You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
You're all arseholes. One, it's common courtesy, and two, it's the only way someone on a road without pavements knows that you've seen them and aren't engrossed in broadcasting your genitals on TikTube instead of watching the road.
I'm *this* close to ordering the 10,000,000 lumen Ultra-Throw Monster Radiation Cannon Deluxe from AliExpress so that you get a taste of your own medicine.
I'm *this* close to ordering the 10,000,000 lumen Ultra-Throw Monster Radiation Cannon Deluxe from AliExpress so that you get a taste of your own medicine.
I once did this (when driving) to a car approaching with full beams on. Headlights and Cibie Oscars. I illuminated a police car!
You're all arseholes
I'm not just an arsehole, I'm a lazy arsehole. Auto-dip headlights innit, takes me an age to realise I'm dazzling someone and to work out how to manually dip.
Of course all the arsehole cyclists with the
10,000,000 lumen Ultra-Throw Monster Radiation Cannon Deluxe from AliExpress
can find the nearest ditch 😀
And add to that those that don't avoid (or at least slow down for) large kerbside puddles! 🌊
that you've seen them and aren't engrossed in broadcasting your genitals on TikTube instead of watching the road.
What 🤷♂️
So your walking down an unlit road without a light and expect car drivers to see you? Fair enough if you have a light yourself, I usually carry an old exposure diablo pointing just Infront of me to try and make myself seen
Exposing an old diablo whilst walking may get you on that TikTube thing that is mentioned earlier on the thread.
Cooking dinner and my glasses steamed up and I didn't read it as diablo!
that you've seen them and aren't engrossed in broadcasting your genitals on TikTube instead of watching the road.
What 🤷♂️
So your walking down an unlit road without a light and expect car drivers to see you? Fair enough if you have a light yourself, I usually carry an old exposure diablo pointing just Infront of me to try and make myself seen
Reflective clothing + flashing vest + head torch and still ignored / nearly flattened by drivers.
that you've seen them and aren't engrossed in broadcasting your genitals on TikTube instead of watching the road.
What 🤷♂️
So your walking down an unlit road without a light and expect car drivers to see you? Fair enough if you have a light yourself, I usually carry an old exposure diablo pointing just Infront of me to try and make myself seen
Reflective clothing + flashing vest + head torch and still ignored / nearly flattened by drivers.
Confused. Are you ranting about main beams blinding you or being flattened? Most modern cars have auto high beam but sounds like you’d prefer dipped so they can’t see you or is it the other way round? /Confused
Auto lights can get in the sea as far I'm concerned, seems to be the cause of many a driver error, high beam in the middle of the day, just DRLs on in the middle of the night and self leveling leds are no good on a road crest blah blah blah, yeah yeah old man shouting at clouds etc
Confused. Are you ranting about main beams blinding you or being flattened? Most modern cars have auto high beam but sounds like you’d prefer dipped so they can’t see you or is it the other way round? /Confused
Bloody hell, if this confuses you then you shouldn’t be driving at all.
It’s not difficult - just dip your lights when you see a pedestrian. If they have lights themselves then that might be quite a long way away. That way you don’t blind someone, and they know that you’ve seen them. And unbelievably, you might need to slow down a bit while on dipped lights.
I totally agree with the OP. I'm often walking the dogs after dark, in a B- road village with zero street lights. I'll have head torch* and hi Viz workmans parker jacket. Probably 70% of drivers dip, either by automagic or manually. the others just blind me. thankfully we do have pavement all through the village.
* Current torch is linear line of COB LEDs, probably cause a WTF moment when I'm initially seen!
Can we add people who park on the wrong side of the road and leave their full beams on?
Can we add people who park on the wrong side of the road and leave their full beams on?
Yes, as was the case earlier this evening when I went to pick my mate up to go to a gig. There’s a large gravel area on the left side of the road in front of two gates into fields in the lane leading towards his place, and twice in the last couple of weeks or so there’s been a large SUV, Range Rover or something similar, with full beams on just sitting facing oncoming traffic, both times I’ve flashed it, got zero response, so put my full beams on, and still no response. Keeping my lights on full was the only way I could see the edges of the road, but didn’t matter to shitforbrains! I’m wondering if there was anyone actually in the car, if the driver was out having a piss. 😖😡🤬
Auto main beam is the most bizarre invention. And it's so crap too, it often doesn't work (ie goes in to main beam and doesn't dip again) or just dazzles walkers/cyclists/drivers on the opposite carriageway. And who needs main beam going 30mph on a road with cat's eyes?? Morons, that's who. TURN IT OFF. YOU KNOW IF YOU CAN'T SEE!!
