Daytime Driving Lights

LobbyLudd wrote:

MMMMM Why do they continue to put warning lights on all tall buildings, all aircraft and all railway trains, today I wonder -would it be anything to do with (in some way contributing a tiny bit towards) passengers & public safety I wonder or could it be decoration.

Er..... they don't.

In a city only the really high buildings have lights on them. That's what makes them stand out so effectively!

Out in the countryside even the tallest mountains don't have lights on their tops.

Aircraft have strobe lights fitted because strobe lights stand out! Electricity pylons (with a readily available supply of electricity) don't have strobe lights on top but the new (and higher) wind turbines do and their rarity makes them stand out.

My whole point about everyone showing lights is that they don't stand out. Even if we all fitted strobe lights they would lose their effectiveness when we all had them.

With regard to trains they are a throwback from paraffin days. When a train went into a tunnel the driver needed a light on the front. It wasn't practical to stop the train and go up to light the lamp so they lit one before the train left the station. When they invented electric lamps the railway companies were not very quick to catch on and by the time they did the lamp was left permanently on, again because the driver was entering tunnels on most runs.

Instead of introducing new legislation I would be quite thrilled if they rigorously applied the laws that we already have in force. Especially with regard to:

o Speeding.

o The use of phones.

o Illegal lights.

o Maintenance and MOT's.

o Lack of insurance and road tax.

o Driving without a valid licence.

By the way, my original post was to point out that putting your lights on is not "free" as it takes fuel to charge the battery!

Best regards,

Ian

Hmmm, think I will go and put my wooden spoon safely back in a locked cupboard

Tommy-Darcy wrote:Hmmm, think I will go and put my wooden spoon safely back in a locked cupboard

Please don't do that Ian,

We all need a good laugh in this miserable weather

Brian

deckie wrote:

Tommy-Darcy wrote:Hmmm, think I will go and put my wooden spoon safely back in a locked cupboard

Please don't do that Ian,

We all need a good laugh in this miserable weather

Brian

You guys are so good for a laugh honestly


I agree with others about those idiots on the road who don't see the need to put their lights on in bad conditions or at twilight they obviously feel that as they can see alright then all other road users can see them! the other thing that annoys me big time is the number of vehicles with defective lighting like headlights that are not correctly aligned and main dipped beam bulbs out, not so long ago the plod would pull you over for this but seem to turn a blind eye nowadays.

Dave

I think that one of the problems with those drivers who do not put their lights on is down to the fact that many vehicles have illuminated instrument clusters, thus they think their lights are actually on...................that is until they can't see where they are going

Other than that it is just lack of concentration, and probably too busy with their mobile phone/i pod/sat nav/make up to realise they have not actually got their lights on

Agree about those idiots who park on the wrong side of the road and leave their lights on...................berks

Paulmold wrote:................ Trouble is, if the car is fitted with them, the driver can't do anything about them..................

I think that's a convenient cop out.

If it's an after market fit then the driver has ill fitted them and can correct that.

If they were on the car when he bought it then he had the choice to buy or not. Just the same as buying a car with a noisy exhaust - buyers decision .

Once again, Brits being too tolerant of unacceptable behaviour by others.

(I am in favour of the principle of DLRs.)

Going slightly off topic..................

So DLR's are NOW mandatory on new cars, I presume this is yet another piece of legislation forced upon us by those interfering bureaucrats in Brussels

Well it won't be long until the traditional British MPH sign on our roads becomes extinct I am actually suprised we have managed to retain it for this long It is obviously down to lack of money.

After all, schools teach metric measurements not imperial anymore as do Europe so I presume it will eventually be "manditory" to have our road signs in KPH so as to NOT confuse all those foreign visitors and illegals aliens.

Tommy-Darcy wrote:Going slightly off topic..................

After all, schools teach metric measurements not imperial anymore

I was 'dragged up' on the 'old' system ...... so my G/kids laugh when I tell them a measurement is ...... 2 metres & 3 inches

Brian

Tommy-Darcy wrote:........

Well it won't be long until the traditional British MPH sign on our roads becomes extinct I am actually suprised we have managed to retain it for this long It is obviously down to lack of money.

.........

You are well behind the times!!

It's coming in through the back-door. The next time you go down a motorway check the distance markers at the side of the road.

They are one kilometre apart with one hundred metre intermediate markers.

Checking markers with the odometer adds that bit of extra stress that helps when driving down the motorway!

Best regards,

Dutto wrote:

LobbyLudd wrote:

MMMMM Why do they continue to put warning lights on all tall buildings, all aircraft and all railway trains, today I wonder -would it be anything to do with (in some way contributing a tiny bit towards) passengers & public safety I wonder or could it be decoration.

Er..... they don't.

