Re: EU to force daytime use of headlights?

[PC Paul]

John Pitcock wrote:
> I've sent this to uk.rec.cycling as cyclists are concerned about the
> drivers who can't see anything that doesn't have two bright lights -
> as happens now in the dark.
>
> Dipped lights waste most of the light by shining on the road, (and can
> dazzle when badly adjusted, loaded or going over humps). Less powerful
> running lights would use less power, LEDs would be ideal for this but
> neither could easily be fitted to existing cars.
>
> www.JohnPitcock.co.uk

Brilliant. If you'd crossposted it then everybody can join in. But it looks
like you've just started two separate threads...

I've crossposted it now.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, PC Paul
('[email protected]') wrote:

> John Pitcock wrote:
>> I've sent this to uk.rec.cycling as cyclists are concerned about the
>> drivers who can't see anything that doesn't have two bright lights -
>> as happens now in the dark.
>>
>> Dipped lights waste most of the light by shining on the road, (and can
>> dazzle when badly adjusted, loaded or going over humps). Less powerful
>> running lights would use less power, LEDs would be ideal for this but
>> neither could easily be fitted to existing cars.
>>
>> www.JohnPitcock.co.uk
>
> Brilliant. If you'd crossposted it then everybody can join in. But it
> looks like you've just started two separate threads...
>
> I've crossposted it now.

Please don't do that. Any thread crossposted to these two groups is doomed
to descend into a flame war.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

The Conservative Party now has the support of a smaller proportion of
the electorate in Scotland than Sinn Fein have in Northern Ireland.

 

[Niall Wallace]

"PC Paul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John Pitcock wrote:
>> I've sent this to uk.rec.cycling as cyclists are concerned about the
>> drivers who can't see anything that doesn't have two bright lights -
>> as happens now in the dark.
>>
>> Dipped lights waste most of the light by shining on the road, (and can
>> dazzle when badly adjusted, loaded or going over humps). Less powerful
>> running lights would use less power, LEDs would be ideal for this but
>> neither could easily be fitted to existing cars.
>>
>> www.JohnPitcock.co.uk
>
> Brilliant. If you'd crossposted it then everybody can join in. But it
> looks like you've just started two separate threads...
>
> I've crossposted it now.

And I have un cross posted it for this response.

Scandinavian countries have been a head of the game on having a front light
source on on cars at all times of the day. Thats why SAABs and Volvos
allways have their lights on. (Whether its head lights or 21w side lights
(daytime running lamps)) Having lights on during the day does increase
visibility of cars to every road user looking in the right direction.
During day light hours if dipped head lights are bright enough to dazzle
someone then the most likely reason is that it is dark enough for lights to
be required anyhow. When it comes to cyclists it doesn't matter whether
lights are on or off if a driver doesn't see you its either because they
weren't looking at the road in the first place or you are wearing colours
that blend in with the surroundings too well.

As for suitable lamps for cars to use as daylight runing lamps.

Normal sidelights are 5w
The Daytime running lamps used in 80s SAABs and Volvos were 21W (not legal
for use as side lights hence why they only operated when the engine was
running)
Headlights have a legal maximum of 55/65w.

21W bulbs make a pretty decently bright marker thats is easily identified,
5w is rather dull, though some idiots seem ot think they are fine in dusk.

This means that for any car not built with lights specifically aimed at
daylight running will have to use the dim Parking Lights (what sidelights
really are) or use dipped beam. I would much rather see a car running on
dipped beams than sidelamps.

Niall

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Niall Wallace
('[email protected]') wrote:

> As for suitable lamps for cars to use as daylight runing lamps.
>
> Normal sidelights are 5w
> The Daytime running lamps used in 80s SAABs and Volvos were 21W (not
> legal for use as side lights hence why they only operated when the engine
> was running)
> Headlights have a legal maximum of 55/65w.

Note that all these are expressed in watts, which is a grave mistake. The
reason to set a legal /maximum/ is to prevent dazzling, yet many cars now
have lights which are substantially brighter than a 65 watt incandescent
bulb of the type available when the legislation was written. We need new
legislation expressed in maximum lumens, and probably needs to be around
900 lumens.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'll have a proper rant later, when I get the time.