I always try to switch off high beams but, as I noted this morning, the person walking up the road wearing all dark clothing gets dazzled for quite a while before they get picked out by the lights.
But Teslas and Range Rovers can get in the sea – even on dipped beam, they dazzle badly.
Well, if they can't, then WTF are their main-beam headlights for?
If you are wearing dark clothing, it simply doesn't get picked up by lights as well as reflective clothing or a torch etc.
Well, if they can't, then WTF are their main-beam headlights for?
If you are wearing dark clothing, it simply doesn't get picked up by lights as well as reflective clothing or a torch etc.
Specsavers is that way --->
Specsavers is that way --->
So you honestly believe that clothing choice makes no difference to whether you are seen? Do you feel the same about being seen on a bike at night?
Specsavers is that way --->
So you honestly believe that clothing choice makes no difference to whether you are seen? Do you feel the same about being seen on a bike at night?
Sorry, I was being trite and it needed more nuance.
Agreed that clothing does make a difference, but if you are driving at night fast enough that you cannot see and react to a dark dressed person / deer in brown / black badgers arse / pothole the size of Norfolk in time then you are driving too fast.
Besides which, we all know that luminous clothing or markings make all the difference. for example-> Dorset Police patrol car Poole crash pictures released - BBC News
If you are wearing dark clothing, it simply doesn't get picked up by lights as well as reflective clothing or a torch etc.
I get this if we're talking about being seen in dipped headlights, as reflective stuff will often be picked up at a greater distance than the 'main' area of the beam. But we're talking about main beam which, especially in modern cars, is generally like full daylight. There's very little reason why you shouldn't be able to see someone in dark clothing if you're paying proper attention.
But Teslas and Range Rovers can get in the sea – even on dipped beam, they dazzle badly.
Good job that both brands tend to attract considerate and courteous drivers, eh
There's very little reason why you shouldn't be able to see someone in dark clothing if you're paying proper attention.
But it stands to reason that someone wearing more visible clothing will be, well, more visible more quickly – then they won't be dazzled as much if the driver sees them and switches their main beams off.
There's very little reason why you shouldn't be able to see someone in dark clothing if you're paying proper attention.
But it stands to reason that someone wearing more visible clothing will be, well, more visible more quickly – then they won't be dazzled as much if the driver sees them and switches their main beams off.
You are assuming there that the drivers of cars have enough intelligence and understanding of anyone outside the metal box they are in to actually react to seeing someone.
I have been knocked off my bike twice - once was at night, wearing a lumi jacket and my (back in the day) blinding 10w NightEye twin lights. She looked me in the eye and pulled out anyway. The second time I was wearing a turquoise Polaris jacket with luminous flashes, with flashing front light at dusk - and still the police van did not think to look up the bus and cycle lane. They pulled out as the car in the car lane 'flashed them out'... So from a sample of myself, wearing luminous or bright kit does f***k all around dafty drivers, day or night.
There's very little reason why you shouldn't be able to see someone in dark clothing if you're paying proper attention.
But it stands to reason that someone wearing more visible clothing will be, well, more visible more quickly – then they won't be dazzled as much if the driver sees them and switches their main beams off.
I move that all cars and trucks and motorbikes now must be painted bright colours.
All grey and black cars should be immediately crushed, you cannot see them in the dark.
I move that all cars and trucks and motorbikes now must be painted bright colours.
All grey and black cars should be immediately crushed, you cannot see them in the dark.
But they have lights. A pedestrian with dark clothes and a torch would be seen sooner than if they didn't have said torch.
I'm *this* close to ordering the 10,000,000 lumen Ultra-Throw Monster Radiation Cannon Deluxe from AliExpress so that you get a taste of your own medicine
Great idea..you can then feel suitably smug about teaching them a lesson just before the 2 ton range rover driven by the dazzled driver turns you into a radiator mascot....
