Put your headlights on; but not just yet.

Flukey

It is 5pm, it is broad daylight, and there are cars driving around with their headlights on. There is no need for it. Last week, on one evening, even a little later than now, I was out and about. It was a very bright evening, blue skies, and there were cars driving around with their headlights on. It seems to be nothing to do with the brightness, but more to do with the clock. You could be out at 1pm, with big black clouds around and a little dark, and not a single car would have their lights on. It is 5pm and yes, it will be getting dark soon, but not for a good bit yet. There is still plenty of good daylight time.

I know some say that, like in some other countries, cars should have their headlights on all the time, because it will make cars more visible. Well, if you cannot see another car coming towards you in broad daylight, with eyesight like that you should not be driving. Put your headlights on, by all means, but not until it is near to getting dark. I am not saying that they should wait until it is getting dark, but just before it. It is a long way off that now, so there is no need for them to be on.

Now I know people will come in here talking about safety and such, but as I said it is still broad daylight. It is as bright now as it was a few hours ago, when not a single car had headlights on, and it won't be getting dark for a while yet, so there is still plenty of time for people to be putting them on, without them posing a risk until they do.

ballooba

I usually have my lights on full time at this time of the year. If I was driving a Volvo I would have no choice.

Yesterday I don't think I had lights on during the day because it was particularly fine. I even washed the car!

JaysusMacfeck

Main headlights or dipped lights? There's also parking lights and fog lights.

I drive around with my dipped lights on during the day. As a pedestrian and a cyclists, I always think twice about what I'm doing if I see a car with it's lights on - even on a sunny day, a car with dipped lights on is more noticable than ones without.

Main headlights during the day are unnecessary if that's what you're talking about.

tbh

Flukey wrote:

It is 5pm, it is broad daylight, and there are cars driving around with their headlights on. There is no need for it. Last week, on one evening, even a little later than now, I was out and about. It was a very bright evening, blue skies, and there were cars driving around with their headlights on. It seems to be nothing to do with the brightness, but more to do with the clock. You could be out at 1pm, with big black clouds around and a little dark, and not a single car would have their lights on. It is 5pm and yes, it will be getting dark soon, but not for a good bit yet. There is still plenty of good daylight time.

I know some say that, like in some other countries, cars should have their headlights on all the time, because it will make cars more visible. Well, if you cannot see another car coming towards you in broad daylight, with eyesight like that you should not be driving. Put your headlights on, by all means, but not until it is near to getting dark. I am not saying that they should wait until it is getting dark, but just before it. It is a long way off that now, so there is no need for them to be on.

Now I know people will come in here talking about safety and such, but as I said it is still broad daylight. It is as bright now as it was a few hours ago, when not a single car had headlights on, and it won't be getting dark for a while yet, so there is still plenty of time for people to be putting them on, without them posing a risk until they do.

exactly how is this a problem for you?

ballooba

Dipped lights. People who drive with Side Lights only tend to do the same at night, which is insufficient imo. Fog lights are for Fog.

Zoney

It's perfectly reasonable to drive around with headlights on (dipped of course) in daylight - although on for example, a bright sunny day, pretty unnecessary.

A really big issue though is the number of people who drive around with no headlights on in poor visibility (even heavy rain and fog isn't enough for some, nevermind dim overcast winter days). In poor conditions, it often may as well be night-time, and the people driving with no headlights are as dangerous as people driving with no lights after dark. Little better are the misguided people driving around with their parking lights or "candles" on. They may as well not bother!

Finally - there are a really worrying number of people driving around with bulbs gone in their lights. This is quite frankly unacceptable - I really wish there was better enforcement. It's just outright dangerous to have one headlight where there should be two. I've even seen an artic truck with no rear taillights bar the two little ones on the top corners of the trailer.

Those are the really serious issues. Anyone worrying about lights on in daylight is concerned about the wrong thing. Focussing on lack of use of indicators would also be a better thing - it's outrageous that people seem to consider them optional - it's dangerous driving, nothing less, and could even result in killing someone.

Wishbone Ash

If my engine is running - my dipped headlights are on. It's something I've done ever since I started driving regardless of what vehicle I'm in and prevailing weather conditions.

A least nowadays, you don't get muppets flagging you down to tell you the lights are on unlike what used to happen years ago :rolleyes:

Flukey

Ballooba wrote:

I usually have my lights on full time at this time of the year.

Yes, but why, when it is actually broad daylight? A bright day in February is no darker that a bright day in July.

JaysusMacFeck wrote:

Main headlights during the day are unnecessary if that's what you're talking about.

Yes.

