Driving with Headlights on

anotheruser

This annoys me. Greatly.

I wonder if it's a new EU directive like the indicator lights on wing mirrors, which have come in on all modern cars.

The problem is, why can't you see in the day, when it's blazing sunlight that a car is coming towards you? Surely the light is more likely to blind you rather than not? Motorbikes I can understand.

I turn my lights on when street lamps are coming on. That seems most sensible to me. I also don't "flash" lights to say thanks, but do the opposite and dip them for the half second.

Nobody has yet given a good excuse as to why this is happening more and more.

TradePro

anotheruser wrote: »

I wonder if it's a new EU directive like the indicator lights on wing mirrors, which have come in on all modern cars.

Nobody has yet given a good excuse as to why this is happening more and more.

The indicators in mirrors thing ISN'T an EU directive - some cars have them (usually 'posher' models), some don't (usually 'basic' models).

Research has demonstrated that DRL's are a worthwhile safety feature.

Joe_Horner

anotheruser wrote: »

The problem is, why can't you see in the day, when it's blazing sunlight that a car is coming towards you? Surely the light is more likely to blind you rather than not?

Yes, DRLs are now a requirement for EU type approval (since Feb 2011) so any new models introduced since then must have them.

I can think of several situations where they can greatly improve visibility, even in bright daylight:

When you're driving into a bright low sun (morning or evening) an oncoming car with lights on will be far more conspicuous than one without.

When you're entering a heavily shaded area (like the trees posted earlier) from bright sunlight, cars with lights on will be far more visible before your eyes have a chance to adjust to the lower light.

On rural roads where you may get a glimpse of an approaching car across a hedge or similar as you approach a bend, your eyes are far more likely to register a flash of light than a flash of paintwork.

They also correct for the fact that far too few drivers bother with lights in reduced visibility such as rain. There used to be a maxim that if you needed your wipers you also needed your lights, now you'll regularly see people doing 70+ down the motorway with spray everywhere and no lights. If people are that stupid, sooner or later someone will legislate for their stupidity!

No doubt there are more similar situations where they improve visibility (even in bright light) but hopefully you get the idea.

The rest of the time, while they may not be a benefit, they're also not harmful. They're nowhere near bright enough to "blind" someone who's eyes are adjusted for broad daylight - even normal high beams won't do that!

Iceweasel

Someone a few pages back said that they could switch their DRLs off.

I can't be bothered going back to check.

Perhaps you could on cars before the Regs became operative - when they did not need to have any at all - but some did.

I believe the new regs say they must be fitted to all cars receiving Type approval now - but does it say they actually have to be used.

Can the car have them fitted as per required, and the driver choose to have them off either by 'pulling a fuse' or an optional setting.

Not that I personally would want to have them switched off.

OldBeanz

The car mentioned earlier was a Fiat 500 which pre-dates the regulations. Italians only need DRLs outside populated areas. I was there last year and just thought it was some kind of Italan macho thing. Bit pointless if it is optional.

Iceweasel

OldBeanz wrote: »

The car mentioned earlier was a Fiat 500 which pre-dates the regulations. Italians only need DRLs outside populated areas. I was there last year and just thought it was some kind of Italan macho thing. Bit pointless if it is optional.

I don't understand you OldBeanz.

Italian rules say headlights must be used at all times outside built up areas.

What part of that is optional?

Drivers of cars fitted with DRLs of course don't need to concern themselves.

I think you'll find it also applies to everyone driving it Italy - not only Italians - on second reading your post I think that's what you meant - but it's not what you wrote.

anotheruser

Joe_Horner wrote: »

When you're driving into a bright low sun (morning or evening) an oncoming car with lights on will be far more conspicuous than one without.

I agree. That's what sidelights are for... as people have been doing for many years.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

When you're entering a heavily shaded area (like the trees posted earlier) from bright sunlight, cars with lights on will be far more visible before your eyes have a chance to adjust to the lower light.

Perhaps, but then you probably wouldn't be in that shaded area for long. Plus surely you can still see well enough as it won't be that dark.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

On rural roads where you may get a glimpse of an approaching car across a hedge or similar as you approach a bend, your eyes are far more likely to register a flash of light than a flash of paintwork.

But if it's really bright, you want something dark to offset the surroundings so you would be far more likely to register a black blob rather than an incorrectly positioned light.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

They also correct for the fact that far too few drivers bother with lights in reduced visibility such as rain.

That is their own laziness though which is the severe problem with our country and something you will not sure.
Let me guess, you're one of those people who need warning that there are flashing images on a news report, that need a warning on every dry food stuffs to say it may contain traces of nut, or perhaps one of those people who need some sort of sign to tell you there is a gaping big hole on the pavement? :P

Anyway, taking what you've said here, will there soon be a legislation for self driving cars? I know Google and Volvo have tested variants but it needs to happen now because there really are some thick drivers out there who simply cannot drive. Not to mention those who tailgate thinking I will get out of their way...

On a side note to this, why do the UK allow cars to drive faster than 70 or 80? Hell, even put the maximum speed on at 100mph. Afterall, our limit is 70mph at the moment so there is no need to drive quicker. I would suggest we need something to happen in this area before lights which are on for no reason.


Don't get me wrong, I am all for modernisation and moving safety forward, and I understand in some countries that have only a few hours of "daylight" but this sort of thing isn't in the UK.
I wonder if it will stop if and when we leave the EU...

Plus, maybe the EU directive should apply to bicycles too as they should be on the road!

Lum

anotheruser wrote: »

Let me guess, you're one of those people who need warning that there are flashing images on a news report

If he has photosensitive epilepsy it's unlikely he'll be driving.

Joe_Horner

anotheruser wrote: »

[...] Let me guess, you're one of those people who need warning that there are flashing images on a news report [...]

Not at all - as Lum has pointed out, I'd be extremely unlikely to be driving if I was.

Altough, the fact that you seem to believe such warnings to be some sort of pointless nanny-state waste of time "for those sort of people" shows just what your mindset it on the matter, so really no point in discussing the rest of your post with you!

Iceweasel

@anotheruser

I don't understand these three sentences - can you explain?

On a side note to this, why do the UK allow cars to drive faster than 70 or 80? Hell, even put the maximum speed on at 100mph. Afterall, our limit is 70mph at the moment so there is no need to drive quicker.


Also what do you mean by this sentence?

Plus, maybe the EU directive should apply to bicycles too as they should be on the road!