Driving with Full beams on Motorways

unkel

HelterSkelter wrote:

So you are driving in the motorway in the driving lane at 120kmh (at night) and suddenly you see a horse right in front of you

A horse (or more likely a deer) could jump out right in front of you making an accident unavoidable - no matter what your speed is

HelterSkelter wrote:

I think you should go into the council today and give your licence back.

Along with those hundreds of millions of continental drivers that drive at 120km/h on dipped beams on unlit motorways?

HelterSkelter

unkel wrote:

A horse (or more likely a deer) could jump out in right in front of you making an accident unavoidable - no matter what your speed is

Oh right, so we should throw all other common sense out the window then? If I hit this deer then I could be killed on the spot so I should not bother wearing a seat belt as it would not save my life?

BTW, it is the law in this country that you drive with full beam headlights at night:

When driving at night you must use your full headlamps except:

1. For a short period just after the beginning or before the end of lighting up hours (the period commencing half an hour after sunset on any day and ending half an hour before sunrise on the following day) provided visibility is adequate.
2. When stopped in the course of traffic.
3. In a built-up or special speed limit area where there is good street lighting.

You must dip your headlamps:

1. When meeting other traffic.
2. When driving in a built-up or special speed limit area except where the roads are unlit.
3. On continuously lit roads outside built-up or special speed limit areas.
4. When following close behind another vehicle.
5. At the beginning and end of lighting up hours.
6. Where there is dense fog or falling snow.
7. Generally to avoid inconveniencing other traffic.

From the national safety council web site

Don't overdrive your headlights. You should be able to stop inside the illuminated area. If you're not, you are creating a blind crash area in front of your vehicle.

comanche

Generally on a motorway there is other traffic going in the same direction, this should give you enough clues as to what is going on ahead...

And well if there are oncoming cars and you are not following cars dip your lights - motorways generally do not have obstacles on the - why would there be a horse/cow/laama/ostrich on a motorway? Car, trucks etc have lights. Personally I'm alright with the odds and will continue to take my changes!

Something that people in this country don't seem to get either - esp on single carriage roads is

1. You can remember what was in your way when you dip your head lights
2. The car coming towards you is also illuminating the road - that means your side too

unkel

So no comments then about best practice in continental europe where people do not generally use full beams when driving around @120km/h on motorways?

HelterSkelter wrote:

BTW, it is the law in this country that you drive with full beam headlights at night

The rules of the road were probably written before there were motorways here. Unfortunately most people still seem unable to use them properly - I guess nobody told them how to do it!

Don't get me wrong, there's nothing in principal wrong with using full beams. Just:

- people leave them on (either out of ignorance or because they only care about numero uno) blinding another driver

- people switch them off, but too late. The other driver is already blinded. I am almost always the first to switch off the full beams when coming upon a driver going in the opposite direction

- having full beams on in the driving lane still blinds a driver coming in the opposite direction imho, even if they are in the driving lane too

- I really can't see that visibility on motorways is only 30m @120km/h on dipped beams. My guess is that figure is from non-motorways with no reflecting lines / poles etc.

On the balance I feel it is safer overall not to use full beams if possible. Perhaps I should be more selfish

As said it would be better to have some deflectors in the median, even dense bushes would do it. As for motorway lights, I guess we don't have the population density to make that economically viable

Blazer

Hagar wrote:

But not for LHD cars. That is just to stop RHD car beams aiming to the left, oncoming traffic, while driving on the right.

someone's a bit slow today:p

they go on both lights..:D

HelterSkelter

unkel wrote:

So no comments then about best practice in continental europe where people do not generally use full beams when driving around @120km/h on motorways?

I don't know about the laws and practices in the rest of Europe. We are talking about Ireland and the law here is that you should drive with full beam. What people do in the rest of Europe is irrelevant.

Anyway, we'll agree to disagree, I will drive with full beam on unlit motorways, you drive with dipped beam if you want.

Rovi

Mathew Reilly wrote:

Hagar wrote:

But not for LHD cars. That is just to stop RHD car beams aiming to the left, oncoming traffic, while driving on the right.

someone's a bit slow today:p

they go on both lights..:D

\pulls up comfy chair
\opens popcorn
\waits for Hagar to come back

:rolleyes:

Hagar

Mathew Reilly wrote:

someone's a bit slow today:p

they go on both lights..:D

Yes, but it's not me, where did I say anything about a single light?

