting at nighttime, making it difficult for pilots to spot them and thereby aggravating the hazard” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_warning_lights
Ush wrote:
I’ve been a pilot for just over 30 years, and am now an instructor. I can assure you, it’s entirely clear.
problem with modern/latest
problem with modern/latest flashing rear lights is that they flash too quickly and are quickly irritating/distracting due to the amount of retina scorching lumens some of them unecessarily put out.
One of the best rear lights I’ve ever owned was a Knightlight, was maybe rated at .25 watt but it had a big arse and well constructed lens plus a built in reflector directly below it as part of the same lens. It had fast flash, steady and slow flash. the slow flash I thought was more than acceptable and yet you could easily see the light from a mile away on a straight road.
Far too many lights are overkill, particularly in urban enviroments, those using lighthouses whether on the street or on segregated/tow paths etc seriously need to be told to dim them down and put them on steady beam, it’s almost worse than no light at all IMHO.
As for long lasting front lights, if one bothers to do some research one can find more than adequate front lights that will light your way in complete darkness for 8 hours on the back of 4xAA batteries and don’t cost the earth.
personally I use a Sigma Pava, low lasts for an age and is good up to 17/18mph in the dicky dark, full beam works (for me at least) to 30+mph on downhill stretches that are really bumpy but where I know the lane. i don’t find taking 4xAA batteries with me a chore and swapping them out takes but a few seconds.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Agree. There should be a lumen limit. It’s getting idiotic. I’m often blinded by people who think they’re being safe but are actually causing more of an issue.
pl6125 wrote:
I find it’s more about the angle of the light, beam distribution and pattern.
Learning all of the above – that you can’t just stick any strong light on your bike – takes some time. Which means, maybe we should be looking at the point of sales rather than expecting all cyclists to learn and know this stuff? Or education?
dottigirl wrote:
I find it’s more about the angle of the light, beam distribution and pattern.
Learning all of the above – that you can’t just stick any strong light on your bike – takes some time. Which means, maybe we should be looking at the point of sales rather than expecting all cyclists to learn and know this stuff? Or education?
— pl6125Isn’t it just plain common sense? But probably your suggestions are better in the absence of that.
I’ve done DD about 15 times,
I’ve done DD about 15 times, right back from the early 90’s when it was a semi-organised audax style event run by Mosquito Bikes and there were only about 200 people at most and lighting technology was nowhere near what it is now.
The points about lights are well made; having insanely bright flashing lights are fine in town for commuting but once on dark country lanes in a group ride through the night when traffic is minimal you want the opposite – a small steady rear light on its dimmest setting and a nice bright front on constant.
It got frustrating last year asking people to turn their rear lights off or down, there were plenty of people it was impossible to ride behind and it’s really dangerous in a group.
Nice drone video though!
Well I spent a fair part of
Well I spent a fair part of the night being passed by people so had plenty of opportunity to consider rear lighting!
Tbh, didn’t have any problems with flashing rear lights, though there was the odd non flasher which was too bright and/or just angled straight at my eyeline.
Did notice that very few people use any sort of reflective hi-viz stuff. The odd rider who did have some sort of reflector really stood out. My conclusion was that lights have just continued to get better and better, and consequently we are all less bothered by hi- viz.
Agree with the obvious points above – flashing lights last longer, they also arguably more noticeable to drivers.
Thanks to everyone who shared the road with us, and the sea too. See you again next year!
I don’t see any problem with
I don’t see any problem with rear flashing lights and I was in groups with a mix of flashing/non-flashing lights pretty much the whole way. Either they were all considerate enough to be on dim settings or as I suspect group riding skills play a part: it’s a bad habit to be looking down at where most people put their lights so if you’re in that habit your eyes will take a beating. You should be looking at the person in front of you.
It was my first DD and I thought it was great, though it looks like complaining about it on the internet is almost as big as the ride itself. Other than a few knobs inflicting their horrendous taste in music on everyone I couldn’t see anything to complain about.
FFS. Flashing helmets are
FFS. Flashing helmets are scientifically proven to be 106% more stifferer in crashes than Campag, and anyone that now says otherwise was killed by an Audi in a close pass.
BarryBianchi wrote:
I’m not falling for that one. You can get on a list if you flash your helmet. Stiff or otherwise.
it’s a light war, EU regs
it’s a light war, EU regs have allowed brighter and brighter motorvehicle lights so that they can go faster in the dark, people on bikes put brighter lights on to counteract that.
Urban driving should only ever have sidelights, absolutely no need for headlights to be on when the streets are lit and certainly not those shitty DRLs which are an absolute nightmare/worse than usueless. I’ve been pulled over by plod for leaving my front fogs on in the past (it was barely a few minutes after coming off a foggy country lane) but nowadays the DRLs are ridiculous as is the intensity of modern car/van lights and no-one does anything despite them being obviously too bright/blinding.
Makes me chuckle that certain
Makes me chuckle that certain car makers have fitted that bright DRL that they are now switched off so indicators can be seen.
