Safe Speed Forums

The idea that our road safety policy will be progressively dictated by Brussels is pretty seriously scary. I have seen no sign that they know anything about the subject.

To all EU Transport, Industry and UK MEP's cc DaDRL members

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As the deadline of 17 November approaches for submissions on the dangers of vehicle daytime vehicle lights to the EC at TREN-E3-CONSULTATION@cec.eu.int I attach below this poignant email received yesterday from Peter Heilig, MD.
Professor of Transport Studies University of Vienna.

Despite assurances from the EC Directorate-general for Energy and Transport (and certain motor car and lamp bulb manufacturers) that daytime lights have no effect upon the safety of pedestrians, recent evidence from Austria is to the contrary:


From: Dr. Peter Heilig, MD peter.heilig@univie.ac.at
Sent: 11/11/2006
To: DADRL

My prognosis (increasing number of children becoming victims on crossings in
DRL-traffic) proved to be correct.

Since the 'experiment' DRL in Austria the number of accidents concerning children and all other non- DRL- traffic participants went up!, especially when using pedestrian crossings.

Drivers did not 'see' them - i.e. they could not perceive their victims (Because of distraction by DRLs and disturbance and dysfunction of complex processes in the Visual Short Term Memory -VSTM, elicited by DRL - Change Blindness, Inattentional Blindness, Inattentional Amnesia etc!)

Almost daily you can read in our papers- 'another child was injured (killed) at a crossing'.

Statistics, a 'blunt' weapon, can be interpreted either way. Therefore I have to repeat again: Without the need of statistical analysis and its interpretation according to Law Ethics - Protection of one group
(DRL-traffic-participants) while implicitly endangering all other traffic participants means VIOLATION OF THE DUTY OF PROTECTION.
The right of recovery or THE RIGHT OF COMPENSATION could become a rather interesting and lucrative idea for your trusty and clever lawyers.

There is no way to disprove this irrefutable fact.

Sincerely yours
Peter Heilig, MD.

The KfV (Kuratorium für Verkehr-Sicherheit) - the initiators of DRL in published the statistics cited above (att.'a positive development’(?) though unfortunately more accidents with children on crossings)


Kind Regards
Roy Milnes
UK Co-ordinator
Drivers against Daytime Running Lights
www.dadrl.org.uk

To all EU Transport, Industry and UK MEP's cc DaDRL members

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As the deadline of 17 November approaches for submissions on the dangers of vehicle daytime vehicle lights to the EC at TREN-E3-CONSULTATION@cec.eu.int may I apprise you of the environmental impact.

Contrary to reports in the London Times, daytime running lights on a Volvo need 170watts of electrical power but after engine heat losses, mechanical losses, drive belt losses and alternator losses they need about 970 watts of primary energy each DRL using vehicle emitting 0.25kg of CO2/hr.

The UK emits around 560 million tonnes annually of CO2. If adopted daytime lights will add 1.85 million tonnes annually of CO2 into the UK's atmosphere.

During 2005/06 the Carbon Trust UK saved 3.9 million tonnes of CO2 using an army of 250 energy surveyors. The use of daytime running lights will negate 50% of these hard won environmental gains.

As other countries will be forced to follow suit, a decision by the EC to mandate daytime lights will have untenable environmental consequences across the World.

As a compromise, the EC has the option of permitting low power 13 watt non glaring dedicated daytime lights on new vehicles but then intend to make the existing 200 million vehicles in the EU use full power headlights in good daylight.

For the existing vehicle parc, the EC could allow the rarely used (and often
misused) fog lights on many vehicles to accept 13 watt lamps. On vehicle without auxiliary lamps they could permit the fitting of two regulation sized light emitting diode discs by competent persons.

Low power lamps would minimise the environmental impact yet provide a good degree of conspicuity.

Kind Regards
Roy Milnes
UK Co-ordinator
Drivers against Daytime Running Lights
www.dadrl.org.uk

The Government previously opposed the idea on the grounds that using lights in the daytime would increase fuel consumption and emissions, but conceded it was unable to oppose European legislation.

This says all you need to know about Britain today.

You forgot to factor in the weight of the bloody things...

How about this?

http://www.dadrl.org.uk/whatsnew.html

This is really quite easy and straightforward:

1. We tell our government to get stuffed, we don't want DRL.

2. Our government tells the Eurobusybodies to get stuffed.

3. The car manufacturers stop putting this unwanted rubbish on cars.

End of problem.

> Do you think HID lights are dangerous?
> Yes – 90% (11,884 votes)
> No – 9% (1,257)
> Don’t know – 1% (127)
> Total votes – 13,268
The story can be found [url=
http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/02/07/are-h ... -the-road/]here[/url].

