Subject: Re: the TRUTH about Daytime Running Lights !!!!!!

From: [email-masked] (Samir Bhakta)
Date: 26 Sep 1995 17:02:16 GMT

MICHAEL TAJON ([email-masked]) wrote:
: The purpose of DRL's is to be noticed, correct?  Very similar to 
: shouting.  If one person in a crowded room is shouting, that person gets 
: noticed, and usually everyone else listens.  Now, if everyone in the 
: crowded room is shouting, nobody can hear what is being said.  

: DRL's are so effective because not everyone has/uses them, so people 
: 'listen.' If everyone has DRL's, everyone is shouting "notice me!"  And 
: everyone is left saying to themselves, "Notice who?"  I wonder who it was 
: that said, "He who sees everything, sees nothing..."

Very good point, Mike. This seems to be often overlooked in discussions
about DRLs.

--
******************************************************************
Samir Bhakta                              Lockheed Martin Services
[email-masked]                  Mt. Laurel, NJ

"It is better to go into a corner slow and come out fast than to
go into a corner fast and come out dead." - Stirling Moss
******************************************************************

---

From: [email-masked] (Elbert Chang)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 17:07:55 -0500

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (firebug) wrote:

> In article <[email-masked]>,
> Elbert Chang <[email-masked]> wrote:

[blah, blah, blah]

> >But what if there's only two cars on the road (e.g. in the middle of
> >nowhere)?  This is when DRL's is advantageous.  Having the other guy
> >"shouting" at you will alert you of his presences sooner.
> >
> >You only focused on one traffic situation where DRL's are useless.  But
> >there are other times when it is helpful.
> 
> You all seem to focus on only one situation where you claim it is
> advantageous, and ignore the ones where normal headlights should be used
> (like rain) or where DRLs are dangerous. Two cars do not often pass on the
> same road at high speeds in the middle of nowhere, anyway. I don't
> understand the Canadian logic that since it MIGHT be a good thing 1/1000 of
> the time that it must be a good thing 100% of the time.

OK, firstly, I think there was a law being considered in Ohio (not sure if
it passed or not) that requires you to turn on your headlights whenever
you use your wipers.  Almost everybody does anyway, so this is pretty much
moot.

Secondly, where do you live?  There are *plenty* of places where two cars
pass on the same road at relatively high speeds (>45mph) in the middle of
nowhere.  I don't understand what you have against DRL's anyway.

---

From: [email-masked] (Eric Bin)
Date: 27 Sep 1995 17:47:02 GMT

[email-masked] (firebug) writes:

>>In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (MICHAEL
>>TAJON) wrote:
>>> The purpose of DRL's is to be noticed, correct?  Very similar to 
>>> shouting.  If one person in a crowded room is shouting, that person gets 
>>> noticed, and usually everyone else listens.  Now, if everyone in the 
>>> crowded room is shouting, nobody can hear what is being said.  
>>
>>I wouldn't go that far.  If you're in a traffic jam (the "crowded room"),
>>granted, DRL's aren't going to do too much, but you should know that there
>>is someone lurking nearby anyway.

>Normal traffic is all that is needed. Not even a crowded room, just a
>reasonably full room.

(stuff deleted)

>the time that it must be a good thing 100% of the time.

I can't see how DRL are dangerous since I've been using them for the
past three odd years.  People keep claiming that they are blindingly
bright which leads them to be distracting while others say that DRL
causes them to get locked onto those lights while they're driving.  I
don't see many people who use DRL complaining about them, the only
ones who complain are the ones who have never used them.  With regard
to those who find DRL blindingly bright you must either not see the
sun much or your city has a major smog problem.  Living in Vancouver,
I deal with bad drivers everyday, drivers who not only turn on their
low beams during the day but their high beams too, although I find it
to be a nuisance, even with both lights on they are DEFINATELY not
blindingly bright.  And for those who can only focus on the light when
it is present I suggest you find a hiding place before deer hunting
season starts because we might mistake you for an awestruck animal.

Eric Bin
[email-masked]
"Bad drivers don't realize they're bad."

