If the light sensitive technology was reliable then that would be an excellent idea, so long as it doesn't include sidelights as a feature they don't do anything for visibility and just irritate me.
I was just thinking earlier on, an always on soloution for headlights would be ideal and mean that the average "a to b" motorist would have fewer complicated questions like "is visibility reduced?" to answer and so could concentrate more on applying their makeup or writing a text message on their mobile! :O
|
"an always on soloution for headlights would be ideal"
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how to protect bikers if everyone runs daylight lights.
|
|
|
If the light sensitive technology was reliable then that would be an excellent idea, so long as it doesn't include sidelights as a feature they don't do anything for visibility and just irritate me.
At the risk of sounding stupid (done it before and no doubt will do it again) - have read this thread pretty thoroughly, I think, and others like it - but can anyone tell me what IS the purpose of sidelights, and when should they be used?
|
HF,
Siselights is an outdated term, they are actually parking lights.
They are legally required to be used when the vehicle is parked at night on a road with a speed limit of 40mph or above.
|
Thank you Tom. It's been mentioned here before but I was too embarrassed to admit it, when I learned to drive my instructor actually taught me that 'sidelights' were what you turned on as daylight began to fade away to dusk.
I had no idea this was wrong information until I first came here!
|
It probably wasn't wrong information when you were taught, I can remember when nearly everyone drove on sidelights unless there was no street lighting. When headlamp use first started to become common, there was an argument that this was actually detrimental to safety, as the glare from the lights tended to obscure other road users view of objects to the side of an approaching vehicle, as well as making it's speed harder to judge.
This is a view I have some synpathy with, but it would need everyone to revert to sidelights at once to see if it was better or not. Sidelight use when everyone else is useing headlights is dangerous, as you would simply be lost in the glare.
|
|
|
|
|
And I thought the speed limit was "Over 30mph" where parking lights have to used when parked on the highway.
|
|
It is. 40mph and above IS over 30, there are no intermediate limits.
|
|
|
|
Anyone else remember the sidelights, or marker lights to give them their proper term, which were fitted to the early DS Citroens. Very dim.
Remember an apocryphal story about a DS driver being stopped by an old style bobby when driving just on "sides" and being told. "you are supposed to show two white lights, not two ruddy glowing red wires!"
Plus to add a bit more to Tom's info, also must use them when parked even in a 30 if you are nearer than 10m from a junction.
Also its a fallacy that if you park at night in a 30 facing the wrong way, ( ie driver's side of vehicle nearest the kerb) that you are OK if you leave your lights on. Not so, it's illegal to park on the wrong side at night.
|
"Also its a fallacy that if you park at night in a 30 facing the wrong way, ( ie driver's side of vehicle nearest the kerb) that you are OK if you leave your lights on. Not so, it's illegal to park on the wrong side at night."
Are you sure about that, FiF?
I thought it used to be the rule, then changed (late 60's?) to allow us to be stupid by parking on the wrong side.
From the moment I read that, I lost faith in the validity of traffic laws.
Have I been wrong all these years?
|
Absolutely sure, oh Paul with the odiferous cat.
Mate got a ticket for doing exactly that. As he was, and still is, a copper we got out all the books as he was convinced, as I was at the time, that it was OK to park facing the wrong way providing you left your lights on. Anyway somewhere in the depths of Butterworths or Hughes we found it eventually and he had to put his hands up.
Actually to be specific you can park at night with the driver's side nearest to the kerb in two conditions.
1) in a one way street (providing you're facing the right way obviously)
2) if you are in a recognised parking place. eg marked parking bay as defined by the act or a lay-by separated from the highway
The specific bit in the road vehicle lighting regs you are looking for is here >>
highway code clause 222
"You MUST NOT park on a road at night facing against the direction of the traffic flow unless in a recognised parking space."
Which leads you to Road Vehicles lighting Reguklations clause 24
This is such a model of legislative clarity (not) that I hesitate to give you the link to the appropriate page but here goes
www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1989/Uksi_19891796_en_4.htm
happy reading....!