 

[Tony Raven]

Niall Wallace wrote on 14/10/2006 01:32 +0100:
>
> Scandinavian countries have been a head of the game on having a front light
> source on on cars at all times of the day. Thats why SAABs and Volvos
> allways have their lights on. (Whether its head lights or 21w side lights
> (daytime running lamps)) Having lights on during the day does increase
> visibility of cars to every road user looking in the right direction.
> During day light hours if dipped head lights are bright enough to dazzle
> someone then the most likely reason is that it is dark enough for lights to
> be required anyhow. When it comes to cyclists it doesn't matter whether
> lights are on or off if a driver doesn't see you its either because they
> weren't looking at the road in the first place or you are wearing colours
> that blend in with the surroundings too well.
>

Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

 

[Niall Wallace]

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Niall Wallace
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> As for suitable lamps for cars to use as daylight runing lamps.
>>
>> Normal sidelights are 5w
>> The Daytime running lamps used in 80s SAABs and Volvos were 21W (not
>> legal for use as side lights hence why they only operated when the engine
>> was running)
>> Headlights have a legal maximum of 55/65w.
>
> Note that all these are expressed in watts, which is a grave mistake. The
> reason to set a legal /maximum/ is to prevent dazzling, yet many cars now
> have lights which are substantially brighter than a 65 watt incandescent
> bulb of the type available when the legislation was written. We need new
> legislation expressed in maximum lumens, and probably needs to be around
> 900 lumens.

Yep, I really struggle to see when a car with Xenons is comming towards me
because oif how bright the light is. though not as bad as when I go into a
blind left hander and the sun is conveiently in position to make it shine
directly into my eyes at the Apex.

It took me a wee bit of time to stop showing cars with Xenons dipped beams
(high beam is still hallogen on most cars) an extra set of lamps (hella 550
driving lamps) thinking they had their high beam on.

Niall

 

[Niall Wallace]

"Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Niall Wallace wrote on 14/10/2006 01:32 +0100:
>>
>> Scandinavian countries have been a head of the game on having a front
>> light source on on cars at all times of the day. Thats why SAABs and
>> Volvos allways have their lights on. (Whether its head lights or 21w side
>> lights (daytime running lamps)) Having lights on during the day does
>> increase visibility of cars to every road user looking in the right
>> direction.
>> During day light hours if dipped head lights are bright enough to dazzle
>> someone then the most likely reason is that it is dark enough for lights
>> to be required anyhow. When it comes to cyclists it doesn't matter
>> whether lights are on or off if a driver doesn't see you its either
>> because they weren't looking at the road in the first place or you are
>> wearing colours that blend in with the surroundings too well.
>>
>
> Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
> surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.
>

It's not a daft suggestion, but likely to be un popular. Have you ever
noticed how much more obvious a bright pink car is to a green one?

 

[Tony Raven]

Niall Wallace wrote on 14/10/2006 11:37 +0100:
> "Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Niall Wallace wrote on 14/10/2006 01:32 +0100:
>>> When it comes to cyclists it doesn't matter
>>> whether lights are on or off if a driver doesn't see you its either
>>> because they weren't looking at the road in the first place or you are
>>> wearing colours that blend in with the surroundings too well.
>>>
>> Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
>> surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.
>>
>
> It's not a daft suggestion, but likely to be un popular. Have you ever
> noticed how much more obvious a bright pink car is to a green one?
>

But you wouldn't blame the green car driver for the colour of his car if
another driver hadn't seen him so why blame the cyclists for the colour
of the clothes they wear?


--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

 

[Al C-F]

Niall Wallace wrote:
> "Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>>
>>Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
>>surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.
>>
>
>
> It's not a daft suggestion, but likely to be un popular. Have you ever
> noticed how much more obvious a bright pink car is to a green one?
>
>

ISTR that back in the days of BL, the Metro was available in 'safety
colours' for a slight reduction in price.

See how well that caught on.

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Tony Raven wrote:
>
>Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
>surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.

Are drivers of grey and silver cars actually worse at turning on lights
when it is foggy, or do I simply notice them more because they are more
startling being closer once they are visible?

