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 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at the University of Vienna, who was instrumental in getting the EU legislation on daylight running lights withdrawn in 2006, after the Austrian national road safety statistics showed a 12% increase in road casualties upon introduction of mandatory daytime running lights.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."

http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/2011/2/1/

HIDs are a lot brighter, but the drivers who really annoy me most are the ones who drive with front fog lights on when its not foggy or in snow or rain.

If the Government cannot control this how are they meant to control HID users

Edited 1 February, 201115 yr by skippy41

Oh dear! Xenons and super bright DRL's on mine - i must be hated!!

which are 50% brighter than standard dipped headlights

What a load of rubbish, they are usually slightly brighter than sidelights unless you have LEDS.

In the recent dark months I have been blinded not by 'dangerous xenons', but poorly adjusted and aligned halogen lamps. Don't even get me started on the unregulated monstrosities that cyclists are fitting to their cycles nowadays. As for the campaign against DRLs, the legislation has already been passed...what are they hoping to achieve?

In the recent dark months I have been blinded not by 'dangerous xenons', but poorly adjusted and aligned halogen lamps. Don't even get me started on the unregulated monstrosities that cyclists are fitting to their cycles nowadays. As for the campaign against DRLs, the legislation has already been passed...what are they hoping to achieve?

Yes thats true....had a smart car flashing his rear fog a couple of months back because he thought i had my front fogs on....he still didn't get it after i actually flashed my front fogs at him...Then when i over took him (was a motorway!) his headlights were pointing everywhere but where they should have been. I also find motorbikes blind me very often as there is a lot more movement in the light units than there is on a car.

Also if cyclists want to be seen then they should consider getting more than a little 2 led light that flashes....

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

They were doing so well up to this point, which is just plain wrong!

The people who dont like these lights should look at the reason behind the nanny states reason for introducing them.

Could it be that driving standards are not up to scratch when it comes to road awareness, specially as it all started with motorcycles having to have lights on so drivers could see them ?????

Now Motorcyclists can be seen any car immediately behind their bright lights becomes invisible !!!!!

I agree that some of the HID's can be too bright & blinding in the mirror, but i suspect they're not adjusted correctly, or the levelling thumb wheel is wrongly set.

There is NO common standard as to what DRL's brightness should be, My previous Fiat500 was actually a double filament headlight bulb which used the brighter light for DRL, then switched down to sidelight when main lights were switched on & current Octy has LED's, surely a common standard from all manufacturers needs to be introduced.

As far as cyclists are concerned most of them ride around with no lights or even any high vis clothing so that they at least make an attempt to be seen, & those who have the flashing LED lights front & rear are downright dangerous, as these can distract drivers from what is in front of them, tests have shown that a distracted driver will veer towards the distraction.

I would bet that the majority of people who want rid of DRL's drive around in rain, drizzle & light snow in parking lights, or have fogs permanently on. There appears to be a trend in Kent to drive with parking & fogs on only.

If they want to take away DRL from cars, then they need to be fair & take them off bikes as well ( cant have 1 rule for 1 & 1 for others)

A point of note is that even though it may be law to have DRLS fitted it is NOT law in this country to have them on ( freedom to choose)

The Driving Instructors Association (DIA)

And yet I've seen several learners (marked cars, not parents etc) driving around with fog lights on, on cars too old for DLRs.

I agree though, while xenons are bright, I find badly aimed standard lights a lot more painful.

At the moment it is not compulsory for motorcycles to have lights on in the daytime, although a majority do to try & be seen. A huge number of bikers are killed by car drivers not seeing them, that's why they have their lights on. When daytime lights for cars are widespread, motorcyclists, cyclists & pedestrian are going to be much harder to see. The accident levels for those groups are bound to increase. This will no doubt mean even more restrictive laws, speed limits, etc, etc. How many car drivers &/or passengers are injured by people not seeing a car in daylight? Not many I would venture, so why do they need these lights if they are going to put so many other road users in peril?

Ian

Not many I would venture, so why do they need these lights if they are going to put so many other road users in peril?

Take a drive around my area and you'd be surprised how many people do get hit or nearly hit due to walking out in front of cars. This year alone I've seen either whilst walking or driving 3 people be hit by a car due to them walking out without paying enough attention.