The bit you need in clause 24 is para 8.
"(8) The circumstances referred to in paragraph (5)(c) are that-
(a) the vehicle is parked on a road on which the driving of vehicles otherwise than in one direction is prohibited at all times and its left or near side is as close as may be and parallel to the left-hand edge of the carriageway or its right or off side is as close as may be and parallel to the right-hand edge of the carriageway; or
(b) the vehicle is parked on a road on which such a prohibition does not exist and its left or near side is as close as may be and parallel to the edge of the carriageway"
ie as I say either side of the road in a one way or on the left hand side in a two way.
There is also something in Constr & Use Regs but I can't find it at the moment.
Phew! Sorry for the long post.
|
Sorry, FiF, I missed your reply. Thanks for the info.
So, these lighting regulations were applied in 1989. I mentioned the legality of parking on the "wrong" side of the road, being Ok if side lights are on.
This was a law change, circa late 60's, and I became aware of it by press coverage.
It has obviously been reversed in 1989 and is now illegal.....good thing.
It worries me that this change has gone unnoticed by me for 13 years because it received no publicity in '89.
Ignorance is no defence. It's our responsibility to know the law, so can anyone tell me how we're supposed to keep up to date?
|
|
I must park illegally then, at least 50% of the time, as do most people in my street! Glad I've been made aware of this, it takes nothing for me to park on the 'right' side, just had no idea that I was committing an offence by not doing so. And, as you say Paul, ignorance is no defence.
|
One bit of rural road I use has a few shallow bends in it and a house with a pair of gate posts topped by white lights.
At the angle you approach it they could be mistaken in poor visibility for a pair of headlights with the result one would aim to the left of them and land up in the fence.
|
The house is clearly occupied by a car hating econut.
Aren't those badly-aimed garden/drive security floodlights a damned nuicance??
|
Nuicance?????? Aargh, sorry.
Read.....nuisance
|
|
|
AFAIK they are only used when you are parked, say you were parked in a road, and wanted to make the car more visible from the rear (the tailights are always the same brightness regardless of what setting you have the headlights on) as well as on a clear night making the car slightly more apparent from the front.
You should never drive on them though, I was taught this by two seperate Police traffic officers (well, one used to be a TO, and one still is). They said that if you think visibility has reduced in either rain, fog, dusk etc. to warrant sidelights then you are admitting there is a visibility issue and should therefore should have your headlights on. If that makes any sense! :)
Have a look the next time you are out in fog and notice the difference between someone with their headlights on properly, and someone driving with their sidelights, you will be able to spot the headlights from MUCH further away...
|
Quite right, B O
Basic rule: if you can't see them with the lights they've got on then they can't see you if you have the same.
|
Quite right, B O Basic rule: if you can't see them with the lights they've got on then they can't see you if you have the same.
Brian. That would be true if the light output from sidelights were standard across all makes of car. Unfortunately, some are almost invisible even in pitch darkness while others (probably the well designed dim-dip ones) are the ideal brightness in early dusk or some overcast conditions.
GJD
PS I am not defending use of side/parking lights when headlights are necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Blue, I do see the logic and I have seen the difference in visibility between sidelights and headlights - it's just amazing to know I have been operating in ignorance all these years (following the rules I was taught!) - and Tom, I only passed my test about 8 years ago, so I'm not sure if this would have come into the 'older' rules or not.
|
It's probably been a couple of decades now since dipped beam became the recommended way of lighting up at all times, but some of the older drivers (instructors included) never seem to move with the times.
There are still people out there who believe, like my long departed father, that alcohol sharpens the reactions!
|
There is still the widespread belief in the Philippines among the survivors from the Pre-Baseball Cap Period that lights should be should sparingly to "preserve" the battery, for example I still read that lights should not be necessary where streets are well lit (try and find one in Manila) -- I still see this in motoring media. If we add this to the x% of vehicles whose lights simply don't work, it's almost a relief to find Cromagnon Man with eight spotlights on his front bull-bar........even if four of them are red.
|
|
|
Tom, it does,surely?
