- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
TECH NEWS
Video: Backtracker uses radar technology to warn of approaching vehicles
New gadget Backtracker, currently seeking the necessary funding to be put into production, provides early warning of vehicles approaching from behind using radar technology and alerts their distance and speed on a handlebar-mounted device.
Backtracker is claimed to be able to detect approaching vehicles up to 140m away. A handlebar-mounted unit indicates the speed and distance of an approaching vehicle, via an array of LED lights, while the rear-mounted unit, incorporating the radar technology, lights up to alert approaching vehicles.
The inventors describe the Backtracker as a “sixth sense” and, should it work as well as claimed, could provide a safe alternative to other measures for keeping an eye on other road users behind you, such as bar end mirrors or simply looking over your shoulder.
In a study carried out for the DfT by the Transport Research Laboratory in to cycling casualties a few years back, although getting hit from behind wasn't the most common type of collision involving cyclists and motor vehicles (getting hit from the side was) it was the type most likely to kill you.
Backtracker has been developed by a team of engineers based in Stellenbosch, South Africa, who set out in 2010 to develop a product that could make cycling safer. The idea came about after meeting a cyclist fearful of vehicles approaching from behind: “The idea for Backtracker was born through a chance meeting with an elderly cyclist, who had resorted to riding in the face of oncoming traffic, for fear of motorists behind him. It inspired us to create a safety product that could bring confidence back into every ride.
"As cyclists, we know the joy of taking to the open road. We also know the dangers, and rear approaching vehicles represent the worst kind. We don’t always hear them approaching, and motorists are often blissfully unaware of cyclists. In 2010 we set the task of solving this challenge in the hope of gaining some peace of mind while enjoying the fresh air."
The Backtracker has a maximum vehicle detection range of 140m and maximum vehicle speed of 100mph. The battery lasts a claimed 8-hours and the rear LED has a peak output of 40 lumens. The two units together weigh just 130g and use Bluetooth Low Energy to communicate with each other.
.jpg){kind=tracking}
You can currently pre-order the Backtracker at crowdfunding website Dragon Innovation from $149. They’ve currently raised $9,707 of their $226,000 goal. More info at www.backtracker.io
David worked on the road.cc tech team from 2012-2020. Previously he was editor of Bikemagic.com and before that staff writer at RCUK. He's a seasoned cyclist of all disciplines, from road to mountain biking, touring to cyclo-cross, he only wishes he had time to ride them all. He's mildly competitive, though he'll never admit it, and is a frequent road racer but is too lazy to do really well. He currently resides in the Cotswolds, and you can now find him over on his own YouTube channel David Arthur - Just Ride Bikes.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 3 hours 13 min ago
Interesting theory - how many points does it take for them to drive carefully?
- eburtthebike 3 hours 36 min ago
At the end of the consultation in May 2025, a decision will be taken.........
- Grahamd 4 hours 39 sec ago
The absurdity of it deepens when you realise that those points were acquired by the age of 26.
- David9694 5 hours 35 min ago
BAM!
- IanGlasgow 6 hours 10 min ago
"Polartec Power Shield RPM fabric – which has a 10,000mm hydro head to keep wet weather out, and an industry-leading breathability spec of 30,000g...
- mdavidford 7 hours 14 min ago
Oxfordshire councils are quite capable of letting you down too!...
- levestane 7 hours 28 min ago
'each spoke' (single) and 'leaf spring' (made of many leaves) seems contradictory.
- PenLaw 8 hours 20 min ago
I guess Morrissey could claim it.
- wtjs 8 hours 46 min ago
I do see a lot of delivery riders (on illegal e-motorbikes) with their faces covered...
- David9694 9 hours 26 min ago
Stuff like this seems more relevant than ever after the Trump victory. sorry not a funny
Add new comment
58 comments
pikeamus, as I said earlier "fucksticks" will be "fucksticks".
Well yes.