I find its easy to play the blame game but at the end of the day no-one but yourself is responsible for your own safety. I will put my hands up that I've run someone over and nearly taken a bike off but the guy I run over stepped out from parked cars without looking and even said it was his fault and was sorry (as was I for running him over, though it was in a mini and rather funny). The bike had no lights on and came through on my inside undertaking me on a roundabout (yes I was signalling and in the correct lane). We are all human and error as such.

I get more dazzle from normal lights mis-aligned or on full beam than I do from xenons. Though saying that I was following someone the other day and they said my lights where very bright and looked like I was flashing her (I'm guessing the bumps in the road caused that)

Edited 2 February, 201115 yr by polocoupe

Most new bikes these days are sold without a headlight switch, so even if we wanted to switch them off, we can't. I really don't see the point of DRL's and the HID's in my Avensis seem to attract a lot more anger than the HIDs in the Superb or the LED's in the Prius did, they are adjusted correctly though.

DRL's in full fat 4x4's can be pretty dazzeling, bordering on distraction to. We will all have to wear airbag suits soon just to cross the road

Don't have a problem with Hid's.

What i find worse is when you are driving at night on the motorway in roadworks, It's the big work lights they use to see what they are doing, as they seem to point them in any way they like, normally into the eyes of oncoming traffic.

Don't have a problem with Hid's.

What i find worse is when you are driving at night on the motorway in roadworks, It's the big work lights they use to see what they are doing, as they seem to point them in any way they like, normally into the eyes of oncoming traffic.

In some ways I reckon that factory fit HIDS can be worse for dazzling oncoming traffic than aftermarket jobbies because of the float from the self leveling system. Got to agree with you on the Motorway works, going up the A1 a few weeks ago was like a scene from "Close Encounters"

Got to agree with you on the Motorway works, going up the A1 a few weeks ago was like a scene from "Close Encounters"

M25/M1 interchange last night, Was like the aliens had landed and were under investigation

Great, lets all go back to wax candles in glass cases slung on the side of the car eh?

I for one love my xenons and couldn't give a toss what anyone says about them.

It's mostly old people or people in cars with pi$ poor lights that (VERY rarely) flash me thanks to my 'illegal blue headlights' as they were once referred to.

How about a focused campaign against all of the ******s on the road driving with half of their exterior bulbs blown?

I avoided a potential accident on the motorway in abysmal conditions when I just about saw the glow of a pair of DRLs on a Grey Audi A3 with no other lights on despite the pouring rain and the horrendous amount of spray on the road. No DRLs would have most likely resulted in an accident. I'm sure that scenario has been repeated many times. DRLs are great IMO.

The Blinded Bi-Xenon website is a crock of **** IMO. It hardly mentions Xenon lights and seems to moan about the manual height adjusters and that no one ever knows about.

Should be called 'Blinded by **** poorly adjusted halogens'

Great, lets all go back to wax candles in glass cases slung on the side of the car eh?

I for one love my xenons and couldn't give a toss what anyone says about them.

It's mostly old people or people in cars with pi$ poor lights that (VERY rarely) flash me thanks to my 'illegal blue headlights' as they were once referred to.

How about a focused campaign against all of the ******s on the road driving with half of their exterior bulbs blown?

I avoided a potential accident on the motorway in abysmal conditions when I just about saw the glow of a pair of DRLs on a Grey Audi A3 with no other lights on despite the pouring rain and the horrendous amount of spray on the road. No DRLs would have most likely resulted in an accident. I'm sure that scenario has been repeated many times. DRLs are great IMO.

The Blinded Bi-Xenon website is a crock of **** IMO. It hardly mentions Xenon lights and seems to moan about the manual height adjusters and that no one ever knows about.

Cant see why ANYONE would need drl's (Made to look even trendier by being writen as initials, not words) as, in bad weather/poor lighting conditions, the highway code states that you should switch on your dipped beams... Job done, period! As for the beam adjuster... EVERY driver has an obligation to know the functions and features of their vehicle BEFORE taking to the road in it so that argument is up the swanny too!

Any bulb, light etc fitted, wether by the manufacturer OR any owner should also comply with the construction and use laws so fitting incorrect equipment makes it illegal and potentially an MOT failiure... How do you feel now, knowing your brand new, 20 grand head-turner is not fit to take to the roads? This is the same old argument as the one given for changing to smaller or altered numberplates, etc... The only REAL answer is that you think you look cool. Deny this to me if you like but you will only be bull ****ting yourself! I and many others before have "been there, done that, read the book and got the T-shirt"!