LHD = "Left Hand Drive" i.e. a car designed for driving on the right side of the road, e.g. France.
RHD = "Right Hand Drive" i.e. a car designed for driving on the left side of the road, e.g. Ireland.

Re-read my previous post.;)


/edit Hiya Rovi got any spare popcorn?

jayok

unkel wrote:

So no comments then about best practice in continental europe where people do not generally use full beams when driving around @120km/h on motorways?

Here's a few:

1. To start, you are defining that the whole of continental Europe appoves of this. To be honest I don't believe you. I only know the roads I've driven across Europe and without full beams they are very dark and as per my simple example above not safe to do 80km/hr let alone 130km/hr+.

2. Furthermore this is Ireland - we drive on the left. We are generally poorly trained and have poor road markings.

3. While we have numerous bad examples of Irish driving I would tend to focus more on the use of the English road usage and system. The Brits to be fair to them are the the leaders in road-safety and developed Road Craft. The Police Advanced driving course recommends best possible lumination at all times AND ensuring a safe stopping distance above all.

Of course, you are entitled to drive as you see fit once within the law and there posts are largely irrelevant. But the law doesn't cover all safety aspects and driving at 120km/hr on dips on an Irish motorway simply isn't safe. Whether you choose to accept this or not is your preogative - but IMO ignoring this makes anyone an unsafe / dangerous driver.

Rovi

Hagar wrote:

/edit Hiya Rovi got any spare popcorn?

Here you go (Not Worksafe!)-


:D:D

unkel

Not boards.ie safe, Rovi, nevermind work safe

Link to picture of scantily clad lady removed...

embraer170

A trip to Germany where people drive at night at 200+ km/h on low beam headlights. I'm not saying it's right but it's standard practise.

Everyone who's talking about safe stopping distances, do you drive around the countless blind blends (on third class roads, but also on many national primary/secondary roads) at 10 km/h or whatever safe speed. I doubt it.

unkel

HelterSkelter wrote:

We are talking about Ireland and the law here is that you should drive with full beam

Correct. Alhtough adhering to the law is not always the safest option imho

HelterSkelter wrote:

What people do in the rest of Europe is irrelevant

I disagree there. We've only got a few bits of motorway and only in the last decade or so. Continental Europe has had experience with motorways for up to 70 years. More experience so perhaps better practices available that might improve safety here

jayok wrote:

Furthermore this is Ireland - we drive on the left. We are generally poorly trained and have poor road markings

I agree with the training as I pointed out in my previous posts. Motorways in Ireland (including road markings) are of good quality though

jayok wrote:

driving at 120km/hr on dips on an Irish motorway simply isn't safe

Driving at 120km/h on an Irish motorway in full daylight in perfect weather is barely safe

hobochris

Driving at 120km/h on an Irish motorway in full daylight in perfect weather is barely safe

depends on how alert the driver is... the problem in this country with safety is not that we dont have the laws ect in place... but people either do not know them or choose to ignore them..

for example even driving slower then the speed of traffic on a motorway can be dangerous thanks to whatever ignorant idiot is driving on your back bumper. which is why the problem need to be tackled from both sides both drivers who drive slower then the speed of traffic and thoose who drive dangerously need to be penalised...

i say slower drivers because as much as penalising dangerous drivers can help.. slow drivers for example driving in the fast line instead of observing the keep left rule also add to the problem... as they tend to provoke the dangerous drivers.. and also act as a hinderance to drivers wishing to go at a faster speed within the speed limit...

im mainly talking about the drivers who do 50kmh in the outside lane of the m50 with a clear road ahead of them, often causing delays for drivers who are normally stuck in a tail back behind them who wish to do say 120kmh...

but anyway back onto my point...

ignorance or not knowing the law should not be tolerated.. holding a driving licence is a responsabilty not just an asset... meaning that it is your responsabilty to know and abide by all
rules of the road such as the keep left rule and the keeping with the pace of traffic rule not just the ones that prevent an obvious danger such as speeding...

jayok

unkel wrote:

Correct. Alhtough adhering to the law is not always the safest option imho

Since you seem to highlight your desire for the safety option. The you need to realise that driving at 120km/hr on dipped lights is not safe. No "its done on the continent" can deny the physics involved. If you really wanted to drive with the safest option then you would at recognise that doing 120km/hr on dipped headlights is not the safest option as essentailly you are driving blind - this point seems to have bypassed you.

unkel wrote:

I disagree there. We've only got a few bits of motorway and only in the last decade or so. Continental Europe has had experience with motorways for up to 70 years. More experience so perhaps better practices available that might improve safety here

Sure Continental Europe have motorways longer than us. However, their practices are not necessarily "better" than ours. For example, the level of tailgating and speed that occurs in France is shocking. The Italians are notorously dangerous drivers (n one of stretch of motorway from Naples to Rome between the 1st June 06 and the 10th June 06 37 people lost their lives). Such dangerous driving is not as widesperead here and I don't believe that their experience had made them safer drivers.