Alot of the issue is the adaptive headlights on newer cars. Even my van has them. They don't pick up peds as the camera is looking for headlights or street lights. Not so sure how I knock my main beam off if the system fails to spot something (not had that happen yet though).
TBH I remember years ago when Zennon lights started being fitted to new cars and I was commuting down dark lanes with my 6v BLT lights (that were a fortune) that were as best you could get.
But they have lights. A pedestrian with dark clothes and a torch would be seen sooner than if they didn't have said torch.
I'm not sure how true that is. I'm not disputing that it makes a difference, but headlights now seem so bright that I think they might overwhelm small sources of light.
But they have lights. A pedestrian with dark clothes and a torch would be seen sooner than if they didn't have said torch.I'm not sure how true that is. I'm not disputing that it makes a difference, but headlights now seem so bright that I think they might overwhelm small sources of light.
And let us not forget how many drivers do not realise that most daytime running lights are on the front only...
I give up. How any intelligent adult can try to dispute the fact that, if you are wearing darker clothes, you’ll be less visible is beyond me (no matter what lighting any vehicle may have).
I'm not disputing that.
I'm saying that the drivers carry the responsibility more than the pedestrian / cyclist / dog / badger to drive more slowly in their wonderwagon, and that the average intelligence, responsiveness and skill of a driver passing you is 50/50 below average... And the driving test is no test of intelligence.
Alot of the issue is the adaptive headlights on newer cars. Even my van has them. They don't pick up peds as the camera is looking for headlights or street lights. Not so sure how I knock my main beam off if the system fails to spot something (not had that happen yet though).
Same way as you'd cancel non-adaptive main beam.
I give up. How any intelligent adult can try to dispute the fact that, if you are wearing darker clothes, you’ll be less visible is beyond me (no matter what lighting any vehicle may have)
This is the "she was asking for it" argument, isn't it.
You shouldn't have to dress like Bobo the Clown just escaped from a fairy light factory in order not to be at risk from inattentive drivers. No-one deserves to be run over / knocked off or what have you, it is the driver's responsibility to drive to the conditions and that includes driving within a speed where they can stop in the distance they can see.
But walking down an unlit country lane with no pavements at night whilst wearing black jeans and a black hoodie probably isn't the smartest of moves. Having the moral high ground will be of no use to you when they're picking your kneecaps out of someone's bumper.
I genuinely believe that many pedestrians are like the Mirror Universe bugblatter beast of Traal, they think that because they can see you, you can see them.
I genuinely believe that many pedestrians are like the Mirror Universe bugblatter beast of Traal, they think that because they can see you, you can see them.
This 👆🏻, sadly. In the sort of nighttime conditions at this time of year, when it can be misty, raining or drizzling, riding a bike with no lighting or reflectors, and dressed entirely in black with a hood up, is honestly reckless behaviour - I had a situation some years back, when I was driving down my road to turn around so I could drive back up to my house and reverse back into my front parking area, I briefly thought I saw something pass in front of the lights of a car parked further down the road.
I turned and drove up and parked, got out and waited, and a lad on a bike, no lights, dark clothes, came up towards me. I stopped him, and pointed out to him that if it hadn’t been for the car lights behind him, he could have very easily been under the front of my car, or someone else’s, as he crossed in front, because he was effectively invisible. It actually happened to me once, riding back home after my front light bulb failed, and it hadn’t occurred to me that the car driver I rode in front of couldn’t see me!
I wasn’t cross, I just explained to the lad what a risk he was taking, and bless him, he actually got off his bike and pushed it up the road!
My new car has adaptive headlights and auto-dip.
I'm getting flashed at a fair bit at night on certain roads as they just don't like the strength/height of the beam.
Of course there is no damn adjustment.
Bit of stress.
It’s not difficult - just dip your lights when you see a pedestrian.
I always do. The problem is that a lot of folk (even those seemingly old enough to know better) walk along roads and verges, backed by hedges or trees, dressed like a WW2 commando in dull colours with no reflectives. 🤷♂️
No-one deserves to be run over / knocked off or what have you, it is the driver's responsibility to drive to the conditions and that includes driving within a speed where they can stop in the distance they can see.
