No need for headlights if there are streetlights?

[TripleS]

I always instruct to use the full beam, unless another driver is there to be dazzled, even if there are street-lights. I also instruct to use dipped beams or dedicated DRL's during the day. I understand that the same advice is issued by Don Palmer and the Bespoke group. So to recommend not to use any sort of light at night driving on road with streetlights does not seem right for me..,

I note that you instruct, whereas Don Palmer and Bespoke advise. Hmm, OK! My vote goes to DP and his ilk.

More importantly, do you not instruct or advise your pupils (or whatever you care to call them) that not only is it important to dip for other drivers, but that they also ought to avoid dazzling pedestrians and cyclists by using main beam? I mention this because I was out walking on country roads after dark recently (1), and two things became uncomfortably apparent to me.

One was that very few drivers seemed willing to go offside, or even move out further, in order to give more generous clearance to an obviously aged and vulnerable pedestrian and this was even when there was no other traffic around to prevent them from doing so. Poor show, drivers.

The other thing was that these were country roads with no pavement, so I mostly walked on the road facing the oncoming traffic. There was a grass verge for most of the distance, but this was quite rough and uneven, so not very appealing. Given that most oncoming drivers didn't bother to dip their headlights for me, a mere pedestrian, I found I had to stop walking and step onto the grass verge, and then wait until my vision recovered so that I could continue my walk. It didn't seem sensible to continue walking, and risk stumbling over the edge of the verge and falling into the path of a vehicle, which could have happened, in which case, given that the drivers were not allowing much extra clearance, I could have been hit by the vehicle. Drivers didn't appear to be even considering this possibility, let alone making any adjustment to protect against it.

From this somewhat protracted whinge, I conclude that we should not only take care to keep our own driving in order, but also spend a bit more time thinking about situations from the viewpoint of other road users; which means all other classes of road user, even pedestrians and cyclists.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

(1) Objective achieved: Whitby to Scarborough, 21 miles, 7.25 hours.

Yes, you're quite right: my lunacy is clearly established beyond all reasonable doubt.

[Astraist]

Pedestrians and cyclists are users of the road by all accounts, so of course one needs to avoid dazzling them just as he would avoid dazzling cars. A dazzled pedestrian is a dangerous one, not to mention a dazzled cyclist!

As for "advise", "coach" or "instruct" - all are just different translations of the word "מדריך" (madrich). Henceforth I'll go for "advise."

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Before I went anywhere near "advanced driving" it was apparent to me during the 20+ years of driving that entailed, that:

a) Dipped beams are to be used when other road users (and that includes everyone, pedestrians, cyclists, unicyclists...) might be dazzled by main beam
b) Main beam is the really useful aspect of headlights. I used to fit extra driving lights to all my cars wired in parallel with main beam. I haven't done that for a while but I miss them. As John said above, main beam is the default.
c) Pedestrians etc. should be given as much room as possible on the road, even if that means waiting for a gap in the oncoming traffic.
d) The majority of cyclists don't think enough about their safety at night.

[Kimosabe]

I currently have standard bulbs fitted, so following this madrich it's of to my local car bulb dealer for an upgrade. Similar temperature, only brighter..... or maybe some extra lighting altogether...hmmmm

Thanks for the Don Palmer link. Just checking out Bespoke too. This is precisely the sort of stuff I need to know.

Thanks folks.

ps: TripleS, so let me get this straight. There was a road and you walked....on a road....walked... nope sorry, I don't get it.
Walk(n): From the Ancient Banter 'to not move fast enough'. It's a fact that acceleration in any car burns 90 calories/ 100yards. I read that at the internets.

Banter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKYL0tW-Ek

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

You'll find plenty of internet traffic about better bulbs. Beware that normally higher output bulbs = shorter life, so you need to compromise between price and performance. I've always liked Osram Silverstars.

[Kimosabe]

You'll find plenty of internet traffic about better bulbs. Beware that normally higher output bulbs = shorter life, so you need to compromise between price and performance. I've always liked Osram Silverstars.

Just looking at the Silverstar 2.0 and Night Breaker Plus.

Looking forward to some night driving now.

Thanks.

[Kimosabe]

You'll find plenty of internet traffic about better bulbs. Beware that normally higher output bulbs = shorter life, so you need to compromise between price and performance. I've always liked Osram Silverstars.

Hey Nick,

I finally worked out how to replace the bulbs on my freelander 2 (required removal of entire light units) and now I have the rather marvelous 'Night Breaker Plus Special Editions'!! Went for a long night driver last night and finally saw the light!

Thanks.

[nightflight]

I've noticed in certain circumstances visability is markedly improved by running on sidelights rather than dipped beams.
The area directly in front of the car isn't lit quite as well, but still sufficient to clearly see, but by not overloading the eye with light in the near ground, it enables better vision into the middle and far distance.