I'm just saying that I think people who believe cyclists that wear headphones are being inherently irresponsible are wrong.
Road and cycle paths.
I generally shout STRAAAAAAAAAAAAAVAAAAAAAAAAAA! as this is the most effective way of passing.
I'm more than comfortable in my passing technique, I say at volume that I'm passing on the right/left, whichever I deem safer and am more than capable of avoiding any form of contact if there is a misunderstanding. 1,000s of kms and zero collisions would support this. HTH.
And as the following cyclist, what did you do to avoid a collision?
Braked sharply and gave them a few choice words, though I would dispute the phrase "following cyclist" in this context. On one instance, where I was far enough back, I yelled a warning and it made no difference. On a busy road during rush hour most people assume that yells they hear aren't directed at them. Because they typically aren't. When people yell at my I typically assume it's some sort of abuse and ignore it. Because it typically is.
Anyway, we're getting off track. My point is that, as a responsible rider, my hearing virtually never causes me to change what I'm doing.
And I still fail to see how this revolutionary aid is going to be of any help to either set of "fucksticks".
"Fucksticks" will be "fucksticks".
Because I've come to overtake cyclists and runnerists who might be meandering a bit while absorbed in their music. Shouted a warning, which is generally ignored. I then pass said cyclist or runnerist only to see that it was the headphones that made them completely unaware of what is happening around them. Of course I understannd that it is fully my responsibility to pass these meanderers safely and they have to do nothing. #LawOfTheJungle.
Why deliberately handicap yourself? It's not like it's absolutely necessary, is it?
I've also passed cyclists who *werent* wearing headphones, but were chatting, and then decided to turn right without looking over their shoulders because they couldnt hear a car. It's just easy to be a fukstick w/o earphones
Sounds like you are talking about passing on a cycle path, which is not usually the context of the discussion. The context is usually more on the lines of Boris Johnson's comments on a ban in London. On a road you should be passing with the same distance that we expect from a motor vehicle anyway, so a little meandering shouldn't make any difference.
Out of interest, what do you shout? I've seen cyclists and runners be confused by the typical "on your right", and move that way themselves thinking that's what they're being asked to do. I kind've think that mixing sport cyclists and summer-weekend-picnicking riders on the same cycle path is almost as awkward as mixing commuter cyclists on the same roads as traffic.
By way of contrast to your example, I've had several instances where a cyclist switched from undertaking a line of traffic to overtaking it, swerving into my path as they did so because they were relying on their hearing and didn't realise a cyclist was already overtaking the traffic.
What we need is a device that the police can use to detect the speed of vehicles and then they could prosecute. If only this sort of thing existed...
What cyclists need is a device which measures and records the speed of passing cars and the distance from the cyclist. Once we have evidence which is good enough for the courts the police would no longer be able to avoid prosecuting drivers for dangerous tailgating and overtaking.
The device imo opinion is useless in it's current form.
It could be massively improved by incorporating a safety-distance calculator.
http://geckocycling.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/wip-distance-calculator.html
Given the distance you can approximately calculate what speed a car should be doing if it's to slow down in time in the event it cant overtake.
That could be used to change the colour of the user screen. Green for car is slowing down (given the distance) or Red, the car is above the threshold.
Without such a calculator the device is somewhat useless because it leaves entirely to the rider to determine if speed X and distance Y is of concern.
All of this still doesnt fix the problem of the many, many, many false-positives, where there was room to overtake, which is actually what makes the device fairly redundant
Or have it logon to Twitter and say 'Bye'
Perhaps there is an eventual application for this technology, though.
If the device could detect a speed above 30mph at a distance of less than 3m, and at that point it could trigger your phone to rapidly display all the photos stored on it, it would save you having to bother to have to flash your own life in front of your eyes before you die.
So, anyway, the point is this.
When a cyclist is killed by being hit from behind, the radar will show that a car is approaching from behind, perhaps quite quickly.