You have 'em bright to look cool! You have flash wheels to look cool! powerful sound system to look cool. you have a blond GF with big boobs to... You get the picture... Its ALL about image. I would guess that almost everyone who slaps on superbright bulbs does it for this reason but then tries to suggest it is for raod safety... Show me the stats that prove it! If it was, you would drive a Volvo, very slowly!

Ages ago, I read a letter from a fellow motorcyclist stating he had a sports pipe not to sound cool but so others could here he was coming, hence he would be safer.... Horse SH@te! It was cos it sounded powerful and made him feel like a riding "God" and not a plonker, wobbling around on a machine he could barely use the full power of, without killing himself!

Paint it any way you care to, it is just IMAGE and nothing else!!!!!

Should be called 'Blinded by **** poorly adjusted halogens'

Cant see why ANYONE would need drl's (Made to look even trendier by being writen as initials, not words) as, in bad weather/poor lighting conditions, the highway code states that you should switch on your dipped beams... Job done, period! As for the beam adjuster... EVERY driver has an obligation to know the functions and features of their vehicle BEFORE taking to the road in it so that argument is up the swanny too!

Any bulb, light etc fitted, wether by the manufacturer OR any owner should also comply with the construction and use laws so fitting incorrect equipment makes it illegal and potentially an MOT failiure... How do you feel now, knowing your brand new, 20 grand head-turner is not fit to take to the roads? This is the same old argument as the one given for changing to smaller or altered numberplates, etc... The only REAL answer is that you think you look cool. Deny this to me if you like but you will only be bull ****ting yourself! I and many others before have "been there, done that, read the book and got the T-shirt"!

You have 'em bright to look cool! You have flash wheels to look cool! powerful sound system to look cool. you have a blond GF with big boobs to... You get the picture... Its ALL about image. I would guess that almost everyone who slaps on superbright bulbs does it for this reason but then tries to suggest it is for raod safety... Show me the stats that prove it! If it was, you would drive a Volvo, very slowly!

Ages ago, I read a letter from a fellow motorcyclist stating he had a sports pipe not to sound cool but so others could here he was coming, hence he would be safer.... Horse SH@te! It was cos it sounded powerful and made him feel like a riding "God" and not a plonker, wobbling around on a machine he could barely use the full power of, without killing himself!

Paint it any way you care to, it is just IMAGE and nothing else!!!!!

How is his £20k head turner illegal. I think you've missed the point of the whole argument in your rant??

MOT control on maximum light intensity as well as the low light intensity check, could be a way forward.

Controlling the ever increasing light emitted from headlights, must reach a point of intensity acceptance sometime !!

Edited 4 February, 201115 yr by giandougl

How is his £20k head turner illegal. I think you've missed the point of the whole argument in your rant??

Damned good rant though all the same, most of which I agree with too btw.

+1

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.

Seriously!!? Drivers against Daylight Running Lights? Are there really people in this world who have nothing better to do with their time? I'm never going to retire if that's what happens to you.....

And this;

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."

Words cannot discribe how gobsmacked I was when I read this! 'Car drivers have too much protection already, why should we make them safer?' Are you flipping serious!? That is the most rediculous argument I have ever heard for anything in my life! Cyclists and motorcyclists are allowed to drive cars too you know if you think that cycling/ riding a motorcycle is too dangerous.

proliferation of lit traffic streams will make less visible cyclists and motorcyclists more vulnerable within those streams.

This seems to be a common argument from those with nothing better to do than write petitions against something (anything!).

It's also a load of nonsense.

You don't need to make a motorcycle stand out more than a car. You need to make a motorcycle visible to other road users. Putting lights on it in the daytime helps achieve this. I see absolutely no reason why making other road users (i.e cars with DRLs) more visible will make a motorcycle with it's lights on LESS visible. It just means that everyone will be more visible. Which is surely to everyones benefit?

In the recent dark months I have been blinded not by 'dangerous xenons', but poorly adjusted and aligned halogen lamps. Don't even get me started on the unregulated monstrosities that cyclists are fitting to their cycles nowadays. As for the campaign against DRLs, the legislation has already been passed...what are they hoping to achieve?

Absolutely agree. I'm blinded daily by cars with one halogen light pointing directly in my face while the other is pointing at the road. I am rarely bothered by Xenons. And if I am I'm sure it's a problem with alignment rather than the actual technology.