In a city only the really high buildings have lights on them. That's what makes them stand out so effectively!

Out in the countryside even the tallest mountains don't have lights on their tops.

Aircraft have strobe lights fitted because strobe lights stand out! Electricity pylons (with a readily available supply of electricity) don't have strobe lights on top but the new (and higher) wind turbines do and their rarity makes them stand out.

My whole point about everyone showing lights is that they don't stand out. Even if we all fitted strobe lights they would lose their effectiveness when we all had them.

With regard to trains they are a throwback from paraffin days. When a train went into a tunnel the driver needed a light on the front. It wasn't practical to stop the train and go up to light the lamp so they lit one before the train left the station. When they invented electric lamps the railway companies were not very quick to catch on and by the time they did the lamp was left permanently on, again because the driver was entering tunnels on most runs.

Instead of introducing new legislation I would be quite thrilled if they rigorously applied the laws that we already have in force. Especially with regard to:

o Speeding.

o The use of phones.

o Illegal lights.

o Maintenance and MOT's.

o Lack of insurance and road tax.

o Driving without a valid licence.

By the way, my original post was to point out that putting your lights on is not "free" as it takes fuel to charge the battery!

Best regards,

Ian

Having been 'out and about' lately I fully realise what 'Tommy Darcy' was getting at with his first post.
Each month there are more brand new cars appearing with DLRs there is no consistency of design with different shapes and configurations. It is amazing how some are definately very bright (it seems some with a line of 3 intense white leds each side are particularly dazzling) and if like me you have been looking 'at' them (out of interest) they do leave spots before your eyes. They are in general brighter than normal side lights (apparently to be seen in bright sunlight is apparently the design reasoning ??? )

Another phenomenon I have noticed is the increasing number of HGVs 'disguised as a Christmas Tree' coming towards you (amber,blue, white lamps festooned all over the front of the vehicle. Is this legal or the tolerated unofficial truckers version of DLRs ??


ER well ............. just 'expanding' on Dutto's reply
My point re the warning lights on tall buildings (over a specific height legally requiring warning beacons) and other 'less tall' vulnerable structures near airports , on aircraft and on trains was I think merely just to imagine, out of comparison how passenger safety on these particular items may or may not be compromised if they were not present at all in daytime.

Aircraft do have bright static high intensity forward facing 'landing lights' as well that are switched on at specific times in daylight (their version of DLRs I would suggest) - on approach - take off- certain flightpath intersections (as well as the 'strobe' omnidirectional navigation lights)

Oh dear did I go and mention 'trains' - I recall from my own past direct involvement that trains in the 'old days' specifically concerning the era of steam locomotives up to the early 1960s, that there was 'daytime running' procedure and 'nightime running' procedure rules. It was not standard practice to have lit paraffin lamps on the front of steam locomotives in the daytime, only at night. Instead white painted circular discs were required to be fitted in daytime in place of the paraffin lamps . The front of the locomotive had a series of brackets in various positions, the night lamps or daytime discs were fixed in a specific arrangement in order to indentify the 'type' or 'class' of train for the primary benefit of signalmen plus any other staff that needed to be concerned, showing i.e express, goods, semi goods.goods etc. The use of these low intensity lamps was always accepted by the footplatemen that they were practically no use at all for seeing anything within soot blackened tunnels either in daytime or at night.
However modern trains have bright lights in daytime (their version of DLRs I would suggest) as a warning to be seen by track workers etc.

The Ministry of Transport clearly state that vehicles made before the DLR required introductory year models will not be required to fit aftermarket DLRs.
in the future.

I do very agree with Dutto's last bit - it seems 'all' those items listed are blatently happening around us every day - why do they always seem to get away with it !!!

all the best

Here is another example of High Intensity Lighting causing problems.

I, like many many other people suffer from migraines which can be brought on by high intensity flashes of light; the sun catching a door mirror of the car in front, a camera flash, the brake lights on a posh BMW have been known to trigger mine

On telly, if there is flash photography we get a warning " the following contains some flash photography" giving us the chance to look away

However, consider emergency (blue/red) and maintenance (orange) vehicles; these are all now fitted with Extremely High Intensity Flashing LED lighting obviously in the interest of safety especially in adverse weather conditions but there lies a problem. The first warning of a migraine attack is obscured vision which could in itself cause an accident. Again obviously when I get these symptoms I immediately pull off the road as soon as it is safe to do so, but the question is did any testing or consultations happen before these lights were installed or was it just a case of technology rolling out "for the better"? The same question is relevant to Traffic Lights which are also being "upgraded" to High Intensity LED's.

Obviously I am NOT against lighting for safety, just against all these over intense lighting solutions which technology is bringing to us

What was wrong with the lighting before LED's

Tommy-Darcy wrote:Here is another example of High Intensity Lighting causing problems.