Regards
Ken A
|
|
|
|
My mate was taught by a BSM instructor to use sidelights not long ago. Not very good, but to be honest, I was probably a little hard in grouping these people in the "invisible morons" category. It isn't really their fault, it is their teacher's fault. People who drive without *any* lights at all, now that is moronic and thoughtless...
I do consider myself lucky to have been taught to drive so well, I don't believe that good driving is *all* down to natural ability and I'm grateful that I got the teaching that I did. I have many friends who were not taught so well or managged to scrape a pass in their test when they weren't really quite ready to hit the road...
|
|
Parking lights run off the indicator stalk when you switch the engine off, dim dip sidelights are for driving around town when there are good streetlights. Since the true morons are the ones that can't align their headlights or change dud bulbs, dim dip saves you from being blinded by these cyclopian cars. I had an Alfa appear out of the gloom on the M56 last week with no lights at all showing on the front, but both rears were on, so that'll be a company car then.
|
"dim dip sidelights are for driving around town when there are good streetlights"
Err... Do you mean dipped headlights? Sidelights shouldn't be used for driving on even in a well lit area...
|
Almost forgot, a mate of mine really was fined for driving on sidelights at night. And he WAS in a VERY well lit area... I appreciate the plod must have been having a quiet night, but my mate had quite a sporty looking car which probably made him look for something to stop him for, check everything was legit...
But it does prove that you should not drive on sidelights...
|
"But it does prove that you should not drive on sidelights"
Unless they are dim-dip! As previous poster said, with dim-dip when you switch on sidelights with ignition off they are the paking lights. But when you turn on the ignition the dim-dip comes on automatically which is dipped headlights but at a lower intensity. Very useful since it means you can't drive on parking lights and they are very visible in low light where you need to be seen but don't need lights to see with (if you see(!) what I mean). Why was dim dip got rid of - it does mean people couldn't drive on parking lights (where did we get that misleading term "side lights?)
|
P.S.
Drove up to Leeds and back yesterday and to Cambridge and back today (about 400 miles all told largely on motorway and in p*ssing rain and some fog in early mornings) with a "tow-a-van" on the back and to relieve the tedium of being restricted to 60 mph I decided to research for this thread. Unfortunately I lost count of the number of cars with:-
a) no lights at all (am I allowed to say mainly women drivers?)
b) just parking lights -quite a few with just one on! (in heavy rain and spray- almost impossible to see through windows and door mirrors covered in rain)
c) Front fogs only
d) Missing tail lights/headlights/parking lights
e) No rear fogs in very heavy spray/rain
f) Rear fogs on in the clear, bright spells
Did not see ONE plod car at all!
|
|
>> dim dip sidelights are for driving around town when there >> are good streetlights Err... Do you mean dipped headlights?
No, I think he actually means Dim dip. A half way brightness between just sidelights and dipped headlights. I guess the best way to describe it is 12volt bulbs powered by just 6 volts. Phased out around 1993 IIRC.
|
I think you will find that dim dip is obtained by wiring the dipped filaments in series instead of parallel, thus reducing the voltage on each bulb to six volts, as you say.
My Pug 405 (1996) has dim dip, so it was still being fitted after 1993.
In heavy mist/fog (100 - 200 yards visibility) this morning we had the range of no lights, parking lights, dipped heads (no full heads).
I was following a lorry (Volvo tipper truck) whose rear lights showed up after the lorry itself.
This seems to be a common fault on trucks: large slow moving vehicle with not much more than a couple of candles at the back. There must be a case for minimum light output specifications.
|
Oh, sorry, there's me showing my age (or lack of it)! :)
I'm not old enough to remember these Dim Dip things. They sound like a good idea, why on earth did they get phased out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
