DRLs on cars - apparently it's all our fault!

[Davidc]

Mad@urage, I'm not going to bother respoding again to most of that. My considered opinion is that you (and the CTC) are wrong on this subject.

My observations are based on experience rather than on what bureaucrats think, and in any event it's not them that have done the analysis behind the recommendations.

Don't bother trying to base your opposition to DRLs or to my views on your experience of cycling generally or in London. From what you have said mine is at least double that, and also includes periods of cycling in a number of other places, some of which require DRLs on cars. That mainly goes with age, and by the time you catch up I'll be long gone.

Based on my experience I'll be delighted to see DRL laws. Unfortunately in the UK we could end up with the worst possible outcome which would be new cars with DRLs and older ones not having to use them.

I'll continue relying on appropriate and well placed lights of appropriate and effective types in order to be seen, and to see by.Judging by the contents of your posts I'll rely on my judgement not yours in selection and use of those lights.

 

[Davidc]

I don't really care either way. There are times in the middle of the day where dipped lights are appropriate but the driver should really have enough intelligence to realise this.

As I saw in South Devon yesterday most do but sadly a few don't. We have to cater for the few.

I'm more concerned by modern car headlights being so bright that they ofter dazzle other road users.

Again from yesterdays trip into the misty gloom of Devon, one of the biggest issues is the small number of drivers who go around with full beam lights on instead of dipped beam.

 

[PpPete]

Unfortunately in the UK we could end up with the worst possible outcome which would be new cars with DRLs and older ones not having to use them.

OK so we'll agree to disagree on the benefits/disadvantages but I'm baffled by your statement above. Surely this is the only way in which they can be introduced ? New cars required to have them. Older cars without them gradually disappearing.

I'm (just) old enough to remember the introduction of seatbelts....required to be fitted in all new cars, then required to be used in all cars (with a very few exceptions) many years later.

How else do you propose it is done? Requiring all motorists to retrofit ? or all cars without DLRs to run on sidelights? Given that lack of success in persuading motorists not to us their mobiles / paint their nails etc whilst driving that would seem to be wishful thinking of the worst sort.

 

[Norm]

I'm (just) old enough to remember the introduction of seatbelts....required to be fitted in all new cars, then required to be used in all cars (with a very few exceptions) many years later.

Just to clear up something which is kind of unclear in the post above, weat belts have never been required to be used in all cars, only in those cars where they were fitted as part of the original equipment.

You may have intended those vehicles to be the ones covered in your "very few exceptions", PpPete, but I just thought I'd clarify.

 

[Mad at urage]

OK so we'll agree to disagree on the benefits/disadvantages but I'm baffled by your statement above. Surely this is the only way in which they can be introduced ? New cars required to have them. Older cars without them gradually disappearing.

I'm (just) old enough to remember the introduction of seatbelts....required to be fitted in all new cars, then required to be used in all cars (with a very few exceptions) many years later.

How else do you propose it is done? Requiring all motorists to retrofit ? or all cars without DLRs to run on sidelights? Given that lack of success in persuading motorists not to us their mobiles / paint their nails etc whilst driving that would seem to be wishful thinking of the worst sort.

PpPete, they can introduce what is known as "behaviour based standards", in other words they require drivers to switch on lights during the day (that are designed for low-light and night-time use). This is how the law was introduced in Finland, Norway, Denmark and Sweden I believe. The change now is to make all European cars fit permanently-lit lights (whenever the ignition is on presumably).

From a 2008 report in the second link above (forum broke the direct link, but it's org.uk and follow studies tab):

"A 1976 study in Finland found that DRLs would reduce multi-vehicle crashes and ped/cyclists crashes on rural roads by 21 percent"

Notice the Ped/cyclist bit - the law as envisaged in this study would have applied to cyclists too.
Notice "would" - this was predictive and 20 years before Finland introduced the law.

"A 1982 study in Sweden based on two years pre-law and two post law data concluded that the DRL law would reduce daytime crashes by 11 percent, ped/cyclist crashes by 17 percent and bicycle/moped crashes by 21 percent"

Looks good so far!

In Norway a 1993 study found that DRLs would reduce daytime crashes by 15 percent in summer [but] no effects on multi-vehicle crashes in the winter, also there was no affect on crashes involving pedestrians or motorcyclists. None of the results were statistically significant!

Hang on ... no statistically significant results and a 15% reduction concluded (but not for more vulnerable road users now)! Very odd.

"Two studies in 1993 and 1995 evaluating Denmark's 1990 DRL law showed consistent results. These studies concluded that two years after enactment of the law, DRLs reduced daytime multiple-vehicle crashes by 6 - 7 percent and reduced motor-vehicle-to-pedalcyclist crashes by 4 percent."

Hmmm, a slight benefit there, but 4% is not normally regarded as a statistically significant number. Rather less than the promised ("would") reduction of 10 to 20% !

"However the second study also showed that DRLs significantly increased motor-vehicle-to-pedestrian crashes by 16 percent"

Poor pedestrians! For our (in this study) 4% reduction, they get hit 16% more (I wonder if that's because they don't have DRLs ).

As I said: No European study has shown a reduction in road casualties resulting from DRLs (although some promised that there "would" be).

 

[PpPete]

Just to clear up something which is kind of unclear in the post above, weat belts have never been required to be used in all cars, only in those cars where they were fitted as part of the original equipment.

You may have intended those vehicles to be the ones covered in your "very few exceptions", PpPete, but I just thought I'd clarify.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[domd1979]

I reckon that's right.

Having said that, dom knows a thing or two about this, and, if he's still reading this thread I'd ask him if he thought that the reduction in pedestrian/bus coming togethers might not be counterbalanced by meetings of vehicles less well lit and pedestrians - and I'd include bicycles in the vehicle category.

Its an interesting question. The difference it made with Arriva is quite astounding really. As for the disbenefits to peds and cyclists I'm still undecided and haven't read enough on it to completely make my mind up. From a purely driving point of view, I like DRL. The bigger issue really is standard of driving that no amount of DRL or not will solve... Just on vehicle lighting nor will not having DRL stop the high percentage of cheese brain drivers who go round with fog lights blaring which are far higher intensity than headlamps.

Another thought on DRL is that in dull conditions it does mean that any hi-vis will bounce the light back at the driver. There are far too many people - drivers and cyclists who aren't lit up when the weather conditions dictate that they really should be.

 

[Davidc]

OK so we'll agree to disagree on the benefits/disadvantages but I'm baffled by your statement above. Surely this is the only way in which they can be introduced ? New cars required to have them. Older cars without them gradually disappearing.

I meant that we would end up without a law requiring the use of dipped lights when moving.

In Scandinavia and Poland the law was changed to require this. AFAIK where this has been introduced there's an alternative, which is to retrofit a lighting relay to bring on the dipped headlights with an option for a dimming resistor in circuit, like the dim dip system we had at one time which was dropped.

On many cars, including mine, all that's needed to comply with the Scandinavian laws is a software change, available for a small fee (of course).

 

[sheddy]

Petition here - http://www.lightmare.org/

 

[perplexed]

This. All of it, not just the bit I've quoted.

+1

DRL will just mean we're even more lost in the background. Other drivers will just see the 8 billion candle power from the Audi's lights as they look down the road.