I, like many many other people suffer from migraines which can be brought on by high intensity flashes of light; the sun catching a door mirror of the car in front, a camera flash, the brake lights on a posh BMW have been known to trigger mine

On telly, if there is flash photography we get a warning " the following contains some flash photography" giving us the chance to look away

However, consider emergency (blue/red) and maintenance (orange) vehicles; these are all now fitted with Extremely High Intensity Flashing LED lighting obviously in the interest of safety especially in adverse weather conditions but there lies a problem. The first warning of a migraine attack is obscured vision which could in itself cause an accident. Again obviously when I get these symptoms I immediately pull off the road as soon as it is safe to do so, but the question is did any testing or consultations happen before these lights were installed or was it just a case of technology rolling out "for the better"? The same question is relevant to Traffic Lights which are also being "upgraded" to High Intensity LED's.

Obviously I am NOT against lighting for safety, just against all these over intense lighting solutions which technology is bringing to us

What was wrong with the lighting before LED's

Sorry to hear your migraines Tommy are often triggered by these very bright light sources. I agree breakdown vehicles in particular now do seem to have much brighter flashing light 'displays' than would ever seem actually necessary.
Thankfully I only very 'occassionaly' get a migraine and that's enough for me !! I think if I eat too much chocolate with red wine, or I am very greedy sometimes with black pudding

The big justification that makers say with LEDs is of course the very long lamp life combined with very low consumption, but you have to question the intense brilliance that designers seem to favour (why not match the filament lamp that it is intended to replace with the appropriate equivelent wattage/brightness ?) It seems they are determined as you say in going up several notches in brightness for some reason.

I noticed Halfords are marketing the aftermarket daylight running lights as being 'high tek/modern looking' (almost as a designer image effect) Still I understand they have a valuable 'boy racer' section to maintain where some individuals seem to want to 'light effect' their cars more for decoration than anything to do with road safety

Black Pudding ????? HELL's TEETH I never considered those to be a possible cause...................Well nuts, I've given up most things I enjoy I am not willing to sacrifice my brekky aswell !!!!!

Tommy-Darcy wrote:Black Pudding ????? HELL's TEETH I never considered those to be a possible cause...................Well nuts, I've given up most things I enjoy I am not willing to sacrifice my brekky aswell !!!!!

Brekky?? There's nowt wrong with it at any time of the day!

A black-pudding sandwich washed down with a pint of Bateman's Bitter before you go to bed is a real treat!

Sweet dreams!


Ian

PS I've just wiped the slaver off the keyboard! Guess who's on a strict diet and dreams of such suppers!!

It is not restricted to Brekky here either Ian, Yummy anytime!!!

Tommy-Darcy wrote: It is illegal to use headlight bulbs higher than 55w on dip beam, but I swear these strip lights are brighter than a pair of Cibie Oscars!!!!!

Electric power is the rate at which electric energy is transferred by an electric circuit. The SI unit of power is the watt, one joule per second. Don't confuse wattage with brightness.

A strip of Ultra bright LEDs draws about 8 to 10 Watts.

The law has been overtaken by technology.

I have DRL's on my Megane but they are the bulb type and not LED. The LED's do appear much brighter and I must admit that they do dazzle. DRL's are also supposed to switch off when headlights are used. I have noticed that somehow some of them are still illuminated even though the headlights are on. My main gripe is that some drivers use only their DRL's at night which means the rear of he car is not showing any lights. I have seen this mainly around town. A very dangerous practice.

There seems to be a lot of confusion over the use of DRL's and I've seen it mentioned on the forum more than once that the DRL's should go off completely when dipped beam is switched on which is not correct

"DRL may be combined with other lamps. For example some manufacturers use the same lamp for both the DRL and position lamp. In these cases the DRL automatically dims to function as a lower intensity position lamp when the headlamps are turned on"

The ones fitted on our Nuevo decrease to half the brightness when headlamps are switched on. This is perfectly legal.

Also I think people saying they are getting dazzled by DRL's can't be true... I've seen loads on our current trip and have made the following observations, most after market DRL's are pathetically poor in brightness, they often have a blueish, greyish tinge or even yellowish tinge. Factory fitted DRLs have a much whiter higher intensity output like 6000k this just makes the white light much whiter not necessarily brighter... I think people find the extra bright whiteness of these lights a problem and not because they are dazzled by them, I've yet to be dazzled by DRL lights in the same manner as someone coming towards you on high beam

"DRL are necessarily bright to ensure they are visible in the daytime but not so bright that they will dazzle others. However they are too bright for night time use and are not intended to illuminate the road in the dark. If used at night they will cause dazzle and discomfort to others and so drivers should always switch to their position lamps or headlamps at night"

Above quotes from dept for transport

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/dft-information-sheets/daytime-running-lights.pdf

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/safety/daytime-running-lights.html

CruizingComet wrote:..................................

