When auto Lights don't work??

[gannet]

Also it's quite possible that, in terms of lighting, you can increase your chances of an accident in fog by having your foglights on.

When there's noone visible behind you, fine, but as soon as there is someone able to consistently see you, of course they make it much more difficult to perceive the information supplied when your brake lights come on.

That would of course depend on where your rear fog light is on the vehicle.

Dom

To an extent - the Punto's are placed well for this, whereas something like this is bad:



In either case it's still a bright light that unnecessarily distracts from one of the most important signals, and whatever else is going on.

That's as maybe, but that picture doesn't also show the third high level brake light which would be more visible in these instances and would help the distinction between fog and brake lights no end

[trashbat]

It's not a point I really wanted to labour this far, but I disagree - you often see cars with only the high level LEDs working out of poor maintenance, and my feeling is that reaction & perception is significantly inhibited by this. Well, that's also how I feel about having high intensity foglights shining in my eyes when I'm already following a vehicle at a steady rate, and having to pick out other signals from amongst that.

[GJD]

In either case it's still a bright light that unnecessarily distracts from one of the most important signals, and whatever else is going on.

That's more the point. The idea of fog lights masking braking on the vehicle immediately in front is, I think, something of a red herring. The difficulty is with vehicles 5, 10, 20 ahead because you don't have continuous view of their light clusters. If a bright red light appears ahead, is it a brake light that's just switched on or a fog light that, because of a slight relative movement of the vehicles ahead, has just become visible to you?

Following a bright red fog light in thick fog - particularly on a country road with little to mark the border between road and not road (which wasn't the situation in the OP's link of course) - can be quite disorientating. A fascinating feeling (a bit like 'the leans'' if anyone's tried flying an aeroplane in cloud) but not exactly conducive to incident-free motoring.

As a general principle, I can certainly see disadvantages and I can't really see any benefit to leaving a rear fog light on when tail lights are sufficient for the driver behind, apart from laziness. The night driving equivalent would be leaving main beam on in the face of oncomers because you couldn't be bothered to dip.

[dombooth]

Also it's quite possible that, in terms of lighting, you can increase your chances of an accident in fog by having your foglights on.

When there's noone visible behind you, fine, but as soon as there is someone able to consistently see you, of course they make it much more difficult to perceive the information supplied when your brake lights come on.

That would of course depend on where your rear fog light is on the vehicle.

Dom

And whether you have a single fog light, or two fog lights.

Duncan

Of course.

Dom

[dombooth]

Also it's quite possible that, in terms of lighting, you can increase your chances of an accident in fog by having your foglights on.

When there's noone visible behind you, fine, but as soon as there is someone able to consistently see you, of course they make it much more difficult to perceive the information supplied when your brake lights come on.

That would of course depend on where your rear fog light is on the vehicle.

Dom

To an extent - the Punto's are placed well for this, whereas something like this is bad:



In either case it's still a bright light that unnecessarily distracts from one of the most important signals, and whatever else is going on.

Stupid place for them IMO.

Dom

[WhoseGeneration]

Makes one wonder whether a single, central, flashing red rear light as on single seater racecars might be of use in poor visibility conditions.
"Oh no, that would be distracting, I'd have to leave a greater distance from the vehicle in front".
That would be the idea.

[Fignon]

"If you were travelling at 30mph you would have still hit the car in front of you because the visibility was down to 10 yards."

"It was very foggy, in places you could only see 30ft in front of you. Cars only need to be going 30 or 40mph for braking distances to become an issue when it's like that."


Incredible.

[WhoseGeneration]

"If you were travelling at 30mph you would have still hit the car in front of you because the visibility was down to 10 yards."

"It was very foggy, in places you could only see 30ft in front of you. Cars only need to be going 30 or 40mph for braking distances to become an issue when it's like that."


Incredible.

No, not incredible, just indicative of the lack of comprehensive driver training.
Yes, you can go really slowly when conditions dictate.
Of course, if other muppets aren't?

[DanFraser]

"If you were travelling at 30mph you would have still hit the car in front of you because the visibility was down to 10 yards."

"It was very foggy, in places you could only see 30ft in front of you. Cars only need to be going 30 or 40mph for braking distances to become an issue when it's like that."


Incredible.

Yup, and people are still blaming it on speed and want to reduce the speed limit below it's current 70.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-23984059

[trashbat]

They have comprehensive driver training.

Unfortunately, they took it all from Roadcraft: Days Of Thunder Special Edition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e77ybggTHHg

[TR4ffic]

Yup, and people are still blaming it on speed and want to reduce the speed limit below it's current 70.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-23984059

A speed limit is a waste of time because even 50mph would have been too fast for the conditions. Also, it was daylight so how would lighting have helped? Neither do drivers need matrix signs to tell them it's foggy..! LOOK..!

Most drivers travel too fast and too close even in perfect conditions and make no allowance for imperfect conditions.

Its just a case of the all too common adage used nowadays that it's always someone else's fault and if they can't blame an individual they blame the authorities...

[gannet]

Yup, and people are still blaming it on speed and want to reduce the speed limit below it's current 70.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-23984059

A speed limit is a waste of time because even 50mph would have been too fast for the conditions. Also, it was daylight so how would lighting have helped? Neither do drivers need matrix signs to tell them it's foggy..! LOOK..!

Most drivers travel too fast and too close even in perfect conditions and make no allowance for imperfect conditions.

Its just a case of the all too common adage used nowadays that it's always someone else's fault and if they can't blame an individual they blame the authorities...

couldn't have put that better myself...

not to mention matrix signs would not have been visible - it was foggy

[revian]

+1 to the above... At the very least!

[DanFraser]

Yep, another +1 for that reply.

[nigelc]

and another +1

I see that there is a call now for matrix signs as if it would changed things. If people could see them through the fog who actually takes any notice of them. Certainly none of the drivers around here.

To be fair though, the matrix signs are often misleading and warn of things that aren't there.