To increase bikers safety in tunnels, a button or some other type of contact they can trigger while riding past is installed near the tunnel entrance. When triggered, a warning sign indicating that there is a biker in the tunnel lights up and stays lit for the time an average cyclist would need to get through the tunnel. Thereby motorists could see that there is a biker ahead and be on the lookout when they go from daylight and into the dark tunnel. It's always a problem with the light transition.
-- m homola, Oct 23 2007

Baked. http://www.google.c...n+light&btnG=Search
Several versions in several places. [awesomest, Oct 23 2007]

Double baked http://maps.google....043d3507f00ffa8f044
Google map reference to one of these near San Francisco [danpat, Oct 24 2007]

Good idea; but would need cyclists to stop or perform distracting feats of in-motion reaching whilst in a dangerous place [+].

Also useful:
Cyclists who turn on their lights in tunnels
Tunnels with brighter lights near the mouth
-- vincevincevince, Oct 23 2007


I'm still not sure if they actually work or not, but several traffic lights around my area have ground loop sensors in the bike lanes. Something like this could be installed so the cyclist would not have the distraction.

And [21] for a reasonably short tunnel, you can expect vehicles to ride along behind, at least in most places in the US it is the legal requirement. In this case the cyclist should be riding out into the lane to block it completely, and the driver should follow until the next safe passing area. This makes the signal even more important.
-- MechE, Oct 23 2007


Baked. See linky.
-- awesomest, Oct 23 2007


Well, if it saves just one bicyclists, I'm voting for it...except in Seattle where bicyclists are really eco-terrorists...so we ban it in Seattle...okay?
-- Blisterbob, Oct 23 2007


Shouldn't the title be _"Bikes In Tunnel" Warning Sign_? I thought we were making subways for bikes.

And what [danielo] linked. Get the title right, then Google the title.
-- baconbrain, Oct 23 2007


//Well, if it saves just one bicyclists, I'm voting for it.// No! If it saves just one life, you should be voting against it. People always say "If it only saves one life".. etc, without pausing to think.

Suppose you decided to install this on all major tunnels, in order to save "just one bicyclist". Given a reasonable estimate of work-related accidents, you're likely to find that it'll cost more lives than it will save.

Add to that the cost of doing it. It's going to be more than enough to pay for an extra ambulance crew, or for a couple of extra police patrols, or for improved lane-markings on a highway, or for any of a hundred other things that are going to save more than one life.

So, no. If it's going to save "just one" person, you should vote against it.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, Oct 24 2007


Thanks danielo. Good thing I didn't try to make my million on that one.

[21 Quest] Here in Norway there is often no other option than the tunnels due to inconvenient, though scenic, mountains and fjords. I'll send some of the links from google to the state highway department and see they can install some of these.

[baconbrain] Title changed.

Are baked ideas supposed to be deleted?
-- m homola, Nov 01 2007


I don't think they have to be, so long as they were posted in good faith and are not 'widely known to exist'. Oh, and welcome to the half-bakery [m homola].
-- pertinax, Nov 01 2007


Indeed, welcome. Leave the idea--it's a good one, which is why it's baked. For a first one, that's doing pretty good. Thanks for the title change.
-- baconbrain, Nov 01 2007



random, halfbakery