I think that is straying a bit from the original point of the thread – clearly, if a driver isn't driving to the conditions and knocks a pedestrian/cyclist over, they would, most likely, be at fault. However, the OP is (rightly) complaining about drivers not dipping high beams for pedestrians. I hate it (I walk my dogs daily and it is getting to the time of year where it is dark both in the morning and evening when I take them out), however, I dazzled someone yesterday as I simply didn't see them due to their dark clothes – had they been more visible, I could have dipped my beams earlier.
Loads of middle aged angry men shaking their fists at the sky.
If you've got main beam on then you're on an unlit road and travelling at least 30mph. I'm not going to dip my headlights which makes it more difficult to see where I'm going because there may be a pedestrian on the pavement. Out of interest, is it in the highway code that you're meant to do that?
As for auto main beam, yes they may not be as reactive/pre-emptive as normal but hardly something to enrage people about is it?
If you've got main beam on then you're on an unlit road and travelling at least 30mph.
Not necessarily.
Not necessarily.
No, but the alignment of dipped beams is inline with the stopping distance from 30mph. So if you can't react to something within your dipped beams then you're doing more than 30, and if you're driving with dipped beams then you need to consider that you might not be able to stop in the distance you can see.
*yes this does raise questions about busy roads / DC's / Motorways. No one expects people to do 30 on unlit motorways, but if you had a crash on another road you might have to justify why you thought it was busy enough to need to dip your lights, but not to slow down.
If you've got main beam on then you're on an unlit road and travelling at least 30mph. I'm not going to dip my headlights which makes it more difficult to see where I'm going because there may be a pedestrian on the pavement. Out of interest, is it in the highway code that you're meant to do that?
114
You MUST NOT
- use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
Too many idiots wearing dark clothing or riding scooters / bikes with no lights on. Sorry if I dazzle a walker but it saves me squashing some bellend in the middle of the road. Full beam plus spotties, thank you very much. (Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants).
you've got main beam on then you're on an unlit road and travelling at least 30mph. I'm not going to dip my headlights which makes it more difficult to see where I'm going because there may be a pedestrian on the pavement. Out of interest, is it in the highway code that you're meant to do that?If you see
If you see a pedestrian dip your lights. Is anyone saying that they don't do that??
(Likewise is anyone saying don't use full beam when you're the only thing about?)
If you see a pedestrian dip your lights. Is anyone saying that they don't do that??
Apparently yes. Odd isn't it?
Sorry if I dazzle a walker but it saves me squashing some bellend in the middle of the road.
You could just drive slower instead of being a prick.
On automatic main beam:
If I switch on main beam then it defaults to automatically dipping mode, switching to dipped if it sees something ahead and then back to main beam afterwards. Tapping the lever a second time disables the auto mode, it operates just like traditional manual headlights.
However, I see no point in doing this. It's slower to react than an attentive driver would be for sure, and it doesn't see everything (as per this thread discussion). But even in auto mode you can still cancel it in exactly the same way as if it was in manual, blipping the stalk towards you will put you onto dipped lights regardless of what mode you happened to be in beforehand.
I consider it an assist rather than an enable-and-forget feature, I still manually dip lights when necessary. If you're out-reacting the system's reactions then it doesn't make the, ahem, blindest bit of difference whether they're manual or auto. Believing "oh I've got auto-dipping main beam so I never need to touch it again" is the problem here.
If you've got main beam on then you're on an unlit road and travelling at least 30mph.
Not necessarily.
My auto-mains cancel at 27mph and under.
They also have an easily accessible doohickey that allows cancelling main beam manually.
Or you can use the mains entirely on manual mode.
Not sure I see a problem with the auto high beam technology...
My auto-mains cancel at 27mph and under.
Yeah, but not all main beams are the same as on your car. Some cars do not have adaptive or auto-dip technology at all. Some dim at different speeds (on my Lexus I think it is 5mph which I personally think is too slow). So - not necessarily.
The matrix headlights on the Corsa e i occasionally drive has some automation based on speed, street lighting and on coming cars.
The lights will illuminate the verge with a couple of the available LEDs from the nearside headlight whilst the oncoming traffic will have a dipped main beam on the offside light so it doesn't dazzle them.
