Time to enforce or encourage drivers to put their lights on

[steve50]

[QUOTE 3977264, member: 9609"]DRLs are not good news for cyclists, it is an arms race that we will never be able to compete with, DRLs will ultimately make cyclists less visible. Personally I think they are totally unnecessary.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, I think drl's are a good move for all road users. how many times have you been waiting to cross a road and you have checked left and right and left again, you see a car a fair distance away and hesitated, is the car moving or is it parked?? With drl's you can see the car is moving or at least you can see it has the potential to move because it is a lot more visible. The drl's are on indicating the engine is running and the car is possibly moving. The upshot is the car is more VISIBLE and that can only be a good thing for all road users.
Just how do DRL's make cyclists less visible?

 

[snorri]

Yes i saw them but most when they were a few yards away which is dangerous to cyclists.

You're telling us you were out on your bike for a four hour pleasure trip in conditions as bad as that?
That's crazy.

 

[Accy cyclist]

You're telling us you were out on your bike for a four hour pleasure trip in conditions as bad as that?
That's crazy.

I've only just tagged along with the group in the last few weeks. I missed the run last week because the weather was worse than yesterday. I didn't want to miss yesterday's run in case they thought i was wimping out and wouldn't be joining them again. The weather wasn't that bad, i've cycled in a lot worse granted not for 4 hours though. It wasn't all bad, we had a half hour cafe stop then ride back home.

 

[Profpointy]

I disagree, I think drl's are a good move for all road users. how many times have you been waiting to cross a road and you have checked left and right and left again, you see a car a fair distance away and hesitated, is the car moving or is it parked?? With drl's you can see the car is moving or at least you can see it has the potential to move because it is a lot more visible. The drl's are on indicating the engine is running and the car is possibly moving. The upshot is the car is more VISIBLE and that can only be a good thing for all road users.
Just how do DRL's make cyclists less visible?

ok it makes cars more visible, but bikes pedestrians, small children etc less visible. I see a snag with that approach

 

[snorri]

Just how do DRL's make cyclists less visible?

Other road users attention will be drawn to the oncoming vehicle with DLRs, and away from other possible hazards in the vicinity.

Edit. Beaten to it by Profpointy.

 

[Accy cyclist]

[QUOTE 3977280, member: 9609"]It is probably the fault of the Audi that you passed moments earlier who had left you temporarily blinded with their stupid OTT array of high intensity LED jewellery, some of these twats are glowing like a thermo-nuclear device

If we are going to develop this into a proper argument then we are going to need some definitions of gloominess and fogginess - even I agree there comes a point where lights need t be switched on, I even believe there is a point where front fog lights should be used. But in both cases it is way beyond being 'a-bit-overcast'[/QUOTE]

It wasn't just a bit overcast. To me my vision was about 60% of that on a bright day. Even on bright days i have trouble seeing cars that are the same colour as the road.

 

[jhawk]

Over here, car headlights are always illuminated, even during the day.

 

[vernon]

So you think it's ok to drive without side lights on a grey drizzly day? What about people using the road who don't have perfect vision.

Simples, they shouldn't' be using the road with vision defects.

 

[vernon]

Over here, car headlights are always illuminated, even during the day.

But you're not over here where you can drive unlit cars.

 

[vernon]

I disagree, I think drl's are a good move for all road users. how many times have you been waiting to cross a road and you have checked left and right and left again, you see a car a fair distance away and hesitated, is the car moving or is it parked?? With drl's you can see the car is moving or at least you can see it has the potential to move because it is a lot more visible. The drl's are on indicating the engine is running and the car is possibly moving. The upshot is the car is more VISIBLE and that can only be a good thing for all road users.
Just how do DRL's make cyclists less visible?

I wonder how we all coped without the existence of DRLs....

 

[summerdays]

I disagree, I think drl's are a good move for all road users. how many times have you been waiting to cross a road and you have checked left and right and left again, you see a car a fair distance away and hesitated, is the car moving or is it parked?? With drl's you can see the car is moving or at least you can see it has the potential to move because it is a lot more visible. The drl's are on indicating the engine is running and the car is possibly moving. The upshot is the car is more VISIBLE and that can only be a good thing for all road users.
Just how do DRL's make cyclists less visible?

If I'm about to cross a road, I think it's a good idea to look more than once, same at a junction when riding, I don't base my decision making on whether they have lights on or not. In your example they could have just got into the car and switched on their lights but be stationary. I think your brain is meant to notice the differences between two images, helping you to focus on the moving vehicle.

It has to be fairly gloomy or foggy before I expect all cars to have their lights on, and I still manage to see them. You see the occasional one at night without their lights and you wonder how they haven't noticed!

 

[screenman]

[QUOTE 3977289, member: 9609"]We can't compete, all cyclist have become less visible on the road with the introduction of DRLs. It also instils in the minds of motorists that if they collide with any thing that is not lit up like a xmas tree it is not there fault.



That maybe how you feel in your car, I can assure you I do not feel the same.[/QUOTE]

 

[BEHMOTH66]

I wonder how we all coped without the existence of DRLs....

the roads were less busier and driving was less aggressive

 

[screenman]

the roads were less busier and driving was less aggressive

Bang on, where is all this aggresion coming from. I blame East Enders, life for most people was never so angry before that lot started.

 

[swansonj]

the roads were less busier and driving was less aggressive

Or alternatively: we still maintained a concept of roads as shared public space, managed in such a way as to at least give a nudge in the direction of being fairly accessible by all sectors of society, plus a nod in the direction that a fair society is one where the powerful are not allowed to trample over the vulnerable without some sort of attempts at curbs. That was before we gave up and just gave the roads to cars and decided that whatever the best interests of cars were would prevail and sod the rest of society.