Does a Forward-Facing Bike Light Increase Rear Visibility?

A driver has been exonerated in Australia for striking a cyclist because he did not have a front-facing light and was, in the words of the magistrate, “an accident waiting to happen.” There’s just one thing: He was struck from behind, and he was sporting a rear tail-light.

Police prosecutor Sergeant Bob Anderson submitted that a headlight was not relevant because Mr Angel was hit from behind.

He said if Mr Angel was found to be wearing the yellow jacket, there would have been sufficient reflective material clearly visible by cars.

“A flashing red light was displayed on the victim as required by the road rule,” Sgt Anderson said.

So far, so good.

Defence lawyer Jon Irwin submitted that a cyclist riding in darkness required a headlight, rear light and reflectors on the bike.

After hearing six prosecution witnesses and two defence counsel witnesses, Magistrate Terry Wilson found Mr Angel failed to equip his bike with the requirements.

“If he had a (front) light it would have projected 200m in front and Ms Jasper could have picked up a bike was on the road,” Mr Wilson said.

This I find a bit hard to swallow. Firstly, I can’t say I ever spotted a cyclist from behind by dint of their front light. Secondly, maybe I’m using the wrong light, but there’s no way the beam projects 200 meters — it spills a (very) little light on the pavement about 15 feet of me. But maybe others out there have had a different experience?

(Horn honk to Treadly)

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 23rd, 2009 at 7:04 am and is filed under Cyclists, Drivers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

8 Responses to “Does a Forward-Facing Bike Light Increase Rear Visibility?”

  1. Torrilin Says:

    My bike’s front light (a Busch and Mueller generator powered halogen) has a beam that is visible from the front at least 200 meters away. However, it’s a normal headlight, so there is not extensive rearward scatter. My light definitely meets the WI legal requirements for a headlight. When I’m on the bike, it doesn’t seem at all bright, and the beam pattern seems to extend perhaps 30 feet ahead. But to an observer, it’s visible from very far away.

    I don’t find it at *all* believable that a headlight makes a difference in visibility from the rear. I have a much easier time following my partner via his tail light. Light is directional, and a light is most useful when aimed at the person you want to see it. The LEDs used in many bike lights are more directional than the halogens used on cars, and it’s easy to see this in comparisons of two lights. (that’s one reason why I’m happy enough to have a halogen front light… the beam pattern is quite broad)

    I don’t really think it’s wise to ride without a headlight, but since it was not a head on or side collision, I find the defense argument impossible to believe.

  2. Rich Wilson Says:

    California vehicle code 21201(d)(1) requires a front light visible from 300′ (about 90m). It doesn’t say anything about how far the beam must project.

    I’m bothered by the fact that they seem to be judging the cyclist, not the car driver. If one car rear ends another, and the front car has working tail and brake lights, would the front driver’s headlights have anything to do with it?

  3. Anon Says:

    That’s Australia for you. Wonderful place for a holiday, but there is always a nasty edge waiting under the surface. It shows in deliberate assaults on bicyclists also. I’m an Aussie for another year or so. US naturalization papers are in the pipe.

  4. Darrell Noakes Says:

    Just yesterday, I was describing in a conversation how too much cycling “policy” is informed by myth, folklore and superstition, and too little by research and fact. This is a good example of that. Sure, it’s a dumb idea to be out at night without a headlamp, but that had no bearing on this cyclist being struck from behind. A headlamp “visible” from 200m is by no means illuminating the road that far ahead and certainly won’t be visible from behind.(If Australia’s laws read that the beam must “project” that distance, I doubt that they intend to mean that it should illuminate the roadway for that distance, but rather intend it to be visible to drivers approaching from that distance.) Although a tail lamp apparently is required by Australian law, any good rear-facing reflector (e.g. SAE type) is sufficient to alert drivers approaching from behind (the law in this case being yet another example of policy based on superstition rather than fact). The court seems to have made a decision based on misinformed supposition, rather than fact, and cyclists are worse off for it.

  5. Gary K. Says:

    Although certainly beyond requirements of law, I do any longer night rides using a niterider minewt X2 headlight with a lithium ion battery pack. That light, without considerable extra weight, really can project at far distances, and the focused beam on flash mode really picks up anything reflective ahead, even blocks ahead. It turns stop signs, parked car license plates and tail reflectors into a disco party effect that makes it unmistakable that I am riding from any direction. I sometimes get people complaining my light is too bright and hurting their eyes, but that to me is a sure sign it is working. I also never ride with less than two rear facing lights.

    As for this case though, a front light should be irrelevant to a strike from the rear since 99% of bicycle front lights could not project far enough ahead to be significant enough visibility to be seen from the rear.

  6. chris hutt Says:

    A forward facing bike light could marginally decrease rear visibility when viewed in the headlights of a car since the background against which the cyclists is viewed will be slightly lighter with the addition of the light from the cyclist’s own front light.

    The cyclist himself will typically be illuminated by the car headlights to a greater extent than the background against which he is seen (he’s nearer, presents a surface largely at 90 degrees to light direction and typically wears something lighter than the background which in most cases will be tarmac).

    So with the addition of the cyclist’s front light there could sometimes be a lesser degree of contrast between the cyclist and the background against which he is viewed, hence reduced rear visibility.

    Of course any such effect will be highly marginal compared to other factors, but might nevertheless we worth noting with reference to such perverse arguments as that put forward by the defence in the case cited.

