Blaze Laserlights to be rolled out across Santander Cycles fleet

so this explains the confusing green mess I have seen coming towards me recently during my commutes? I thought it was some idiot with a laser pen trying to blind oncoming cyclists.

seems a huge waste of money, considering how ineffective the rear lights are on a boris bike, its surprising that the rear lights are even road legal?

if you look carefully, you have 2 dim red lamps mounted on seat stays at rear axle height, way below where they should be (i.e. seatpost height) to catch the attention of distracted drivers in busy traffic

When we fit lights to customers bikes in many bike shops I've worked in, we always aim to fit as high as possible on the rear to catch the driver's eye line, if you cannot get the light onto the seat post or its obstructed by the rear panier rack, we'd fashion a mount and bolt the light to the rear of the rack so its as high as possible

In the photo I took of one of these bikes at the Design Museum, you can just see the cover for one of the lights above the chain tensioner box (grey) behind the bike's serial number. 

Recently, I've also spotted a good number of people riding Boris bikes at night with no working lights? 

perhaps Serco should concentrate on fixing the existing bikes, and TFL on upgrading the poor rear lights, than wasting money on a gimmick

[[[[[[ Test-send

The ides of this is quite good, although the ones I have seen in London seem to suffer from the image bouncing around and not being that recognisable.

As for the cost, the bulk order would make them much cheaper than the retail version.

Personal injury cases have long been deemed unsuitable for jury trials so I wouldn't worry about the impact of these lights on outcomes in civil cases. I am just curious as to how it was decided these expensive unproven lights were money well spent as there were other more cost effective improvements that could have been made as other posters have pointed out.

This has just re-set the contributory negligence barrier a hell of a lot lower. Anyone smashing into a London cyclist will have their barrister argue 'they should have had those TfL-approved laser lights on'. Juries will no doubt agree. A fucking stupid idea that again shifts the onus away from drivers paying attention and onto vulnerable road users expected to deploy ever-brighter 'safety' accessories. Obviously the company was tanking due to poor reviews, so did a deal.

I notice that the article mentions "improved confidence" twice, as if just feeling more confident will make cycling safer. Is there any evidence that this light makes cycling safer, e.g. by reducing close passes? Or is just there to make cyclists feel better about themselves - the Gok Wan of cycling technology!

I doubt it has anything to do with safety! I imagine Santander noticed that few tourists were hiring their bikes at night. Stick a gimmicky light on the front and boom, sales go up! 

Ther are a lot of flaws with this and I think it is quite a cynical way for the city of London to be seen to do something for cyclists, without really addressing the underlying causes of 'accidents'.  The TRL report found that "in static tests, with drivers sitting in a bus, car, van and tipper lorry, the Laserlight made the bike more visible AT NIGHT in various positions around the vehicle."  

So given 80% of accidents happen in DAYLIGHT hours during the commuter rush hours or morning and early evening, it doesn't make sense to go to the expense of fitting this expensive device. 

Unless of course, they just want to be seen to do something to help cyclists rather than actually spending the money that is needed to put in quality infrastructure.

Love the caveat that is in the TRL report:  'Whilst the tests described in this report indicate the conditions under which the Blaze Laserlight can be seen, they do not ensure that the Blaze Laserlight will be noticed by drivers who may be concentrating on other events'. Ha! 

Quotes from the TRL report are from this article in The Guardian 

On the other hand, do you think motorists would pass us properly if we fitted a three foot lightsaber pointing out from the side of the bike?  "Hmm, the force is strong in this one, think I'll give him some room..."  It might be more effective than a projector light.

There are many problems with this...can't be arsed spelling them out. Yes it's a gimmick, yes it's expensive and yes if this were made by a big company I'd be wondering about backhanders.

The front light (stupid lazer thing aside) is a decent upgrade (at a far larger cost than need be) but what about the rear?? Pretty important no???

I backed Blaze on kickstarter as I really liked the idea of a forward light projection. The trouble is that it doesn't really work as our roads are so bumpy that you don't get a clear projection, more of a green squiggle a short distance ahead. At best people saw it but didn't think where it might be coming from as they focused their attention on the green squiggle. I no longer use mine as a result as the cateye volt is cheaper and more effective.
I do wonder who decided to roll these out across the bike fleet and what the reasoning was as I don't think the case has been conclusively made.

Don't necessarily think they're a distraction - just don't think they do anything. It doesn't make a shred of difference to whether someone is going to pull out in front of you, or across you, or step into the road ahead of you. If they're going to do that, no stupid little lighted bicycle will make a difference. 125 quid a pop? SOmeone is making a f*** of a lot of money from nowt more than a gimmick.

I've ridden a few Boris bikes with presumably the test models on. They are a mistake. As much as they seem a great idea, there is something quite disorientating about the projected bike picture in front of you and the way it moves off the road, on to backs of bikes ahead, nearer/further over speed bumps and undulating surfaces, and esp when you turn the handlebars and it appears to 'shoot off'. And you're attention turns downwards to it, instinctively, at the loss of left-right peripheral vision. Like a donkey and a stick.

Also, pedestrians do the same, and I expect drivers. They look down and away at it - not at you projecting it. It's adding a lot of distraction to already busy London streets. Silly.

Rrp is 125 quid. Guessing these must be dynamo powered? Not cheap is the answer

Very gimmicky lights. How much did this cost?

11,500 sales? No wonder she's thrilled......