JaysusMacFeck wrote:

Main headlights or dipped lights? There's also parking lights and fog lights.

Main lights, full on, in broad daylight.

JaysusMacFeck wrote:

even on a sunny day, a car with dipped lights on is more noticable than ones without.

You'd still be easily able to see them without them though. As I said, if you can't see a vehichle in broad daylight, then you should not be on the road at all, except with your guide dog.

tbh wrote:

exactly how is this a problem for you?

I never said it was. It would indicate that there a lot of drivers out there that think everyone else is close to complete blindness.

Zoney wrote:

although on for example, a bright sunny day, pretty unnecessary.

You mean like in broad daylight! Exactly. There is no need for it.

Zoney wrote:

Finally - there are a really worrying number of people driving around with bulbs gone in their lights.

It is amazing how many people don't notice that either. From inside your car it should be clearly evident if one headlight is completely off.

The street lights came on outside my house at about 5:50pm. It is still usually quite bright when they do. It is ok and makes sense to have lights on by then, but there were cars driving around with lights on 2 hours before that.

Wishbone Ash

Flukey wrote:

The street lights came on outside my house at about 5:50pm. It is still usually quite bright when they do. It is ok and makes sense to have lights on by then, but there were cars driving around with lights on 2 hours before that.

So what! What point are you trying to make? Next you will be getting worried about motorists who indicate while entering a one-way street!

Aquavid

What's even more worrying is that while driving through the port tunnell on Saturday, at 80 kph, I was overtaken by a *petrol tanker* which was going at least 20 kph faster, and with no lights on!!!!

Aquavid

JaysusMacfeck

Zoney wrote:

Little better are the misguided people driving around with their parking lights or "candles" on. They may as well not bother!

Zoney wrote:

there are a really worrying number of people driving around with bulbs gone in their lights. This is quite frankly unacceptable

Garda enforcement issue. You see in the states, the cops will always pull people over for broken lights. There's seems to be so many broken bulbs on the road, you'd wonder if people even bother getting their cars serviced anymore. It seems they can't even change a simple bulb. [/QUOTE]

Zoney

Flukey wrote:

Yes, but why, when it is actually broad daylight? A bright day in February is no darker that a bright day in July.

The days are shorter, it's more likely you will have to put on your headlights (esp. considering the changeable weather - sunny periods are usually short indeed) so it's quite understandable to take the precaution of leaving your lights on. Also, you are more noticeable (even in negligably so when it is sunny)

Main lights, full on, in broad daylight.

I'm still not certain what precisely you mean. I've seldom seen someone with "high beam" lights on in daytime - although of course at night all manner of drivers neglect to dip their headlights when they should. By dipped headlights - I don't mean the dim or parking lights.

You'd still be easily able to see them without them though.

It's still better to be more noticeable.

It would indicate that there a lot of drivers out there that think everyone else is close to complete blindness.

Just because you can be seen in daylight does not mean you are noticeable, however big a car is. Cars can appear in the periphery of vision unexpectedly - they do move a bit faster than people. Having headlights on is a distinct advantage in being noticed.

You mean like in broad daylight! Exactly. There is no need for it.

No, there is less need for it. At the height of noon in sunshine or summer, there's probably a lot less need - but it's not a bad thing either.

The street lights came on outside my house at about 5:50pm. It is still usually quite bright when they do.

5:50 PM may be quite light one evening, and like nighttime the next, depending on the weather. Fortunately plenty of streetlighting uses light sensors, but these don't necessarily take account of the visibility - just light levels. Often street lighting does not come on until well after it would be useful - it usually doesn't come midway through the day no matter how poor visibility gets for example!

Hagar

If you drive with dipped lights on when it is not needed please consider the effect you have on the visibility of motor cyclists They drive with their lights on all the time to try to increase their visibility. If we all had lights on all the time they would loose that slight advantage. It might cost one of them their lives.

Wishbone Ash

Hagar wrote:

They drive with their lights on all the time to try to increase their visibility

I see loads of motorcyclists with no lights on even in poor conditions. Others wearing all black leathers/helmet without even wearing a Sam Browne.

Red Alert

Surely you don't mean environmentally? The load on the engine won't make any appreciable difference to the power consumption.

kippy

I always used dipped lights during daylight hours-no matter what the conditions. Its not hurting anyone, its an easy way to be safer and I think it works.
I believe that if it means I am even slightly more visable then it is worth it.

Using full lights during daylight hours can be a hazard and shouldn't in my opinion ever be done. Dipped lights, no problem.