Either way the "contental Europe" discussion is only heresay. The braking distance vs vision figures highlights the unsafe driving practice of driving beyond your vision. Fact.

peasant

Now, now ...

The whole idea of a motorway is that you can drive safely over and above the speed that your field of vision/breaking distance would normally command.

The overall idea is to provide a safe road to allow fast progress for a large number of vehicles and the whole thing is constructed in such a way, that it is reasonably safe to do 120 km/h in normal conditions (and that includes night time)

You know that there will be no crossroads, you know that the bends won't get tight and tighter all of a sudden, you know there will be no potholes and you know that construction sites will be signpostested well in advance.

You can further safely assume that there will be no tractor or horse and carriage, no cyclists or other slow moving vehicles and no pedestrians. You can assume that any slow moving vehicles will be doing at least 50 km/h (or is it 60?) because otherwise they wouldn't be allowed on the motorway.

You should further assume (outside Ireland anyway:D ) that all vehicles are lit up at night, that all vehicles are travelling at speeds close to the max (or at least 80 km/h for trucks) and that freeflowing traffic will be faster in the overtaking lane than in the driving lane. Also you can assume that you will be warned, if there are steep hills or sharp bends and that the speed will be limited in such places.

There remains the risk that there *may* be debris or deer (other loose animals) on the road ...but that risk is so small that it does not warrant rendering the whole motorway system pointless by forcing everybody down to such a slow speed that they could definetly avoid that tyre, piece of wood or deer that suddenly decides to "jump" them.

unkel

jayok wrote:

If you really wanted to drive with the safest option then you would at recognise that doing 120km/hr on dipped headlights is not the safest option as essentailly you are driving blind - this point seems to have bypassed you

It's not bypassed me, I simply don't believe the figures quoted. I believe my vision is way more than 30m at 120km/h on dipped beams on a motorway. As I suggested that figure might come from a non-motorway

I agree with you about the level of tailgating in France and more so in Spain and Italy. I do not condone it under any circumstances but most of it happens in my experience where the tailgated driver is overdue merging back into the driving lane or the driver didn't pay attention to fast approaching cars before making the move into the overtaking lane

unkel

peasant wrote:

You can assume that any slow moving vehicles will be doing at least 50 km/h (or is it 60?) because otherwise they wouldn't be allowed on the motorway

70km/h is better again. In many countries the police are quicker to take slow drivers off the motorway than fast drivers. Given the choice of either taking a 60km/h driver or a 180km/h driver off the motorway (min speed 70km/h, max speed 120km/h) in the Netherlands, the police are known to go after the slower driver

I'm convinced one of the reasons the UK motorways are very safe is that the difference in speed between the fastest and the slowest cars is very, very small. I've never experienced anything similar in Europe, but I have in the US

Blazer

Hagar wrote:

Yes, but it's not me, where did I say anything about a single light?

LHD = "Left Hand Drive" i.e. a car designed for driving on the right side of the road, e.g. France.
RHD = "Right Hand Drive" i.e. a car designed for driving on the left side of the road, e.g. Ireland.

Re-read my previous post.;)


/edit Hiya Rovi got any spare popcorn?

Ooops...looks like I was the slow one..:o
but then again I never realised that dipped lights points the left..just never took heed of it.

unkel

Mathew Reilly wrote:

I never realised that dipped lights points the left..

Dipped lights point to the left in RHD drive cars. They point to the right in LHD cars

jayok

unkel wrote:

It's not bypassed me, I simply don't believe the figures quoted. I believe my vision is way more than 30m at 120km/h on dipped beams on a motorway. As I suggested that figure might come from a non-motorway

Other that quoting reports from Road Safety Authorities and other bodies - there is little that I could do. If you don't believe it then fair enough. However, even if your vision allows for 60m on dips you are still 40 meters short and thus driving blind.

peasant wrote:

The whole idea of a motorway is that you can drive safely over and above the speed that your field of vision/breaking distance would normally command.