 

[Neil Williams]

Al C-F wrote:

> See how well that caught on.

I've got a Citroen Berlingo, which is (a) bloody huge and (b) bright
red. Both of these, for some reason, do not seem to prevent people
(mainly other drivers) seemingly failing to see it on frequent
occasions.

Neil

 

[DavidR]

"Niall Wallace" <[email protected]> wrote

> When it comes to cyclists it doesn't matter whether lights are on or off
> if a driver doesn't see you its either because they weren't looking at
> the road in the first place

....which they are less likely to be doing when distracted by all the
lights.

> or you are wearing colours that blend in with the surroundings too well.

Blame the cyclists, heh?

 

[squeaker]

Simon Brooke wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Niall Wallace
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > As for suitable lamps for cars to use as daylight runing lamps.
> >
> > Normal sidelights are 5w
> > The Daytime running lamps used in 80s SAABs and Volvos were 21W (not
> > legal for use as side lights hence why they only operated when the engine
> > was running)
> > Headlights have a legal maximum of 55/65w.
>
> Note that all these are expressed in watts, which is a grave mistake. The
> reason to set a legal /maximum/ is to prevent dazzling, yet many cars now
> have lights which are substantially brighter than a 65 watt incandescent
> bulb of the type available when the legislation was written. We need new
> legislation expressed in maximum lumens, and probably needs to be around
> 900 lumens.
>
> --
> [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
>
> ;; I'll have a proper rant later, when I get the time.
IMHO the light spectrum is also a problem, as a lot of these super
wizzy new car lights have quite a blue tinge, an our eyes are more
sensitive to the blue end of the spectrum. I wrote to UK DoT a couple
of years ago about the problem of dazzle from high output car
headlights - they claimed to be 'working on it'.... (If you dig around
there is some US stuff on the web about this - big problem over there
with their massive tanks - er, light trucks - which pitch a lot on
their off-road suspension.)

 

[Daniel Barlow]

Tony Raven wrote:
> Niall Wallace wrote on 14/10/2006 01:32 +0100:
>> [...] or you are wearing colours that blend in with the surroundings
>> too well.
>
> Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
> surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.

I'm a little confused by this. If it's so common to hit cyclists
because they blend in with the surroundings, why do we so rarely hear
about people hitting the surroundings?


-dan

 

[Ambrose Nankivell]

Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Tony Raven wrote:
>> Niall Wallace wrote on 14/10/2006 01:32 +0100:
>>> [...] or you are wearing colours that blend in with the surroundings
>>> too well.
>>
>> Perhaps if cars were painted in colours that didn't blend in with the
>> surroundings, they too would not need daytime lights.
>
> I'm a little confused by this. If it's so common to hit cyclists
> because they blend in with the surroundings, why do we so rarely hear
> about people hitting the surroundings?

I have friends who live in a house on a corner at the end of a mile long
straight stretch of A road. There is a tree at the apex of the corner. It
seems very resilient. No one has ever hit it on a bike.

However, your point in general is taken.

A

 

[Pyromancer]

Just a thought, but given the impetus now seemingly being given to
climate change and energy saving, might ideas like this finally be
shelved? An individual lamp may only use a tiny amount of power, but
multiply that by all the vehicles out there...

(though I suppose with low power devices like LEDs it doesn't really
matter even when there are millions of them)

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Pyromancer <[email protected]>:
>Just a thought, but given the impetus now seemingly being given to
>climate change and energy saving, might ideas like this finally be
>shelved? An individual lamp may only use a tiny amount of power, but
>multiply that by all the vehicles out there...

And it's still a tiny fraction of their overall consumption (and the same
fraction no matter how many we consider) - turning off headlights on motor
cars is rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Gorgonzoladay, October - a weekend.

 

[Alistair Gunn]

David Damerell twisted the electrons to say:
> And it's still a tiny fraction of their overall consumption (and the same
> fraction no matter how many we consider) - turning off headlights on motor
> cars is rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

.... whereas mandating that they be on at all times is surely equivalent
to nor bothering to man the pumps on the Titanic?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...