Does anyone else momentarily switch off their headlights when approaching an unlit bend, (typically country b-roads and similar) to get a better idea if there is an approaching vehicle or not?

[martine]

I've noticed in certain circumstances visability is markedly improved by running on sidelights rather than dipped beams.
The area directly in front of the car isn't lit quite as well, but still sufficient to clearly see, but by not overloading the eye with light in the near ground, it enables better vision into the middle and far distance.

Does anyone else momentarily switch off their headlights when approaching an unlit bend, (typically country b-roads and similar) to get a better idea if there is an approaching vehicle or not?

No I never run on sidelights in an unlit National Speed Limit even momentarily...it's illegal for a start but I do sometimes drop from main beam to dipped to check for oncoming traffic.

[GJD]

I've noticed in certain circumstances visability is markedly improved by running on sidelights rather than dipped beams.
The area directly in front of the car isn't lit quite as well, but still sufficient to clearly see, but by not overloading the eye with light in the near ground, it enables better vision into the middle and far distance.

Does anyone else momentarily switch off their headlights when approaching an unlit bend, (typically country b-roads and similar) to get a better idea if there is an approaching vehicle or not?

I might drop from main beam to dipped on the approach to a bend like that to see if someone's coming, but not all the way down to sidelights. I can imagine dropping to sidelights would be even more effective at revealing the presence of and oncomer who is out of sight round the bend, but only at the expense of not being able to see where I'm going (and also breaking the law).

Better vision in the middle and far distance on sidelights compared to dipped headlights? Are you sure?

[TripleS]

I've noticed in certain circumstances visability is markedly improved by running on sidelights rather than dipped beams.
The area directly in front of the car isn't lit quite as well, but still sufficient to clearly see, but by not overloading the eye with light in the near ground, it enables better vision into the middle and far distance.

Does anyone else momentarily switch off their headlights when approaching an unlit bend, (typically country b-roads and similar) to get a better idea if there is an approaching vehicle or not?

I might drop from main beam to dipped on the approach to a bend like that to see if someone's coming, but not all the way down to sidelights. I can imagine dropping to sidelights would be even more effective at revealing the presence of and oncomer who is out of sight round the bend, but only at the expense of not being able to see where I'm going (and also breaking the law).

Better vision in the middle and far distance on sidelights compared to dipped headlights? Are you sure?

On that last point, I agree it does seem unlikely, but I wonder if it depends on the level of the ambient lighting. Incidentally, I have noticed that driving on dipped beams can give better vision than main beams if the latter happen to hit upon some of the reflective signs. These can bounce some of your light back at you rather too effectively.

[Ancient]

On that last point, I agree it does seem unlikely, but I wonder if it depends on the level of the ambient lighting. Incidentally, I have noticed that driving on dipped beams can give better vision than main beams if the latter happen to hit upon some of the reflective signs. These can bounce some of your light back at you rather too effectively.

Can't they just! Why do we need to be blinded by reflected light just as we reach a sharp bend (for example)? Also why do 'tourist' type brown signs need the same retro-refclecting treatment as 'safety' signs? Do we really need to see these as (painfully bright) blotches from 200 yards? Or should they simply be readable when we slowly pass them?

[GJD]

On that last point, I agree it does seem unlikely, but I wonder if it depends on the level of the ambient lighting.

Quite possibly. The question did mention an unlit B road as an example though, so I wasn't picturing much in the way of ambient lighting .

Incidentally, I have noticed that driving on dipped beams can give better vision than main beams if the latter happen to hit upon some of the reflective signs. These can bounce some of your light back at you rather too effectively.

Yes. Damn annoying.

[TripleS]

On that last point, I agree it does seem unlikely, but I wonder if it depends on the level of the ambient lighting.

Quite possibly. The question did mention an unlit B road as an example though, so I wasn't picturing much in the way of ambient lighting .

Incidentally, I have noticed that driving on dipped beams can give better vision than main beams if the latter happen to hit upon some of the reflective signs. These can bounce some of your light back at you rather too effectively.

Yes. Damn annoying.

Ah, now then: does ambient lighting only relate to artificial lighting, and not the prevailing level of natural light? I dunno, just askin'.

[nightflight]

Better vision in the middle and far distance on sidelights compared to dipped headlights? Are you sure?

Yes, dipped just illuminates very brightly the near distance giving a massive contrast between near and middle distance brightness. Try it next time on a street lighted motorway/a-road, particularly mid evening time.
By the same principle, I presume most people dim their dashclock/speedo etc right down at night time? Otherwise you're over illuminating the foreground at the expense of that behind it.
I wish my headlights had a dim function rather than a dip one sometimes.