Daytime running lights

[Mark pallister]

Kids running out in front of vehicles has nothing to do with the visibility of the car. The kid just isn't paying attention to traffic, most of the time they haven't even looked sideways when running across the road. Headlights / sidelights makes no difference. In fact kids running out in front of cars , has the same cause as drivers pulling out in front of cyclists, their attention is elsewhere. Visibility doesn't come in to it.

This is why much lower speed limits on residential roads should be promoted and rolled out. You can't stop kids running out into the road when playing on a residential street.

I think most kids parents and school teachers will be drumming it into there heads to look before they run out so therefore making your car a visible as possible seems to me should be very drivers top priority
especially in 30mph built up zones

 

[mjr]

As I keep trying to explain, real life doesn't equate to the binary armchair in which you seem to live.

There's 10 things wrong with that argument: firstly, I was out cycling with friends last night while you were posting here, so which of us is the armchair warrior; and secondly, the logical disconnect between your anecdote and the conclusions exist in the real world.

Further, when confronted with a very bright oncoming single headlight, that light tends to eliminate my ability to see anything else other than the oncoming headlight, particularly as I am now slightly myopic. In the dark, it is almost impossible to see what is behind a headlight until right at the last minute.

Which is similar to what I posted earlier about DRLs: lights can make it harder for some people to see unlit things. Sympathies on the myopia, but I'm myopic too, although with a side order of contrast detection abnormalities which actually seems to make it slightly easier to see at night.

I'm sorry to be harsh about changing your cycling practices based on a medical condition, but Highway Code Rule 115 says that if you cannot see beyond an oncoming headlight, then you should slow (possibly stop) until you can see unlit surfaces (whether or not you believe you've identified their vehicle type correctly from the lights).

As you mentioned - the white van man saw me but was a crap driver. The reason that he saw me:-

• Volt 400 light on the front of the bike
• Reflective rucksack straps.
• Reflective pedals.

What, no front reflector?

I have absolutely no doubt that if I did not have a light and reflectives, I would not now be typing this post. Thus my conclusions that visibility for cyclists is important, and also that people should drive with working headlights.

Sorry but there's surely plenty of doubt in that. A rider without lights and reflectives would not necessarily get wiped out by crap drivers, because most of them survive every night, often to the irritation of legally-lit-and-reflectored riders and drivers. Various reasons are suggested, including risk compensation meaning that if someone doesn't have lights and reflectives, maybe they don't assume that anyone sees them and so don't rely on the likes of white van motorcycle-impersonating man to give them any room.

And I still don't get how you draw any logical conclusion supporting the failed be-safe-be-seen campaigns from an incident where a motorist saw you and still didn't give you proper room! It seems like "cyclists should be armed with motor-disabling devices" would be a more valid conclusion from that...

 

[mjr]

I think most kids parents and school teachers will be drumming it into there heads to look before they run out so therefore making your car a visible as possible seems to me should be very drivers top priority
especially in 30mph built up zones

I hate to break it to you, but kids make mistakes and making such a widespread mistake should not result in death. A driver's top priority should be dropping their speed so they can stop within what they can see to be definitely clear (and not only what's unoccupied right now). Twenty's Plenty where children play.

Also, as mentioned, lights break up outlines and make it more difficult to judge distances, making it more likely that a kid will misjudge the time available to get out of the way of a car if it has stupidly bright DRLs on it. DRLs have been introduced by motorists to help motorists, not children, walkers or cyclists.

 

[Mark pallister]

I hate to break it to you, but kids make mistakes and making such a widespread mistake should not result in death. A driver's top priority should be dropping their speed so they can stop within what they can see to be definitely clear (and not only what's unoccupied right now). Twenty's Plenty where children play.

Also, as mentioned, lights break up outlines and make it more difficult to judge distances, making it more likely that a kid will misjudge the time available to get out of the way of a car if it has stupidly bright DRLs on it. DRLs have been introduced by motorists to help motorists, not children, walkers or cyclists.

So your saying a pedestrian can spot a unlit car easier than a car with drls on ?

 

[mjr]

So your saying a pedestrian can spot a unlit car easier than a car with drls on ?

No, it's not only me saying this. See @Drago in post #118 https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/daytime-running-lights.255567/post-5823732

It's a big problem in road danger reduction that so-called "common sense" is so often common nonsense.

 

[Mark pallister]

Ahh well if there’s two of you it must be true
It’s funny how the government and the car industry managed to get it so wrong
Never mind there here to stay now 👍

 

[icowden]

I'm sorry to be harsh about changing your cycling practices based on a medical condition, but Highway Code Rule 115 says that if you cannot see beyond an oncoming headlight, then you should slow (possibly stop) until you can see unlit surfaces (whether or not you believe you've identified their vehicle type correctly from the lights).

But highway code rule 115 is an advisory rule (should not must) and seems to be aimed predominantly at car drivers as a cyclist slowing from around 10mph to 5mph isn't going to make any real difference - and slowing down in the face of an oncoming transit van isn't going to help if you don't know it is a transit van. If I hit the van, the van isn't going to care. I will. It is more important therefore that the driver of the van can see me rather than the other way around. It's helpful if the van is operating with legal headlights so that I can see the thing and get out of the way of it.