No - the whole idea of a motorway is to provide a safer higher-speed road network than a traditional road allows. Compromising safety rules (which includes stopping distance) are never incorporated into any design. During the daylight hours and on lit road sections 120 km/hr are fine as you can see that far, but in reduced visibility conditions this is not the case.

If 120km/hr was safe no matter what, why introduce lower speed limits on some sections of motorway?

Consider your previous post within the context of morning fog instead of dark. Do you still believe it's safe to travel at 120km/hr with only 30 meters of visibility? If not, why is the dark different?

HelterSkelter

peasant wrote:

There remains the risk that there *may* be debris or deer (other loose animals) on the road ...but that risk is so small that it does not warrant rendering the whole motorway system pointless by forcing everybody down to such a slow speed that they could definetly avoid that tyre, piece of wood or deer that suddenly decides to "jump" them.

Well South Dublin County Council must consider it a serious enough risk as they erected signs along the M50 warning of deer.

peasant

Consider your previous post within the context of morning fog instead of dark. Do you still believe it's safe to travel at 120km/hr with only 30 meters of visibility? If not, why is the dark different?

There is one marked difference between fog and darkness.

You can see a lit car travelling (or even parked) 100 meters in front of you in the dark ...you can't in fog.

Well South Dublin County Council must consider it a serious enough risk as they erected signs along the M50 warning of deer.

So, what do you do, when you see one of those signs? Slow down to a hundred, 80, 60 ? Mind you, that deer might just jump out right in front of your car ....maybe you'd better stop altogether and walk?

jayok

peasant wrote:

There is one marked difference between fog and darkness.

You can see a lit car travelling (or even parked) 100 meters in front of you in the dark ...you can't in fog.

Could you see a pile-up or overturned truck in the dark? Only if their lights are on after the crash. My point remains the same - driving at a speed that puts your stopping distance beyond visibility is unsafe.

HelterSkelter

peasant wrote:

So, what do you do, when you see one of those signs? Slow down to a hundred, 80, 60 ? Mind you, that deer might just jump out right in front of your car ....maybe you'd better stop altogether and walk?

No, I keep an eye out for deer on the road and surrounding fields. This section of road is lit up but if there were no lights you would never see a deer on the road driving at 120kmh on dipped lights.

peasant

Nothing is clearcut.
Of course there is a bit of skill and judgement involved in motorway driving.
Rarely are you the only vehicle on the m-way, there are others ahead of you and you move along as a daisy chain. The cars in front of you help to light up the section of road that your lights can't reach and so you can see a lot further...and as one car passes one spot safely it is safe to assume that you can do the same seconds later.

If you find yourself all alone on the motorway, usually there is very little traffic accross the median as well. In that case, stick on your full beams and dip them when meet oncoming traffic.

You will only be on dips for a short time, minimising the risk. Also traffic from accross the median will help to illuminate the road in front of you.

I maintain therefore that there is no reason whatsoever to drive slower than the limit, just because it is dark.

HelterSkelter

peasant wrote:

I maintain therefore that there is no reason whatsoever to drive slower than the limit, just because it is dark.

I think the point most people are making is that you should use full beam when driving on the motorway at night, not that you driver slower than the speed limit.

peasant

HelterSkelter wrote:

I think the point most people are making is that you should use full beam when driving on the motorway at night, not that you driver slower than the speed limit.

I know that ...

But you also mustn't use the full beam when your are blinding other traffic, which on a busy motorway is most of the time.

So you drive with dipped headlights.

All I'm trying to say is that you can do so safely.

When there's no traffic, you can drive safely (safe for you and for others) on full beam, when there is traffic, you can drive safely on dips, as the other traffic lights up the road for you ...where's the problem?

NeMiSiS

"When there's no traffic, you can drive safely (safe for you and for others) on full beam, when there is traffic, you can drive safely on dips, as the other traffic lights up the road for you ...where's the problem?"

I am wondering the same myself..

Are people saying while driving at night on a motorway, you should have your full headlights on continually ? Even if you have traffic in front of you ?

I would behave in this manner while driving at night on motorways : "If you find yourself all alone on the motorway, usually there is very little traffic accross the median as well. In that case, stick on your full beams and dip them when meet oncoming traffic."
TK

HelterSkelter

peasant, that is exactly what I think. My problem is with people who don't use full beam on empty motorways because they reckon they can see over 100m ahead in pitch blackness.