    In a similar vein you might be interested to know that I experimented for a while with a front bicycle turned backwards to illuminate me rather than the road ahead. I reasoned that it would be safer if a motorist about to pull out could clearly see a cyclist approaching rather than just a point of light whose distance away can be difficult to judge.

  7. chris hutt Says:

    Sorry, slight typo in last para. ‘Front bicycle turned backwards’ should of course be ‘front light turned backwards’.

  8. Coggs Malone Says:

    Anon – can I get you to clarify for me, what you mean by your remarks “That’s Australia for you. Wonderful place for a holiday, but there is always a nasty edge waiting under the surface”? Exactly what do you mean. Don’t slag Australians, my inference is that you, for some reason, harbour some sort of bitterness towards being Australian. We do have to have a serious look at our bicycle laws but what country doesn’t?

Leave a Reply

Traffic Tom Vanderbilt

How We Drive is the companion blog to Tom Vanderbilt’s New York Times bestselling book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us), published by Alfred A. Knopf in the U.S. and Canada, Penguin in the U.K, and in languages other than English by a number of other fine publishers worldwide.

Please send tips, news, research papers, links, photos (bad road signs, outrageous bumper stickers, spectacularly awful acts of driving or parking or anything traffic-related), or ideas for my Transport column to me at:

For publicity inquiries, please contact Kate Runde at Vintage:

For editorial inquiries, please contact Zoe Pagnamenta at The Zoe Pagnamenta Agency:

For speaking engagement inquiries, please contact
Kim Thornton at the Random House Speakers Bureau:

Order Traffic from:

Amazon | B&N | Borders
Random House | Powell’s

U.S. Paperback UK Paperback
Traffic UK
Drive-on-the-left types can order the book from

For UK publicity enquiries please contact Rosie Glaisher at Penguin.

Upcoming Talks

April 9, 2008.
California Office of Traffic Safety Summit
San Francisco, CA.

May 19, 2009
University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies
Bloomington, MN

June 23, 2009
Driving Assessment 2009
Big Sky, Montana

June 26, 2009
PRI World Congress
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

June 27, 2009
Day of Architecture
Utrecht, The Netherlands

July 13, 2009
Association of Transportation Safety Information Professionals (ATSIP)
Phoenix, AZ.

August 12-14
Texas Department of Transportation “Save a Life Summit”
San Antonio, Texas

September 2, 2009
Governors Highway Safety Association Annual Meeting
Savannah, Georgia

September 11, 2009
Oregon Transportation Summit
Portland, Oregon

October 8
Honda R&D Americas
Raymond, Ohio

October 10-11
INFORMS Roundtable
San Diego, CA

October 21, 2009
California State University-San Bernardino, Leonard Transportation Center
San Bernardino, CA

November 5
Southern New England Planning Association Planning Conference
Uncasville, Connecticut

January 6
Texas Transportation Forum
Austin, TX

January 19
Yale University
(with Donald Shoup; details to come)

Monday, February 22
Yale University School of Architecture
Eero Saarinen Lecture

Friday, March 19
University of Delaware
Delaware Center for Transportation

April 5-7
University of Utah
Salt Lake City
McMurrin Lectureship

April 19
International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association (Organization Management Workshop)
Austin, Texas

Monday, April 26
Edmonton Traffic Safety Conference
Edmonton, Canada

Monday, June 7
Canadian Association of Road Safety Professionals
Niagara Falls, Ontario

Wednesday, July 6
Fondo de Prevención Vial
Bogotá, Colombia

Tuesday, August 31
Royal Automobile Club
Perth, Australia

Wednesday, September 1
Australasian Road Safety Conference
Canberra, Australia

Wednesday, September 22

Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s
Traffic Incident Management Enhancement Program
Statewide Conference
Wisconsin Dells, WI

Wednesday, October 20
Rutgers University
Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation
Piscataway, NJ

Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Ontario Injury Prevention Resource Centre
Injury Prevention Forum

Monday, May 2
Idaho Public Driver Education Conference
Boise, Idaho

Tuesday, June 2, 2011
California Association of Cities
Costa Mesa, California

Sunday, August 21, 2011
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Attitudes: Iniciativa Social de Audi
Madrid, Spain

April 16, 2012
Institute for Sensible Transport Seminar
Gardens Theatre, QUT
Brisbane, Australia

April 17, 2012
Institute for Sensible Transport Seminar
Centennial Plaza, Sydney
Sydney, Australia

April 19, 2012
Institute for Sensible Transport Seminar
Melbourne Town Hall
Melbourne, Australia

January 30, 2013
University of Minnesota City Engineers Association Meeting
Minneapolis, MN

January 31, 2013
Metropolis and Mobile Life
School of Architecture, University of Toronto

February 22, 2013
ISL Engineering
Edmonton, Canada

March 1, 2013
Australian Road Summit
Melbourne, Australia

May 8, 2013
New York State Association of
Transportation Engineers
Rochester, NY

August 18, 2013 “Ingenuity” Conference
San Francisco, CA

September 26, 2013
TransComm 2013
(Meeting of American Association
of State Highway and Transportation
Officials’ Subcommittee on Transportation
Grand Rapids MI



April 2009
« Mar   May »

No, you probably won be compensated one million dollars; however, with the right blend of negotiating skills and patience, your efforts will be substantially rewarded!I have seen up to forty thousand dollars added to starting compensation through diligent negotiations. It is a way to significantly raise your standard of living and sense of self, simply by