Driving Instructors Association supports Lightmare campaign
The Driving Instructors Association (DIA) is putting its weight behind the Lightmare campaign, which has been organised to fight the growing road safety issue of blinding lights affecting a driver's ability to perceive hazards.
The campaign's website has just been launched at www.lightmare.org.
The amalgamation of two separate organisations - Blinded Bi-Xenon and Drivers Against Daylight Running Lights (DaDRL) - Lightmare is the culmination of many years of work from both organisations on the effects of bright lights on road safety.
Ken Perham, a night-time London taxi driver for the last 40 years, has been campaigning about the intensity of the modern ‘high intensity discharge' (HID) headlight system. The technology involves the headlights to ‘float' and respond to the undulations in the road surface. As this system cannot be checked sufficiently during an MOT test, vehicles fitted with it can dazzle oncoming road users, in contravention of the Construction and Use Regulations 1986 and the Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations 1989.
Perham said: "These lights are up to three times brighter than a standard halogen headlight and the HID system causes severe distraction to a driver approaching them, to the point that the intensity of these lights hides less conspicuous objects, such as motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians, putting these vulnerable groups in danger. This situation must be considered as an urgent matter to be redressed by the government."
Perham has teamed up with Roy Milnes, who has been at the helm of DaDRL for the last 12 years. He has been involved in a worldwide campaign involving other organisations and ophthalmologists to look at a more common-sense way of vehicle lighting for daytime use.
New laws that come into effect in the UK from Feb 2011 mean that daytime running lights - which are 50% brighter than standard dipped headlights - will be mandatory for all new European-built vehicles. Motorcycle and bicycle action groups are concerned that the proliferation of lit traffic streams will make less visible cyclists and motorcyclists more vulnerable within those streams.
Milnes said: "Car drivers are already overprotected in their vehicles, thanks to safety cages and in-vehicle technology. Cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians don't have this luxury."
Milnes has worked extensively with Dr Peter Heilig, professor of ophthalmology at the University of Vienna, who was instrumental in getting the EU legislation on daylight running lights withdrawn in 2006, after the Austrian national road safety statistics showed a 12% increase in road casualties upon introduction of mandatory daytime running lights.
Howard Redwood, head of road safety at the DIA, said: "Lightmare has collected a staggering amount of data and produced a very strong case to persuade the UK government to reconsider the current MOT system and the need for daytime running lights. The DIA are more than happy to get behind this campaign."
More information and a petition calling on the government to eliminate daytime and night-time blinding vehicle lamps can be found on the Lightmare website at www.lightmare.org.
ENDS
Contact: Craig Thomas, DIA
0208 665 8035 (direct line)
07971 861234 (mobile)
craigthomas@driving.org
http:/www.driving.org/
Editors' notes
1. The Driving Instructors Association (DIA), founded in 1978, represents the interests of the professional driving instructor and is the world's largest association for professional driving instructors. It is regularly consulted by all the relevant government bodies, has representation in parliament, and enjoys influence in Europe and throughout the world.
2. The DIAmond Advanced Test, originally introduced in 1992, enables Approved Driving Instructors (ADIs) to offer their customers and train them for an advanced test, based on the DSA's Cardington system of marking, as an alternative to the police ‘system of driving'. It is conducted by a national network of professionally qualified examiners. Both the Advanced and Special test are accredited by the International Association for Driver Education (IVV) and the Driving Standards Agency (DSA) and also meet the stringent requirements for the ADI (Approved Driving Instructor) and register of fleet trainers' test of driving ability (part two).
28 January 2011

Car drivers are already overprotected in their vehicles, thanks to safety cages and in-vehicle technology. Cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians don't have this luxury.

Headlight fight hots up in the war on the bobby dazzlers
Posted 7th Feb 2011 by James Baggott
Filed under: Government/Legal, Opinion/Editorial, Safety, Pedestrian safety , News

A growing campaign aims to tackle the 'dangerous' issue of super-bright car headlights dazzling other road users.

Dubbed the 'Lightmare' campaign, it has received the backing of the Drivers Instructors Association among other prominent motoring groups.

The movement – pioneered by night-time London cabbie Ken Perham – wants to tackle 'high intensity discharge' headlights 'blind' on-coming road users.
'These lights are up to three times brighter than a standard halogen headlight and the HID system causes severe distraction to a driver approaching them,' explained Perham.
The intensity of these lights can hide less conspicuous objects, such as motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians, putting these vulnerable groups in danger. This situation must be considered as an urgent matter to be addressed by the government.'

Perham says these headlights use technology that responds to undulations in the road – but as this isn't checked as part of the annual MOT, faulty systems can cause serious problems.
Perham has joined forces with Drivers Against Daylight Running Lights (DaDRL) to add extra weight to his battle. The DaDRL is concerned rules that come into force this month making daytime running lights mandatory for all European-built cars could result in cyclists and motorcyclists becoming more vulnerable.

The campaign is gathering support too. Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, told Autoblog: 'Figures show drivers being dazzled by headlights were recorded as a contributory factor in 365 road accidents in 2009, three of which were fatal.
'There will not be a driver out there who at some stage has not been blinded by over-bright or incorrectly adjusted headlights and, as technology changes, ministers need to take account of evidence from elsewhere to assess whether the dangers are increasing.'

This view was backed by Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.
He told us: 'We are not convinced daytime running lights are genuinely needed in this country. It is not clear how many casualties would be saved and there is concern that they would not be good for motorcyclist safety.
'On the issue of headlights, it is true that you do get dazzled sometimes by oncoming headlights, and there is a case for considering how best to prevent that including changing the MOT test.'

And Safe Speed's Claire Armstrong added: 'When overtaking, daylight running lights (including HID) reduce the ability to judge distances, which can be distracting and create confusion for all motorists.
'Also, it's worth noting that when people age, their eyes react less quickly to light. When someone is temporarily blinded by car headlights the time taken to recover increases, thus rendering them unable to see the road ahead, and the greater the chance of a crash.'

The Institute of Advanced Motorists said it was up to drivers to use their lights in a way which doesn't dazzle other users and added many cars have the ability for motorists to adjust them from the dashboard.

While The AA's head of road safety Andrew Howard said he understood the benefits of daytime running lights were more obvious in other parts of Europe, but added the current designs would not 'bring problems'.
'In fact they may bring advantages in helping road users distinguish moving cars from a background of parked vehicles,' he added.

It appears the argument for and against these lights is only set to grow as more and more cars appear on our roads sporting them. But what do you think? Let us know your thoughts by posting your comments below.