I really can't believe there are people in the world who get so wound up about things like this and get their facts totally wrong

Seriously!!? Drivers against Daylight Running Lights? Are there really people in this world who have nothing better to do with their time? I'm never going to retire if that's what happens to you.....

And this;

Words cannot discribe how gobsmacked I was when I read this! 'Car drivers have too much protection already, why should we make them safer?' Are you flipping serious!? That is the most rediculous argument I have ever heard for anything in my life! Cyclists and motorcyclists are allowed to drive cars too you know if you think that cycling/ riding a motorcycle is too dangerous.

This seems to be a common argument from those with nothing better to do than write petitions against something (anything!).

It's also a load of nonsense.

You don't need to make a motorcycle stand out more than a car. You need to make a motorcycle visible to other road users. Putting lights on it in the daytime helps achieve this. I see absolutely no reason why making other road users (i.e cars with DRLs) more visible will make a motorcycle with it's lights on LESS visible. It just means that everyone will be more visible. Which is surely to everyones benefit?

Absolutely agree. I'm blinded daily by cars with one halogen light pointing directly in my face while the other is pointing at the road. I am rarely bothered by Xenons. And if I am I'm sure it's a problem with alignment rather than the actual technology.

I really can't believe there are people in the world who get so wound up about things like this and get their facts totally wrong

+1 - What he says!

How is his £20k head turner illegal. I think you've missed the point of the whole argument in your rant??

Although meant as a light-hearted pee-take... My "Rant" as you called it did not miss the point at all and if you read it a little better, (Try again, with hindsight), You will see YOU missed MY point!

I implied fitting unapproved equipment would make a vehicle technically unroadworthy, not that a £20K vehicle would automatically BE unroadworthy... It will but no-one seems bothered to check these days. You WILL notice though, that the part manufacturer will ALWAYS have small print saying "Not for road use"!

Having said that, many manufacturers HAVE flouted construction and use rules to sell cars. The most noticable being the "Sneaky" extra pillar prior to the front side window (A pillar) on many cars despite laws stating there should only be one, for clarity of veiw.

Another point is the use of indicators inboard of the headlights, though they should be on the outside.. Loopholed as newer legislation states thet there must be an additional indicator on either side of the vehicle, usually on the wing, often on the mirror, in orderto be seen operating from the side of the vehicle.

This is mis-used as the outside the headlight rule as a design statement, making safety second on the agenda!

Although meant as a light-hearted pee-take... My "Rant" as you called it did not miss the point at all and if you read it a little better, (Try again, with hindsight), You will see YOU missed MY point!

I implied fitting unapproved equipment would make a vehicle technically unroadworthy, not that a £20K vehicle would automatically BE unroadworthy... It will but no-one seems bothered to check these days. You WILL notice though, that the part manufacturer will ALWAYS have small print saying "Not for road use"!

Having said that, many manufacturers HAVE flouted construction and use rules to sell cars. The most noticable being the "Sneaky" extra pillar prior to the front side window (A pillar) on many cars despite laws stating there should only be one, for clarity of veiw.

Another point is the use of indicators inboard of the headlights, though they should be on the outside.. Loopholed as newer legislation states thet there must be an additional indicator on either side of the vehicle, usually on the wing, often on the mirror, in orderto be seen operating from the side of the vehicle.

This is mis-used as the outside the headlight rule as a design statement, making safety second on the agenda!

I have read it about 4 times and still can't see why you are saying that a Yeti or even my car is illegal? The DRL's are coming into force from Feb this year and every new car will have to have them. Are you saying that mine are illegal?

As for indicators....they've been integral in headlights for longer than i can remember....

So from what i can make out all cars on the road (in particular MPV's with the extra pillar) are illegal? wow.....

mrgf,

you state various parts of some new vehicles are built contrary to the C & U Regs. Can you please give a link to the EXACT paragraphs of the Regs?

Oops

Edited 7 February, 201115 yr by Llanigraham

DRL's actually work in bad weather...Say for instance (especially at this time of year) that its been slatting it down, then the sun comes out. Glare off the road surface is horrendous and often you cannot see oncoming traffic because of it, but if they have their headlights on or the car has DRL's, you can easily see them through the sun glare..That pees on their bonfire... And 99% of driving instructors nowadays are hopeless. Especialy the big boys who are nearly all franchisee muppets who havent even fully qualified yet..If the car has the red triangle in the windscreen and not the green octagon badge, give it a very wide berth