When a cyclist is passed by a car, the radar will show that a car is approaching from behind, perhaps quite quickly.
99.999999999999999% of cases will be the latter.
If it's not possible to identify the former (*and* to do so in time to react in such a way as to avoid the collision), the device seems useless.
If they replace the handlebar units LEDs with the motion tracker sound effect from Aliens, I'll buy it*
*not really.
I hope no one has spent money on this as it is a crock of shit idea. Don't give up the day job.
If it had missile lock it would be worth considering, but otherwise nah ……. it's rubbish!
Dude you have no clue - this is an amazing device! I've used it, and in all honesty I wouldn't want to cycle without it.
Its an amazing feeling to know what's going on behind you while cycling - very liberating!
Whilst flawed, I do like it that people can come up with a concept like this and within hours get a whole raft of "feedback" from a huge and impassioned focus group. The hope is something may just come out of it which may just be of some use. Exactly what, I'm not sure. How about making it aero so it can tell you when you are about to be caught and dropped by your -2 minute man/woman in your club tt?
When will someone develop and market a lightweight and indescrete front and rear facing video camera wit a lot battery life an a loop in record in system. Either for fitting to th bike or incorporated into helmets or front and rear lights units. Surely no that complicated or difficult. Make the compulsory and make sure all car van and lorries and make sure they know bikes are carrying them and I predict drivers would instantly become more considerate.
I was thinking the same. A rear-facing camera with a handlebar-mounted display would be far more useful ... if there is any use at all for such a device.
I keep thinking the same thing, there's an absolute demand for someone to make a half decent quality, discrete bike camera with good battery life to use for safety and evidence if you're unlucky enough to need it.
Given how many people I see with a GoPro on their head, which is both expensive and about as discrete as a head mounted penguin, there's an absolute gap in the market. The mobius camera is the closest I've found in terms of the electronics and price, but it needs three things.
- A small rainproof case as standard, not something to go diving with that makes it huge.
- Double the battery life.
- Better mounts, either copy the GoPro system or something even smaller.
All the pieces to make such a camera are out there, the car dashcam market is overflowing with cheap hardware, someone just needs to produce something for the cyclists.
A safe alternative to a mirror? To make cycling safer? Come on, road.cc. Mirrors are safe and surely you can find a better way to write about driver danger.
The light at the back I can see being useful, the bit at the front I can see being terrifying - constantly going off!
just use as a posh rear light and leave it at that surely?
Get any decent flow of passing vehicles and you'll switch the damn thing off - certainly not much use on any busy roads, and in town. forget it.
if you ride on the average road with a stream of traffic, how would you determine if the beep is one to worry about or just another car???
Unless you are riding in a segregated bicycle path, there will be cars up your arse practically all the time, and there is nothing you can do about it.
You might as well have a sticker on the handlebars with printed text on it stating "there is traffic behind you. It includes several car drivers who want you to just go away somehow".
That would be correct more than 90% of the time.
If you have a radar device such as this and it tells you there is a vehicle behind you, it affords you no advantage over looking over your shoulder, or just paying no heed whatsoever to whatever is behind you. What are you supposed to do when it tells you that there is traffic behind you? Accelerate away from it? Pull in to the gutter and let it squeeze past you with the usual 6mm of space?
So what is the reaction supposed to be to the warning? You'll look behind before making a manouvre (or use a mirror) and then act accordingly, but what do you do when a car is identified speeding behind you? It will need to be used in conjunction with a Teleporter, beam me up Scotty.
Think I'm with what seems to be the majority.
I don't really get it!
On the one hand its a bit like the NASA space pen - ie just use a mirror.
On the other hand I would replace the LED head unit with an app for a phone or just an audio alarm. I already have enough on my bars and there would not be enough room for another gadget.
How about a kickstarter for a subtle automatic top tube mounted gravel chip launcher. Anything that passes too close and fast gets a stone fired at then (maybe about window height)....the usual suspects would soon start giving bikes more room.
Pages