I appreciate the biking argument up above but dont think that its a bad thing for anyone if cars go around with dipped lights. There area lives that could be saved equally by having cars with dipped lights and I dont think they would cause any extra problems for motorcyclists.

There are a fair few threads in this forum and indeed the motors forum on the merits of lighting up during daylight hours.
Kippy

I drive with my (dipped) lights on all the time, it is most effective when driving east on a sunny evening when the sun is behind you near the horizon, all drivers going west can see is the sun!! (reverse that for the mornings). Thats why in Sweden the law requires cars to be lit at all times (the sun is always low on the horizon this far north)

Victor

Flukey wrote:

Yes, but why, when it is actually broad daylight? A bright day in February is no darker that a bright day in July.

Matching cloud and tree coverage, July would be brighter as the sun is higher in the sky.

Wishbone Ash wrote:

A least nowadays, you don't get muppets flagging you down to tell you the lights are on unlike what used to happen years ago :rolleyes:

Of course flagging someone down for having no lights (at all) on at night, gets responses that vary from from "How was I supposed to know they weren't on" to "how dare you comment on my girlfriend's driving".

Deleted User wrote:

I drive with my (dipped) lights on all the time, it is most effective when driving east on a sunny evening when the sun is behind you near the horizon, all drivers going west can see is the sun!! (reverse that for the mornings).

I'm not so sure on this. My understanding is all the other driver gets to see is light and not your car.

Wishbone Ash

Aquavid wrote:

I was overtaken by a *petrol tanker*

How did you know the tanker was carrying anything and if it was , how did you know it was 'petrol'? Presumably you must be able to decipher the codes on the Hazardous Chemical panel.

Alun

Victor wrote:

Of course flagging someone down for having no lights (at all) on at night, gets responses that vary from from "How was I supposed to know they weren't on" to "how dare you comment on my girlfriend's driving".

The best response I ever got, after pointing out to someone that he had not only just one headlight and one rear sidelight working, but that none of his 3 brake lights were working was "Yes, I know, they've been like that for weeks now! I keep meaning to get them fixed. Some people just seem to have a deathwish.

SickCert

Didnt the Council have a safety promotion a couple of years ago about daytime headlights? Turn them on as i'll see you better in my mirrors.

tbh

International Studies

Andersson, K., Nilsson, G., and Salusjarvi, M.: The effect of recommended and compulsory use of vehicle lights on road accidents in Finland. Report 102A. National Road and Traffic Research Institute, Linkoping, Sweden, 1976.
A study in Finland conducted between 1968 and 1974 found that DRLs, when required on rural roads in the winter, were associated with a 21-percent reduction in daytime multiparty crash events (involving more than one motor vehicle or motor vehicles colliding with pedestrians or pedalcyclists).

Andersson, K., and Nilsson, G.: The effect on accidents of compulsory use of running lights during daylight hours in Sweden. Report 208A. National Road and Traffic Research Institute, Linkoping, Sweden, 1981.
In Sweden, a study based on 2 years of pre-law and 2 years of post-law data reported and 11-percent reduction in multiparty daytime crashes subsequent to the DRL law.

Vaaje, T.: Kjorelys om dagen reducerer ulykkestallene. Arbetsdokument 15.8.1986. Transportokonomisk institutt, Postboks 6110 Etterstad, N-0602 Oslo 6, Norway, 1986.
A study in Norway published in Norwegian and reviewed by Koornstra found a 14-percent drop in multiparty crashes prior to the law, during the 1980-85 period when voluntary DRL use was climbing.

Elvik, R.: The effects on accidents of compulsory use of daytime running lights for cars in Norway. Accid Anal Prev 25: 383-398 (1993).
A study in Norway, covering the period 1980 to 1990, examined the effect of the country's DRL law, which applied to new cars in 1985 and to all cars beginning in 1988. DRL use was estimated to be about 30-35 percent in 1980-81, 60-65 percent in 1984-85, and 90-95 percent in 1989-90, so, as in the earlier Scandinavian studies, only partial implementation of DRLs was assessed. There was a statistically significant 10-percent decline in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes associated with DRLs in this study, excluding rear-end collisions, which increased by 20 percent. For all daytime crashes involving multiple parties, there was a statistically significant 15-percent reduction associated with DRLs in the summer but not in the winter. No significant effects of DRLs were found for collisions involving pedestrians or motorcyclists.