Also I think people saying they are getting dazzled by DRL's can't be true... I've seen loads on our current trip and have made the following observations, most after market DRL's are pathetically poor in brightness, they often have a blueish, greyish tinge or even yellowish tinge. Factory fitted DRLs have a much whiter higher intensity output like 6000k this just makes the white light much whiter not necessarily brighter... I think people find the extra bright whiteness of these lights a problem and not because they are dazzled by them, I've yet to be dazzled by DRL lights in the same manner as someone coming towards you on high beam .......................

Sorry - can't agree with that. I know when I'm being dazzled and it happens when some OE fitted DRLs, particularly on Audis, are coming towards me. Your experience may only have been from the dizzy heights of a MH driver's seat but from a standard car seat - they dazzle - and so do I when I return the favour with my main beams! (and I really don't care if that's an inappropriate response - you dazzle me and I'll dazzle you).

As a motorcycle user i have been driving around on dipped lights for more years than i can remember. The reason was to make a motorcycle stand out from cars,whose drivers are known to be poor at seeing other vehicles.
Possible the use of running lights on all cars will negate that effect.
Road safety would be inproved by having lights that come on in poor visibilty or nightime automatically , as i often see cars with no lights on.Saving their battery maybe!
regards
Mike
i cannot condone retailation by main beam dazzle .To dangerous.

mikethebike wrote:As a motorcycle user i have been driving around on dipped lights for more years than i can remember. The reason was to make a motorcycle stand out from cars,whose drivers are known to be poor at seeing other vehicles.
Possible the use of running lights on all cars will negate that effect.
Road safety would be inproved by having lights that come on in poor visibilty or nightime automatically , as i often see cars with no lights on.Saving their battery maybe!
regards
Mike
i cannot condone retailation by main beam dazzle .To dangerous.

As a now ex-biker I used a daylight driving lamp 40 years ago and more recently rode on dipped headlamps. The modern high powered bike lights while great for rider in the right conditions can be a danger to other road users when incorrectly adjusted.
I also dislike the modern high powered cycle lights set too high.
My VW Polo has the dipped beam set as daylight driving lights because thats the way Europe wants it. Unfortunatly there is no way of turning them off.

peugeotboxer wrote:Just as aside (not really off topic....I hope), last friday evening I followed a Rover car (probably one of the last made) and the rear tail lights had been converted to LEDs.
They were so bright and dazzling that I felt certain that his brake lights were stuck on.
It was only when he braked at a roundabout that I could see his rear window brake light come on.......the other two tail lights hardly increased in intensity.

Presumably he will have problems at the MOT station unless he is pulled by the police before hand.

PB

If this was a Rover 75/MG ZT then the rear lights were probably retro fitted from the current car that is still produced in China (They are a complete light unit), I believe it is or is going to be E mark approved.
I know quite a few people that have these lights installed and they are not as bright as the rear lights on a Range Rover.

My view on DRL's is that they look really naff, factory fitted or aftermarket, but I have much bigger thing in my life to worry about!

SJR

kenjones wrote:
My VW Polo has the dipped beam set as daylight driving lights because thats the way Europe wants it. Unfortunatly there is no way of turning them off.

Are you sure they can't? Reason I ask is that on the current VW T5 the DRLs ~can~ be turned off, but you need to know the specific sequence of switch moves to make to do it, and AFAIK it's not described in the user manual. If it's a recent Polo then I would not be surprised to find something similar on it.

-mojo- wrote:

kenjones wrote:
My VW Polo has the dipped beam set as daylight driving lights because thats the way Europe wants it. Unfortunatly there is no way of turning them off.

Are you sure they can't? Reason I ask is that on the current VW T5 the DRLs ~can~ be turned off, but you need to know the specific sequence of switch moves to make to do it, and AFAIK it's not described in the user manual. If it's a recent Polo then I would not be surprised to find something similar on it.

Thanks -mojo-
It's a 2012 Polo Match 1.4 DSG.
Since reading your post I have looked on the net and there seems to be a difference between Daylight DRIVING lights as many VWs have which are in addition to the normal lights and can be deactivated or Daylight RUNNING lights which use dipped headlights, rear and number plate lights as on my Polo which may not. I have found a sequence described for the Polo which the poster hasn't tried.
My car is buried under a couple of feet of snow at the moment but i'll try when I can get too it.
Ken

SJR wrote:My view on DRL's is that they look really naff, factory fitted or aftermarket, but I have much bigger thing in my life to worry about!

SJR

Don't we all, but being dazzled IS one of my concerns