Oooo look our lights are now too bright let’s them off……..
Oh sorry were you blinded?
Flashing front lights are for
Flashing front lights are for city riding only, out in the sticks with no street lights it should be constant beam only. Most annoying when someone in the pitch black comes towards flashing like a blinking disco!
Flashing lights during the
Flashing lights during the day, what a load of old balls, more pointless nonsense. It won’t stop those that aren’t looking from crashing into you, it’s those that you need to worry about and lights, hi-vis, sunflares aren’t going to protect you.
And as with certain police reports, all it does it then put the blame onto those that are riding with legal lights, “lights were not very bright”, lights were ‘dim’, yet still were legal. Upping the ante on lights only has a negative outcome, flashing lights during the day gets right up my nose and overtly bright flashing lights on urban roads is simply a hazard/thoughtlessness at best.
but if you’ve some hard evidence it will protect you/prevent incident link us to it so we can understand the thinking/facts.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
You obviously don’t know the tragic story behind Exposure/USE.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Definitely obtuse
“but if you’ve some hard evidence it will protect you/prevent incident link us to it so we can understand the thinking/facts.” I have to assume by hard evidence you mean studies, and practical application of research:
LMGTFY
Not easy to find but…
https://colorusage.arc.nasa.gov/flashing_2.php
Blomberg 1986: A flashing light held by a pedestrian yielded a greater detecti on and recognition distance when compared with reflectorised accessories (420m versus 207m and 96m versus 92m respectively).
Watts 1984b: A rear bicycle lamp yielded a greater detection distance when compared with reflectors (306m versus 184m).
Watts 1984c: A flashing beacon on a bicycle yielded a greater detection but not recognition distance when compared with reflectors (588m versus 444m and 59m versus 71m respectively)
So, none of them show that it will prevent harm, but all demonstrate that a flashing light more readily gains attention than a steady light, or no light at all.
Now that’s been done for you, how about you prove th null hypothesis, that flashing lights don’t provide protection, or aren’t more visible.
madcarew wrote:
You did read what you pasted there didn’t you? They’re comparisons of reflectors to three other visual aids: steady light(pedestrian); steady light(bicycle) and flashing light(bicycle). Nowhere in there is there a comparison between steady lights and flashing lights. The only one of those which I have been able to find is one performed on snowploughs in North America[1] and its conclusion was that steady lights enabled drivers to more correctly judge the distance to the snowplough. (There must be others but I cannot find them. I assume that there is psychology/perceptual vision research which demonstrates that blinking lights attract the attention more in _certain conditions_, but they are not easy to find).
Two points jump out from this:
1) People’s confidence that they “know” some “common sense” is strongest when they are low in information and they will be ruder and more vehement in their assertion of the truth of that weak position.
2) Car drivers are so used to ignoring safe driving practices that they will even smash into the back of something as huge as a snow plough (admittedly in low visibility conditions). The emphasis on doing the little we can to make ourselves more visible is misplaced. By all means do so, but the only meaningful, significant improvements can some from the regulation and control of the origin of the problem: the dangerous vehicles.
1. Bullough, J.D. et al “PAPER #14: REAR LIGHTING CONFIGURATIONS FOR WINTER MAINTENANCE VEHICLES” IESNA Annual Conference: Ottawa, ON, Canada; August 5-8, 2001 http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/resources/pdf/iesna01a.pdf
madcarew wrote:
So no evidence then! These are people LOOKING, these are NOT the people who do not see steady lights. Try again.
it’s not obtuse to question ‘common sense’ or other little fallacy nuggets.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
I think that you may have to just accept that there is no evidence, study results or anecdotal real world experience of other people that can challenge your rather strange and counter intuitive belief system.
Mungecrundle wrote:
I think that you may have to just accept that there is no evidence, study results or anecdotal real world experience of other people that can challenge your rather strange and counter intuitive belief system.[/quote]
Correct. There are just some people on here who are destined to keep making the same f-ups over and over again on the basis that they won’t listen to anyone, and can’t tell the difference between Googling to find what you want to find, and actual evidence. This is the general area where the NHS interrups Darwinism. Take a view…
BarryBianchi wrote:
This from someone who doesn’t know what a dual carriageway is, and can’t figure out quote tags.
My view is you’re full of shit.
davel wrote:
This from someone who doesn’t know what a dual carriageway is, and can’t figure out quote tags. My view is you’re full of shit.
I just wish I could find the words to tell you exaclty how valuable your “view” is.
BarryBianchi wrote:
Echo, echo…
Who are you talking to, you dribbling mess?
Get your grandma to give you some HTML tips when you’ve put down your Biggles comic.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
When I was taking flight lessons, I remember learning that movement is detected better by your peripheral vision. So flashing lights could could create a movement-like effect that would then be more noticeable to those people not looking directly where a cyclist could be. Not saying I know this to be the case, but just throwing it out there as a possible reason flashing lights could be more effective in certain situations.