Hansen, L. K.: Daytime running lights in Denmark--Evaluation of the safety effect. Danish Council of Road Safety Research, Copenhagen, 1993; Hansen, L. K.: Daytime running lights: Experience with compulsory use in Denmark. Fersi Conference, Lille, 1994.
Two studies evaluating Denmark's 1990 DRL law have been completed, one that assessed short-term effects, the other looking at longer term effects. Results of these two studies were quite consistent. There was a small reduction in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes (7 percent) in the first year and 3 months the law was in effect, with one type of DRL-relevant crash (left turn in front of oncoming vehicle) reduced by 37 percent. In the second study, which covered 2 years and 9 months of the law, there was a 6-percent reduction in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes, and a 34-percent reduction in left-turn crashes. There was a small reduction in motor vehicle-pedalcyclist collisions (4 percent) but a statistically significant increase (16 percent) in motor vehicle-pedestrian collisions.
North American Studies

Some DRL critics have attempted to undermine the unequivical results of international studies on the grounds that driving conditions in Scandinavian countries are not comparable to North American driving conditions. The following studies utterly refute this assertion

Cantilli, E. J.: Accident experience with parking lights as running lights. Highway Research Record Report No. 32. National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1970.
In the United States, a small-scale fleet study conducted in the 1960s found an 18-percent lower daytime, multiple-vehicle crash rate for DRL-equipped vehicles.

Stein, H. S.: Fleet experience with daytime running lights in the United States. Technical Paper 851239. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA. 1985.
In a much larger fleet study conducted in the 1980s, more than 2,000 passenger vehicles in three fleets were equipped with DRLs.

One fleet operated in Connecticut, another in several States in the Southwest, and the third operated throughout the United States. A 7-percent reduction was found in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes in the DRL-equipped vehicles compared with control vehicles.

Aurora, H., et al.: Effectiveness of daytime running lights in Canada. TP 12298 (E). Transport Canada, Ottawa, 1994.
In a study in Canada comparing 1990 model year vehicles (required to have DRLs) with 1989 vehicles, a statistically significant 11-percent reduction in daytime multiple-vehicle crashes other than rear-end impacts was estimated. This estimate was adjusted to take into account the fact that about 29 percent of 1989 vehicles were fitted with DRLs. Collisions involving pedestrians, pedalcyclists, motorcyclists, and heavy trucks and buses were not included in this study.

Sparks, G. A., et al.: The effects of daytime running lights on crashes between two vehicles in Saskatchewan: a study of a government fleet. Accid Anal. Prev 25: 619-625 (1991).
In another Canadian study, crashes of vehicles with and without DRLs in a government fleet in Saskatchewan were compared with a random sample of crashes involving vehciles without DRLs. The estimated reduction in daytime two-vehicle crashes was 15 percent. When the analysis was limited to two-vehicle collisions most likely to be affected by DRLs--involving vehicles approaching from the front or side--the estimated reduction was 28 percent.

Society of Automotive Engineers Inc., Automotive Engineering Vol. 102 ; No. 8 ; Pg. 35; ISSN: 0098-2571 (August, 1994).
In 1994 Avis, Inc. announced the results of a traveler-safety study analyzing the incidence and degree of damage to cars equipped with daytime running lights; the study showed a significantly greater degree of damage to those without daytime running lights (DRLs). Those equipped with DRLs have their headlights on at all times and are more visible to other drivers. During the day, they are on at an 80% power level; in the dark they operate at 100%.

Damage severity in the non-DRL group (measured in terms of cost) was 69% greater than that of the DRL-equipped fleet. Only the non-DRL vehicles experienced damage in excess of $15,000. The Avis study involved 1500 cars with DRLs, and 1500 without, representing approximately 29,000 rentals in eight cities in Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Washington.

Wishbone Ash

SickCert wrote:

Didnt the Council have a safety promotion a couple of years ago about daytime headlights? Turn them on as i'll see you better in my mirrors.

The Gardaí had a similar campaign and I recall Telecom Eireann or Eircom adapting it's vehicles so that the lights came on automatically when the engines were running.

Bards

Even in the middle of summer with plenty of sunlight, (on straight straight stretches of road), dark coloured cars can blend into the road and can cause head on collisions by other drivers not seeing them and over-take the car in front.

Daytime Running Lights reduce this type of collision

corktina

it doesnt cost anything, switch them on sooner rather than later...and not side lights either, they are ONLY for parking

irlirishkev

Deleted User wrote:

I drive with my (dipped) lights on all the time, it is most effective when driving east on a sunny evening when the sun is behind you near the horizon, all drivers going west can see is the sun!! (reverse that for the mornings). Thats why in Sweden the law requires cars to be lit at all times (the sun is always low on the horizon this far north)

Precisely. Cars behind you in this case are practically invisible.