I'm interested as to why you evaluate "be safe be seen" as a failure and look forward to your citation of the research that supports your evaluation.

 

[mjr]

Ahh well if there’s two of you it must be true
It’s funny how the government and the car industry managed to get it so wrong

Who said they got it wrong? It helps motorists and the car industry and that was more important to them than helping children.

Never mind there here to stay now 👍

Nothing is forever. Except the loss of the Cathedral of Chalesm.

 

[mjr]

But highway code rule 115 is an advisory rule (should not must) and seems to be aimed predominantly at car drivers as a cyclist slowing from around 10mph to 5mph isn't going to make any real difference - and slowing down in the face of an oncoming transit van isn't going to help if you don't know it is a transit van. If I hit the van, the van isn't going to care. I will. It is more important therefore that the driver of the van can see me rather than the other way around. It's helpful if the van is operating with legal headlights so that I can see the thing and get out of the way of it.

But why was it more important that that driver of that van could see you? They didn't seem to give a toss whether they hit you or not. That's why the anecdote contradicts your conclusion: it was far more important that you could see them - and not only their incorrect lights.

I'm interested as to why you evaluate "be safe be seen" as a failure and look forward to your citation of the research that supports your evaluation.

I'll leave it to someone far smarter than me: https://rdrf.org.uk/2016/09/28/on-formula-one-drivers-telling-children-to-wear-hi-viz/ - please read it before you hurt someone you love.

 

[Mark pallister]

But why was it more important that that driver of that van could see you? They didn't seem to give a toss whether they hit you or not. That's why the anecdote contradicts your conclusion: it was far more important that you could see them - and not only their incorrect lights.


I'll leave it to someone far smarter than me: https://rdrf.org.uk/2016/09/28/on-formula-one-drivers-telling-children-to-wear-hi-viz/ - please read it before you hurt someone you love.

What’s that supposed to mean ?
Are you saying that by having a light on his bike he’s putting his loved ones in danger ?

 

[snorri]

making your car a visible as possible seems to me should be very drivers top priority
especially in 30mph built up zones

A lowering of the 30mph limit to 20mph would be more beneficial than any visibility enhancing measures.

 

[Drago]

A lowering of the 30mph limit to 20mph would be more beneficial than any visibility enhancing measures.

Even more so if it were ruthlessly enforced.

 

[gbb]

Kids running out in front of vehicles has nothing to do with the visibility of the car. The kid just isn't paying attention to traffic, most of the time they haven't even looked sideways when running across the road. Headlights / sidelights makes no difference. In fact kids running out in front of cars , has the same cause as drivers pulling out in front of cyclists, their attention is elsewhere. Visibility doesn't come in to it.

This is why much lower speed limits on residential roads should be promoted and rolled out. You can't stop kids running out into the road when playing on a residential street.

In the dark (I did say at night...ie dark) anyone, a kid or adult, absolutely would have a better chance of knowing a car was incoming, the light throw from my side lights, 5 watts is virtually nil, or 55 watt (iirc) dipped beam, light throw several 10s of metres, they'd see the lights of a dipped headlight way way before 5w sidelights. (Remember, they cant see a car until they're 4ft from the road)
Speed limit is 30, personally I probably travel at a max of 20 because of these hidden paths, but at 30, you're travelling at what ? 40 ft per second....you're on those hidden paths in a second....I choose to give myself and any ped or kid every, I mean every, chance of not getting hit because they're distracted, not looking, whatever.
It's a rare occurence tbf, but I did once have to emergency brake (probably 20 years ago) .
IIf God himself told me using sidelights was the right thing to do, I'd still use headlights in those circumstances, nothing will convince me otherwise.
I cant find my emojis, but a thumbs up to portray a good discussion, no angst intended.

 

[gbb]

Even more so if it were ruthlessly enforced.

I'd agree, but I'm a realist, that will never, ever, ever happen.

 

[gbb]

In the interests of the discussion, can we positively define just what we actually mean by DRLs.
My Astra has 5w tungsten sides, 21w tungsten DRLs, 55w halogen headlights, I guess like many 'lower end / standard ' cars. I watched an Audi today, but couldn't figure if his LED DRLs and his headlights were on., I really need to see one in the daylight, fat chance, dark when I go to work, darkish when I go home.
My 21 w DRLs throw not much light and certainly dont seem to me to be dazzling.
Are there legal limits for DRLs wattage, if so why or how are some manufacturers apparently engaging in an arms race that shouldn't even get type approval ?
Or are some drivers simply using far too much lighting for the circumstances..are they actually using DRLs and headlights thus annoying,folk, dazzling everyone unnecessarily. Genuinely interested to break it down because DRLs on my car simply cannot be seen as invasive, brighter yes but theres still no real light throw from them...and I've stood several metres in front to check.
What I'm saying is, are we demonising DRLs when it actually may (underlined) be some drivers of high end cars are using high output headslights at the same time, in daylight. I'm rambling a bit, I'm ready for bed.