Anecdotally (useless overall, I know) it seems that I do get less people pulling out in front of me from side roads when I have my front light flashing. I only set it this way at certain times, usually dawn or dusk, when it’s not dark enough for the flashing to distract but not bright enough to feel like no light is needed, and also bright enough that a steady light may not be noticed as well. Mainly used on my way to work when the sun is at my back; most people looking at me from the front get blinded by the sun so I need something to stick out more. I also point the light further downwards when I have it flashing, to try not to piss off anyone 🙂
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
“how about you prove (your) hypothesis, that flashing lights don’t provide protection, or aren’t more visible.”
You are making some strong claims
“Flashing lights during the day, what a load of old balls, more pointless nonsense. “
“hi-vis, sunflares aren’t going to protect you.”
It’s up to you now to provide evidence to support your claims.
Actually one of these studies shows that hi vis does raise your conspicuity to motorists. As to your point about this being people who are “looking “. There is evidence to show that people who are “looking” will just as readily miss the obvious as those who aren’t looking.
Over to you, provide some evidence of your claims, or accept that you are talking exactly the same “balls” and poppycock that you are saying (most of) the rest of the world is saying.
I saw the snowplough report as well, and it provides interesting reading, but sbow plougsh, by nature (if you’ve ever followed one in action) are surrounded by a cloud of snow which as the study shows is a serious obfuscating factor. It did interestingly show that steady lights were more visible in that circumstance than flashing.
I am very happy for the accepted wisdomto be challenged and that that flashing lights are no more visible, or no more likely to enhance your visibility than a steady light, or no light in the day time . But that is going to require some rigorous proof. Clearly, no kind of light is not going to protect you from a driver who is looking at their phone or combing their beard in the mirror, but most accidents aren’t a result of this. Common sense (!) says that raising your visibility is going to enhance your chances of not being run over by most motorists
madcarew wrote:
You’re trying to train one of the stand-out packs of mince on this site to do back-flips. It’s like intellectual altitude training; long, aching process that’s only rewarding if you have a definite use for it.
madcarew wrote:
the initial claim was that flashing front lights ARE better/make you more visible, I said they’re not, thus the onus of proof goes with those stating that flashing lights are better/more visible. Maybe you need to figure out how things work with regard to onus of evidence as what you linked to proves diddly squat.
“one study”, yeah, there’s always that ‘one’ study that might loosely prove your point. Plenty more that say that hi-vis doesn’t work, and if it was so effective why aren’t the government demanding hi-vis colours for those vehicles that crash into each other all the time???
And as i’ve said it before, going down the route of hi-vis, helmets, brighter lights puts more and more onus on the vulnerable to protect themselves and absolve responsibility from those that present the harm
As for dual carriageways and snow ploughs, what the fuck are you jabbering on about!
You’re the one who is obtuse!
No. You have just confused your “onus” of proof with your “anus”.
BarryBianchi wrote:
Ah so, having l;ost the argument you resort to personal insults, congrats on your loss!
I get the point about plod
I get the point about plod saying ‘lights were dim’ – it was cited at the inquest into Pete Longbottom’s death. But one of the issues is about distance you’re expecting to be seen from. I’ve ridden several TTs behind people with the 4/4 Scorpion, which is the brightest I’ve seen – enough to leave flashing retinal burn for a few minutes if you’ve been following someone with one for any distance. They’re visible for miles in daylight on a straight road, but you ain’t going to see them round a corner or through a hedge.
I use a flashing rear light in low light or at night, with a steady light as well. Not sure of the evidence, but flashing lights seem to create movement that the eye picks up better, steady lights allow better distance judgement. I use a flashing front light where there are streetlights, but a steady light where there aren’t – it’s good to be able to see what’s on the road…
And yes, I am unaware of the Exposure back story.
Roadie_john wrote:
Yeah – this is what I recommend to newbies: flashing to be seen, steady for them to judge how far away you are.
Anyone know the backing music
Anyone know the backing music?
TerreyHill wrote:
I’m not sure but agree it was really good – anyone know who it was?
EDIT: “Tsunami” https://m.soundcloud.com/thegronk
Luv2ride wrote:
Muchas gracias!
This][1] is interesting. It
This][1] is interesting. It is specifically looking at the distance at which observers recognize a bicycle, as opposed to recognize that there is something in the road, but it suggests that flashing red taillights increase the recognition distance substantially. However, even better seem to be flashing lights on each ankle. Also it is recognized that this contradicts an earlier study which seemed to show that a flashing front light was not useful. In addition the visual background specifically excluded the situation which many of us find ourselves in: oncoming, glaring traffic lights. Still, it’s interesting and introduces the explanation that one major path of optic nerves (ventral) detect what a thing is and relies on cones, while the other to detect where a thing is (dorsal) relies on the rods which are much more effective at night time.
1. Edewaard, Darlene Elise, “The Nighttime Conspicuity Benefits of Static and Dynamic Bicycle Taillights” (2017). All theses 2620.
http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3627&context=all_theses