So pedestrians can be illuminated by default on unlit roads even when there is oncoming traffic.
The lights can be used in non matrix mode but the majority of the time the auto setting is used as it combines with the rain sensing auto wipers.
Too many idiots wearing dark clothing or riding scooters / bikes with no lights on. Sorry if I dazzle a walker but it saves me squashing some bellend in the middle of the road. Full beam plus spotties, thank you very much. (Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants).
Suggesting that people you don’t see when you are driving are at fault because they are wearing dark clothes is motornormative victim blaming. All drivers (and many cyclist for that matter) will dazzle pedestrians on occasions. I know I have done so and I know it was my fault and I was in the wrong.
Full beam plus spotties, thank you very much. (Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants).
You use full beams (and 'spotties') in lit areas?
Suggesting that people you don’t see when you are driving are at fault because they are wearing dark clothes is motornormative victim blaming.
It's not just during the night. Check this chap out and how well he blends into the background. In broad daylight. Was he not thinking?
/s
https://twitter.com/ediz1975/status/1979834430425551313?t=2mVPL-2kmwVkjKDr3v_q0g&s=19
The replies on twitter are breathtaking btw.
Interesting experience this morning – 7am, raining, dark and I was driving on a narrow national speed limit lane without a footpath (just wide enough for two cars to pass with care but no centre lines). I had my adaptive high beams on and driving at around 40mph. I saw a small spot of light on the left which made me slow more and I realised it was a pedestrian simply by seeing a faint 'person-shaped' dark blob. Obviously I then switched off the full beams and passed without drama, however, had he not had the small low-powered torch pointing towards me, I doubt I'd have seen much at all until much later – my lights barely illuminated the figure and I saw no real definition. Not sure what my point is, other than even with full beams on, if the pedestrian is wearing dark clothes, they won't be easily seen.
It's odd that we take a driving test when young... including a loose verification that we can see/observe well enough to drive... and then nothing else... forever. The plans to introduce eye tests for the over 70s are welcome... but perhaps something in middle age should be mandated? Night time vision in particular can drop off pretty sharpish with age, without people always being aware just how much they're effected.
I think something more than eye tests should be mandatory say every 10 years from passing the driving test.
I guess that there isn’t much action on this issues as the UK accident stats may suggest that things aren’t too bad… but I suspect that part of the reason for this is that peds avoid some ( especially rural) roads altogether. Where I live, it is rare to see people walk along many stretches of main road as it is uncomfortable and dangerous to do so. People drive as if there won’t be anyone walking and if you do walk at night you would be probably be blamed for any incidents that do occur.
If the people were regularly seen walking long these roads and their right to do so was respected and they were treated accordingly, peoples driving habits would be significantly different.
Yes it's the motornormative issue you mentioned earlier.
The plans to introduce eye tests for the over 70s are welcome... but perhaps something in middle age should be mandated?
I'd be in favour if this. At age 50 you start getting "you're old now, you should probably come see us so we can check you're not about to drop dead" messages from your GP. It doesn't seem a great leap to me to include an eye test as part of the human MOT whether you drive or not.
"Mandatory" is challenging (cf. vaccines) but it could easily be made a condition of obtaining a licence. People resist change but even if we said it was only for new licence applications it'd trickle down eventually, by the time Gen-Z and later are gimmers like us it'll apply to everyone. The easiest way of effecting change is to not have to change from anything in the first place, you don't get many non-smokers going "I'm gasping for a fag."
People resist change but even if we said it was only for new licence applications it'd trickle down eventually, by the time Gen-Z and later are gimmers like us it'll apply to everyone.
Yeah but you'd get young 'uns saying "bloody boomers..."
You use full beams (and 'spotties') in lit areas?
Yes. Did I say something that confused you?
Our street lights in the 'hood are utter pants. 2 mins from my house there are no street lights.
Which means "they're not very good at all". We also have a FK TONNE of roos. You really want to avoid them, as well as dark-clothed pedestrians. Or at least try.
Yes. Did I say something that confused you?
Obviously. Nothing in your post suggests you are in Australia until you mention 'roos. Prior to that you just sound like an idiot who can't see and won't slow down, but now I have a context for that you're ok.