---

From: Paul Lu <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Sep 1995 00:40:18 GMT

[email-masked] (Bob Goudreau) wrote:

>I believe that your analogy is fault.  The purpose of DRLs is to make
>*moving vehicles* stand out from the rest of a driver's field of vision
>-- which is dominated primarily by *inanimate objects* such as the
>road, trees, houses, sky, etc.  In short, vehicle visibility is not a
>zero-sum game.

A moving vehicle itself attract MY attension. With or without DRL

>
>If every car having "notice me" lights on in front is so distracting,
>then why aren't you also opposed to tail-lights at night?  After all,
>every moving vehicle is also supposed to have them on, and their only
>purpose is signal "notice me!" to other drivers.

Bob, you are comparing apple to orange here.

In the night, you don't see a car in front of you without
its rear light.

Without DRL, I still see those cars. I understand some
people don't. I consider myself lucky that I have not
been run over by those people given that I have been
driving 15 years without DRL.

If DRL is so good, here is a hardball question for you:

Why is the rear light "just a pair of small red bulb?"
Isn't a set of DRL much brighter and draw more attention?

---

From: [email-masked] (Bob Goudreau)
Date: 27 Sep 1995 17:45:40 GMT

Paul Lu ([email-masked]) wrote:

: >If every car having "notice me" lights on in front is so distracting,
: >then why aren't you also opposed to tail-lights at night?  After all,
: >every moving vehicle is also supposed to have them on, and their only
: >purpose is signal "notice me!" to other drivers.
:
: Bob, you are comparing apple to orange here.
:
: In the night, you don't see a car in front of you without
: its rear light.

Not true.  After all, (full-strength) headlights illuminate your field
of view, don't they?  Tail-lights at night (and turn signals and brake
lights at any time of day, for that matter), have only one purpose:
to shout "notice me" to other drivers who ideally would have noticed
the other vehicle anyway.  But we don't live in an ideal world, which
is why these sorts of vehicle lights sometimes come in handy as
additional measures of safety.

BTW, I noticed that you've totally avoided my original point, which
was to rebut the bogus zero-sum "people shouting in a room" analogy.

: If DRL is so good, here is a hardball question for you:
:
: Why is the rear light "just a pair of small red bulb?"
: Isn't a set of DRL much brighter and draw more attention?

This seems obvious: the situation where you see the other vehicle's
headlights or DRLs in front of you is when it is approaching you in a
lane of oncoming traffic, but the situation where you see its
tail-lights in front of you is when you are overtaking it while
traveling in the same direction.  Do the math:  the closing time for
the two vehicles in the first scenario will be an order of magnitude
briefer than that for the second scenario.  Having the headlights be
brighter than the tail-lights compensates for the shorter closing time
by making the headlights visible from a greater distance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau			Data General Corporation
[email-masked]		62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231			Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

---

From: [email-masked] (firebug)
Date: 28 Sep 1995 00:56:24 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
>additional measures of safety.

At night, headlights are insufficient to see all the cars that are of
immediate concern, especially at higher speeds. Tail-lights at night serve
the purpose of allowing the car to be seen. Brake lights serve the purpose
of giving the person behind you warning that you are slowing down - and if
they do not also slow down they will hit you. Turn signals indicate a future
action. Their purpose is to bring attention to the fact not that the car is
THERE but that it will soon be DOING SOMETHING. This may include slowing
down to make a turn or changing lanes, both of which might require an action
from someone seeing it.

You've never seen someone without functioning brake lights (or with brake
lights that are indistinguishable from taillights) slow down directly in
front of you? You've never been behind someone when all of a sudden they
slow down for no apparant reason and make a turn with no signal? You've
never had someone change into your lane right in front of you without
signalling? You've never been waiting to make a right turn onto a fast road,
but don't because you see someone coming, and then only when they turn onto
your road do you realize that you could have gone before he and the entire
pack of cars behind him went by - if only he had signalled.

Now, I know it's hard to see the front turn signals with DRLs, but you
must've had all the ones involving the back of another car happen to you. If
not, please explain to me how these odd Canadian roads work.

---

From: [email-masked] (firebug)
Date: 28 Sep 1995 00:56:24 GMT