Zoney

Guards could have been catching people for broken headlights every minute or so today on the R445 Dublin Road (old N7) in Limerick between Parkway and Groody - there were at least half a dozen such cars went past in the five minutes or so while I was walking along!

smemon

dipped lights for me all the time now..

few weeks ago, i came up to a junction, with right of way...

deliberately put sidelights on at the time coming up to it (even though it was daylight) as it was crowded and i wanted to make sure everyone seen me.

So up i come to the junction, expecting some eejit to fly out in front of me and that's exactly what happened.

Luckily i was ready with the brakes and horn Had i not known the roads, i wouldn't have been able to brake in time and i'd have been rammed into oncoming traffic.

It's remarkable the amount of people who view a 'stop' sign as 'merge'.

embraer170

Another vote for always using dipped headlights.

Look at cars coming towards you and see how much sooner you notice one with headlights than one without. Even a fraction of a second makes an immense difference...

I also feel pedestrians are less likely to run out in front of me when my headlights are on..

Wishbone Ash

smemon wrote:

deliberately put sidelights on at the time coming up to it (even though it was daylight) as it was crowded and i wanted to make sure everyone seen me.

If you wanted to make sure everyone could see you, why not use dipped headlights? Sidelights (parking lights) are for parking only and not for use while your vehicle is in motion.

Flukey

I understand and appreciate all the safety arguments, as I said in my first post. I am not querying those at all. It is still a bit strange to see a car with headlights on when it is full daylight though. It is also that they put them on more in line with the clock than the level of brightness as I said. On a dark day at 1pm you'd hardly see any with lights on but on a very bright evening, with the onset of darkness still a way off, you'll see a lot of cars with them on. So you'd wonder what triggers the drivers that didn't have them on earlier to put them on, when it is no darker and in some cases even brighter? Is it a domino effect, with one driver seeing another with them on and then it spreads?

Yesterday evening was a really bright evening in Dublin. The sun was still brightly shining before it set and yet many cars had their headlights on. I saw drivers driving west, with the guards down to block the sun out of their eyes, with their headlights on. As for the difference between February and July daylight, a low sun can often make things even brighter and more noticeable. The amount of hours of daylight may be less, but sometimes the brightness can be more intense in winter.

tbh

I think the general consensus is that it's not doing any harm. But do you know, I was thinking about this and one thing occurred to me: If I'm turning onto a street with parked cars, I could look left and right, and see a car, but if I see a car with it's headlights on, I know it's moving - it's easier to distinguish from the parked cars. It's not as if I can't see a car if the lights are not on, but if I see two, and one has it's lights on, I'll register it first. Better to be safe than sorry, I suppose.

Calina

I'm not sure that's reliable though tbh, it's just not only do I occasionally see people parked with full lights on, I often see them parked on the wrong side of the road and if you are down the country with no streetlighting you have absolutely no idea which way the road goes. I know of at least one fatal accident caused by someone assuming that a parked car with full lights pointing into oncoming traffic was moving and on the correct side of the road.

Wishbone Ash

Calina wrote:

I know of at least one fatal accident caused by someone assuming that a parked car with full lights pointing into oncoming traffic was moving and on the correct side of the road.

It's debatable but I think I would prefer that, a car parked on the incorrect side (illegal at night), had it's lights on as the reflectors would be on the rear and therefore useless.

Victor

Wishbone Ash wrote:

It's debatable but I think I would prefer that, a car parked on the incorrect side (illegal at night), had it's lights on as the reflectors would be on the rear and therefore useless.

However, those head lights are pointed into traffic, blinding people.

corktina

THATS what parking lights are for.....

(we should have another thread "turn off them fogs...unless its foggy...in which case turn the damn things ON"

Calina

Wishbone Ash wrote:

It's debatable but I think I would prefer that, a car parked on the incorrect side (illegal at night), had it's lights on as the reflectors would be on the rear and therefore useless.

For me it is not debatable. In addition to the fatal accident I mentioned above I have had major issues trying to identify where the road went because of drivers parked on the wrong side of the road with their full or dipped headlights on straight at me. As corktina says, that's what parking lights are for. Or they shouldn't have the lights on at all. You have more of a chance of seeing where they are relative to the rest of the road is there.

jd

Calina wrote:

For me it is not debatable. In addition to the fatal accident I mentioned above I have had major issues trying to identify where the road went because of drivers parked on the wrong side of the road with their full or dipped headlights on straight at me.

This happened to me tonight on the road from Ennereilly to the N11 (near the Redcross River)
A four x drive was parked with full beams on the wrong side of the road (as it turned out, beside a T junction :eek: ), - I had to stop as it was impossible to make out which way to go.
jd