Daytime Running Lights, DRLs

M

mathepac

Registered User
Messages
8,334
I had to make a short trip today that necessitated the use of a dual-carriageway. Conditions were bad due to heavy rain and spray from cars. I drove on dipped headlights and a rear fog light. Poverty spec car, all I had.

Several vehicles passed me at ferocious speeds in the r/h lane with no rear lights lit. Is it likely these cars are fitted with DRLs and the numbskull drivers don't understand that they have to take certain actions in adverse weather conditions, for their safety and that of other road users? These cars of course never indicated to overtake me, nor did they move back left once the overtake was complete, exercising their inalienable right to drive in the "fast lane" Two of the cars were noticeable as they were red, Cork-registered VOLVOs.

Is there any way AI or car designers could take over here and deduce that a cretin is driving and switch on the appropriate lights at least? Slowing him/her down or operating the indicators or steering might be just a step too far.
 
I noticed the rear light thing myself too.
I blame the car manufacturers not the drivers for this. The day time running lights should also turn on the rear lights.

There might be a miniscule fuel saving by not having the rear lights on but especially with LED bulbs it would really be miniscule.
 
We are an incredible country where turning on car lights for so many people is avoided until fairly heavy darkness, where the drivers themselves need it to see where they are going (not to help them BE seen).
Then once the decision is made to tun on the lights, full beams are used at every opportunity and only dipped at the last moment even when it is clear that oncoming vehicles are approaching. An all or nothing approach culturally.
 
I drive with dipped headlights all year round at all times of day.

Extra fuel cost is microscopic although bulbs will probably wear out quicker. Although with LEDs the lifespan is measured in tens of thousands of hours…..
 
ClubMan said:
What about visibility of the autonomous vehicle for other non autonomous vehicles, motorbikes, cyclists, pedestrians, etc.?
Click to expand...
You think they are going to be reliant on a little light on the back of a car to see it in inclement weather? Technology has advanced past our sight capabilities.
 
Not only will powered vehicles be self-aware, they'll be aware of other road users and have collision-avoidance technology.

By then motorbikes will have been banned for safety and pollution reasons, and roads will have integral fly-overs and under-passes for pedestrians, powered traffic, and cyclists, eliminating the need for traffic lights and pedestrian crossings, shortening journey times, and making them safer.

Simple safety measures based on rule-based expert systems will fasten seatbelts, maintain appropriate distances between vehicles depending on speed limits, weather, and road conditions, and deny access to faster roads to holders of learner permits and inexperienced "drivers". Destinations must be submitted in advance to the vehicle's route-planning and navigation systems, with routes optimised based on prevailing conditions. Most half-decent current technology sat-navs can do this.
 
Last edited:
T McGibney said:
Even wildlife.
Click to expand...
Wildlife are equipped to cope with darkness.

Headlights can actually pose a danger to wildlife.

For example, a Rabbit dazzled by a bright light will stand still and could be hit by a car.

Lamping can be a very efficient hunting method.
 
Last edited:
mathepac said:
By then motorbikes will have been banned for safety and pollution reasons.
Click to expand...

Triggered! I firmly believe every car driver should be mandatorily required to spend 10 hours driving a vehicle from another license category, both A and C in order to understand the limitations and vulnerabilities that those road users experience from car users who e.g. don’t have the awareness to turn on their lights in bad road conditions. Without experiencing the vulnerability directly i.e. having their own ‘skin in the game’, they often end up opining on things like motorcycle safety! (Not directed @mathepac, I don’t know your driving experience).
 
ClubMan said:
I was referring to the ability of other road users to see the AI car so that they don't run into it or get run over by it for example!
Click to expand...
I was referring to the eventuality where we have self driving cars and driving yourself will be banned as it’s too unsafe.
 
Itchy said:
Triggered! I firmly believe every car driver should be mandatorily required to spend 10 hours driving a vehicle from another license category, both A and C in order to understand the limitations and vulnerabilities that those road users experience from car users who e.g. don’t have the awareness to turn on their lights in bad road conditions. Without experiencing the vulnerability directly i.e. having their own ‘skin in the game’, they often end up opining on things like motorcycle safety! (Not directed @mathepac, I don’t know your driving experience).
Click to expand...
How do you propose getting people to take out licences / learner permits for vehicle classes they don't intend driving long-term? AI-powered simulators, passengers with experienced drivers in HGVs or other work vehicles, cross bars of bicycles (I know, no licence required, but include them anyway, and finally pedestrians? 22% of all road fatalities in 2024 were pedestrians. How will you get drivers out of cars and onto pavements or will you just ignore > one-fifth of road fatalities?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top